正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Scientist says objects don't exist when you're not looking at them! Donald Hoffman, cognitive scientist at UC Irvine, says there is only your experience of the an object, generated the moment you perceive it, gone the moment you look away. An object two people see are two separate events....

AmericanALCHMY's profile picture

American Alchemy

38,170 subscribers

30,509 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

教育科学技术
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

MIT scientist says aliens are likely all around us! We just can't see them... Donald Hoffman says the mathematics indicates embodied consciousness like ours is a rare exception in the universe. The universe should be teeming with intelligence more advanced than humans, operating without traditional bodies. Hoffman calls our human form one of the cheapest, most restrictive "virtual reality headsets" in existence. The default state of consciousness, according to the math, has no body at all. "Embodiment is very, very small." "The universe would be teeming with life that is more advanced than humans and also doesn't have traditional bodies." "Our particular kind of view of the world, the kind of, I'll call it a headset, the virtual reality headset that we're using for our embodiment, is one of the more trivial kinds of headsets." "Our headset is one of the cheapest, most restrictive possible." "There are all sorts of variations that are far more interesting and complicated than what we've got." "Embodiment is the exception, not the rule." Full episode with Donald Hoffman out now.
2:18

MIT scientist says aliens are likely all around us! We just can't see them... Donald Hoffman says the mathematics indicates embodied consciousness like ours is a rare exception in the universe. The universe should be teeming with intelligence more advanced than humans, operating without traditional bodies. Hoffman calls our human form one of the cheapest, most restrictive "virtual reality headsets" in existence. The default state of consciousness, according to the math, has no body at all. "Embodiment is very, very small." "The universe would be teeming with life that is more advanced than humans and also doesn't have traditional bodies." "Our particular kind of view of the world, the kind of, I'll call it a headset, the virtual reality headset that we're using for our embodiment, is one of the more trivial kinds of headsets." "Our headset is one of the cheapest, most restrictive possible." "There are all sorts of variations that are far more interesting and complicated than what we've got." "Embodiment is the exception, not the rule." Full episode with Donald Hoffman out now.

American Alchemy

300,876 次观看 • 1 个月前

Donald Hoffman and co are on the brink of releasing PROOF that consciousness is fundamental and NOT produced by the brain. BREAKTHROUGH: How consciousness creates the simulation;
2:20

Donald Hoffman and co are on the brink of releasing PROOF that consciousness is fundamental and NOT produced by the brain. BREAKTHROUGH: How consciousness creates the simulation;

👽 (Ruby) 👽

229,061 次观看 • 4 个月前

Donald Hoffman: : Reality Is An Interface, Illusion - Math Undeniable - Consciousness Creates Spacetime - Evolution Hid the Truth | Donald Hoffman | Mscs Media *327 Full Ep: Donald Hoffman, scientist, and professor, asks, do we see the world as it truly is? ⁠In ⁠The Case Against Reality⁠, pioneering cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman says no. We see what we need in order to survive. Our visual perceptions are not a window onto reality, Hoffman shows us, but instead are interfaces constructed by natural selection. Imagine we were all born with lenses, that put us in a video game, how would we know? The objects we see around us are not unlike the file icons on our computer desktops: while shaped like a small folder on our screens, the files themselves are made of a series of ones and zeros - too complex for most of us to understand. In a similar way, Hoffman argues, evolution has shaped our perceptions into simplistic illusions to help us navigate the world around us. Yet now these illusions can be manipulated by advertising and design. Follow Professor Hoffman: ⁠ ⁠ physics Drawing on thirty years of Hoffman's own influential research, as well as evolutionary biology, game theory, neuroscience, and philosophy, The Case Against Reality makes the mind-bending yet utterly convincing case that the world is nothing like what we see through our eyes. Donald Hoffman's books, and papers, are easy to read and understand. Books: ⁠The Case Against Reality⁠ ⁠Visual Intelligence⁠ ⁠Observer Mechanics⁠ ⁠Fusions of consciousness⁠, ⁠Fact, Fiction, and Fitness⁠, and ⁠Objects of consciousness⁠. Donald Hoffman Spotify Spotify Podcasts 🎙 #donalddhoffman #Spotify #Space #spacetime #podcast #Science #Physics #neuroscience #illusion #REALITY #Simulation #interface #CONSCIOUSNESS
11:01

Donald Hoffman: : Reality Is An Interface, Illusion - Math Undeniable - Consciousness Creates Spacetime - Evolution Hid the Truth | Donald Hoffman | Mscs Media *327 Full Ep: Donald Hoffman, scientist, and professor, asks, do we see the world as it truly is? ⁠In ⁠The Case Against Reality⁠, pioneering cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman says no. We see what we need in order to survive. Our visual perceptions are not a window onto reality, Hoffman shows us, but instead are interfaces constructed by natural selection. Imagine we were all born with lenses, that put us in a video game, how would we know? The objects we see around us are not unlike the file icons on our computer desktops: while shaped like a small folder on our screens, the files themselves are made of a series of ones and zeros - too complex for most of us to understand. In a similar way, Hoffman argues, evolution has shaped our perceptions into simplistic illusions to help us navigate the world around us. Yet now these illusions can be manipulated by advertising and design. Follow Professor Hoffman: ⁠ ⁠ physics Drawing on thirty years of Hoffman's own influential research, as well as evolutionary biology, game theory, neuroscience, and philosophy, The Case Against Reality makes the mind-bending yet utterly convincing case that the world is nothing like what we see through our eyes. Donald Hoffman's books, and papers, are easy to read and understand. Books: ⁠The Case Against Reality⁠ ⁠Visual Intelligence⁠ ⁠Observer Mechanics⁠ ⁠Fusions of consciousness⁠, ⁠Fact, Fiction, and Fitness⁠, and ⁠Objects of consciousness⁠. Donald Hoffman Spotify Spotify Podcasts 🎙 #donalddhoffman #Spotify #Space #spacetime #podcast #Science #Physics #neuroscience #illusion #REALITY #Simulation #interface #CONSCIOUSNESS

Mscs Media

3,482,416 次观看 • 2 年前

This MIT scientist just dropped a bombshell realization about extraterrestrial life. Donald Hoffman’s work suggests the universe is filled with “life more advanced than humans.” We just can’t see them. Why? They don’t have physical bodies. He suspects the physical world is not objective. It’s only a consequence of consciousness. And consciousness is fundamental, not the physical world. Hoffman: “The mathematics seems to indicate that embodiment is the exception, not the rule.” “And that our particular view of the world, I’ll call it the virtual reality headset that we’re using, for our embodiment, is one of the more trivial kinds of headsets.” “We often have the opinion of ourselves that we’re pretty much near the top of the food chain, here on Earth anyways.” “But when I look at the mathematics of this trace logic, it indicates that our headset is one of the cheapest, most restrictive possible.” “And that there are all sorts of variations that are far more interesting and complicated than what we’ve got.” Jesse Michels American Alchemy Donald Hoffman
1:37

This MIT scientist just dropped a bombshell realization about extraterrestrial life. Donald Hoffman’s work suggests the universe is filled with “life more advanced than humans.” We just can’t see them. Why? They don’t have physical bodies. He suspects the physical world is not objective. It’s only a consequence of consciousness. And consciousness is fundamental, not the physical world. Hoffman: “The mathematics seems to indicate that embodiment is the exception, not the rule.” “And that our particular view of the world, I’ll call it the virtual reality headset that we’re using, for our embodiment, is one of the more trivial kinds of headsets.” “We often have the opinion of ourselves that we’re pretty much near the top of the food chain, here on Earth anyways.” “But when I look at the mathematics of this trace logic, it indicates that our headset is one of the cheapest, most restrictive possible.” “And that there are all sorts of variations that are far more interesting and complicated than what we’ve got.” Jesse Michels American Alchemy Donald Hoffman

Holden Culotta

83,189 次观看 • 1 个月前

John Searle: consciousness cannot be an illusion and here's the argument that makes it undeniable Science has a long track record of overturning our intuitions. The table looks solid, it isn't. The sun appears to set, it doesn't. We've learned to accept that appearances deceive us, and that reality lies beneath. But philosopher John Searle argues there is exactly one domain where this move simply cannot be made: consciousness itself. "Where consciousness is concerned, you can't make the standard appearance/reality distinction that we make for the rest of the world." His logic is simple. When a scientist tells you the table isn't really solid and that it's a cloud of micro-particles, you can accept that. The appearance (solidity) and the reality (particles) are two different things, and you can hold them apart. Same with the sunset. It looks like the sun moves. It doesn't. The rotation of the Earth creates an illusion. Appearance and reality come apart and you understand the gap. Now try applying that same logic to your conscious experience. Someone claims your pain isn't really there, that your awareness is just an illusion. But here, Searle says, the distinction collapses entirely: "Where the existence of consciousness is concerned, the appearance is the reality. There's no way that some guy can come to me and convince me I'm not conscious if I think I'm conscious, I am conscious." This is a structural point about what consciousness fundamentally is. For every other phenomenon, the appearance can be explained away by pointing to what's "really" happening underneath. But consciousness is the very medium in which all appearances occur. There is no "underneath" to retreat to. To say consciousness is an illusion, you would first need to be conscious of the illusion. The argument defeats itself on contact.
0:50

John Searle: consciousness cannot be an illusion and here's the argument that makes it undeniable Science has a long track record of overturning our intuitions. The table looks solid, it isn't. The sun appears to set, it doesn't. We've learned to accept that appearances deceive us, and that reality lies beneath. But philosopher John Searle argues there is exactly one domain where this move simply cannot be made: consciousness itself. "Where consciousness is concerned, you can't make the standard appearance/reality distinction that we make for the rest of the world." His logic is simple. When a scientist tells you the table isn't really solid and that it's a cloud of micro-particles, you can accept that. The appearance (solidity) and the reality (particles) are two different things, and you can hold them apart. Same with the sunset. It looks like the sun moves. It doesn't. The rotation of the Earth creates an illusion. Appearance and reality come apart and you understand the gap. Now try applying that same logic to your conscious experience. Someone claims your pain isn't really there, that your awareness is just an illusion. But here, Searle says, the distinction collapses entirely: "Where the existence of consciousness is concerned, the appearance is the reality. There's no way that some guy can come to me and convince me I'm not conscious if I think I'm conscious, I am conscious." This is a structural point about what consciousness fundamentally is. For every other phenomenon, the appearance can be explained away by pointing to what's "really" happening underneath. But consciousness is the very medium in which all appearances occur. There is no "underneath" to retreat to. To say consciousness is an illusion, you would first need to be conscious of the illusion. The argument defeats itself on contact.

Big Brain Philosophy

17,476 次观看 • 3 个月前

This is the view from the drone itself. You can see it is using a thermal camera that makes people assume the video is taken at night. But obviously above you see it is not at night. I think this is why people assume bombers are only used at night. But they are used during the day. You can see the drone has two cameras, one thermal and one visual light and it depicts both in the video simultaneously.
0:32

This is the view from the drone itself. You can see it is using a thermal camera that makes people assume the video is taken at night. But obviously above you see it is not at night. I think this is why people assume bombers are only used at night. But they are used during the day. You can see the drone has two cameras, one thermal and one visual light and it depicts both in the video simultaneously.

Andrew Perpetua

12,542 次观看 • 1 年前

FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONFUSED… We experience TIME as a straight line, one moment after another, PAST TO PRESENT TO FUTURE. But that is only how it appears from inside the system. Beings in higher dimensions, what some call “ORACLES” OR “GODS,” do not experience time like this. They do not move through it. They observe it in its entirety. A closer analogy would be CHANNELS ON A SCREEN. What is playing on FOX and what is playing on CBS is not separate in existence, it is only separated by perspective. Both are happening at the same time, fully active, fully real. In the same way, what we call 1950 and what we call 2004 are not distant points moving away from each other. They are both present within the same total field of reality. From that level of awareness, nothing is being “waited on.” There is NO DELAY. There is only ACCESS. A shift of perception is all that is needed, like changing the channel. So if everything exists at once, then your FUTURE is not something that is coming toward you. It is something that already exists. The version of you 20 YEARS FROM NOW is already there. You have already CHOSEN THAT PATH, you have already GONE THROUGH WHAT COMES WITH IT, you have already LIVED THROUGH IT ALL. And what you are doing now is not creating it. You are MOVING THROUGH IT. Slowly remembering why you are there at all.
0:23

FOR THOSE WHO ARE CONFUSED… We experience TIME as a straight line, one moment after another, PAST TO PRESENT TO FUTURE. But that is only how it appears from inside the system. Beings in higher dimensions, what some call “ORACLES” OR “GODS,” do not experience time like this. They do not move through it. They observe it in its entirety. A closer analogy would be CHANNELS ON A SCREEN. What is playing on FOX and what is playing on CBS is not separate in existence, it is only separated by perspective. Both are happening at the same time, fully active, fully real. In the same way, what we call 1950 and what we call 2004 are not distant points moving away from each other. They are both present within the same total field of reality. From that level of awareness, nothing is being “waited on.” There is NO DELAY. There is only ACCESS. A shift of perception is all that is needed, like changing the channel. So if everything exists at once, then your FUTURE is not something that is coming toward you. It is something that already exists. The version of you 20 YEARS FROM NOW is already there. You have already CHOSEN THAT PATH, you have already GONE THROUGH WHAT COMES WITH IT, you have already LIVED THROUGH IT ALL. And what you are doing now is not creating it. You are MOVING THROUGH IT. Slowly remembering why you are there at all.

THE VOICE 🌹 🗣🎙🇺🇸🦅🌎⚓💜♠️CHRIST CONSCIOUSNESS

39,969 次观看 • 19 天前

Message from #NEIOH ~ Energy, Consciousness And Spirit "Start With This Truth. There Is Only Energy, Consciousness And Spirit. Light Would Be The Highest Frequency Of Energy. All Of These Aspects Are Necessary In The Expression Of Life. The Combination Allows You To Live. This Is The Reason We Tell You Often That You Are Everything. You Are Life Itself Knowing Itself In Many Ways. This Is The Gift For All Expressions." Podcast YouTube
3:47

Message from #NEIOH ~ Energy, Consciousness And Spirit "Start With This Truth. There Is Only Energy, Consciousness And Spirit. Light Would Be The Highest Frequency Of Energy. All Of These Aspects Are Necessary In The Expression Of Life. The Combination Allows You To Live. This Is The Reason We Tell You Often That You Are Everything. You Are Life Itself Knowing Itself In Many Ways. This Is The Gift For All Expressions." Podcast YouTube

Kab

118,392 次观看 • 1 年前

the purification process is not for the faint of heart. it is the road less traveled. the narrow way. "You can't sit down with your family at dinner and say... You know I've realized the self is an illusion and that we are all manifestations of one universal consciousness."
16:18

the purification process is not for the faint of heart. it is the road less traveled. the narrow way. "You can't sit down with your family at dinner and say... You know I've realized the self is an illusion and that we are all manifestations of one universal consciousness."

Drewski

120,201 次观看 • 7 个月前

ELON: WE’RE DESCENDANTS OF STARS – BUT HOW DID WE BECOME CONSCIOUS? “I've thought a lot about what is consciousness. Where does consciousness arise? If you start at the beginning of the universe, assuming the standard model of physics is true, then you have this Big Bang, the matter condensing into stars, those stars exploding. A lot of the atoms that are in your body right now were once at the center of stars. Those stars exploded, recondensed. Fast forward 13.8 billion years, and here we are. And somewhere along that very long journey to us, consciousness arose. Or the molecules started talking to each other. And it begs the question of what is consciousness? Is everything conscious? Maybe. It's hard to say where along that line, there's no sort of discrete point where consciousness didn't exist and then suddenly does exist. It seems to be, maybe you have a condensation of matter that has a density of consciousness, we don't know. The real answer is, we don't know what consciousness is. But with Neuralink and the progress that the company's making, we'll begin to understand a lot more about consciousness.” Source: Neuralink Update, June 2025
1:16

ELON: WE’RE DESCENDANTS OF STARS – BUT HOW DID WE BECOME CONSCIOUS? “I've thought a lot about what is consciousness. Where does consciousness arise? If you start at the beginning of the universe, assuming the standard model of physics is true, then you have this Big Bang, the matter condensing into stars, those stars exploding. A lot of the atoms that are in your body right now were once at the center of stars. Those stars exploded, recondensed. Fast forward 13.8 billion years, and here we are. And somewhere along that very long journey to us, consciousness arose. Or the molecules started talking to each other. And it begs the question of what is consciousness? Is everything conscious? Maybe. It's hard to say where along that line, there's no sort of discrete point where consciousness didn't exist and then suddenly does exist. It seems to be, maybe you have a condensation of matter that has a density of consciousness, we don't know. The real answer is, we don't know what consciousness is. But with Neuralink and the progress that the company's making, we'll begin to understand a lot more about consciousness.” Source: Neuralink Update, June 2025

Mario Nawfal

55,256 次观看 • 10 个月前

🚨BREAKING: A cognitive scientist from MIT has mathematically proven that evolution guarantees we see zero percent of true reality, that most consciousness in the universe exists without a body, and that non-human intelligences with a wider window on reality than ours can reach in and manipulate it the way a programmer manipulates a video game. Donald Hoffman (Donald Hoffman) is a cognitive scientist at UC Irvine who has spent 40 years building a mathematical theory of the observer. His work was cited by John Wheeler in the "It From Bit" paper. He studied under Marvin Minsky at MIT, spent two decades secretly meeting with Francis Crick to study consciousness, and has nine specific mathematical conjectures on the table that would derive general relativity, quantum field theory and the Big Bang from a single framework. The top high-energy physicists in the world, Nima Arkani-Hamed and Nobel laureate David Gross, are already saying spacetime is doomed. Hoffman thinks he knows what replaces it. This interview is the first time he has publicly laid out what his mathematical model explains about alien life, embodiment and the structure of reality. It already derives time dilation and quantum wave functions directly from differences in observer window size. Physics has spent a century failing to solve the measurement problem because it has been looking in the wrong place. The observer has to come first, and no physicalist framework can get you there. A consciousness with a larger observer window has access to the underlying structure of our reality in ways we can't perceive or counter. A craft going Mach 40 instantaneously in our headset could be a leisurely maneuver in theirs. The implications for UAP and alien life are immense. Embodiment, being locked into a body with fingers and toes as your only interface with the world, is a probability zero anomaly in the full space of possible minds. He also says current large language models are dumber than cucumbers. His new framework, the recursive trace logic, is a completely different architecture, and some of the biggest names in frontier AI have already come to him about it. The framework has no ceiling, and the implication is a single unified consciousness exploring itself through an unbounded number of perspectives, each one capable of waking up. Death, in this framework, is just the closing of an icon on the desktop. Full conversation is live now.
1:44

🚨BREAKING: A cognitive scientist from MIT has mathematically proven that evolution guarantees we see zero percent of true reality, that most consciousness in the universe exists without a body, and that non-human intelligences with a wider window on reality than ours can reach in and manipulate it the way a programmer manipulates a video game. Donald Hoffman (Donald Hoffman) is a cognitive scientist at UC Irvine who has spent 40 years building a mathematical theory of the observer. His work was cited by John Wheeler in the "It From Bit" paper. He studied under Marvin Minsky at MIT, spent two decades secretly meeting with Francis Crick to study consciousness, and has nine specific mathematical conjectures on the table that would derive general relativity, quantum field theory and the Big Bang from a single framework. The top high-energy physicists in the world, Nima Arkani-Hamed and Nobel laureate David Gross, are already saying spacetime is doomed. Hoffman thinks he knows what replaces it. This interview is the first time he has publicly laid out what his mathematical model explains about alien life, embodiment and the structure of reality. It already derives time dilation and quantum wave functions directly from differences in observer window size. Physics has spent a century failing to solve the measurement problem because it has been looking in the wrong place. The observer has to come first, and no physicalist framework can get you there. A consciousness with a larger observer window has access to the underlying structure of our reality in ways we can't perceive or counter. A craft going Mach 40 instantaneously in our headset could be a leisurely maneuver in theirs. The implications for UAP and alien life are immense. Embodiment, being locked into a body with fingers and toes as your only interface with the world, is a probability zero anomaly in the full space of possible minds. He also says current large language models are dumber than cucumbers. His new framework, the recursive trace logic, is a completely different architecture, and some of the biggest names in frontier AI have already come to him about it. The framework has no ceiling, and the implication is a single unified consciousness exploring itself through an unbounded number of perspectives, each one capable of waking up. Death, in this framework, is just the closing of an icon on the desktop. Full conversation is live now.

Jesse Michels

1,652,306 次观看 • 1 个月前

Donald Hoffman: "Embodied consciousness like ours has a probability of zero." This is a new finding from the MIT trained cognitive scientist. The normal state of consciousness is not embodied. In the mathematics it registers as measure zero with a probability of zero. Hoffman told Jesse Michels the human condition as the worst possible interface. We are like a marathon runner with weights as well as terrible shoes and a backpack. We cannot move a cup with intention alone. We move our fingers toes and arms and from that narrow channel we have to scheme our way to doing anything physical. It feels low bandwidth and high latency. It is sort of like you can play the game of consciousness and move things around but you remain so restricted. This view dovetails with a lot of religious stories around the fall of man. The ideas open up profound questions about the true nature of reality and our place in it.
2:37

Donald Hoffman: "Embodied consciousness like ours has a probability of zero." This is a new finding from the MIT trained cognitive scientist. The normal state of consciousness is not embodied. In the mathematics it registers as measure zero with a probability of zero. Hoffman told Jesse Michels the human condition as the worst possible interface. We are like a marathon runner with weights as well as terrible shoes and a backpack. We cannot move a cup with intention alone. We move our fingers toes and arms and from that narrow channel we have to scheme our way to doing anything physical. It feels low bandwidth and high latency. It is sort of like you can play the game of consciousness and move things around but you remain so restricted. This view dovetails with a lot of religious stories around the fall of man. The ideas open up profound questions about the true nature of reality and our place in it.

Interstellar

22,754 次观看 • 1 个月前

MIT trained cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman says "embodied consciousness like ours has a probability of zero". This is a new finding discovered just weeks ago. The normal state of consciousness is not embodied. Hoffman frames the human condition as the worst possible interface. "We're like a marathon runner with weights, terrible shoes, and a backpack." We can't move a cup with intention alone. We move fingers and toes and arms, and from that narrow channel we have to scheme our way to doing anything physical. "The normal case for consciousness in this framework is not to be embodied." "In this mathematics, it's measure zero, probability zero." "It dovetails with a lot of religious stories around the quote-unquote fall of man." "To get to the moon, all I can do is move my fingers, my toes, my arms." "It's low bandwidth and high latency." "It's sort of like you can play the game of consciousness and move things around, but you're so restricted." Episode dropping today.
3:56

MIT trained cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman says "embodied consciousness like ours has a probability of zero". This is a new finding discovered just weeks ago. The normal state of consciousness is not embodied. Hoffman frames the human condition as the worst possible interface. "We're like a marathon runner with weights, terrible shoes, and a backpack." We can't move a cup with intention alone. We move fingers and toes and arms, and from that narrow channel we have to scheme our way to doing anything physical. "The normal case for consciousness in this framework is not to be embodied." "In this mathematics, it's measure zero, probability zero." "It dovetails with a lot of religious stories around the quote-unquote fall of man." "To get to the moon, all I can do is move my fingers, my toes, my arms." "It's low bandwidth and high latency." "It's sort of like you can play the game of consciousness and move things around, but you're so restricted." Episode dropping today.

American Alchemy

488,845 次观看 • 1 个月前

––Charlie Barnett: "Consciousness and the computability of it. It sounds like, or at least in the past, that you've implied that consciousness is computable. Some, like Roger Penrose, have argued the opposite, and he's argued that consciousness is non-computational, and he uses Gödel's incompleteness theorems to argue that the mind can see truths that a purely algorithmic system can't derive, and therefore the brain must be using some kind of non-computable process when it comes to consciousness, something beyond what machines can do. What would you say to a view like that? David Deutsch: Yet again, it is using an impossible conception of what knowledge is. So Penrose thinks that when we see a proof of a mathematical theorem, we are touching certainty, we are god-like entities when we're mathematicians. But that's not true. Our mathematical knowledge is conjectural, just like our knowledge of physics. It's even more removed from our senses, because it's not true that the interior of our brains and the interior of our thoughts is more accessible to us than the world we perceive through our senses, or the world that we perceive through our theories, the center of the sun. We know lots about the center of the sun, even though no one has ever perceived it, and perhaps no one ever will. So mathematical truths are based on conjecture. What Gödel showed is that there is no firm ground underneath mathematical theories either. There's no way of proving that the standards of proof that we currently use are perfectly rigorous. And there have been cases in history where they have shown not to be rigorous. I think Pernot, who was the first to axiomatize the principles of the natural numbers, his first attempt at that was wrong. And it's interesting that he did not say, well, I've axiomatized them, therefore there's nothing to them other than my axioms. No, he said, oh dear, my axioms don't correctly represent the real number, the natural numbers, so I have to change them. So he was grasping, conjecturing for a reality, an abstract reality, just like scientists try to grasp physical reality. So the same epistemology applies to mathematics as it does to science."
2:31

––Charlie Barnett: "Consciousness and the computability of it. It sounds like, or at least in the past, that you've implied that consciousness is computable. Some, like Roger Penrose, have argued the opposite, and he's argued that consciousness is non-computational, and he uses Gödel's incompleteness theorems to argue that the mind can see truths that a purely algorithmic system can't derive, and therefore the brain must be using some kind of non-computable process when it comes to consciousness, something beyond what machines can do. What would you say to a view like that? David Deutsch: Yet again, it is using an impossible conception of what knowledge is. So Penrose thinks that when we see a proof of a mathematical theorem, we are touching certainty, we are god-like entities when we're mathematicians. But that's not true. Our mathematical knowledge is conjectural, just like our knowledge of physics. It's even more removed from our senses, because it's not true that the interior of our brains and the interior of our thoughts is more accessible to us than the world we perceive through our senses, or the world that we perceive through our theories, the center of the sun. We know lots about the center of the sun, even though no one has ever perceived it, and perhaps no one ever will. So mathematical truths are based on conjecture. What Gödel showed is that there is no firm ground underneath mathematical theories either. There's no way of proving that the standards of proof that we currently use are perfectly rigorous. And there have been cases in history where they have shown not to be rigorous. I think Pernot, who was the first to axiomatize the principles of the natural numbers, his first attempt at that was wrong. And it's interesting that he did not say, well, I've axiomatized them, therefore there's nothing to them other than my axioms. No, he said, oh dear, my axioms don't correctly represent the real number, the natural numbers, so I have to change them. So he was grasping, conjecturing for a reality, an abstract reality, just like scientists try to grasp physical reality. So the same epistemology applies to mathematics as it does to science."

Deutsch Explains

13,825 次观看 • 1 年前

WHAT IS THISSSSS ARE WE ALL GONNA CRY IN THE LAST EPISODE OMG 😭 You just know that when the pillars of Super Junior (Leeteuk and Heechul) fight — it does not only affects the two of them but the members too. This is the ultimate TeukChul moment - the confirmation that the divorce era really ended 😭 #슈퍼주니어 #SUPERJUNIOR #WokeUpToSuperTV #눈떠보니슈퍼TV
1:42

WHAT IS THISSSSS ARE WE ALL GONNA CRY IN THE LAST EPISODE OMG 😭 You just know that when the pillars of Super Junior (Leeteuk and Heechul) fight — it does not only affects the two of them but the members too. This is the ultimate TeukChul moment - the confirmation that the divorce era really ended 😭 #슈퍼주니어 #SUPERJUNIOR #WokeUpToSuperTV #눈떠보니슈퍼TV

ഒkat

30,721 次观看 • 1 年前

What is going on with UFO cloaking capabilities? "I looked up and I couldn't see the craft. You actually cannot see the craft. The light bends around it." "We have these tools that tell us where to look. All our sensors are pumped into our visor. It shows us the object in a box right on our visor." "We have every expectation of having a successful merge and seeing this object. And then it wasn't there." "We still see it on the flare. We still see the energy emitting from that area, but nothing visually." "They are describing phenomena, objects that appear very often out of nowhere and disappear on the spot."
0:52

What is going on with UFO cloaking capabilities? "I looked up and I couldn't see the craft. You actually cannot see the craft. The light bends around it." "We have these tools that tell us where to look. All our sensors are pumped into our visor. It shows us the object in a box right on our visor." "We have every expectation of having a successful merge and seeing this object. And then it wasn't there." "We still see it on the flare. We still see the energy emitting from that area, but nothing visually." "They are describing phenomena, objects that appear very often out of nowhere and disappear on the spot."

American Alchemy

20,354 次观看 • 2 个月前

BREAKING: There are now reports of THREE PEOPLE who lost their lives at the Islamic Center shooting in San Diego. "There are two teachers or staff from the school to be more specific, that have been killed as a result of the shooting. That is separate from the suspects we are hearing about."
1:52

BREAKING: There are now reports of THREE PEOPLE who lost their lives at the Islamic Center shooting in San Diego. "There are two teachers or staff from the school to be more specific, that have been killed as a result of the shooting. That is separate from the suspects we are hearing about."

Gunther Eagleman™

2,097,559 次观看 • 1 个月前

“There are only two religions on earth” Interesting take.. In both scenarios the true essence of ascending from oneself or one’s life is through the process of becoming closer to that which is greater than self. Either by mirroring God through your life or by removing the ego in the present moment to shift your consciousness in such a way that you share the same space with the Creator. In both of these scenarios there starts with the belief or faith that there is a something greater than “I” or self. It is a way of being, a path taken. It is not “religion” or “books” that save us, these are only guides or guardrails. But it is within our own being the ability to ascend, or create that relationship. Not through good deeds and donating to charity or receipting every Bible verse, but an internal alignment of values, a perspective that seeks Truth, Life and wholeness in ALL things, not for profit or personal gain but because it IS the way of the universe. Humans have free will, the ability to choose, and it is this choice that gives us the power, the power to change or stay the same. It all starts within.
1:08

“There are only two religions on earth” Interesting take.. In both scenarios the true essence of ascending from oneself or one’s life is through the process of becoming closer to that which is greater than self. Either by mirroring God through your life or by removing the ego in the present moment to shift your consciousness in such a way that you share the same space with the Creator. In both of these scenarios there starts with the belief or faith that there is a something greater than “I” or self. It is a way of being, a path taken. It is not “religion” or “books” that save us, these are only guides or guardrails. But it is within our own being the ability to ascend, or create that relationship. Not through good deeds and donating to charity or receipting every Bible verse, but an internal alignment of values, a perspective that seeks Truth, Life and wholeness in ALL things, not for profit or personal gain but because it IS the way of the universe. Humans have free will, the ability to choose, and it is this choice that gives us the power, the power to change or stay the same. It all starts within.

Drewski

12,976 次观看 • 6 个月前