Usually I come away from listening to great physicists' feeling life is a meaningless aberration in the universe. Max Tegmark makes me feel a whole lot better.
Oh crikey! honey you’ve got to work on your insults, this lazy-cringeworthy 1/2 effort old hash isn’t going to fly. Sigh...evolution has never looked more promising
He's political. He is knowingly and deceitfully lying about physics. Ask him about Frank DiMeglio. He is lying his head off. He is maximum money making agenda "physics". He's not a genius. He's an entertainer, a clown.
Yeah, i like him too. Yet, this is a little dumb honestly.. If not inconsiderate. How can you be so ecstatic with the eternal condition of life when a huge part of it is share misery? The last year i've witnessed a few cases of animal cruelty so deranged i cannot mention here. It's one thing to see stuff in youtube vids or reddit gore, another to encounter them in reality. They remain with you for the rest of your life. As for humans in particular, there were somewhere between 80 and 100 billions of us ever, and most of us experienced being eaten alive by animals, eaten alive by bacteria, cavities in a time where there were no dentists or painkillers, being taken into slavery, forced to watch their children raped and killed, tortured, lived through war, eaten dogs and shoes and tree bark to survive, humiliations of all kinds, cancer, kidney stones, auto-immune disease, poverty, depression, schizophrenia, panic disorder, Alzheimer, locked-in syndrome, etc etc etc. Jubilation before an eternal immutable universe is vulgar considering the above.
I think everything just is what it is and what happens happens, and something will go on happening eternally. We're something that's happening until we don't happen anymore, and after all the happening keeps on, and we don't even have an idea of what's happening. I think everything's pretty great!
I am optimistic because we are capable of interacting with and testing any known element or exotic combination. We could actually influence the Font of All .
I'm severely depressed and have been for a long time and I'm aware that my brain chemistry and past environment has played a role in my view (I don't believe in free will), but it seems like we are just a means by which the universe/multiverse experiences itself. "We" are not really there as truly independent actors that make change, but are only an epiphenomenon of reality itself. I can't extract myself from this view and any attempt to create meaning is just a desperate attempt for me to hold onto "my" life. It doesn't help that I have neither much self-esteem nor -efficacy, so even the idea that I can create meaning and play some kind of substantive role in the world leaves me with much doubt. Perhaps some people are just meant to be this way and die a lonely and largely socially unproductive death, always being stuck at the chessboard of life never really moving any pieces. Eminent scientists and well-off people are probably less likely to have this kind of issue as they have proven themselves to be useful or at least ameliorate the pain of life by material hypnosis and comfort such things can bring. I guess it would be interesting to know of any eminent scientists, philosophers, or the like who have a similarly depressing view as mine. On top of that we deal with the minutiae of daily life and how obvious humans eschew logical behavior, leaving us tethered to a democratic process in which money and emotion drown out much of the logical options available. This all just seems so hopeless and to make the world a better place in a serious way appears to be a Sisyphean effort. I still think it's cool to try to make it better, I just question if I have what it takes, basically. We need so many good people to bring us out of all this and it just seems like a losing battle among little victories. I don't know. Peace and farewell. P.S. I have no idea what I'm saying. P.P.S. If you did, thanks for listening.
Dude. Please know that you are so eloquent and what you are saying is separate from the mental state you might or might not be in at any given point in time. You are making a difference especially by holding onto the perspective you do. I think there are some concepts here that are hard to reconcile, but there is a way to have a positive perspective. If everything is unified in some fatalistic way, if everyone is kind of "one", in some sense, then that means that there are rules - it means that there are reasons to live in certain ways. You're holding on to this... you're holding on to the idea that we can make sense of our collective existence, that we can organize "ourself". When Tegmark talks about what we can do to make a difference, when you think about what you can do to make a difference, don't think about yourself as arbitrarily defying the rules which unify us. Think of yourself as helping ourself, to work within the rules that unify us, to work towards a better collective understanding of those rules, which gives us freedom from the arbitrary and unfortunate stress of defiance of said rules... In other words, you have your dharma, and my feeling just from reading your comment is that you are an exceptional repository of exceptionally good intention. If that's your only role in life know that that is a extremely valuable role.
IIllytch321 I completely understand and feel you on that . I'll give you your answer to this dilemna . First off this feeling you have it's because of a lack of a deeper meaning correct? Do you know for sure or not if God exists or anything spiritually related that might confirm his existence ? If he exists then this eliminates this issue . Go dig deep , in the dark or the light , me myself I ran into the dark and found what I was not looking for , but it exists.
You mention that, unlike physical phenomina in the observable universe, the mathematical principles of which we are composed are "timeless and eternal". But perhaps, if we look, we could find an analogy to our universe's entropy/demise somewhere in the staging and scale of maths. Entropy comes about because, by definition, "more random" (and therefore tending-to-physical-destruction) states are the natural habitants of the superspace of possible universes into which our universe persists. But where mathematical notions cannot be disrupted, they still offer vast (in this case infinitely) areas where the arrangement would not readily profer things-like-we-know-them. Perhaps demise in maths is not about time, but the analogy to entropy that is the only-infinitesimalness of the porportion of mathematical space without the ignominy of uninhabitable construction. Such are my thoughts. Max, you're great!
Too bad, because all we know with certainty is that the universe and all its constituent parts ARE objects in consciousness. The universe is *already* meaningful in that "meaning" is an inherent property of everything that is experienced.
Can you explain what you mean by consciousness, with great repect people seem to be explaining what they don't understand (the physical Universe) by using something (consciousness) that they don't understand!
Yes, sorry for my brevity earlier. I was only pointing out the obvious fact that Descartes already did: that the only thing we know with absolute certainty is that our conscious experience exists. Everything after that is an extrapolation or theory built on top of this experience (in fact, *using* this experience). By consciousness I simply mean subjective experience of any sort. So all we can say with certainty (until we know more about the nature of our experience) is that the universe and all it's parts are objects in our experience. As Schrodinger himself said: "The reason why our [consciousness] is met nowhere within our scientific world picture can easily be indicated in seven words: because it is itself that world picture. It is identical with the whole and therefore cannot be contained in it as a part of it."
Religion is like an abusive partner who continually tells you that you would be meaningless with out them. But in reality your only meaning/purpose in both of these situations is that of a slave,, instructed to worship your master ceaselessly. I revel in the fact that I am completely pointless in terms of the universe yet I am meaningful to those around me as they are to me.
Great interview! Not sure I agree that maths is the ground of everything... numbers have no experiences! However, it’s not far off saying that mind is the ground of everything, and I like that MT stresses that our “meaning making” is real, and matters!
:)) This has a strange relevance to what Nietzsche said about how we should live.. to do it as if we're destined to eternally return upon the same actions and events. I personally think that the most revolutionary attitude is to be humble, act normally, morally and be yourself even in front of existential absurdity and chaos. If one manages to hold on to these absolutely "banal" aspects (s)he achieves something exceptional. Instead, if he's driven to seek the "extraordinary" at all cost, this only proves the most ordinary type of desperation, the most boring desire of the masses: exceptionalism. A somewhat paradoxical situation.
If we as humans can be described as algorithms living in a mathematical world, then with advances in technology, our future descendants should someday be able to create their own universes. Or maybe we are already living in one of them?
I think, for the origin of mathematics, we have to extend to deeper layers of the anthropomorphic principle. If our minds are made of the phenomena of decohering the quantum state of the universe, the anthropomorphic principle says the functioning of evolution in creating a consciousness (where imbalances will be made in the distribution of material/quantum mechanical states in favor of life and consciousness) is a predetermining fact to the natures of the mathematical laws. Out of what will they be chosen? I speculate that mathematical notions (mathematics could be called a "notional space") are a collusion of agreements by all the determiners of whether a principle holds. These primitive-to-mathematics determiners (which could be said to make up a "definitional space") are entities capable of holding a state of truth or falseness for mathematical principles of which they could be claimed to be a part. Principles which collude with one another will necessarily be reinforced, and the structures may stabilize with the exquisite infinite laws of mathematics we have now. This also brings up the possibility of other notional spaces--other maths--existing in definitional space, with which we share no common principles. I dub our local notional space "Mathematica" and our definitional space "Demiurge".
What is life? To live. Animals do this. They are what they are. But humans can imagine and create on much greater scales than other living beings. Through that they have great control. That is why humans expect more from humans.
_The safest general characterization of European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato._ -Alfred North Whitehead, _Process and Reality,_ p 39, 1979 Max Tegmark’s _Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality,_ 2014, which should be read by minds thirsting for the meaning of existence and our place in the multiverse, is highly original but Platonic. Hardly any thinker can escape from the influence of Plato...and Leibniz. What is the purpose of human life? Knowledge is important but *love* is more important because it transcends knowledge and death. Without love and sense of humor life is meaningless. Thus, _I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing...I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell, possibly; it doesn’t frighten me._ -Richard Feynman, BBC interview in 1981 (seven years before his death) 💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
The thing i hate the most about about secular ideologies is how they don´t apply the same scepticism to things like justice, freedom or the purpose of life, that they do apply to gods and souls. how hypocrite and stupid you have to be to cherry pick things you like and dismissing the ones that don´t make you feel ''superior''?
Max, Maths needs a template, prime numbers are the same in every universe, but there has to be some fundamental unit to "count" them, or "record" them.
8:16 what can we do to really make a difference? How about we stop building football stadiums and use our resources to feed the people starving to death ? How about we forbid people to have many secondary residences, holiday residences etc..when some people cannot even have a primary shelter ? How about we get rid of the idea of selection to able to contribute to the community? Having an activity to provide for our basic needs should not be a privilege.
This is funny to me; I have studied 'emergence' by experiment, I have conducted experiments on the emergent fractal. What I found is a match to all the great questions; I think I can reconcile QM with GR and reality and it will be with the fractal - I might even do it over summer. I can already produce a Hubble and 'inflationary DE expansion diagram, and my model points to all QM problems, no problems with superposition and wave and particle of light. The fractal acts like the EMS - or is it the converse of that truer? The funny thing is (or not) I applied for a very small grant offered by Max and his FQXi, just to get some help - some support, I'm not a scientist as such; I was not asking what others were, but my application was clear. The grant was on the QM 'observation problem' - perfect for me: I was rejected and millions of dollars went to the big science programmes. I didn't even get a reply, no interest at all. The reason I applied is because I heard Max talk about helping the 'small people' - what if there is someone out there with ideas that can't be heard. Anyway, here is a poor and rather frustrated presentation of my work I did sometime ago; I aim to slow down and go through it piece by piece in the future. I have lots to do. ruclips.net/video/NoTEwZ-pTtk/видео.html . No hard feelings Max, jag hoppas att träffa dig någon gång, Jag bor i Stockholm; I/we have lots to discuss, if you are interested.
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. In addition, it's also probably why there are things like 6 quarks, 6 neutrinos, etc.
I think, for the origin of mathematics, we have to extend to deeper layers of the anthropomorphic principle. If our minds are made of the phenomena of decohering the quantum state of the universe, the anthropomorphic principle says the functioning of evolution in creating a consciousness (where imbalances will be made in the distribution of material/quantum mechanical states in favor of life and consciousness) is a predetermining fact to the natures of the mathematical laws. Out of what will they be chosen? I speculate that mathematical notions (mathematics could be called a "notional space") are a collusion of agreements by all the determiners of whether a principle holds. These primitive-to-mathematics determiners (which could be said to make up a "definitional space") are entities capable of holding a state of truth or falseness for mathematical principles of which they could be claimed to be a part. Principles which collude with one another will necessarily be reinforced, and the structures may stabilize with the exquisite infinite laws of mathematics we have now. This also brings up the possibility of other notional spaces--other maths--existing in definitional space, with which we share no common principles.
J luke I just told somebody else this , but there is really a spiritual world right next to us that we just can't see. You need to dig deep and find out how to see it. If you do that you will know for sure if it's true , and then share it with others. I promise you on everything were not alone
*@J luke* I don't act as thought there's a "heaven" in daily life, but maybe there is something like that? I'm agnostic, so I think that there could be a god or could be no god--I simply cannot know (nor can anyone, hence the Kierkegaardian "leap of faith"). But would it be any consolation to say to yourself, "Hey, maybe there isn't a god, but if there is, I'll find out the answers when I die"? I like to think that if there is a god (none of the ones that humans believe in now, including the Christian god) it would be truly forgiving and infinitely understanding. There would be no "hell" and no eternal separation from it. Therefore, even if one struggles to believe while alive, they may die and then see this truth and be accepted by god. Again, assuming this god actually exists, heh. If a god exists that isn't so understanding or forgiving, what the fuck ind of god is that?//11?1 Peace.
Once you get into the realms of imaginary numbers you know how far the cosmos is. Minus imaginary is where reality of zero starts. Zero can never exist. It is just a concept of imaginary in the negative parts.
In theology one aspect of human dominated the other and that's why we have sexual differentiation of cell. Sex is determined by aggressive behavior of the cell of one over the other and can switch places to any part of the body. That is why a cell can be a nose or eye or leg.
mean is illusion. If u try to find meaning then universe distortion like light curved by gravity. If you want to real to see real shape of universe then plz Don't ask to meaning in universe.
Much like seeking to "get closer to truth" Searching for meaning requires movement, a direction, ideally, away from something and toward something. How then is anyone expecting to find meaning and ultimately get closer to truth if one perpetually asks the same fucking questions over and over again? which is all these dim-witted dullards ever do.
I would slightly disagree - I think his statements are perfectly coherent, but they don't actually answer any of the questions (as is typical with this show).
![[Limbus Company - PV] Chapter.7 - Oblivion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VUpkXPkvoxU/mqdefault.jpg)
Usually I come away from listening to great physicists' feeling life is a meaningless aberration in the universe. Max Tegmark makes me feel a whole lot better.
I love this personality. The way he smacks before beginning to talk and all.
The glorious MAD MAX...
Aww love Tegmark ,he’s phenomenal
MAGA 2020
I'm hotter than him
it's ok Jean is Asian, so he'll have no problem 'getting in' if he's white man.
Oh crikey! honey you’ve got to work on your insults, this lazy-cringeworthy 1/2 effort old hash isn’t going to fly. Sigh...evolution has never looked more promising
He's political. He is knowingly and deceitfully lying about physics. Ask him about Frank DiMeglio. He is lying his head off. He is maximum money making agenda "physics". He's not a genius. He's an entertainer, a clown.
Max has a brilliant mind well done man
Yeah, i like him too. Yet, this is a little dumb honestly.. If not inconsiderate. How can you be so ecstatic with the eternal condition of life when a huge part of it is share misery? The last year i've witnessed a few cases of animal cruelty so deranged i cannot mention here. It's one thing to see stuff in youtube vids or reddit gore, another to encounter them in reality. They remain with you for the rest of your life. As for humans in particular, there were somewhere between 80 and 100 billions of us ever, and most of us experienced being eaten alive by animals, eaten alive by bacteria, cavities in a time where there were no dentists or painkillers, being taken into slavery, forced to watch their children raped and killed, tortured, lived through war, eaten dogs and shoes and tree bark to survive, humiliations of all kinds, cancer, kidney stones, auto-immune disease, poverty, depression, schizophrenia, panic disorder, Alzheimer, locked-in syndrome, etc etc etc.
Jubilation before an eternal immutable universe is vulgar considering the above.
Max strikes me as a sophomore physics student who suddenly got famous and now thinks he has insights into things he doesn't actually understand.
7:58 He said "our distant ancestors". He meant to say "our distant descendents". I do that sometimes.
I enjoy listening to Max on any topic, even though I don't always feel his optimism.
Agree . A humble brainbox..next Nobel laureate
I think everything just is what it is and what happens happens, and something will go on happening eternally. We're something that's happening until we don't happen anymore, and after all the happening keeps on, and we don't even have an idea of what's happening. I think everything's pretty great!
I keep coming back to this one
I am optimistic because we are capable of interacting with and testing any known element or exotic combination. We could actually influence the Font of All .
I'm severely depressed and have been for a long time and I'm aware that my brain chemistry and past environment has played a role in my view (I don't believe in free will), but it seems like we are just a means by which the universe/multiverse experiences itself. "We" are not really there as truly independent actors that make change, but are only an epiphenomenon of reality itself.
I can't extract myself from this view and any attempt to create meaning is just a desperate attempt for me to hold onto "my" life. It doesn't help that I have neither much self-esteem nor -efficacy, so even the idea that I can create meaning and play some kind of substantive role in the world leaves me with much doubt. Perhaps some people are just meant to be this way and die a lonely and largely socially unproductive death, always being stuck at the chessboard of life never really moving any pieces.
Eminent scientists and well-off people are probably less likely to have this kind of issue as they have proven themselves to be useful or at least ameliorate the pain of life by material hypnosis and comfort such things can bring. I guess it would be interesting to know of any eminent scientists, philosophers, or the like who have a similarly depressing view as mine.
On top of that we deal with the minutiae of daily life and how obvious humans eschew logical behavior, leaving us tethered to a democratic process in which money and emotion drown out much of the logical options available. This all just seems so hopeless and to make the world a better place in a serious way appears to be a Sisyphean effort. I still think it's cool to try to make it better, I just question if I have what it takes, basically. We need so many good people to bring us out of all this and it just seems like a losing battle among little victories. I don't know.
Peace and farewell.
P.S.
I have no idea what I'm saying.
P.P.S.
If you did, thanks for listening.
IIllytch321 you deserve all the goodness in the world.
IIllytch321
Dude. Please know that you are so eloquent and what you are saying is separate from the mental state you might or might not be in at any given point in time. You are making a difference especially by holding onto the perspective you do. I think there are some concepts here that are hard to reconcile, but there is a way to have a positive perspective. If everything is unified in some fatalistic way, if everyone is kind of "one", in some sense, then that means that there are rules - it means that there are reasons to live in certain ways. You're holding on to this... you're holding on to the idea that we can make sense of our collective existence, that we can organize "ourself".
When Tegmark talks about what we can do to make a difference, when you think about what you can do to make a difference, don't think about yourself as arbitrarily defying the rules which unify us. Think of yourself as helping ourself, to work within the rules that unify us, to work towards a better collective understanding of those rules, which gives us freedom from the arbitrary and unfortunate stress of defiance of said rules...
In other words, you have your dharma, and my feeling just from reading your comment is that you are an exceptional repository of exceptionally good intention. If that's your only role in life know that that is a extremely valuable role.
Stop posting this in every video of the channel. Being inconvenient may explain why you're lonely
IIllytch321 I completely understand and feel you on that . I'll give you your answer to this dilemna . First off this feeling you have it's because of a lack of a deeper meaning correct? Do you know for sure or not if God exists or anything spiritually related that might confirm his existence ? If he exists then this eliminates this issue . Go dig deep , in the dark or the light , me myself I ran into the dark and found what I was not looking for , but it exists.
Towards the end, max remark is very poetic and moving.
The only thing missing for this to be a religion is for Max to personify the human ability to understand the universe and call it God.
Excellent work.
You mention that, unlike physical phenomina in the observable universe, the mathematical principles of which we are composed are "timeless and eternal". But perhaps, if we look, we could find an analogy to our universe's entropy/demise somewhere in the staging and scale of maths.
Entropy comes about because, by definition, "more random" (and therefore tending-to-physical-destruction) states are the natural habitants of the superspace of possible universes into which our universe persists. But where mathematical notions cannot be disrupted, they still offer vast (in this case infinitely) areas where the arrangement would not readily profer things-like-we-know-them. Perhaps demise in maths is not about time, but the analogy to entropy that is the only-infinitesimalness of the porportion of mathematical space without the ignominy of uninhabitable construction.
Such are my thoughts. Max, you're great!
Salutes to Mr tegmark everyone !!!
very very impressive..
I think we should explain the Universe using 'physics' first and then look for meaning!
Too bad, because all we know with certainty is that the universe and all its constituent parts ARE objects in consciousness. The universe is *already* meaningful in that "meaning" is an inherent property of everything that is experienced.
Can you explain what you mean by consciousness, with great repect people seem to be explaining what they don't understand (the physical Universe) by using something (consciousness) that they don't understand!
Yes, sorry for my brevity earlier. I was only pointing out the obvious fact that Descartes already did: that the only thing we know with absolute certainty is that our conscious experience exists. Everything after that is an extrapolation or theory built on top of this experience (in fact, *using* this experience). By consciousness I simply mean subjective experience of any sort. So all we can say with certainty (until we know more about the nature of our experience) is that the universe and all it's parts are objects in our experience. As Schrodinger himself said: "The reason why our [consciousness] is met nowhere within our scientific world picture can easily be indicated in seven words: because it is itself that world picture. It is identical with the whole and therefore cannot be contained in it as a part of it."
Religion is like an abusive partner who continually tells you that you would be meaningless with out them. But in reality your only meaning/purpose in both of these situations is that of a slave,, instructed to worship your master ceaselessly.
I revel in the fact that I am completely pointless in terms of the universe yet I am meaningful to those around me as they are to me.
Great interview! Not sure I agree that maths is the ground of everything... numbers have no experiences! However, it’s not far off saying that mind is the ground of everything, and I like that MT stresses that our “meaning making” is real, and matters!
:)) This has a strange relevance to what Nietzsche said about how we should live.. to do it as if we're destined to eternally return upon the same actions and events.
I personally think that the most revolutionary attitude is to be humble, act normally, morally and be yourself even in front of existential absurdity and chaos. If one manages to hold on to these absolutely "banal" aspects (s)he achieves something exceptional. Instead, if he's driven to seek the "extraordinary" at all cost, this only proves the most ordinary type of desperation, the most boring desire of the masses: exceptionalism. A somewhat paradoxical situation.
If we as humans can be described as algorithms living in a mathematical world, then with advances in technology, our future descendants should someday be able to create their own universes. Or maybe we are already living in one of them?
I think, for the origin of mathematics, we have to extend to deeper layers of the anthropomorphic principle. If our minds are made of the phenomena of decohering the quantum state of the universe, the anthropomorphic principle says the functioning of evolution in creating a consciousness (where imbalances will be made in the distribution of material/quantum mechanical states in favor of life and consciousness) is a predetermining fact to the natures of the mathematical laws.
Out of what will they be chosen? I speculate that mathematical notions (mathematics could be called a "notional space") are a collusion of agreements by all the determiners of whether a principle holds. These primitive-to-mathematics determiners (which could be said to make up a "definitional space") are entities capable of holding a state of truth or falseness for mathematical principles of which they could be claimed to be a part.
Principles which collude with one another will necessarily be reinforced, and the structures may stabilize with the exquisite infinite laws of mathematics we have now.
This also brings up the possibility of other notional spaces--other maths--existing in definitional space, with which we share no common principles. I dub our local notional space "Mathematica" and our definitional space "Demiurge".
What is life? To live. Animals do this. They are what they are. But humans can imagine and create on much greater scales than other living beings. Through that they have great control. That is why humans expect more from humans.
_The safest general characterization of European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato._
-Alfred North Whitehead, _Process and Reality,_ p 39, 1979
Max Tegmark’s _Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality,_ 2014, which should be read by minds thirsting for the meaning of existence and our place in the multiverse, is highly original but Platonic. Hardly any thinker can escape from the influence of Plato...and Leibniz.
What is the purpose of human life? Knowledge is important but *love* is more important because it transcends knowledge and death. Without love and sense of humor life is meaningless. Thus, _I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing...I don’t feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without having any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell, possibly; it doesn’t frighten me._ -Richard Feynman, BBC interview in 1981 (seven years before his death) 💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
interesting ,that was good
The thing i hate the most about about secular ideologies is how they don´t apply the same scepticism to things like justice, freedom or the purpose of life, that they do apply to gods and souls. how hypocrite and stupid you have to be to cherry pick things you like and dismissing the ones that don´t make you feel ''superior''?
the strange thing in life is that even in one planet with the most favorable conditions it only had risen once
vertigoz Maybe it was placed there, or somehow created by an agent. I doubt life created itself by accident, sounds like a joke.
Physicist and philosopher!
wow
What's left of a soap bubble bursting away in midair?
...part 2? Where?
Awesome explanation, waiting for more :).
Max, Maths needs a template, prime numbers are the same in every universe, but there has to be some fundamental unit to "count" them, or "record" them.
dan connor Yes, you need an absolute point of reference, or ultimate reality.
8:16 what can we do to really make a difference? How about we stop building football stadiums and use our resources to feed the people starving to death ? How about we forbid people to have many secondary residences, holiday residences etc..when some people cannot even have a primary shelter ? How about we get rid of the idea of selection to able to contribute to the community? Having an activity to provide for our basic needs should not be a privilege.
This is funny to me; I have studied 'emergence' by experiment, I have conducted experiments on the emergent fractal. What I found is a match to all the great questions; I think I can reconcile QM with GR and reality and it will be with the fractal - I might even do it over summer. I can already produce a Hubble and 'inflationary DE expansion diagram, and my model points to all QM problems, no problems with superposition and wave and particle of light. The fractal acts like the EMS - or is it the converse of that truer? The funny thing is (or not) I applied for a very small grant offered by Max and his FQXi, just to get some help - some support, I'm not a scientist as such; I was not asking what others were, but my application was clear. The grant was on the QM 'observation problem' - perfect for me: I was rejected and millions of dollars went to the big science programmes. I didn't even get a reply, no interest at all. The reason I applied is because I heard Max talk about helping the 'small people' - what if there is someone out there with ideas that can't be heard. Anyway, here is a poor and rather frustrated presentation of my work I did sometime ago; I aim to slow down and go through it piece by piece in the future. I have lots to do. ruclips.net/video/NoTEwZ-pTtk/видео.html . No hard feelings Max, jag hoppas att träffa dig någon gång, Jag bor i Stockholm; I/we have lots to discuss, if you are interested.
Cool. We give the universe meaning.
gsilcoful Meaning can only really exist in the mind of sentience and intelligent sentience at that. Cool indeed 😊
Well said!
yup it's Hella cool
Another good thought!
I love Max - - and William Lane Craig; I am okay with that.
gross
Symbiotic relationships are not that hard to understand
So from where do the mathematic laws originate? Mathematics are not random.
Mathematics is a human construct that has it's roots in physical reality much like chemistry.
meatpie29 You mean mathematical formulas or math at is basic level?
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows:
Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction.
Then:
1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe.
In addition, it's also probably why there are things like 6 quarks, 6 neutrinos, etc.
The Antagonizer This is actually a very interesting thought.
I think, for the origin of mathematics, we have to extend to deeper layers of the anthropomorphic principle. If our minds are made of the phenomena of decohering the quantum state of the universe, the anthropomorphic principle says the functioning of evolution in creating a consciousness (where imbalances will be made in the distribution of material/quantum mechanical states in favor of life and consciousness) is a predetermining fact to the natures of the mathematical laws.
Out of what will they be chosen? I speculate that mathematical notions (mathematics could be called a "notional space") are a collusion of agreements by all the determiners of whether a principle holds. These primitive-to-mathematics determiners (which could be said to make up a "definitional space") are entities capable of holding a state of truth or falseness for mathematical principles of which they could be claimed to be a part.
Principles which collude with one another will necessarily be reinforced, and the structures may stabilize with the exquisite infinite laws of mathematics we have now.
This also brings up the possibility of other notional spaces--other maths--existing in definitional space, with which we share no common principles.
So what happens if an ai computer knew its code and could simultaneously be conscious. I'm disappointed they didn't address that.
Why should rain forest and galaxies look beautiful? Why do we like somethings and don't others?
Unfortunately is not as easy as you point out
Why robert always have this "tell me something grand" attitude?
Instead of asking short questions and letting the interviewee talk, he seems to want to show off what he thinks he knows.
Because this is a purpose of this documentary.
What's Your 'Fight' Team:
1) Objective Truth
or
2) Subjective Truth
3) Any Other Choice is Consider a (2) 'Flavour'
Meaning is a mental construct,the universe exits because it does
Why do we ask physical scientist to be philosophers? It fails so miserably
Why this series is attracting so many depressed people is a thing that IDK
User Droid deep thinking correlates to depression
If a Heaven exists then that would indicate human life is not insignificant.
I fear human life is insignificant.
J luke I just told somebody else this , but there is really a spiritual world right next to us that we just can't see. You need to dig deep and find out how to see it. If you do that you will know for sure if it's true , and then share it with others. I promise you on everything were not alone
*@J luke*
I don't act as thought there's a "heaven" in daily life, but maybe there is something like that? I'm agnostic, so I think that there could be a god or could be no god--I simply cannot know (nor can anyone, hence the Kierkegaardian "leap of faith"). But would it be any consolation to say to yourself, "Hey, maybe there isn't a god, but if there is, I'll find out the answers when I die"?
I like to think that if there is a god (none of the ones that humans believe in now, including the Christian god) it would be truly forgiving and infinitely understanding. There would be no "hell" and no eternal separation from it. Therefore, even if one struggles to believe while alive, they may die and then see this truth and be accepted by god. Again, assuming this god actually exists, heh.
If a god exists that isn't so understanding or forgiving, what the fuck ind of god is that?//11?1
Peace.
@@Dan.a.k.a.bradpitt beautiful, but no proofs yet...... Just beautiful and lovely words, nude ones
Sounds like that god is just Math omni present mathematical structure in level 100 WHO knows
I'd rather listen to William Lane Craig. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
craig and chopra are charlatans.
Once you get into the realms of imaginary numbers you know how far the cosmos is. Minus imaginary is where reality of zero starts. Zero can never exist. It is just a concept of imaginary in the negative parts.
In theology one aspect of human dominated the other and that's why we have sexual differentiation of cell. Sex is determined by aggressive behavior of the cell of one over the other and can switch places to any part of the body. That is why a cell can be a nose or eye or leg.
I don't know why God put it like that. Nature is immense. Every cell has the complete intelligence.
Tegmark is knowingly and deceitfully lying about physics.
lol. there is neither purpose nor meaning to existence. however, we can pretend.
Wed don't know. This is a philosophical problem.
mean is illusion. If u try to find meaning then universe distortion like light curved by gravity. If you want to real to see real shape of universe then plz Don't ask to meaning in universe.
We still don't understand beyond three dimensions. Nothing has been developed beyond three. No maths at all.
Time dimension has not been explored.
No physics laws beyond three and how they behave.
String Theory is beautiful and predicts Gravity....if correct will explain why we are here!!
Who has a PhD here from Oxbridge in String Theory or Theoretical Physics?
Until you have,stop posting pompous statements that arnt true
Tegmark, finally start being honest to yourself and the public.
Why do people self-anesthetize themselves with such fantasies and wild speculations that have no scientific evidence to support it?
Much like seeking to "get closer to truth" Searching for meaning requires movement, a direction, ideally, away from something and toward something. How then is anyone expecting to find meaning and ultimately get closer to truth if one perpetually asks the same fucking questions over and over again? which is all these dim-witted dullards ever do.
Schmorqs! Lol!
Totally incomprehensible
I would slightly disagree - I think his statements are perfectly coherent, but they don't actually answer any of the questions (as is typical with this show).
The questions are always more meaningfull then the answers.
Speak for and about yourself
Max looks a bit like Ted Bundy.
Bla, bla, bla ...