Відео

This man is a genius!!!

Conscious Action explained Based on the information they capture with their senses, living beings with brains manage a utilitarian mental representation of the conditions that currently take place in their relevant material environment. This Mental Correlate is a kind of “photograph” of what is happening in the Present in the relevant material environment of the Individual, a Mental Correlate that we will call “Reality of the Individual”. Life experience, stored in the brain, allows us to give meaning to what is perceived. At the same time, as Pavlov demonstrated, life experience allows us to project eventual future states of the individual's relevant environment, generating expectations of action. Information from the Past, the Present and an eventual Future is managed by the brain. It is evident that the brain makes a utilitarian distinction between the Past, the Present and the projection of an eventual future. Human language allows us to incorporate into the mental correlate events and entities that are not necessarily part of what happens in the world of matter, which gives an unprecedented “malleability” to the Reality of the Individual. For the unconscious, everything is happening in the Present. When a child, whom I will call Pedrito, listens to the story of Little Red Riding Hood, said entity is integrated into the Reality of the Individual. In turn, for the child, this entity is “very real”; he does not need his eyes to see it to incorporate it into his mental correlate of the relevant environment. Thanks to our particular language, authentic “immaterial and timeless worlds” have a place in the Mental Correlate of the relevant environment. In the first four years of life, the child is immersed in an ocean of words, a cascade of sounds and meanings. At this stage, a child hears between seven thousand and twenty-five thousand words a day, a barrage of information. Many of these words speak of events that occur in the present, in the material world, but others cross the boundaries of time and space. There is no impediment so that, when the words do not find their echo in what is happening at that moment in Pedrito's material environment, these words become threads that weave a segment of the tapestry of the Reality of the Individual. Just as the child's brain grants existence to the young Little Red Riding Hood when the story unfolds before him, similarly, when the voices around him talk about tomorrow and a beach with Pedro, as happens for example when his mother tells him says: -“Pedrito, tomorrow we will go for a walk to the beach”- the child's mind, still in the process of deciphering the mysteries of time, instantly conjures the entity Pedrito, with his feet on the golden sand, in the eternal present of childhood. Although over time a strong association between the entity Pedrito and his body is established in the child's brain, a total fusion between said entity and the child's body can never take place, since for the Unconscious the bodily actions of Pedrito They only take place in the Present, while the entity Pedrito is able to carry out actions in authentic timeless and immaterial worlds. The entity Pedrito is what we call the Being, and we know its action as Conscious Action.

Conscious Action explained Based on the information they capture with their senses, living beings with brains manage a utilitarian mental representation of the conditions that currently take place in their relevant material environment. This Mental Correlate is a kind of “photograph” of what is happening in the Present in the relevant material environment of the Individual, a Mental Correlate that we will call “Reality of the Individual”. Life experience, stored in the brain, allows us to give meaning to what is perceived. At the same time, as Pavlov demonstrated, life experience allows us to project eventual future states of the individual's relevant environment, generating expectations of action. Information from the Past, the Present and an eventual Future is managed by the brain. It is evident that the brain makes a utilitarian distinction between the Past, the Present and the projection of an eventual future. Human language allows us to incorporate into the mental correlate events and entities that are not necessarily part of what happens in the world of matter, which gives an unprecedented “malleability” to the Reality of the Individual. For the unconscious, everything is happening in the Present. When a child, whom I will call Pedrito, listens to the story of Little Red Riding Hood, said entity is integrated into the Reality of the Individual. In turn, for the child, this entity is “very real”; he does not need his eyes to see it to incorporate it into his mental correlate of the relevant environment. Thanks to our particular language, authentic “immaterial and timeless worlds” have a place in the Mental Correlate of the relevant environment. In the first four years of life, the child is immersed in an ocean of words, a cascade of sounds and meanings. At this stage, a child hears between seven thousand and twenty-five thousand words a day, a barrage of information. Many of these words speak of events that occur in the present, in the material world, but others cross the boundaries of time and space. There is no impediment so that, when the words do not find their echo in what is happening at that moment in Pedrito's material environment, these words become threads that weave a segment of the tapestry of the Reality of the Individual. Just as the child's brain grants existence to the young Little Red Riding Hood when the story unfolds before him, similarly, when the voices around him talk about tomorrow and a beach with Pedro, as happens for example when his mother tells him says: -“Pedrito, tomorrow we will go for a walk to the beach”- the child's mind, still in the process of deciphering the mysteries of time, instantly conjures the entity Pedrito, with his feet on the golden sand, in the eternal present of childhood. Although over time a strong association between the entity Pedrito and his body is established in the child's brain, a total fusion between said entity and the child's body can never take place, since for the Unconscious the bodily actions of Pedrito They only take place in the Present, while the entity Pedrito is able to carry out actions in authentic timeless and immaterial worlds. The entity Pedrito is what we call the Being, and we know its action as Conscious Action.

Conscious Action explained Based on the information they capture with their senses, living beings with brains manage a utilitarian mental representation of the conditions that currently take place in their relevant material environment. This Mental Correlate is a kind of “photograph” of what is happening in the Present in the relevant material environment of the Individual, a Mental Correlate that we will call “Reality of the Individual”. Life experience, stored in the brain, allows us to give meaning to what is perceived. At the same time, as Pavlov demonstrated, life experience allows us to project eventual future states of the individual's relevant environment, generating expectations of action. Information from the Past, the Present and an eventual Future is managed by the brain. It is evident that the brain makes a utilitarian distinction between the Past, the Present and the projection of an eventual future. Human language allows us to incorporate into the mental correlate events and entities that are not necessarily part of what happens in the world of matter, which gives an unprecedented “malleability” to the Reality of the Individual. For the unconscious, everything is happening in the Present. When a child, whom I will call Pedrito, listens to the story of Little Red Riding Hood, said entity is integrated into the Reality of the Individual. In turn, for the child, this entity is “very real”; he does not need his eyes to see it to incorporate it into his mental correlate of the relevant environment. Thanks to our particular language, authentic “immaterial and timeless worlds” have a place in the Mental Correlate of the relevant environment. In the first four years of life, the child is immersed in an ocean of words, a cascade of sounds and meanings. At this stage, a child hears between seven thousand and twenty-five thousand words a day, a barrage of information. Many of these words speak of events that occur in the present, in the material world, but others cross the boundaries of time and space. There is no impediment so that, when the words do not find their echo in what is happening at that moment in Pedrito's material environment, these words become threads that weave a segment of the tapestry of the Reality of the Individual. Just as the child's brain grants existence to the young Little Red Riding Hood when the story unfolds before him, similarly, when the voices around him talk about tomorrow and a beach with Pedro, as happens for example when his mother tells him says: -“Pedrito, tomorrow we will go for a walk to the beach”- the child's mind, still in the process of deciphering the mysteries of time, instantly conjures the entity Pedrito, with his feet on the golden sand, in the eternal present of childhood. Although over time a strong association between the entity Pedrito and his body is established in the child's brain, a total fusion between said entity and the child's body can never take place, since for the Unconscious the bodily actions of Pedrito They only take place in the Present, while the entity Pedrito is able to carry out actions in authentic timeless and immaterial worlds. The entity Pedrito is what we call the Being, and we know its action as Conscious Action.

Conscious Action explained Based on the information they capture with their senses, living beings with brains manage a utilitarian mental representation of the conditions that currently take place in their relevant material environment. This Mental Correlate is a kind of “photograph” of what is happening in the Present in the relevant material environment of the Individual, a Mental Correlate that we will call “Reality of the Individual”. Life experience, stored in the brain, allows us to give meaning to what is perceived. At the same time, as Pavlov demonstrated, life experience allows us to project eventual future states of the individual's relevant environment, generating expectations of action. Information from the Past, the Present and an eventual Future is managed by the brain. It is evident that the brain makes a utilitarian distinction between the Past, the Present and the projection of an eventual future. Human language allows us to incorporate into the mental correlate events and entities that are not necessarily part of what happens in the world of matter, which gives an unprecedented “malleability” to the Reality of the Individual. For the unconscious, everything is happening in the Present. When a child, whom I will call Pedrito, listens to the story of Little Red Riding Hood, said entity is integrated into the Reality of the Individual. In turn, for the child, this entity is “very real”; he does not need his eyes to see it to incorporate it into his mental correlate of the relevant environment. Thanks to our particular language, authentic “immaterial and timeless worlds” have a place in the Mental Correlate of the relevant environment. In the first four years of life, the child is immersed in an ocean of words, a cascade of sounds and meanings. At this stage, a child hears between seven thousand and twenty-five thousand words a day, a barrage of information. Many of these words speak of events that occur in the present, in the material world, but others cross the boundaries of time and space. There is no impediment so that, when the words do not find their echo in what is happening at that moment in Pedrito's material environment, these words become threads that weave a segment of the tapestry of the Reality of the Individual. Just as the child's brain grants existence to the young Little Red Riding Hood when the story unfolds before him, similarly, when the voices around him talk about tomorrow and a beach with Pedro, as happens for example when his mother tells him says: -“Pedrito, tomorrow we will go for a walk to the beach”- the child's mind, still in the process of deciphering the mysteries of time, instantly conjures the entity Pedrito, with his feet on the golden sand, in the eternal present of childhood. Although over time a strong association between the entity Pedrito and his body is established in the child's brain, a total fusion between said entity and the child's body can never take place, since for the Unconscious the bodily actions of Pedrito They only take place in the Present, while the entity Pedrito is able to carry out actions in authentic timeless and immaterial worlds. The entity Pedrito is what we call the Being, and we know its action as Conscious Action.

I am studying Thomas's new book, "The Elephant and the Blind" which takes up all of what he has presented in this video. This video has been extremely helpful in unveiling the potent, life-changing understanding that Thomas brings to the study of consciousness. On the level of personal phenomenology, this video along with his new book has instantly catapulted awareness to a whole new level of fluidity and access to the furthest reaches of the awareness phenomenological state space. Thank you Thomas... you are one of the greatest teachers of wisdom active on Earth in this hour of civilizational collapse.

It may be that even though the multiple quantum history branches are being evaluated at the same time, there are only specific way points in that evolution of multiple quantum history branches at which things align in such a way that, only at those way points the perception can occur and one of the characteristics of these way points is that the multiple branches have merged to only let us perceive one outcome of the measurement. And that is why we (or our measuring devices) - who are embedded in this brancheal space - never perceive (or measure) a simultaneously dead or alive cat. So in some sense a measurement can be thought of as a brancheal network update that forces and hastens the arrival of such way points. Think of it like this....a key can enter a key hole of a lock only when the internal tabs are pushed out in a specific way to let the key through. Or another example is when travelling on a city road, only when we arrive at a crossing we can see the side street buildings. The very phenomenon which we call a perception - can only happen at the way points in the previous paragraph. And in fact there could be other network updates which may force these way points and force the merging. That is why quantum computers are protected from stray air molecules lest they destroy the quantum state. BTW the last sentence also debunks the myth that consciousness is necessary to collapse quantum wave function.

Unlike many scientists who claim space and time are really spacetime a 4 dimensional object - Stephan Wolfram and Tim Maudlin - whom I agree - seem to claim that time dimension is not like a space dimension and this spacetime is not a 4D object, rather 3SD (space-like dimension) + 1TD(time-like dimension) object. In addition the directed-ness of time-like dimension is an intrinsic property of time-like dimensions and therefore it is not possible to go backward in time. Which is why spacetime does not have Euclidian geometry, rather has Minkowski/Hyperbolic geometry and there is a negative sign in the formula of spacetime distance between events in spacetime (which is analog of pythagorus's formula in Euclidian geometry).

The computational boundedness is also the cause of the apparent libertarian free will. The libertarian free will hides in the gap between Laplaces demon level knowledge if what is going on the brain and what we can actually because we are not Laplace's demon.

The Markov blanket is a plausible concept but, as far as I was able to search, it is a concept that has not caught on. Ultimately, all the picture remains highly speculative. Maybe I don't really appreciate its value.

Universal origin. A continuous sea of randomness. Exogenous entropy rains down. Tiny ripples ring with white noise; monkeys mashing the keyboards of actuation. Inevitably waves coherently collide, too much energy in one spot, so it gets a name. “Popping into existence”; only if for an instant. Unfit to survive. Inevitably a sustained coherence forms, it keeps happening, so it gets a name: “pattern”; dismissed as an artifact of perception. Unfit to evolve. Inevitably patterns resonate with spontaneous order. It feels special, so it gets a name: “Beautiful” ,”Congruent with the symmetry of nature”, “It’s just a large language model predicting the next word”; dismissed as an artifact of perception. Unfit to change the future. Inevitably a pattern coherent with its environment will begin to resonate with the future. These patterns survive longer and thus with respect to time appear to take over the system. These patterns appear to have free will to anyone who believes in the arrow of time. These patterns have apparent goals, so they get a name “Agent.” Implication: Any sufficiently complicated sea of randomness will eventually become fully coherent and an accurate reflection of its own future.

Talking faster has never communicated an idea faster.

Could we consider a Mind to be a Logical system?

MERCI

He looks like a deepfake of himself

Thank you so much for sharing the video! treasure!

Brilliant

A year ago when I had just started to read on free energy, this video was so heavy that I felt physically sick from the pressure of trying to understand it. Now, watching it for the first time since then, I can understand and appreciate 80 percent of it but the remaining heavy 20 percent is still upsetting my stomach😅... maybe I should revisit in a year again

ua-cam.com/video/JBt3kl2cfLc/v-deo.html

What is something "In-Itself".? Does Consciousness arise from the brain. No. We can directly experience Pure Consciousness by transcending thought. No problem. Access "Mahamritunjaya mantra - Sacred Sounds Choir" and listen to it for 5 min per day for at least two weeks. In due time you will tap into and merge with Consciousness (Brahman, the Transcendental Absolute).

Imo, the best metaphor for the Computational Irreducibility is that one has to live his life to find out where he stands on his, say, 60th birthday. There is no function F(t) that will do the job, whether deterministic or probabilistic.

Interresting I need to listen to the rest

thank you.

Markov Blankets and Conscious agent concepts stunned me

For me, there is less question about understanding Stephen's work. But rather about how I am able to make it possible for myself to play with it ...

At 1:08 is he saying Tegmark is correct essentially?

It's more like to a sermon than a scientific presentation. The difference between science and religion is that in science we acknowledge the contributions of others and we don't present what we know as the singular truth. He does neither of those two things.

awesome. thank you!

In the end I got the feeling that Sara is on the right track. And the interesting analogy with ants can also be compared with a flock of birds showing swarm behavior. (The physical distance between the birds also indicates information interchange, but) the overall picture we should look at may be even bigger than the emerging phenomena we see.

Consciousness exists only within the set of rules that go with it.

Information is not a thing that exists but a relation between things that exist.

Some of Sara's thoughts about life make my toes curl in my shoes. She seems to be a great thinker but, I tend not to agree with her argument why life wasn't spontaneous as propagated by f.e. evolution theory. The concept of life as dynamic information context is useful, but incomplete, because it's just a lighthouse vision (you don't see what isn't visible due to the lack of light outside the scope). One could even argue that the broader (dynamic information) context determines the causal outcome (me) so that no other outcome is possible with or without statistical possibilities.

Thank you for the explanation!! One step closer to finding the seat of concsiounness.

I have couple of questions: 1) You mentioned the possibility of experimental verification of this theory where we can possibly distinguish systems with different phis with some sort of interference experiments. For this to be valid, we need to assume the fact that phenomenal consciousness is monotonically correlated to the information of the system. How is consciousness even coming into the picture if you're measuring interference as a function of complexity? 2) Your fundamental idea seems to be that we do not consciously experience superposition, hence you propose the m-property to be consciousness. Where does your theory fail if you have a complexity dependent m-property instead of consciousness? You have five motivations for your hypothesis. I apologise for my naivety, but I'm not completely satisfied with your motivations. Your conceptual and causal motivations seem to be required to make a simplest theory but are there any reasons why why should expect consciousness to have a causal role? Or for a connection between consciousness and quantum mechanics? Does the metaphysical motivation, i.e. property dualism, require a causal role for consciousness instead of simply supervening on the physical? The explanatory motivation, I would assume, every theory would have? Thank you for reading the comment.

Dr. W ended abruptly, so let me make his point about consciousness. Evolution selected for a large frontal cortex which gave us the ability to plan and develop abstract thinking, which propelled us to the top of the food chain. A necessary part of the ability to plan is the ability to imagine a Conceptualized Self, and place this Self in various possible imaginary situations and predict possible and probable outcomes. Consciousness is a spinoff of this, an "executive function" designed by evolution to oversee the operation. All of this is taking place inside a Rule 30 universe where the bizarre and unexpected happens all the time. BTW, another byproduct of the Conceptualized Self is human suffering. The Conceptualized Self is only in the imagination, but we start to think it's real. There is no "real me" at the core of my being, I'm an organism, albeit a higher-level organism, reacting to an environment with the goal of survival. Buddhism is kind of saying the same thing (see Robert Wright's "Why Buddhism Is True"). :)

I love you Louis, great work

29:37 Actual cat. Not a representation.

I've never understood the antipathy of most scientists toward the idea that consciousness could arise from as yet undiscovered principles of nature. Note - *not* "supernatural": natural, just not yet part of our mainstream view. As far as I can see if you begin with this assumption the "big picture" can all be explained in a much simpler way. I really hate to think that's it's mere arrogance that drives the antipathy. I don't see how it's possible to be completely certain that our picture of the world is complete. If I had to guess, I'd guess that the biggest problem is the rivalry that's developed between science and religion. Scientists fear that conceding an "unknown" consciousness is too close to allowing for the possibility of God and so on. I certainly don't see that allowance as "necessary," though I suppose I could see it weakening the argument against. But come on, guys - do you want to win your school playground scrap so badly that you'll ignore possible truths to do it? That's not *supposed* to be how scientists operate. I can at least *understand* the religious camp "digging in their heels." But *scientists* are not supposed to "heel dig." That rivalry is b...sh.. anyway - there's just no reason that science and religion should be at each other's throats. They weren't when I was younger - at least not nearly to the same degree. Looking back, I find fault on both sides. The extreme fundamentalist religious views, the attempts to commandeer the school curricula etc. - all of that is beyond ridiculous. And scientists - how do you expect people of faith to react to people like Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss, who don their scientist robes and attack with all the foaming at the mouth ferocity they can muster? You've all let the same thing happen to you that has happened in our political culture in general, and I find it *pathetic*. People on both sides should be ashamed of themselves. I'm sure not all of you on either side are directly to blame. But you're all letting the extremists in your camps drive the agendas. That makes it your fault too - because together the sensible people on both sides could put a stop to the war. Police your own houses - turn your backs on the radicals and foster an air of sanity.

I've occasionally checked in on this research over a fair number of years - you guys have really come a long way, Dr. Wolfram. Congratulations!

This really does offer a nice explanation for how quantum computation can bring enhanced performance.

This is rather fascinating. Does the paradigm capture the quantization of things and so on? Does it lead inexorably to fundamental particles with the right spins and so forth? Can you get Heisenberg uncertainty? So many questions... Oh, sorry - you're coming to it.

phenomenal presentation, thank you!

Read the ctmu

These lectures are gold, thank you

Thank you Dr. Ploner

gibberish

Popped and Kuhn should have picked up the phone and called Solomonoff before their popularizations of the philosophy of science trashed the potential of computation at the dawn of Moore's Law.

Would be interested to hear how this would apply or not to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics.

An excellent presentation. You and your team have made so much incredible progress in this truly groundbreaking work that will be the foundation for scientific learnings over the next century. Amazing. I thank you for recording and documenting all this work over the years -- it will be studied by generations. Thank you.

It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with primary consciousness will probably have to come first. The thing I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing. I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order. My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461