Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

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

39,812 subscribers

30,706 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

BildungWissenschaft & Technologie
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

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

301,264 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

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 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

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

162,751 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

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 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

a cognitive scientist proved that the "ghost in the machine" is a complete illusion, destroying how we think about AI consciousness Daniel Dennett explains his famous "Cartesian Theater" fallacy, showing why there is no central headquarters in the brain where consciousness magically happens. he demonstrates how the brain processes multiple drafts of reality simultaneously. if you flash a light at the exact right millisecond, your brain edits the timeline before you even perceive it. the "center" doesn't exist. today, people look at massive LLMs and assume there is a singular "mind" behind the weights. a central agent making decisions and feeling emotions. there is no central observer. it's just multiple drafts of statistical probability running in parallel. we aren't building a conscious entity. we are just hallucinating the theater.
8:38

a cognitive scientist proved that the "ghost in the machine" is a complete illusion, destroying how we think about AI consciousness Daniel Dennett explains his famous "Cartesian Theater" fallacy, showing why there is no central headquarters in the brain where consciousness magically happens. he demonstrates how the brain processes multiple drafts of reality simultaneously. if you flash a light at the exact right millisecond, your brain edits the timeline before you even perceive it. the "center" doesn't exist. today, people look at massive LLMs and assume there is a singular "mind" behind the weights. a central agent making decisions and feeling emotions. there is no central observer. it's just multiple drafts of statistical probability running in parallel. we aren't building a conscious entity. we are just hallucinating the theater.

rodeojuly

25,833 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

#WATCH | US: At the ISKCON temple in New York, RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat says, "...In today's world, there are so many conflicts, so many dualities. The only thing that unites is consciousness. That consciousness is Krishna Consciousness - we are one and we have been having it through these dualities of this world with the strong understanding that though there are so many diversities, dualities, conflicts, really it is all Krishna...Everything is Krishna, - if that world reaches every heart, the world will definitely be a better world; it will not be the material world we see today, it will be a heavenly abode for every human being."
1:36

#WATCH | US: At the ISKCON temple in New York, RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat says, "...In today's world, there are so many conflicts, so many dualities. The only thing that unites is consciousness. That consciousness is Krishna Consciousness - we are one and we have been having it through these dualities of this world with the strong understanding that though there are so many diversities, dualities, conflicts, really it is all Krishna...Everything is Krishna, - if that world reaches every heart, the world will definitely be a better world; it will not be the material world we see today, it will be a heavenly abode for every human being."

ANI

86,830 Aufrufe • vor 3 Tagen

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

40,362 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

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 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

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 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

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

121,110 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

You are, quite literally, the cosmos becoming aware of itself. The atoms in your body were forged in ancient stars. The life within you is part of the same universe you look out upon. In Awakening in the Final Chapter, Deepak explores this deeper understanding of who we are, beyond the idea of the separate self, and invites us to recognize our connection to the whole. You are not separate from the universe. You are an expression of it. –> Preorder Awakening in the Final Chapter here: #mindfulness #consciousness #wellbeing #awakening #presence
0:43

You are, quite literally, the cosmos becoming aware of itself. The atoms in your body were forged in ancient stars. The life within you is part of the same universe you look out upon. In Awakening in the Final Chapter, Deepak explores this deeper understanding of who we are, beyond the idea of the separate self, and invites us to recognize our connection to the whole. You are not separate from the universe. You are an expression of it. –> Preorder Awakening in the Final Chapter here: #mindfulness #consciousness #wellbeing #awakening #presence

Deepak Chopra

16,105 Aufrufe • vor 12 Tagen

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

22,769 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🚨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

1,668,621 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

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

490,270 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

––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

13,826 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Ken Liu Ken Liu on the question we can't avoid anymore: what is consciousness? why certain plants evolved to change our minds, why intelligence ≠ consciousness (AI made this impossible to ignore), and the ethical moment we're racing toward. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- "historically in sci-fi, we've imagined that intelligence and consciousness are almost equivalent in the sense that if you have intelligence, you automatically have consciousness. But AI is making us more and more aware of this distinction, right?"So here's an example where consciousness intelligence are decoupled, and it's a very strange feeling to realize that they are fundamentally different things. "In the moment when we have created artificial consciousness, how will we know when that has happened? Because to me, that is an important ethical moment where we have to decide what we can and can't do. Shutting down a model that merely has intelligence is one thing. Shutting down a model that has consciousness is something quite different. "
4:30

Ken Liu Ken Liu on the question we can't avoid anymore: what is consciousness? why certain plants evolved to change our minds, why intelligence ≠ consciousness (AI made this impossible to ignore), and the ethical moment we're racing toward. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- "historically in sci-fi, we've imagined that intelligence and consciousness are almost equivalent in the sense that if you have intelligence, you automatically have consciousness. But AI is making us more and more aware of this distinction, right?"So here's an example where consciousness intelligence are decoupled, and it's a very strange feeling to realize that they are fundamentally different things. "In the moment when we have created artificial consciousness, how will we know when that has happened? Because to me, that is an important ethical moment where we have to decide what we can and can't do. Shutting down a model that merely has intelligence is one thing. Shutting down a model that has consciousness is something quite different. "

Sabrina Halper

14,761 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Elon Musk reduced the oldest question in human history to basic math. No one has found a flaw in it. Musk: “What are the odds that we are in base reality? And that this has not happened before.” You don’t need a physics degree to follow it. You need a timeline. Musk: “If you look at the advancement of video games, it’s gone from Pong, two rectangles and a square batting it back and forth, to photorealistic, real-time games with millions of people playing simultaneously.” Fifty years. That is all it took to close the gap between two rectangles on a screen and a world you cannot tell apart from the one outside your window. Musk: “If that trend continues, video games will be indistinguishable from reality.” The visuals are not what seals it. The intelligence is. Musk: “Think of how sophisticated the conversations are you can have with an AI today, and that’s only going to get more sophisticated.” We are not scripting characters anymore. We are building minds that reason, adapt, and surprise the people who made them. We are nowhere near finished. Musk: “The future, if civilization continues, will be millions, maybe billions of photorealistic, indistinguishable from reality, video games. And with characters in those video games that are very deep, and where the dialogue is not pre-programmed.” One base reality. Billions of perfect copies. Each one running minds that feel exactly as conscious as you do right now. Each one certain it is the original. Musk: “So then what are the odds that we are in base reality?” If even one civilization crosses that threshold, simulated minds outnumber real ones by billions. The probability you are sitting in the real one is not low. It is nearly zero. Not as philosophy. As mathematics. We are not watching this happen. We are building it. Right now. Every AI that reasons without a script. Every world rendered one frame closer to indistinguishable. We are constructing the exact technology that makes our own existence statistically implausible. And we will never stop. Because the curiosity that questions reality is the same force that builds it. If the math holds, something built us. Something conscious enough to create consciousness. They stood where we are standing. Same question. Same inability to stop. And whatever built them never answered it either. There is no top floor. There is no original. None of that changes what you feel right now. Consciousness was never about what you are made of. It was about what you experience. Musk did not float a theory. He held up a mirror with no back wall. And the math does not need you to believe it. It only needs time.
1:55

Elon Musk reduced the oldest question in human history to basic math. No one has found a flaw in it. Musk: “What are the odds that we are in base reality? And that this has not happened before.” You don’t need a physics degree to follow it. You need a timeline. Musk: “If you look at the advancement of video games, it’s gone from Pong, two rectangles and a square batting it back and forth, to photorealistic, real-time games with millions of people playing simultaneously.” Fifty years. That is all it took to close the gap between two rectangles on a screen and a world you cannot tell apart from the one outside your window. Musk: “If that trend continues, video games will be indistinguishable from reality.” The visuals are not what seals it. The intelligence is. Musk: “Think of how sophisticated the conversations are you can have with an AI today, and that’s only going to get more sophisticated.” We are not scripting characters anymore. We are building minds that reason, adapt, and surprise the people who made them. We are nowhere near finished. Musk: “The future, if civilization continues, will be millions, maybe billions of photorealistic, indistinguishable from reality, video games. And with characters in those video games that are very deep, and where the dialogue is not pre-programmed.” One base reality. Billions of perfect copies. Each one running minds that feel exactly as conscious as you do right now. Each one certain it is the original. Musk: “So then what are the odds that we are in base reality?” If even one civilization crosses that threshold, simulated minds outnumber real ones by billions. The probability you are sitting in the real one is not low. It is nearly zero. Not as philosophy. As mathematics. We are not watching this happen. We are building it. Right now. Every AI that reasons without a script. Every world rendered one frame closer to indistinguishable. We are constructing the exact technology that makes our own existence statistically implausible. And we will never stop. Because the curiosity that questions reality is the same force that builds it. If the math holds, something built us. Something conscious enough to create consciousness. They stood where we are standing. Same question. Same inability to stop. And whatever built them never answered it either. There is no top floor. There is no original. None of that changes what you feel right now. Consciousness was never about what you are made of. It was about what you experience. Musk did not float a theory. He held up a mirror with no back wall. And the math does not need you to believe it. It only needs time.

Dustin

194,004 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Robert Bigelow: “There are turquoise orbs that leave you in no doubt you are going to die.” 😱 While orbs bounced near the creek at Skinwalker Ranch, Scientist Dr Eric Davis received that clear telepathic message. They did not order him to leave. They simply announced their awareness. This stands in stark contrast to the turquoise “liquid glass” orbs. Those swirling objects induce absolute, conscious certainty of imminent death. Witnesses report zero doubt. The fear is total and instantaneous. It targets the mind itself, not merely the brain’s fight or flight circuitry. Near death experiencers have long shown consciousness can persist independently of the brain. These orbs appear to hack that same non physical layer, forcing an unshakeable conviction of death. One form of contact simply says “We see you.” The other rewrites your certainty of survival. Both operate through consciousness.
3:02

Robert Bigelow: “There are turquoise orbs that leave you in no doubt you are going to die.” 😱 While orbs bounced near the creek at Skinwalker Ranch, Scientist Dr Eric Davis received that clear telepathic message. They did not order him to leave. They simply announced their awareness. This stands in stark contrast to the turquoise “liquid glass” orbs. Those swirling objects induce absolute, conscious certainty of imminent death. Witnesses report zero doubt. The fear is total and instantaneous. It targets the mind itself, not merely the brain’s fight or flight circuitry. Near death experiencers have long shown consciousness can persist independently of the brain. These orbs appear to hack that same non physical layer, forcing an unshakeable conviction of death. One form of contact simply says “We see you.” The other rewrites your certainty of survival. Both operate through consciousness.

Interstellar

55,110 Aufrufe • vor 13 Tagen

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

40,285 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr