Видео

Wow, utter nonsense.

Yes they are , they are the watcher and the fallen

Man these comments sections are suddenly filled with radicalised Peterson gobbling youths, gawdayum.

SIMPLICITY to understand “Artificial” anything is never the REAL THING.

You said it correctly, Chomsky implied what you said with his word associations and it's not the first time he has done that example. I've heard him do it when speaking about Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis, there are probably others considering the pattern is established.

Have more integrity dude

OMG Lou is so meladramatic............Hollywood coaching for sure IMO

LOL! Screw this old pansy; Team JP all the way, baby.

SETI sauce 🥸🤐👽

Man, you answer your own question in the first 2.5 minutes. All that questioning and not enough 'knowing' - it seems to me - is the exact phenomenon which may deliver you many fruits, if you dare to sit with your terror of not knowing.

If I understand this man, he is brilliant and is one of a very few who truly understands materiality and the realties of his discipline. I think that most math and physics professionals, his counterparts, do not. To be painfully simple about it, there are no actual infinities. There cannot be. To exist, or the means and manner of existence is to be finite, delineable and quantifiable. For example, the universe as often defined by those like Penrose and Cox, et. al., cannot be infinite in scope by definition of the very body of physics to which they claim we are obliged to defer. They claim it expanded from a singularity and is expanding still. They have defined its scope as 10 -15 cm or some such (the proper size is irrelevant in my comments) and claimed that by inflation it expanded instantly to the size of a grapefruit, both quantifiable measures. I wonder then what was that last measure of expansion just before the very next one was infinity? Consider their explanation for the origin of the universe as bouncing or cyclical, its iterations having existed infinitely back. Several problems with this; to conform to the cyclical universe theory, i.e., that the universe has been expanding, stopping and collapsing to expand again, over and over forever. First, the supposedly infinite expanse of the present universe (and any previous) could not be collapsed back to a quantifiable measure any more than it could have expanded from one to infinity. Second, the only way to consider or contemplate this line of iterations of the universe infinitely back is from this open end (the here and now) backward. We cannot go back to the other end to contemplate movement forward as the theory claims the iterations of the universe would appear, because there isn’t one (an “other end”). We could only calculate that the iterations would populate that infinite line back, in the backward direction. Even “if” we tried to consider it forwardly, we would never get here, to the here and now. Yet here we are contemplating the notion. This theory then fails miserably and is quite sophomoric. So, I have what I think is proof of the source of the errors made. Please try this on for size, it is my own. I will take credit for it even if you find it ridiculous, though if you do, please explain why. Consider, a line which extends infinitely out in both directions. It would indeed have infinite points composing it “even if” those points had quantifiable scope and dimension. However, a line segment, 1” long let’s say, could not yet would have to. A 1” line segment would have to begin somewhere specific in space and end a quantifiable 1” away. Each end by definition would have to be designated by a point beyond which there was no other. By that, it would have to have all aspects which were quantifiable or the line segment could not have been defined to begin with. So that these end points would be quantifiable, so too would all the other points of which the line segment was composed and therefore there could not be infinite points composing it. Additionally, to have infinite points, each would have to be infinitely small which is a contradiction for an infinitely small point would simple not be able to exist. Continuing on, if we were to accept that above, we would be then obliged to asked ourselves, if these end points had scope and dimension, what would they be? If 10x, why not 5x, or 1x or .5x, ad infinitum. We then confront that these points and all other points composing the line segment would have to be infinitely small. So the line segment cannot have infinite points but as the same time, must have. The problem is the pairing of the concept of infinity with those of materiality and this is not possible. So, what do you think?

Brilliant !

This exchange only highlights the rise of anti-intellectualism. The comment section agreeing with the “hitler comparison” solidifies my point.

So he’s like Hitler and Atila the Hun. Not very profound, nor very original. This is after 65 years in the Universities.

hey curt, don't you think a debate between Edward frenkel and josha bach would be super interesting?

Cult of personality is very vivid in Greer. Greer has a desire to be at the top of the pile.

Since the advent of technological activity, humanity's most precious gift, evil has become even more maniacal. This leading to an impossible state of indiscernible activity, making the truth impossible to separate from a lie, & boom, here we r!

Yeah there is gold. Book deals, likes viewers & podcasts like YOURS!

These

Curt! They r both suspects & even worse, u r just aggrandizing their mythomanic behavior. All reports & no physical evidence anywhere. Even Elon Musk has attested that not 1 of more than 6,000 satellites he had put in space since 2019, has detected squat in space. No anomalies! Come on dude! Stop this viruses from spreading.

Load of bollox. Coulthardt running a 3 ring circus of bullshit with Elizondo and Co. They're all making money from this bullshit.

Walton is a pathetic liar… He went on the Joe Rogan show with his $2 made up story and couldn’t even look Joe in the eyes when recounting it. He had to look away during the whole fucking story… Telling it like he was reciting some poetry with his weak ass trembling voice… This dude is a con artist and I can’t believe that we wasted a movie on this bullshit and that anyone would give this cretin the time of day at all after what we know.

Bigfoot is the remaining living descendants of nephilim. Eliud , they will mindspeak to some. If you know , then everything will click into place and make sense. Nothing is odd about telepathy, cloaking. Ketchum’s DNA profile are exactly what you’d expect if you knew the story of genesis 6. The way that native Americans treat the Sasquatch. The way there are many different kinds of them and they speak “samurai chatter”. Orbs and the lady in white

Shes a grifter big time.Says anything without backup proof .She just loves money

Doty is a liar and a scoundrel

"A physical system cannot be conscious, apparently" (0:20) Why??? What motivates this conclusion? I'm a physical system, and I am conscious. I think it's the exact opposite. Only a physical can be conscious. If qualia, as Joscha says, are only representational in a simulation, how are such representations reified such that qualia are experienced? Contrast Joscha's theory with John Searle's treatment of consciousness in the following video: "Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence | John Searle | Talks at Google" Talks at Google - video dated Dec 3, 2015 URL ending with rHKwIYsPXLg&t=1814s (Concerned that full URL will cause comment not to be posted)

mirage men.....look at this new shiny object

Is there a connection to consciousness and Bigfoot? Any perception, anything body, any location, any orientation of matter, internal or external, subtle or gross, Is a manifestation of consciousness. Otherwise it would not be known and no one to know it.

If u have no clay to make bricks dint complain when the building falls down, pais is a great mind

He said you are not worth paying attention to. I agree.

UAP sightings are way up now. Any idea their plans? Did we stir them up in Antarctica?

His connection to chris bledsoe is very interesting. Gives me reason to believe that maybe she isnt full of it.

I’m not worried about the aliens. I’m much more worried about the factions in our government that know the truth and have the alien technology that might use that tech against us in order to false flag the aliens as a threat, and keep that tech to themselves. We have never been alone. They’ve been here for thousands of years.

I don't believe anything said by anyone in this video.

Thank you for referring to the source of your Video clips! Though I know the channel "Theories of Everything" I wasn't aware at this specific video that I am interesting much! Now I can watch all of it at "Theories of Everything" !

"Quantum electric vacuum breakdown" I'm no physicist, but was told in my college freshman year that nature hates a vacuum...and will endeavor to fill it with something. Typically with whatever is closest and will satisfy the vacuum. So, if Pais is suggesting that Tesla (and others) theorized that something on "the other side" is waiting to fill it...or, mankind can fill it and "transport mass to the other side" that might make sense?

'superdeterminism' is just a pejorative way to say 'determinism', which is just a very forgiving assertion that effects have causes. That's it. The standard QM interpretation isn't even compatible with this very low bar axiom. This axiom is literally an assumption that is compatible with _every single other scientific theory or concept_ ... except QM.

Well when you type in Joscha Bach Bernardo Kastrup into the search this is the top result, so at least this video has that going for it.

You would think heir documentarian would have considered filming the levitating items.

Lets try a reasonable, logical question: But why would a highly advanced alien civilization with the ability to traverse interstellar space mot have the ability to clone cows or other animals from one or a few speimens and do whatever it is they do with the animals in a more convenient manner than coming here for ages?

"Eye witness testimony" - the lowest level of evidence.

This is an invitation to see a theory where light is both a wave and a particle, with a probabilistic ∆×∆pᵪ≥h/4π, future continuously unfolding in relation to the electron probability cloud of atoms and the wavelength of light. In this theory, the wave-particle duality of light and matter (electrons) creates a blank canvas that we (atoms) can interact with forming a future relative to the energy and momentum of our actions. This interaction is represented by a constant of action in space and time, mathematically denoted as the Planck constant h/2π. This concept is supported by the fact that light photon energy ∆E=hf is continuous exchange into the kinetic energy Eₖ=½mv² of matter, in the form of electrons.

This is indeed a very Interesting perspective from Hameed (A. H. Almaas) on psychedelics. My take on this: If you cannot access the same realisation you are having on psychedelics without them, you are not using them properly - yet! What does it take to use them properly? It requires developing a solid spiritual practice. Without it, the use of psychedelics can be quite dangerous. Even if not in all cases dangerous, it remains incomplete! Why incomplete? Well, it´s not the case that we modern people are the first ones to use them, right? There is a long standing tradition of using psychedelics going back for thousands of years and these indigenous traditions are using them in context of healing and initiation - which means: they do not use them without the context of initiation and solid spiritual practice. That should be enough for us to respect and learn from them as much as we can!

I have no trash understanding of it since I'm not very good on physics. But may I ask if Ngyuen is way too harsh on that theory? He said there is a big error on the beginning of the paper and that it completely invalidates Geometric Unity. What do you guys think? People like professor Dave (who I find incredibly annoying) claim that Eric is a fraud. What are your thoughts?

I’m sorry but i don’t believe anything she says

I left as soon as he said wacky conspiracy theorists....

There is no proof of portals, all imagination

There are no bigfoot, amazing the new ways people come up with to try to exsplain away the fact that is no evidence, it is all fiction combined with immagination

Nature is countable and does not divert, prime trajectory included. That is real, every day, it is real.

Scientific principles can be done in reverse, no?