"Hey Bill Nye, Are We the Universe?"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 сен 2024
- "Hey Bill Nye, Are We the Universe?"
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this week’s #tuesdayswithbill, The Science Guy takes us on a journey through the skeptic’s brain to answer a question about spiritual existence. Are we spiritually or electronically connected to each other and everything else? Bill doesn’t believe so because what we’re talking about is something impalpable. There’s no way to test for things like spirits and chakras. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but it does mean we should have to reason to believe they exist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NYE:
Bill Nye, scientist, engineer, comedian, author, and inventor, is a man with a mission: to help foster a scientifically literate society, to help people everywhere understand and appreciate the science that makes our world work. Making science entertaining and accessible is something Bill has been doing most of his life.
In Seattle Nye began to combine his love of science with his flair for comedy, when he won the Steve Martin look-alike contest and developed dual careers as an engineer by day and a stand-up comic by night. Nye then quit his day engineering day job and made the transition to a night job as a comedy writer and performer on Seattle’s home-grown ensemble comedy show “Almost Live.” This is where “Bill Nye the Science Guy®” was born. The show appeared before Saturday Night Live and later on Comedy Central, originating at KING-TV, Seattle’s NBC affiliate.
While working on the Science Guy show, Nye won seven national Emmy Awards for writing, performing, and producing. The show won 18 Emmys in five years. In between creating the shows, he wrote five children’s books about science, including his latest title, “Bill Nye’s Great Big Book of Tiny Germs.”
Nye is the host of three currently-running television series. “The 100 Greatest Discoveries” airs on the Science Channel. “The Eyes of Nye” airs on PBS stations across the country.
Bill’s latest project is hosting a show on Planet Green called “Stuff Happens.” It’s about environmentally responsible choices that consumers can make as they go about their day and their shopping. Also, you’ll see Nye in his good-natured rivalry with his neighbor Ed Begley. They compete to see who can save the most energy and produce the smallest carbon footprint. Nye has 4,000 watts of solar power and a solar-boosted hot water system. There’s also the low water use garden and underground watering system. It’s fun for him; he’s an engineer with an energy conservation hobby.
Nye is currently the Executive Director of The Planetary Society, the world’s largest space interest organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Cory: Hi Bill. Cory here from Vermont, the beautiful state of Vermont. I'm a huge fan, by the way. Thank you for everything that you do. So my one question to you is I've been reading a lot of things about spirituality and electric impulses, you know, really I guess stemming through our entire anatomy and kind of the concept that our universe is us and we are our universe. A little out there, I get it. I know. My question is to you, what do you think about that? Thank you.
Bill Nye: Cory, this is a great question. We, in the skeptical community, are very skeptical that there's any life force running through us other than chemical energy that makes us go. Now, I'll give you an example. Yoga. People do a lot of yoga and the big thing in yoga is to stay flexible, to stretch, to make sure your bones and muscles stay limber through your whole life and it's very effective and people get a lot out of it. But along that line, there are claims that you have these sources of energy in your body that, my understanding, are called chakras, but no one has been ever able to observe a chakra. I mean, they're an idea and you might experience it in your mind, but there's nobody who's been able to cut open a human or a mouse and X-ray a human, tap on a human, listen to a human with a stethoscope, or take human blood samples, and detect a chakra. It just hasn't happened.
With that said, people get a lot of comfort out of communities to know that other people are thinking the same way you're thinking. There's a team, essentially the human team, we'd all work together if push came to shove. But I am very skeptical that there's this life force that runs through us all. People have gone looking for it from a scientific standpoint for centuries. Now remember, there's a couple ideas in science that are very important and they're described nowadays in what's called critical thinking; your ability to...
For the full transcript, check out bigthink.com/v...
Want to get Smarter, Faster?
Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter
“Through our eyes, the universe is perceiving itself. Through our ears, the universe is listening to its harmonies. We are the witnesses through which the universe becomes conscious of its glory, of its magnificence.” - Alan Watts
I know this is old but damn, Alan Watts is your proof? Wow.
@Madelyn Hernandez Schrödinger held similar beliefs. Also they aren't saying their proof is Alan Watts they're just quoting Alan Watts.
@@madelynhernandez7453 you do realize your sense of self doesn’t have any scientific or quantifiable “proof” either right? What I mean by this is that there is no structure, no combination of chemicals, no hormones, etc that directly cause and create an observable sense of self that can be quantified through neurological data or structure functionality observation. So now, let’s go full materialist. We are particles ever shifting, forming geometrical patterns, getting energized the closer we get to each other, and manifest in ever changing forms that represent and constitute what we understand as reality or “matter”. We are the same particles, the same energy, the same physical constructs that the universe is made out of, so I don’t really see how you can disagree with the fact we are the universe even if you’re a pure materialist. If you’re a materialist you believe the universe is all there is, so how could there be anything but the universe and it’s capability to observe and measure itself?
"The nitrogen in our DNA
The iron in our blood
The calcium in our teeth
The carbon in our apple pies
We are made of the interiors of collapsing stars-
The cosmos is Also within us,
We are made of star stuff.
We are a way for the cosmos to know itself"
-Carl Sagan
Humans are a way for the Universe to experience itself.
+tyfenrir Where is your evidence?
+merinsan Your eye's. If there were no eyes in this world then there would be no light, only heat.
Life is a way for the Universe to experience itself. Carl Sagan used to say we are a eye piece in which the whole Universe looks at itself with.
Since every atom in your body came from and resides in the Universe, you are it! You weren't brought into this world, you came from it, you are it. We all are.
+tyfenrir Many scientists and science popularizers use this catchy phrases to draw people in, not push them away from science, and it's ok in this purpose. But they usually know that it's just a white lie. Take Darwin for instance: "from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved". He knows fully well that all that wonder is paid in rivers of blood, death and suffering for literraly billions of individuals.
+merinsan I do recognize it's a reference to Carl Sagans quote, the problem is I very much doubted he would approve of its use in this context.
The problem is, someone has asked if "we are the universe?" The answer is clearly no. By quoting Sagan, you're essentially legitimizing the question. Sure we are a part of the universe, but the universe is not conscious in any way, which is what the question was about.
+merinsan hes right. The ego prevents humanity from seeing this truth
"We are a way, for the cosmos, to know itself." - Carl Sagan
Exploring that idea, that the universe is not just 'out there' but it's here; this planet, our bodies, our minds, then yes, we are the universe.
All of us, are the universe.
Every one of us, is, the universe.
If you are already well aware of it, it may come as no surprise. But given the way people used to see the world; the inside and the outside as separate, if you were raised that way and never considered yourself a part of the universe but rather a distinct from it, then it can be a very life changing realization.
I really wish Bill had mentioned Carl in this video and the affect that this statement had on people, have been broadcast on television in the context of the rest of the Cosmos series and not just limited to a passage in a book that far fewer people may have come upon.
ABitOfTheUniverse Your death effectively causes a replacement of Your conscious experience with a completely new one. Someone else's, which That being comes to experience their Self just as you're seeing the world (first person) right now (through your eyes) there will always be a "You"...
Silly Bill Nye, of course you can't see the chakras. You need to possess the Byakugan to do that.
+BryceBryceBaby or sharingan :)
+BryceBryceBaby I don't think Bill Nye believes in the chakras nor Byakugan.
+Kosmos de Kosmopoliet He didn't say chakras are not real due to the fact that we cannot visibly seem them. All he said was that we cannot disprove them due to the fact that you cannot prove any negative.
When he says the scientific community has been looking for it he does not mean literally looking with their sense of sight but rather with the scientific method which extends far outside our own senses.
+Kosmos de Kosmopoliet Thoughts and dreams can be detected and measured, and have been, without having to dissect anyone.
+BryceBryceBaby Guess I'll never shoot a Hadoken :(
I prefer Neil DeGrasse Tyson's answer to these questions. Yes, we are the Universe. The Universe is in us as much as we are in the Universe. A much more elegant answer.
link?
link?
link?
link?
link?
A "life force" was this ever mentioned in her question?
We ARE a part of the universe. The universe (as we understand it) is held within our subjectivity. And before anyone says anything primitive, im not negating third person objective reality. Only that, it as a phenomenon exists within our experience.
josh ketum Your death effectively causes a replacement of Your conscious experience with a completely new one. Someone else's, which That being comes to experience their Self just as you're seeing the world (first person) right now (through your eyes) there will always be a "You"...
I think he’s using an example
WHWWD And Philosophy how do you know this?
Lunar Atlas he's been saying that in a bunch of comments without answering, it's probably a load of bs
I mean, yeah dude!
Faith is needed for spirituality in most cases, it is willful ignorance. I don't feel comfortable relinquishing my critical thinking skills to any aspect of life.
+Sebanoe Then that means that you are willfully ignorant of faith and spirituality. Checkmate, you stupid atheist!
+sems1193
Did you hear that whooshing sound going over your head?
+Sebanoe and you dont question any of the information you're fed do you ;) hypocritical much.
and lets be honest here as well, you dont truly understand what an atom is nor do you understand how cells work down to their very make up... you just listen to what a group of few say and eat it up because its more convenient to believe that, its whats "popular" so you go with the flow.
just trying to make you think. ;)
+Sebanoe I don't know, I'm an atheist, but I consider myself a very spiritual person. Spirituality to me is the feeling of being one with the universe, the awe of observing it, and the countless questions we have about it. The feeling you get in your core when you see something beautiful in nature or another person. And the more I study scientific fields, the more spiritual I become. Spirituality doesn't necessarily mean faith or religion.
+F Mar im trying to spread ideas like this because religion hijacked the concept of spirituality.
I think Bill missed the point of the question.
Emily Long Your death effectively causes a replacement of Your conscious experience with a completely new one. Someone else's, which That being comes to experience their Self just as you're seeing the world (first person) right now (through your eyes) there will always be a "You"...
@@naturalisted1714 And how do you know that? Did you just make this up?
Claim: We never see reality, only an interpretation of reality created by our brain. The sense of self is an illusion in that it can be turned off and on. For some, they see the entire world as themselves. Our brain shapes our reality, and our beliefs shape our brain. If we work systematically to remove division, we can see the world as our self (experience bliss, etc.). This is the main theme behind many religions, at least originally.
A human brain by itself interprets nothing. It is just a piece of meat about the size of a cauliflower encased in a shell made of bone. It needs all the familiar five senses to give the illusion of a permanent self.
@@mael-strom9707 ah, a cynic
@@daywalker3068 I guess Siddhartha Gautama was a cynic until his awakening. 😁🙏
@Dislike Button The brain by itself resides in total darkness marinated by bodily fluids within a bioelectric field and interprets reality by all the senses at its disposal. Without the five basic senses, the human brain would just be a bioelectrical charged useless knob of meat.
Mushrooms and acid sure make you feel like part of everything and it is amazing. Some of the things that are big parts of quantum physics point towards that type of connection or feelings you can have on psychedelics.
5:21
You just know Bill's been blazed out of his mind at some point in his youth.
"ahahah woahh dude"
Just once I would love to see Bill respond with "Oh FFS what a stupid question!" I would absolutely lose it if he did that but he won't because he's a bit nicer than that.
+The Red Bafoon omg yes I would laugh my ass off. Like they show a video with a serious guy with a serious questions and Bill is just like "ugh this asshole again. Look im not going to answer such a dumb question"
I have an idea about what consciousness is. If we look at nature, with each step of complexity, new properties arise. time arise when elementary particles interact with each other... and so do space. likewise atoms: they are made of elementary particles, but they show properties that elementary particles do not have. when atoms are combined to create molecules, each molecule show new properties that atoms do not have. is it so strange to think of consciousness as simply a new property that arises when a lot of neural connections are established? the more the complexity of a system, the more the properties it shows, that's my idea of consciousness .
As an atheist I feel that we are the universe observing itself. The laws of physics have created a universe that gives rise consciousness. I don't believe in an afterlife or that our consciousness goes somewhere when we die, but I do find it comforting that the atoms that make up my body will go on to give life to other organisms.
I do think you misinterpreted her question though. I don't think she was referring to a life force that gives rise to conscious beings, but asking "do we live in the universe or are we the universe?" My answer to that is that we are the universe observing itself.
When I saw the video title I expected something different. I was slightly disappointed with Bill's answer, as I don't think it was on point, the answer was very informative regardless.
If we go purely by the question "Are we the universe?" my answer would be that we are. We are a part of the universe after all. Are we the Universe experiencing itself? Maybe. I mean what is the difference between a photon hitting a particle in your eye and being absorbed different, from a photon hitting a particle of similar makeup outside of your eye and being absorbed? The only real difference is the effect it has on the system the particle is a part of, but that doesn't elevate the position of a carbon atom in an eye over a carbon atom in a piece of coal. ;)
+d3rrial Yeah, agreed. Fascinating, isn't it? 'We are a way for the cosmos to know itself', as Carl Sagan said.
+d3rrial I was slightly disappointed, especially with the beginning, but the end was appropriate. Maybe if the guy had more time he would have talked about materialism and monism, the guiding principles of sceptical science, Buddhism and our place in the natural world. What I mean is, it's probably obvious to Bill that we are the universe in that sense, even if the consequences for what it means to be human are wide ranging and manifest in everything that we do and understand. but he ends the video with an invitation for future scientists to elucidate this further, so I think you're really both on the same page. it's all about consciousness x
+Buffoon1980 "We are all star stuff." Great quote by Carl Sagan. But I think he approached the question properly. It would be like asking a question about the existence of a divine being. Unlike religion, science is open to these questions and all potential answers, assuming you are able to provide real evidence for their existence.
+d3rrial Therefore I am a piece of coal :0
Ok, I think I reached a whole new level in my Zen understanding of reality :)
+d3rrial You got it. Incredible that Bill didn't, really. Or perhaps there is an agenda involved here. Tsk tsk.
I am an neuroscientist and currently figuring this interesting study out as well as many others. Stay tuned in the medical science updates to find out.
This comment has been deleted by the Federal Government.
I honestly think that back in those days, people mistaken our Central Nervous System for these Chakras. So in a way, we actually do have chakra, its just the electrical currents in our Central Nervous System firing off. Further more, the reason why I enjoy the stories of how the Buddha came to be is because they are possible. Nothing in history claimed he did the impossible like walked on water, or moved oceans.. He was basically an ancient psychologist that discovered a way for ever person to find their better self.
Any person on this planet could easily replicate the process that Siddhartha Gautama went through to achieve his heightened sense of being. Buddhism has helped sparked my interest in medicine and healing for the mind. Being able to sit there, one on one with someone and get to their root of suffering and show them how they can sprout above it.
But I'm getting WAY off topic, haha.
im thinking the same too with the nervous system on how people interpreted that as the chakara's. even IF we dont have this spiritual essence it doesn't change the fact that we DO feel something to make our lives happy and very peaceful for us to enjoy and appreciate what we can do in life. BTW im also a Buddhist too so maybe its just we got the same sense of idea :P
So Buddha isn't displayed as a divine being with extra abilities?
no, buddha never developed or was granted any super power that could change the world, he only believed and teached that of ways to find and obtain peace through his practices, and that human beings are all just well human beings and that to hate each other is a pointless concept bent on creating more violence and distrust. something in terms like that i might be mistranslated but let me %100 assure you that Buddha is not an asian jesus nor was he a divine being, he was just a straight up guy who taught people the way to happiness through understanding and acceptance of other people. i recommend you do some more research on him if you want to understand it a bit more, its kinda complicated for me to explain, in fact in Buddhism its best to learn about the religion by own means of experience.
Neceros Correct. The Buddha never claimed he was a deity, or had supernatural like powers.What he achieved in himself, he sought out to share that everyone else can also achieve it.
Buddhists view of the word Divine, or Divine light is different. When a Buddhist achieves a state of enlightenment or Nirvana, they are at the best state of mind and being they can achieve. Their body will feel light (as in weight and in warmth). Their mind is clear and focused only in the present moment.. Past and Future don't cause them any stress.
When people were around the Buddha, they too felt different. They described it as him having a divine light around him. The best part is that you can have any or no faith and acquire that same state of mind and body that the Buddha did. You do NOT have to be a Buddhist to achieve the heightened state of mind and body.
+Neceros Wait? Did you actually believe that he was presented as a divine being with extra abilities? I'm a Buddhist, oh well here we go again.
Buddha was a prince, he lived a sheltered and privileged life. One time he saw how the world really was, he saw the suffering and the pain and abandoned his royal life. He went to starve himself. (I'm not to sure what really happened here) but he meditated under a bodi tree and eventually became enlightened. He realized that what causes suffering and pain is one persons attachment and greed, to achieve enlightenment one has to rid themselves of superficial items and greed.
Think of the Jedi Code (If you know Star Wars) in fact George Lucas based the force and the Jedi off Buddhism
In short, Buddha isn't a god, he never claimed to be a god. He was just a mortal man, while there maybe some elements of spirits and demons thought Buddhist stories in Asia those are remnants of spiritualities and polytheistic religions that have been combined
I think see was asking something different than what you think she asked. I believe she was asking more from the point that our brain creates your universe. What if you couldn't see or hear your universe would be very different, Now what if you were nerve dead too so you couldn't feel,smell, or taste. Your universe would be in an almost still zen like state of just consciousness. In this way you are the center of your universe and your brain lives in the universe, but also your universe lives in your brain. You could also see it from the quantum side, where consciousness is required to collapse infinite possibility wave form universe into the particle like universe like in the wave/particle duality two slit quantum experiment. Now if you take it one step further and say your inside voice is quite like a sense it that it streams you like sound and one can manipulate it slightly like you can do with your breath and heartbeat but it starts back up by it's self like the other senses. So you are the listener or witness-er of the inside voice and sense not the inside voice it's self like most people think. Then you get to a point where universe creates consciousness and consciousness creates the universe and true consciousness is not related to senses and ability to have a inside voice but it it the actual "witnessing or observing" in a senseless shapeless infinite timeless "being" state, because we are not talking null states because quite is measured by noise level and blackness is defined by light, we are talking a point were reality and duality kind of collapses into infinity. Such states are quite possible and easy with sensory deprivation and dmt.....I would love to hear someone talk about those types of ideas.
Sam Harris would have a field day with this question. : D
+Taxtro He pretty much dealt with it in Waking Up
+Taxtro As would Alan Watts, who I think argued for this the best of anyone of the West in the last century.
The cosmos is a series of interdependent, interconnected processes. We are in it, and of it, as well as everything else, too. In this sense, the cosmos is non-dual, but our illusion of self gets in the way, and ultimately it is seeing through the illusion that one is the universe, as one is forever in and of it.
+ShakinJamacian Bill Nye would conflate this with religious b.s. and dismiss it, as does Harris et. al.
valinor100 Of course..but who said I was inferring otherwise? You dismiss illusion, and religion is illusion for one reason, and it isn't even a religious claim.
All religion promotes dualism, but the world is non-dual. Any religion that infers dualism - a 'me' that is separate from life - is bullshit.
ShakinJamacian
I was just commenting on your post.
What I mean is that Nye has perhaps never even heard of non-dual philosophy, and Harris, though he is well versed in it, would always say that non-dualism is only a product of brain function and not indicative of how the universe works.
Hey Bill, don’t know if you ever get around to reading any of these, but I just want to let you know how much I appreciate you and your ability to answer questions like these without belittling or insulting your inquirer while still asserting your firm beliefs. You are certainly someone I look up to. My concise takes on the likeness of your voice before I harm the planet and usually dissuades me from doing so. Keep up the good work.
Good answer Bill - but you can prove a negative, for example, through an argument of logical impossibility (think physical square-circles existing in a galaxy we don't have access to). You'd have been better off saying you can't prove that particular negative, or even better, that the burden of proof is never on a person to prove a negative. A minor distinction - and that is probably what you meant. Just brought it up for the sake of clarity.
As for the "we are the universe" part - we could just say that the atoms that make up our biological bodies are, of course, "PART OF the universe". The distinction between "being the universe" and being "part of the universe" is important. The heart isn't the body, it's a part of the body, mars isn't the solar system, it is part of the solar system, etc.
+trick0171 I think you are referring to proof by contradiction, there is also contraposition. Which, is almost the same thing.
Well, the part is intrinsically connected with the whole just as an individual wave in an ocean is still the ocean, it is just the ocean acting as a wave.
Having misspent my youth "living better through chemistry", I can tell you that even under the most nominal conditions, our perception of reality can often be little more than a house of cards. There are many ways in which our perception of reality and the true nature of the universe don't always match up.
Like Bill's example of dark matter and dark energy. Another example is pattern recognition. Humans are very good at it. It's part of what got us to the top of the food chain. In fact, we're so good at it, that we sometimes see patterns where none exist. That's why the scientific method, and the ability to think critically are so important.
There is a great deal that we don't know, and there is a natural tendency to fill in the gaps of our knowledge with speculation. This imagination, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. Quite the opposite. The danger comes when we fail to take the next steps of observation and experimentation that turns a hypothesis into a theory, and a theory into fact. Or not. Either way, something is learned.
Human history, both ancient and current, is riddled with the failures of taking a supposition and positing it as immutable truth. The resulting death and destruction is also evident throughout history. Yet these things take hold of us. Generations and centuries pass, and people get so emotionally invested in fairy tales, that when the truth finally does present itself, it is summarily ignored.
We do this at our peril.
+Michael Powers Well said.
5:29 AHAHAH
When a person says, "I am the Universe." It could mean many different things. I like to think of it this way: The only information I have of the Universe are the messages that come to my mind from my senses. Everything that I know, I know as impulses of information from those senses. So how do I know whether that information is real or just part of my mind? I don't. I can say it is unlikely that it is all illusion, but that doesn't prove it to be so. Again, proving a negative. So, if I am "locked" in my mind and can't escape that mind, then my mind is the originator of the Universe as far as I am concerned. This only makes sense on the individual level. So there's an answer to your question that should pose science no real concerns. You are the Universe. But you are not my universe nor am I yours. Now, if we ever manage to create a technology that can read another person's mind, this still holds true because you would still have to experience that person's world through your own senses. Again, it could still just be the proverbial "shadows on the wall" of your mind. We know, from psychological studies, that a person's "view" of the Universe can effect great changes in the world around them. By that logic, you re-create your Universe whenever you view it differently. This philosophy, it seems to me, bridges the gap between science and spirituality. By the way, I don't think of "spirituality" as "religion." I think of it more as a journey to the most ephemeral parts of our consciousness. I hope I used that word right :-D Now, I am ready for the blogosphere to blow the hell up!
+Keith Morgan Or you can experience it from that person's senses! ;)
Philip Almqvist My contention is that the information would be indistinguishable from that which enters through your own senses so you couldn't know if it were any more real than what comes from your normal experiences.
I know I’m kind of late with a response to this comment but I stumbled upon it while watching the video. If you see this comment from me, and you’re into this consciousness stuff and the approach from science compared to the spiritual side, then i would recommend you read “the nature of consciousness” by Rupert spira...if you want. He touches upon what you have said but explains it better than I can in a comment section on RUclips. Check him out ! :)
what a gentle & generous man
There is no you. Never mind spirituality, I’m just talking through a perspective.
The you universe is literally everything conceivable; including life. We create separations by naming different parts of it. That’s ok, nothing wrong with that, it’s just how we are. For example the arrangement of the specific atoms that make me up, have my name. The arrangement of atoms that make up a wall, well... we call it a wall.
I can separate your hand from you by saying that’s “Your hand”. But in reality, your hand is part of you in the same way you are a part of it. Same with the air you breathe, the light you see, etc. Simply put, if you are a part of it, then it’s a part of you.
The atoms that make everything up existed long before the atoms that make you up came to be arranged the way they are now, and they will continue to exist after your arrangement changes. And that doesn’t have to mean your death. Technically, it happens every second. Every instance of time, at least one atom in your arrangement has somehow changed from what it was before. Therefore death and birth are just 2 more transitions, nothing more.
So there is no us, you, me, etc. Those are just labels, it’s all just one. It’s all connected. So yes, it’s indeed correct to say that when we experience something, it is technically the universe experiencing itself.
This is a direct casualty based on the fact that we define “the universe” as “everything”.
The closest is that we perceive the universe, and each person has their own "universe" as we are limited to our own physical body and brain.
Someone give our good friend Bill some Shrooms please... that is all.
Not that i'll get a reply but the question was are we the universe not is there a life force flowing through us, with that said, the life force is absolutely there as our central nervous system so good explanation but the question was is our central nerves system some how connected to the universe and i could be wrong but the sense i would put that in is this, Does any part of the body whether eye or brain cell or blood or eardrum or nervous system, resemble the universe and parts of the universe and events in the universe, Are we a smaller version of ourselves. are we organisms inside an organism, is our life span just a fractal of time in another being, are we a cancer cell, just a growth on a cell in something much larger, i've seen a ton of pictures with things like brain cells compared to a "picture of the universe" or eyes and nebulas cells splitting and the death of a star and its intriguing because, in that sense it is a lupe. we are all connected, maybe we effect the body of something we're in and our condition in it would effect the bodies of the beings inside ourselves and our nebulas and vast universe of nerves systems each with there own planets and stars and satellites in this microscopic vast emptiness that creates us and everything as a whole, we're all organic matter.
+Jaedon King to add to the part about being a cancer cell, We do have a certain longing for space and adventure and to venture out into the unknown, everything else seems to have a scientific reasoning behind it like why we eat and drink and laugh and cry but this longing for the unknown to expand and thrive and conquer and build and grow as a unit. Is Cancer so different? My grandmother just passed away from Cancer, maybe i'm just grasping at straws because of recent events but, i do know everything that happens makes me want more than i need, is that for me? or is that for man kind? most of us certainly don't do things for the planet. Our purpose isn't to maintain the world, its to maintain ourselves, i love the earth and everything about it, so i'll live here my whole life sucking the life out of it for myself?
+Jaedon King I feel the same, she wanted to talk about the "we are the big bang" thing I guess it too.
molekulaTV Okay i was worried i was crazy :p
+Jaedon King Happy to hear you have a relief :)
Another thing: This time he went too far a bit on the top of that he did not listen to the question right?
At least he should express himself differently when it comes to this topics not just because to practice a better way to approach people but also because quantum physics makes anything possible anyway... Right? :)
+Jaedon King Your not sucking anything out of anything if you just let life flow through you... like a river, it's just a path for the water to return to the origin, and a river can be beautiful.
No life force? I'd say the entire universe is a living force. Think about it, it's moving on it's own and creating highly complex mathematical patterns within itself, some of which are so complex that they're self aware. If we found an object that did this, we'd assume it was either alive and highly intelligent or that it was a machine created by someone intelligent.
May the Force be with you Padawan.
I believe that conciseness is a state of matter that occurs due to the way in which it is arranged, if I am right then we could be able to measure the level of anyone/things conciseness judging by the way that it's matter is arranged.
Are you trying to be concise?
nobody has ever cut open a rat and found an idea.
+apagoogoo yeah it was a weak argument tbh xD
+apagoogoo True, but if we wire their brains up we probably could see it having an idea. Also ideas, by definition, are intangible. Chakras, if they existed might not be, but as of yet we haven't found one, no matter what tests they try. Therefore the odds are against it existing. Much like the purple unicorn that lives in my back passage.
+apagoogoo But we can prove people have ideas. If I am an expert in a field, and you show me an unsolved problem in that field, I just may solve it. If I do, we can draw two conclusions from this: either I had an idea that led me to solving it, or I really knew the answer since birth and I was lying about it the entire time and decided to reveal it at the moment. I think by Occam's razor it's more rational to conclude I simply had an idea.
+Runos9999 agreed
+apagoogoo
But we can cut open a human, remove a piece and find that we've removed an idea!
(due to some ethical concerns, that tends to involve checking changes after a stroke etc)
Ughh I hate what this channel has become, The questions seem to get more and more irrelevant to the knowledge areas of Bill Nye. The questions are also really stupid, Bill is not some sort of prophet, he knows only what we know.
+Bob Pettersson but it gets views, you yourself are proof enough that Bill Nye gets people to watch.
+Bob Pettersson Your not the only one who has noticed this. My 5 year old little boy has asked me more thought provoking questions.
Negative nancy sheesh.. Lighten up bro it was a fun video
I know right, how annoying. This is a question for a stoned and drunk amateur philosopher. What a waste of time.
Well bill did like the question
Loving the atmosphere of this channel--both the videos and commenters.
I love how he responds with enthusiasm and friendliness = D I bet Cori (Kory, Kori, Cory) was beaming happiness after watching the video :P
After a person dies the universe dies for that specific person so each person is the center of the universe according to its existence that is what makes each one of us extremely important
Yea i accually had a hard time at first grasping this fact at a young age. I was 12 when I started question my semi religious upbringing. I came to the realization through science and critical thinking, around 13, that I more than likely, am just a piece of the universe and a cluster of elements consiously experiencing and studying themselves for a tiny blip of time. And that the universe is also consious through other people's minds and how that connects me with other people. It scared me to think that I would become nothing after I die and that my consiousness would slip away forever but really, my body will be recycled and i will be reincorporated into many new things as the cycle of life and I have since come to terms with this as a 17 year old
I don't think that question was at all religious or spiritual; the purely Taoist approach would answer the answer the question through a purely logical and ontology based assessment.
You are the universe because you and it are indistinguishable. This concept is derived from the principal of Yin and Yang, IE, dialectic monism - humans tend to separate things dichotomously when they really represent the same thing. "The yin-yang principle is not, therefore, what we would ordinarily call a dualism, but rather an explicit duality expressing an implicit unity" - Alan Watts.
What's the difference between good and bad? In saying something is good, you imply something is bad and vice versa. You cannot have good without bad, and therefore, (the logical leap is not hard to make, but I need clarification myself) the two are indistinguishable. Alan Watts compares this type of thinking to two ends of a stick; though you can label one end and the other, they are still part of the greater stick.
Yin and Yang refer to the dark and light sides of a mountain; though one side is dark and the other is light and you could classify it as such, they both comprise the mountain.
From the Tao-Te-Ching (accurately described as an ancient book of philosophy, not necessarily religion)
When everyone knows beauty as beautiful,
there is already ugliness;
When everyone knows good as goodness,
there is already evil.
“To be” and “not to be” arise mutually;
Difficult and easy are mutually realized;
Long and short are mutually contrasted;
High and low are mutually posited;
Before and after are in mutual sequence.
You cannot view the universe with out you, and the universe would not be apparent without you. 'You' are the 'universe'.
An interesting read on the subject is something called "The Tao of Physics," to which it suggests much of eastern philosophy could easily be applied to modern notions and concepts in physics.
I thought Bill Nye could have answered her question a little more literally. "What do you think about the idea that we are the universe and the universe is us?"
It would not be unscientific to say that we are intrinsically part of the universe and thus, the universe is also a part of us. We are star dust are we not?
Similar to one of his last points, scientists instructed members of various groups, "Turn up the corners of your mouth, and raise your eyebrows," or, "Squint your eyes, and purse your lips," etc. Based on emotional evaluation surveys before and after these sessions, those whose faces were directed into a smile (without consciously smiling) reported being in a better mood; similar body-emotion correlation was witnessed for all emotional expressions.
"We are made of star stuff." -Carl Sagan
I thought she meant the idea that we are star dust like what Carl Sagan said... Cause all the elements in our body come from super novas (dying stars) cooling and combining and... Spinning I guess lol
i am an assteroid i guess lol ...just wandering around aimlessly in the universe.
love Bill
I have experienced the "chakra". My understanding is that you are unlocking your brain to feel more. I had read an article written by a navy seal who explains your body is always half turned off to stimulus.SO like when you lift something, you could lift nearly twice as much as you believe and think you can.
That's just a trick you tell yourself in order to open your mind. Like a workout. Like practice. Once you figure it out you can just feel it.
Firing electrons through "Young's Slits" and watching or not watching which slit they pass through proves the partial wave duality of electrons and gave us something known as the "Observer Effect". It is a small leap for a philosopher using the data from this experiment to suggest that the universe needs consciousness to exist and therefore: Yes, we are part of the universe and the universe is part of us.
Nicola Tesla did a great amount of work on this. He studied the Hindu Vedic teachings in this subject and was fascinated with the concept of Akasha which I think is the the question asked by the girl. Tesla even used the same term Akasha in his understanding of matter. There is a documentary called Inner world Outer world on youtube which explains how the concept of Akasha has been mentioned in different traditions around the world at different point of time.
I feel like Conciousness is a way of the universe to show it's forever expanding size. What that means is that every conciousness we have, or that a single stimulus you react to is different in every dimension of the universe. Now since the universe is so vast with it's endless space, it's reasonably to think the dimensions of the universe is endless. Therefore, every reaction could be different if you acted differently, which in turn split the two dimensions off into different type of events in history in both dimensions(
This is where science falls short, consciousness isn't something that's observable and tangible. You can explain life and what defines what being alive is. But the consciousness, the you, your personality, emotions, dreams, purpose none of that can be explained with science alone.
I keep thinking "Don't be an asshole, enjoy this lighthearted/quasi-bullshit question" but I can't keep myself from being annoyed.
Chakras are the organs in independent motion within the body that generate energy (cycles of polarity, nirvana, opposing charges) - genitals, stomach, lungs, heart and brain. Awareness of each's pulse, and how they synch to an exterior rhythm or together, is how yoga enables the body to conserve and release energy as desired.
I used to think that yoga has physical benefits but after reading Stuart McGill's research on spine biomechanics I was enlightened and moved on to athletic movements (deadlift, squat, etc) which is more beneficial.
Some personal woo of mine.
As far back as I can remember was the singularity. It was great. All our energy, spatial dimensions and even time hanging out in an infinitesimal monad set in a nothingness so nothing it wasn’t even vacuum. Then something happened, I don’t recall it very clearly. Perhaps it was another universal membrane drifting and undulating that contacted our ever-so-stable oneness. Interacting and exchanging it’s dark, strange ideas of math and physics. As our once perfect unity poured in to fill gaps and make room for the new stuff it violently expanded. Time and our familiar X, Y, and Z axis shot out in all directions and the multitude of other dimensions curled into manifolds, dragging the intrinsic fields of existence through their twisting prime knots, causing vibrations…good vibrations.
With these groovy oscillating vibes they coalesced into quantum bits, spinning into electrons, neutrons and protons and all the good stuff for making stuff. Hydrogen parties would get so crowded they’d eventually squish each other together into other elements. Fusing away the midnight oil. It was great until we tried to make iron. Caused a bit of an explosion but the bright side is it chucked out a bevy of other weird and wonderful elements even cooler than iron. That junk swirled around a while and hydrogen got together for another shindig, you can’t keep a good atom down. Some of the cool gases got together and made some planets some of the rocky stuff did to.
Earth got a lot of interesting dead sun leftovers and after a tumultuous youth, getting into fights, forming a moon, young planet stuff…it cooled off a bit and started having fun with chemistry. Hydrogen and oxygen became good friends and formed some water. Molecules met other molecules they felt they could get along with and some even formed little barriers around them so they could float a bit longer and meet new and interesting chemicals. These became cells, some became mitochondria, they figured they could last a bit longer if they could reproduce themselves and then promptly went crazy seeing who could build the most ridiculous thing to do so.
And here we are.
That was a cool question and a very good answer. Thx.
+TheFinnmacool Really? I wasn't satisfied by the answer. After all, the answer was just that he didn't know.
+Philip Almqvist he said a bit more than that
Pocari Sweat He talked about magic and yoga.
what were you looking for?
I wanted to know if everyone is really part of the same Cosmic consciousness, meaning that all is one.
Just because something hasn't been discovered or is not understood does not mean it does not exist. What it does mean is we haven't figured out how to find it or rather we don't know what question to ask.
BIG FAN HERE. Been watching him since I was a kid. Later in life I valet his vehicle. . You'll never guess what two cars he came with. .
I still watch your videos during school!!!! They are so interesting I love them
Neat answer. Not to her question, but neat all the same.
In that line, I find it interesting that Bill takes bare bones approach to life, apparently because some things are not provable in and by science. Science is great, but I don't get those who dispute that there is more to life than what we can measure and explain.
Because Science is to require observations and proof, if you do not prove something then you cannot accept it as truth. Religion is to require complete faith in something that cannot be proven to any reasonable degree. In this way Religion and Science cannot mix, if you truly employ the scientific method you cannot be Religious.
+Zeppy That's just not true. For some religions maybe, but certainly not for Christianity. Some like to paint a gap or incompatibility between science and religion, but they are missing some crucial points. Christians opposing science, do so out of ignorance of their faith. Atheists opposing Christianity do so out of ignorance about Christian faith. Missing or failing to understand information are the basis for most of the world's problems.
Religion takes off where science stops, so they can't really be in conflict. Science explains the how, and religion the why.
Petar Stamenkovic Here is where the vagueness of Christian belief comes into play. Some people take the bible literally, some take a part of it literally and some take none of it literally.
But which of these groups is a "true" Christian and who are you to decide that?
Literal interpretations accept things like turning water to wine, which contradicts our scientific understanding.
+Zeppy Consider the idea of an all encompassing mind behind all there is. This mind has guided evolution of our universe from its foundation, billions of years ago with the end goal of creating conscious, free willed and self aware beings in its image.
Granting this and doubting 'turning water into wine' is absurd and reminds me of that famous quote- _sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic._ There is no reason to doubt that an omniscient, omnipotent creator would have any trouble accomplishing any described task in its sacred book, without breaking any of the sciences, he himself has established.
+outsideclock *_Who gets to decide who is a "true" member of your cult?_*
Either intelligence to understand what was written or compassion to embody the Word. Preferably both.
+outsideclock Object to Christianity. It deserves criticism. But to jump from there to- everything appeared on its own in time for no reason or rhyme- in spite massive evidence to the contrary - reminds me of "well, that escalated quickly" meme.
Our existence and the universe we observe are highly unlikely. From the intensity of gravity, strong and weak force, the weight of proton and electron- the very nature of all the elements that arranged in just the right amount, intensity, place and time to allow formation of the galaxies, planets and ultimately the universe that we know. As if that wasn't enough, consider the supremely unlikely course of evolution from the first self replicating bit that fortuitously emerged on the Earth to the formation of consciousness capable beings with free will and time to contemplate it all…
Winning a lottery million times in a row seems like a sure thing in comparison. None of this even considers spiritual side of life, most people are intimately familiar with. Here is a video you may like:
sci2.tv/#!/videos/171
We are made of atoms
The rest of the shit in the universe is made of atoms
Therefore we "are the universe," case closed
+InfinityV0rtex 96% of the quanta in the universe is non-atomic. So really, we're just the crud collecting in the windowsill of the universe.
GabrielSparkletits Exactly, that's why I said "the rest of the _shit_"
InfinityV0rtex "...is made of atoms" which is wrong. And I cannot allow anyone on the internet to be wrong. Now sit still for your correctional probing or I will have to call Mr Hands in for another round of gentle administrations.
GabrielSparkletits ^ Everybody on the internet be like ^
Dr Scrubbington Your death effectively causes a replacement of Your conscious experience with a completely new one. Someone else's, which That being comes to experience their Self just as you're seeing the world (first person) right now (through your eyes) there will always be a "You"...
N,N-Dimethyltryptamine
+Neopterix Frosti Psilocybin, heroic dosage by preference :) then the scientific method become obsolete...
+JackassBauer1 Science becomes obsolete? There's action and consequence to everything, and science is the most objective thing we have to accurately describe reality. I'm not going to grow wings if I believe in it. I'm not going to survive without water if I believe I can.
I love magic mushrooms and it brought me to a deep understanding of how culture and language is bullshit, words are symbols and it's brainwashing. We come into this world pure without ideas or symbols brainwashed into us and experience everything with our feelings and senses. However, knowing this made me realize that while everything we speak is just symbols (a form of external communication) and ideologies are a "group" of patterns of symbols (like religion), we can't know or prove anything without the scientific method.
+lxMaDnEsSxl If you understood how words and symbols are brainwashing, how can you speak of science with such esteem? Is not science bound to be expressed witin these imperfect representations that is language?; is it not true that our language is a reflection of ourselves and not exclusively the external world?; are we not bound to remain ignorant of the true nature of reality when all science is capable of doing is speaking of the external world in terms of ourselves?
I mean don't get me wrong, science is cool because it predicts stuff which keeps my belly full in the evenings. But let's not pretend science is anything but statistically successful predictions, based on theories whose individual constituents/factors may just as well be false.
Emil Hägglund Interesting :)
It make me think about the way we use electricity everyday and we depend on it, we can predict how it behave and benefit from those behaviors, yet science have no idea what is electricity.
Even the word "electricity" itself have no clear definition. You can speak about electrical charge, electrical potential, etc... but when we talk of "electricity", does it mean the movement of electrons or the electrons themselves? Or the electrical charge present in the wire? It is still open for debate...
Emil Hägglund +JackassBauer1
"Math", by itself, doesn't prove anything.
Math is the language of science. The basic concept is this: You observe a thing in the world. You translate it into mathematical formulas. When you put observations in, you get new numbers out, and you translate those back into the world. If those things are also true about the world, then your formulas are good enough (for the moment). If they're not, you chuck the formula and find a new one*.
Picture an animal in nature. See its life depends on how well it thinks objects outside its body. Language is for external communication. Objects are for internal thinking.
Thinking with Objects is our Native Logic. You can always fall back on Native logic. It's the same across all species. We think with Objects Internally and use Language for External Communication. It's indisputable.
We have to map words to objects. For example, a "chair" is the name we give to an object that we can sit on.
There are two object classes to think with, one that requires us to exist (ex. man-made symbols like "Christian" or the word "chair") and Earth objects that don't require us to exist. Earth objects are here whether we are or not, while the other object class needs us to exist. We are from Earth, and not a technological generated fantasy of words.
Thinking with Earth | Man Objects above language allows you to live above all humans of the past. In short, you live for the children and future instead of the dead with the freedom of youth returned-You live as designed and know it.
Free yourself from word-slavery and end the mind and body dichotomy. Ground yourself. You are from Earth, and we do need science. Since recorded history we have been able to advance our technology and benefit in great ways, but it also came with side effects that we were not aware of. The biggest one being word slavery. "I am an American! I am a Muslim! I am a WORD!"
Our Biology is still here when we die. We are Electromechanical Cells of Life. Live for the future cells, live for the children.
4:54 woah Bill! YOU CANT CALL THEM THAT! D:
+Pwasma Dwagon What exactly did he say?
Alejandro Serrano YOGA PEOPLE! D:
I like how Bill is very direct (even blunt) with his oppinions and the oppinion of most critially and rationally thinking people but at the same time does not seek to hurt feelings. I never thought a world without spirituality or religion was a cold, indesirable world. In fact I think it makes things sometimes hard but at the same time pretty clear, which in turn can be very deliberating. WIll I just stop excisting when I die and leave nothing behind except memories in other people's head and a dead body? In my oppinion yes, and even the memories will be gone once *they* die at some point. But I don't think that's sad. I think it can give you all the drive you need in our world. But then nothing you ever do matters from a philosophical point of view! - Yes, in a way it doesn't matter. But I can profit even from that thought, personally. I only have this one incredibly short life and there is nothing I can do to change that. All the more reason for me to make the very best out of it. Once I'm gone, I'm gone for good. But as long as I'm around, I'm truely as free as I could possibly be. I find it relatively easy to make peace with myself knowing that. Nothing to fear, once you can accept it :)
Little out-there? More like the most in-there thing there ever was: We are existence subjectively experiencing itself. Simple enough, right? Alarming, that a truth so monolithic and seemingly impossible to miss, seems to go largely unnoticed or ignored altogether. It's difficult to get the full implications of it across to others, particularly when attempting to do so using words. Like Bill said, it is often used with so much woo-woo surrounding it that it can be difficult to extract the meat and potatoes behind the idea. See: most religions, Joseph Campbell, the monomyth, etc. It's the kind of thing that you can convince someone to accept, yet their reaction is basically, "Meh, so what? Big whoop." To (want to) believe it, and to *feel* it are two vastly different things.
Many start to truly feel their unity with the cosmos through seemingly-random, intense spiritual experiences, meditation, or by taking entheogenic drugs. It can be a frightening experience, the sort that tends to take you by surprise and knock you off your feet. When this happens, you may want to run and tell everyone, but instead what will happen is you'll end up sounding like one of those sweaty, shirtless guys at a rave with pupils the size of dinner plates, saying something like, "HOLY SHIT YOU GUYS I JUST REALIZED I'M GOD." thus destroying your credibility with rationalists, and causing you to be burned at the stake by religious folk.
Point being: This is likely to be the future spirituality of a secular, scientific species that has done away with belief in the supernatural. However, there is a deep-seated reluctance among many of our species to critically analyze the philosophical implications of this sort of thing, but hopefully it is just part of the human race's growing pains. Some members of our species have given it a bad reputation that will take a while to move past.
I feel like he missed the point. She wasn't asking about "Chakras" or "life force." She was asking if it's correct to say that we are the universe, and the universe is us. And in a sense, I think it is correct to say that. Is a leaf a tree - or a tree a leaf? Not quite, but the leaf is part of the tree, and we are part of the universe. You can derive comfort from that fact without ever resorting to woo.
I think there is a big miscommunication between the science community, and the spiritual community which stems from a trivial difference in context. Both sides use the same words to refer to different concepts, and then end up arguing without taking the time to clear the misunderstanding.
A lot of what was referred to as the "woo woo" in the video is actually meant to be interpreted in the abstract sense. It's similar to the way you might use terms like "container" and "queue" when discussing programming. These words are really abstract tools which people use to refer to some set of patterns that create a shared context of communication. They become shared terminology that these people may use in their discussion, with a mountain of attached experiences.
In reality there is absolutely no need to "woo woo" anything. We already have chemical, electromagnetic, and physical signals. At this point we really understand only a bare fraction of how all of these things interact. We can certainly detect and measure that the actual physical events that these people claim are happening aren't, but we seldom take the time to consider that the internal precepts of these people might now actually correspond to what is happening externally.
In other words, just because people claim that "chakras" are these points all over the body, doesn't mean much. In the end "chakras" are basically areas that govern particular actions be it emotion, physical well being, or imagination. We know that the brain does split functionality into different areas. In conjunction we also know about ideas of referred sensation. Is it really outside the realm of possibility that people have learned that interacting with certain areas of the body is able to excite or inhibit particular moods and behaviors?
People in Scientific community, and in the Spiritual community are so busy arguing semantic differences arising from word use, that they miss the fact that many spiritual and scientific ideas do align... just not where we expect them to.
I think most of this sort of thing coming down to the old humans are special. Lots of reasons and causes over the years but always humans are somehow different and special.
Ps, pineal gland had rods and cones and remains light sensitive... 3rd eye???
The chakras are not what we think but they are very much physically present...
That is one cool suit, very stylish, pretty good explanation of potential "life force" too.
lol I always like his" I don't know maybe you can figure out how it works" answers
Physically and energetically, the universe is one unit. All things (you, me, planets, stars, etc.) are temporary manifestations of this matter and energy.
He completely missed the point.
My beliefs are most closely related to that of Pantheists (or at least what I understand a pantheist to be). I feel like Bill missed the major aspect of the question and ironically enough focused on the individual aspect of it (human-centric) and avoided the question, "Are we and the universe on in the same". I personally believe we are, and to simplify it in the most simplistic way I would say to look at how we view everything else. Do we consider earth one thing and the things living on it something completely separate? Do we consider our galaxy to be something separate from our solar system? Do you consider the citizens of a state to be separate entities from a state?
No of course not, because if something occupies something, they are apart of that something. So in that sense, I believe on a very basic level that we are the universe and the universe is us. No chakras, no spirituality, just that we are the universe experiencing ourselves on a constant basis.
Bill Nye looks like Abraham Lincoln
And Benedict Cumberbatch fusion
Quite a profound response near the end of the video, though it's incomplete in some sense. I actually expected Bill to say that in some sense we are indeed the universe, as the matter that constitutes us is no more distinct than the matter around us, the elements of which were all processed and formed in stars. Moreover, when Bill started to talk about consciousness I kind of hoped he would name David Chalmers and his hypotheses that consciousness is either fundamental or universal. I don't believe that to be true myself, but it does give a more complete picture of what consciousness could be, and all three hypotheses (reductionist, fundamental and universal) give an indication of how we relate to the universe.
5:28 wow dude :D
I wish he answered the questions about how the Universe is us and we are the Universe. I just want to hear him talk about how we are the reflection of how the Universe sees itself compared to how we are made in God's image.
Why did I get such a big laugh out of Bill referring to "Yoga People" as "Yoga People"?
Loved the part where Nye said "if you cut a huma…eh MOUSE…"
I seems to me that most people are afraid of losing a sense of self. religion in general promises life after death, that I as an individual will retain my awareness of myself. Just my own taught though.
i think the question is about the self. The self is everything and nothing at the exact same time.
What about the measurement theory? measuring an atom? sometimes it's a wave & other times a particle. can you explain quantum mechanics please?
of course we are the universe, or at least part of it. we cannot exist without the universe, and we would not know the universe if we were not here to know it. its like asking if an eyeball is part of the body. the body manifests eyes to utilize the sense of sight, the universe manifests humans to utilize its sense of human perspective. our bodies are made from universal matter. the planet we live on is stardust. every thought we've ever had has been the direct result of external stimulus. we cannot imagine or name anything besides that which is contained in the very same universe that gave birth to us. OBVIOUSLY anything and everything is the Universe, that's the very definition of the word, it means EVERYTHING
Consciousness is not so complicated. It's basically what you get when your brain & body work properly while you are awake. A culmination of all mind/brain activity.
Bill Nye Tho from FB and Twitter needs to get on these comment threads. I feel he could bring a lot of insight
I don't think she meant anything about a life force, rather the concept that we are in the universe but the universe is also inside us. We are made of star stuff out together in a specific pattern, so ultimately we are the universe much like a wave is still the ocean.
Bill's response to the question largely focused on the idea of an "outsider", such as a God or a separate driving force to the cosmos. This can easily be disqualified for it assumes illusions of dualism: of true, isolated division and separation between things. Instead, the cosmos is more of a system of "this goes with that" instead of a "this and that as cut off things," if one can grasp.
Kind of weird to see him respond to the question in the way he did, because more generally her question could have been proposed on aspects of non-duality than dualism. We are this universe for this universe is one suchness, like many waves in an ocean. The waves may be defined and stand out as one thing at a particular time, but they go with and are forever part of the ocean, even if the waves change. This is the cosmos.
The same forces that allowed atoms to form, galaxies to form, life to form and anything else, are the same forces that take a sip of coffee in the morning.
I like your Yoga references. Very self-aware.
While I agree with what he is saying in essence (as I usually do) I believe he's being a bit condescending, if not a little over cynical. That's a bit disappointing. He didn't really humor her and answer her question, he just went on a rant about how science doesn't have room for religion, which was in poor taste. She didn't even mention anything outside of "spirituality."
Before my chakras started opening and spinning, I didn’t think we had chakras. Surprised me. 🤷🏾♀️
tuesdays with bill make me happy
those iare the things I thought of for an answer but you said it a thousand times better than I could have. neat stuff
I have a degree in science and I believe that science practiced well is a worthy activity. That being said, I can assure every one that chakras opening is an experience of the mind and body. A physical experience. I have had those experiences but prior to having them I too was sceptical. So science has limitations, it cannot prove/disprove chakras exists yet I have experienced their existence.
+Gregory Baillie You sir, have not deserved your degree. You might have felt something, but why would you believe it was this magical thing called a chakra? Maybe it was just your mind doing a trick on you. Maybe it was an evil demon! You can describe what you felt, but you can NOT say it was a particular thing without any evidence for it.
You've portrayed both a sign of confirmation bias and stupidity (two things that should have been removed by your education - which I must assume was poor).
well why can't dark energy be from the spirit world then, a sideline inverse dimension, if you will
the dark side has cookies
Hey Bill, if the body shows no physical traces of chakras or consciousness, and the spirit or soul is in fact an invisible manifestion of sorts, what if the evidence is not how we are built on a cellular level, but how we actually function on a molecular level? Many bodily reactions like the fight or flight reflex or anything adrenaline related for that matter is something that is caused by emotions due to an outside stimulation, rather than an involuntary inner chemical reaction like digestion. It manifests as not only mental fluctuations but physical as well. And since this differs so greatly from person to person, for example seeing a big dog may scare someone and put them into this primitave reflex, but for others would cause no distress. The fear the first person feels would be a manifestation of their "soul" or perhaps how their brain's electrical circuits are constructed as per that individual. So I wondered could this be an example of how the spirit transcends itself into what appears as normal bodily functions, varying based on that sole individual's own thoughts and consciousness? Just a shmought.
I'm kind of surprised that Bill didn't quote Carl Sagan in the way he talked about how we are made of the exact same stuff that the stars are made of and which exploding stars blow out into the universe to become water, rocks, minerals, acids, proteins, and eventually life which gains consciousness and can then go forward and study and learn about the universe with Carl's famous quote, "We are a way for the cosmos to know itself."
We are all hallucinating all the time, including right now. It’s just that when we agree about our hallucinations, we call that reality … Anil Seth
Every still pic of Bill is exactly same. All these different videos and he hasn't changed a bit. And that's great!
We are the product of the universe.
We humans just happen to have the luck to become aware of the universe. And you just happened to get lucky enough to be human.