Why does the camera guy NOT show the slideshow? I understand that Dr. Krauss is talking but common sense says, if you are videoing a lecture, YOU VIDEO THE SLIDESHOW FOR CONTEXT!!! 😂 I mean no disrespect by any means. Good lecture.
He's expressive enough to pull it off Also probably wants you to buy the book now that Amazon takes 50 percent off the top Math whizz and super genius's geniuses sure never see monopoly coming an or think they could cash out before the tumor is full grown
@@scottkleyla7752this comment actually swayed me away from agreeing with OP into actually thinking about it first. And I felt like a dirty cheap ass. I agree. People should attend these. This guy is one of the mainstream scientists that’s kinda underrated.
@@thepiper5522 Well sure, it would help to see his graphs and drawings. I just realised that i could see this entire thing for free at home. So atleast i got to see the entire thing, and for that im grateful.
My name is Marco Biagini and I am a physicist; I would like to explain the reason why, contrary to what it is said at 1:39 in the video, the idea that the collappse of the wave-function is caused by a measurement device or by the interaction between two particle is logically inconsistent. The time evolution of the wave function is determined by Schrödinger's equation, but this equation never determines the collapse of the wave function, which instead is imposed by the physicist "by hand"; the collapse represents a violation of the Schrödinger equation, and the cause of the collapse is therefore attributable only to an agent not described by the Schrödinger equation itself. The point is that any measurement device and all the interactions involved by the measurement device are described by the Schrodinger equation. After one century of debates, the problem of measurement in quantum mechanics is still open and still represents the crucial problem for all interpretations of quantum mechanics. In fact, on the one hand it represents a violation of the Schrodinger equation, that is, a violation of the fundamental laws of physics. On the other hand, it is necessary for the laws of quantum physics to make sense, and to be applied in the interpretation and prediction of the phenomena we observe. Indeed, since the wave function represents infinite possibilities, without the collapse there would be no event; for there to be an event, then there must be one possibility that is actualized by canceling all other possibilities. This is the inescapable contradiction against which, all attempts to reconcile quantum physics with realism, break. Quantum mechanics does not describe reality as something that exists objectively at every instant, but as a collection of events isolated in time (i.e. the phenomena we observe at the very moment in which we observe them), while among these events there are only infinite possibilities and there is no continuity between events.
In fact, the properties of a physical system are determined only after the collapse of the wave function; when the properties of the system are not yet determined, the system is not real, but only an idea, a hypothesis. Only when collapse occurs do properties become real because they take on a definite value. It makes no sense to assume that the system exists but its properties are indeterminate, because properties are an intrinsic aspect of the system itself; for example, there can be no triangle with indeterminate sides and no circle with indeterminate radius. Indeterminate properties means that properties do not exist which implies that the system itself does not exist; actually photons, electrons and quantum particles in general are just the name we give to some mathematical equations. The collapse represents the transition from infinite hypothetical possibilities to an actual event. Quantum mechanics is therefore incompatible with realism (that's why Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics); all alleged attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics with realism are flawed. The collapse of the wave function can be associated with the only non-physical event we know of, consciousness. Therefore, events can only exist when consciousness is involved in the process. However, the fact that properties are created when a conscious mind observes the system in no way implies that it is the observer or his mind that creates those properties and causes the collapse; I regard this hypothesis as totally unreasonable (by the way, the universe is supposed to have existed even before the existence of humans). The point is that there must be a correlation between the existence of an event (associated to the collapse of the wave function =violation of the physical laws) and the interaction with a non-physical agent (the human mind); however, correlation does not mean causation because the concomitance of two events does not imply a causal link. No cause of collapse is necessary in an idealistic perspective, which assumes that there is no mind-independent physical reality and that physical reality exists as a concept in the mind of God that directly creates the phenomena we observe in our mind (any observed phenomenon is a mental experience); the collapse of the wave function is only a representation of God's act of creation in our mind of the observed phenomenon and is an element of the algorithm we have developed to make predictions and describe the phenomena we observe. This is essentially the view of the Irish philosopher George Berkeley, and in this view God is not only the Creator, but also the Sustainer of the universe. The fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics is that reality is not described as a continuum of events but as isolated events, and this is in perfect agreement with the idealistic view which presupposes that what we call "universe" is only the set of our sensory perceptions and that the idea that an external physical reality exists independently of the mind is only the product of our imagination; in other words, the universe is like a collective dream created by God in our mind. Idealism provides the only logically consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics, but most physicists do not accept idealism because it contradicts their personal beliefs, so they prefer an objectively wrong interpretation that gives them the illusion that quantum mechanics is compatible with realism. In my youtube chanel you can find a video about the unphysical nature of consciousness. Marco Biagini
Humans 'consciously' are delusional and are motivated by subconscious Forces. The evidence constantly shows .It destroys the Natural Habitat it depends on . Time after Time .All Civilisations throughout its evolution . Have the same self destructive behavioral traits.
@3DFLYLOW Don't even bother with that one, it took me about twenty minutes to look up some of the word salad he is laying down, and either he is ultra brilliant on an entirely new level......or he uses words and concepts very loosely to push a dualist view of the world. Quantum wave collapse is actually quite mundane, and it has no relevance to God or souls.
@@marcobiagini1878 1) Gods are imaginary. 2) The wave function never collapses. A mind or consciousness is never required for an observation to be made.
That phrase 'I don't know' just don't exist anymore. When I ask somebody something that they don't know they just make something up instead of saying 'I don't know'.
I've been observing this condition for years now and it's baffling. It seems like people have somehow decided that they can decide what to believe. When they shuffle together some crazy ideas they immediately launch into the ideas as being "real". I have no idea how they are able to do this, nor do I understand why someone would do this. I can try to imagine the chain of reasoning that leads one to embrace fantasy as real, but knowing the difference prevents me from building said chain. It's not a new thing but it seems to me that it's a product of widespread ignorance. Extreme, willful and stubborn ignorance. People really do believe just about anything they choose to believe regardless of the body of existing knowledge that so many brilliant minds have worked to collect. It's a terrible development in my opinion and it's just a matter of time before the threshold is crossed from beyond which there is no way to recover. What's worse, I don't see any solution.
@@bryandraughn9830 I think it has something to do with television or media in general. It's making people stupid. That's why I don't watch it. I don't even own one and UA-cam and Discord is the only social media I use.
It's funny how all it takes is to use the right words in the right sequence to explain something. Five years trying to understand electromagnetic waves and suddenly BOOM
1:48:17 my favorite coincidence that happened to me is that I was actually "studying" coincidences (for counter-apologetics purposes-long story), and I was stuck somewhere, so I just opened up the nearest book, which just so happened to be _Metaphors We Live By_ by Lakoff and Johnson, and it just so happened to open up to page 143, where I just so happened to stumble upon "the solution of my problems" (that's literally the metaphor that section is about! 🤣)
Considering our Species is seemingly involved with the current mass Earth extinction event . It is comforting to know we have all these Incredibly Intelligent, trained Scientists ,Teachers and Philosopher's .
@@scottkleyla7752 Try 'The Republic', by Plato. Whatever our Species claims consciously. Its actions clearly show. It is a Species, dominated by subconscious 'seriously dangerous' Forces .
For those who understand that we don't know about consciousness... It proves positive that AI is not here. AI is only a brand name. People assume it has consciousness because of the name, but in order to do that we would have to be able to define that term. AI and machine learning is going to advance us, but the sky is not falling. Thank you Professor Krauss for enlightening some people to this aspect. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love
We don’t know how consciousness emerges from our brain processes but we know when something is conscious. We know the people around us are conscious. Likewise, we could infer when AI achieves consciousness.
@@CliffSedge-nu5fv Yes, it’s much more than just knowing things. But we recognize consciousness in others so we should be able to recognize it if it emerges in computers. I envision a series of tests being developed just as doctors today infer how conscious patients are that have brain diseases and injuries.
as a software engineer I don't find anything "intelligent" about our current AI, although yes they can do amazing things... But only one (playing chess or generating images or answering questions based on answers we've already given it)
Plato’s cave has a deeper meaning. It is literally due to not having free will. We become mental products of our memories and their emotional state. We live through that experience till we realize we are not those experiences. Buddha teaches it too. “All that we are is the result of what we have thought. It is founded upon and based in our thoughts.”
Being from Plato's cave, i can certainly say those shadows on the wall are real and measureable, even though I know now how they are caused. I certainly prefer living outside the cave and contemplating the sun. I don't want to return to the cave, but the shadows are as real as you want them to be.
I am some basic particle of the periodic tables of minerals and electric pulse from fluid dynamics and an instrument according to CHIPPEWA mysterious voice ho-wah-kan, a message from "Gray Eye's" blood brother of "Lone Wolf" father of corn.
Dude, I’d love to tell you that’s not bollocks, however, the absence of “free will” has arranged this comment and yeah that’s bollocks. Complete bollocks 😂😂 You’ve no shame, shameless, what’s that like to be? Pretty fucing ugly I’m guessing😎
At 25.06, when the photo is taken, is it not a case that: the camera's 'shutter' speed is so slow, compared to the speed of light, that light has sufficient time to reach the camera imaging plate?
I am a system of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. We need to move beyond the notion of “We” because we as humans is a loose premise at best. In essence, the body conduit has no fixed predicate in the abstract lens. What is it of us that knows that? We should begin to define ourselves as a set of a’ priori modes. A set that allows for systemic alignment. A set synthesised with realities structures and stresses. This is the next step. Everything else is tied up in a field of inverted axioms and that path is a dead end.
I have 2 questions: 1 - If photons have zero mass, then how can they be multiplied by 90? Isn't zero times ninety equal to zero? And so does that illuminate the idea that perhaps photons do have mass just very little? And perhaps their mass is only equal to zero within certain circumstances (like the world that we live in). 2 - Could it be that the epileptics who had undergone the surgery, which separated the two halves of their brains, were not able to recollect, verbally, the visual experience of the snowfall, was due to a potential reality that consciousness is dependent upon language/communication? So the hand that identified the shovel did not, in fact, do so consciously, perhaps.
I am a physicist and I will explain why scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated solely by the brain; this leads us to conclude that our mental experiences cannot be purely physical/biological. The brain operates in a fragmentary manner, with many separate processes happening simultaneously. I prove that such fragmentary structure implies that brain processes are not a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness; therefore, something else must be involved-something indivisible and non-physical, which we often refer to as the soul. (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). Emergent properties are often thought of as arising from complex systems (like the brain). However, I argue that these properties are subjective cognitive constructs that depend on the level of abstraction we choose to analyze and describe the system. Since these descriptions are mind-dependent, consciousness, being implied by these cognitive contructs, cannot itself be an emergent property. Preliminary considerations: the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what can exist objectively are only the individual elements. Defining a set is like drawing an imaginary line to separate some elements from others. This line doesn't exist physically; it’s a mental construct. The same applies to sequences of processes-they are abstract concepts created by our minds. Mental experiences are necessary for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and cognitive constructs; Therefore, mental experience itself cannot be just a cognitive construct. Obviously we can conceive the concept of consciousness, but the concept of consciousness is not actual consciousness; We can talk about consciousness or about pain, but merely talking about it isn’t the same as experiencing it. (With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams) From the above considerations it follows that only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, and consequently the only logically coherent and significant statement is that consciousness exists as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because there is a well-known correlation between brain processes and consciousness. However, this indivisible entity cannot be physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience. Clarifications The brain itself doesn't exist as a completely mind-independent entity. The concept of the brain is based on separating a group of quantum particles from everything else, which is a subjective process, not dictated purely by the laws of physics. Actually there is a continuous exchange of molecules with the blood and when and how such molecules start and stop being part of the brain is decided arbitrarily. An example may clarify this point: the concept of nation. Nation is not a physical entity and does not refer to a mind-independent entity because it is just a set of arbitrarily chosen people. The same goes for the brain. Brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a subjective abstractions used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole (and therefore every function/property/capacity attributed to the brain) is a subjective abstraction that does not refer to any mind-independendent reality. Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. However, an emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess; my arguments prove that this definition implies that emergent properties are only subjective cognitive constructs and therefore, consciousness cannot be an emergent property. Actually, emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described directly by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option/description is possible). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes. Emergence is nothing more than a cognitive construct that is applied to physical phenomena, and cognition itself can only come from a mind; thus emergence can never explain mental experience as, by itself, it implies mental experience. Conclusions My approach is based on scientific knowledge of the brain's physical processes. My arguments show that physicalism is incompatible with the very foundations of scientific knowledge because current scientific understanding excludes the possibility that brain processes alone can account for the existence of consciousness. An indivisible non-physical element must exist as a necessary condition for the existence of consciousness because mental experiences are linked to many distinct physical processes occurring at different points; it is therefore necessary for all these distinct processes to be interpreted collectively by a mind-independent element, and a mind-independent element can only be intrinsically indivisible because it cannot depend on subjectivity. This indivisible element cannot be physical because the laws of physics do not describe any physical entity with the required properties. Marco Biagini
Oh my brain friend, the tests given my darpa program indicate (random pattern access core recall) photographic and kinetic values operation ESP,with remote viewing capacity therefore tuned to most frequencies cosmic and magnetic with paranormal tendencies.The perfect radar and radio equipment operations specialist.I AM
@@marcobiagini1878 Nonsense. There are no gods. The wave function never collapses. Consciousness is never needed for real events to have measurable properties. Your combination of pseudoscience and pseudo-mysticism is embarrassingly stupid. I'm sure your word-salad has convinced a lot of gullible people to think you know anything about quantum mechanics, so congratulations on your successful trolling.
(..) this is an artistic proof of a created universe. When you paint a shadow it's the opposite color of the object that made the shadow. Nobody knew what the opposite color of white was so the artists avoided painting white on white. The opposite color of white is baby blue and baby pink. The first artist to figure it out was Norman Rockwell. I was the second artist to figure it out. I saw it in the corner of a white room. The lighting was perfect to see it.
Nice presentation, i would argue that the reason why the result is important is not just that itnis inconsistent with Galileo, thats pretty much down to whether you consider the effect to be background dependent or not, if it is just environmental, like a wind you experience by running through air, then its pretty meh. The thing that shows an inconsistency without relativistic physics, whether it is a material artifact or something fundamental, is the ability to both meaaure the speed of light on a round trip, directly, and to. Measure the strength of electromagnetic forces directly. If one can change while the other does not, then there is some trouble, either they both change together, which would result in some strange physics abscent more things changing along with it to make it unobservable, or one changes compared to the other and the formula for the speed of light just isnt correct in that frame, either way it is an issue with the theory, abcent some for of relativistic transformation properties, i think he went a bit far a bit fast woth the implications of that, but can't fault him for not being perfect, he did push stuff forward, and general relativity is a jewel to be sure.
The world appears from the ignorance of Consciousness and disappears with the knowledge of Consciousness, just as a snake appears from the ignorance of the rope and disappears with its recognition. This is what it means by saying that the “Universe is an illusion”.
I don't know if illusion is the right term for this dynamic. Projection might be a little better. Some part of it must be real, or it wouldn't be useful. I'm just not so sure the world appears, so much as we conceive of ever more accurate and precise projections to place on it. We think our ancestors lived in a world of illusions, just as our ancestors will think the same of us. (Because they'll have better projections.)
Multiversity believer,time alters with speed,no clocks are synced but with the atomic clock of Grenwich England or 0° latitude of 360° equilateral position of ground zero
@ the 1:18:30 mark he's telling us about asking questions, and it struck me that I had seen a video or read and article that states, for the past 50 or 60 years we have taught gorillas and chimpanzee's sign language equal to the speech of a 4 or 5 year old child, and in all that time not a single one of them has asked a question.
@@scottkleyla7752 no they ask for things like food, toys, hugs, tickles, play, all the time, but they never ask abstract questions like why the sky is blue
Great comment!-Goethe said it is because of Light that the eye is born which suggests that Light Beings not only build the eye (Somehow they Super Conduct the organ of observation (the eye) but we only get an image....Obviously it is a Cosmic Mystery on What is Willing this incredible Deed.....of architecting our organs...
Is it me or does Krauss seem to oscillate his voice a lot? I had to change the volume throughout the lecture, because he would be hard to hear, then tend to burst out yelling.
Super lecture again, explaining the difficult, counterintuitive behaviour of Nature. HOWEVER, once again, camera operators dont care about what is being said or most important, of what appears displayed on screens, which was specially critical here. This is now normalised. Maxwell? Where was he? It looks like he had a beard.... Much easier (and cheaper!) would have been to dispense with the camera operator, leave the camera steady and avoid any editing by keeping, for example, the framing at 9:30 or 31:30 all along. Anyway, next time.....
Quantum measurement is like traveling in time to pass even if I can u can not get back without leaving a footprint, blueprint of u somehow interact inevitably
The prophecy according to my cemetery stone cutter is 26June2024,a parting of the Eastern Sky shall prelude the return of the Great Creator.GMO organisms are spliced together with a golden pellet propelled at near light speed into two different life forms combining DNA in process.Are we a product of meteor collision?🎉
Science teaches the student of science that the student has many illusions of the world based on faulty and incorrect guesses which appear out of no where to have been the best work possible by people masquerading as scientists while practicing entertainment. Science teaches US that even those with the best theoretical training and what is called the most advanced knowledge including the most advanced tools have and continue to have, due to the continued excuse of 'this is the best thing we've got', no clue how the world actually works as the frauds among them spend all of their time regurgitating nonsense to the sense less. Then Actual Science proves to actual scientists the actual observers of the actual world, why the illusion held by the pseudo scientist masquerading as an entertainer is wrong by proving to the Actual Scientist how the world actually is given the tools provided by arithmetic and geometry the only two consistent scientific tools available to the thinking crowd for what amounts now to the longest possible period of time still observable by those of us still here aka about five thousand years and counting now... What Larry is doing here by stating as a professional scientist that 'science tells us that the world is an illusion' is creating and fostering an illusion about the word science that any first year science student should be able to see through but apparently the nonsense where a wave becomes a point because someone looked at it sideways becomes the ugly truth exposing a pile of frauds pretending to have done their homework when all they did was stand in front of a mirror and preach. no bueno.
Krauss says life is an accident of circumstances. Well, accepting this, it would be an avoidable “accident of circumstances” to spend my time listening to Krauss’ hubristic rant.
( ；∀；) consciousness is the particle and wave double slit experiment. The cones and rods of your eyes preserve the particle and wave duality so your vision don't look like a flat screen television. It's supposed to be a violation of physics but it is the only exception in the whole universe.
( o´ｪ｀o) We need to popularize the idea of getting God married. Getting God married is a good use of someone's time. You are supposed to make the environment intelligent so no God is needed. We fixed the video and audio for the best experience possible. Cameras are supernatural and all of them captured 3D that not a gimmick. The audio loud don't make violence so has depth. Nobody has to buy anything for it to work.
Own. His own shadow. Platos cave is meant to show how our knowledge is limited by our frame of reference. The people in the cave only see shadows of the world outside, they have no idea that a much more complicted reality exists beyond the cave they dwell in. Similarly, Plato theorises there exists a realm that we cannot perceive, but from which our reality is derived.
@@joeldobbs7396brother, “one of these things is not like the other” I’m familiar with the theory. I’m saying regardless you know your body is not 2D and that you even chained at some point must realize the something is different.
@@scottkleyla7752 psychologically or literally? Maybe you have a pocket full of sunshine lol by that I mean time of day. Mines darkest in the evening both literally and figuratively
You are a physics professor. I saw you debated a Muslim, If you do not lie, be fair, and search for the truth, then when you debate a Muslim, you should debate a Muslim, a physics professor like you. Quran 18:51 "I did not make them witness to the creation of the heavens and the earth or to the creation of themselves, and I would not have taken the misguiders as assistants." Allah descends knowledge gradually according to each era, Qur’an 15:21[And there is not a thing but that with Us are its depositories, and We do not send it down except according to a known measure."] Allah is the greatest,🙌❤️🌍🌿🌘🌞🕋
I dont mean to politisize this, dr Krauss's lectures are always great to listen to, that's why I don't really understand the point of that joke about Palestine. as an educator he should know that the youth of all times generation does have to have high standards both, academically and morally. luckily they do a great job on that, they stand up against genocide, against the suffering of other people because us, the older generation allowed the representatives of our governments to fall for money, to betray our values, to let the zionist lobby control all aspects of lives. the crimes against humanity are happening before our eyes, I hope that dr Krauss ethnicity does not come before his morality.
@ibite100 what? Zionist lobby controlling all aspects of our lives? Genocide? Next, you will say that Hammas and its followers didn't commit any heinous acts when they attacked on the 7th October.
(/_;)/~~ The universe was created in 1976. It is too hot to make a universe at the time of the big bang. It can be created at anytime. God is slow and easy. A human can do a lot with their lifespan. I got the hunk. God got the chunk. Everyone else can have the rest. That is song spirit of ''76 by The Alarm.
Allah descends knowledge gradually according to each era, Qur’an 15:21[And there is not a thing but that with Us are its depositories, and We do not send it down except according to a known measure."] Allah is the greatest,🙌❤️🌍🌿🌘
Fundamental Energy Density = Sum(VectorDirectionDifference)/Volume = increased path = time dilation (speed is constant, while path length increases) = (frequency). [path of least resistance = fundamental equation for the universe = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors) normalized length]. This is not a space warping, but rather a curvature of motion flow with respect to another motion flow, which is the density of Sum(VectorDirectionDifference)/Volume = energy density, quantitatively. And really we shouldn't even think of energy as a wave (at quantum gravity scales), but rather modes of angular motion polarization (continuous flow). these inverse quantities emerge via this simple beautiful equation = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors). No extra nonsense required to highlight the true fundamentals. Space/time doesn't warp, motion flow directions warps on local intersect with a inverse motion flow direction differential density = energy density. (h) = a circumference length of motion flow relative to the radius (hbar) [is the dominant mode length of motion flow storage in the universe, and permeates all of space, while mass is the displacement of this mode], and this drives mass formation and gravity wells around the mass. The universe is a large scale path of least resistance algorithm, quantifiably denoted (mathematically and computationally). Path of least resistance = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors).
@@Joe-ym6bwBecause everything he wrote there is pseudoscience gibberish. In fact I have copypasted it to use as an example. Whomever wrote it would say I am just too dumb to understand it, or perhaps that I have been brainwashed by established science and am doomed to graze with the other sheep. Either way, it won't be their ability to communicate that is at fault. Maybe they are friends with a certain actor that claims 1+1=1? I think i will point out some of the ways in which it makes no sense and see if i get a coherent defense or just abuse.
You know, there is nothing stopping you from learning real science. You might actually be good at it, but you would have to stop pretending you know things you don't. The world doesn't need another Deepak, stringing words together and pretending its something more than creative writing. If this is not nonsense, explain some of your terms; What is Fundamental Energy Density? What is it fundamental to? Try saying it like this: just as an understanding stochiometric chemistry is fundamental to understanding internal combustion engines, particularly those with computer controlled fuel injection, an understanding of _________________ is essential to learning about ______________. Oh my, a fundamental equation for the universe! Could you please cache that out a bit? Separate it from the other terms so a dummy like me can understand it, please. The sad part is, you probably have no shortage of people that give you positive feedback. I am going to suggest less time on the internet, and some CBT.
@@joeldobbs7396 What's real science? Fundamental Energy Density = Sum(VectorDirectionDifference)/Volume. Path of least resistance = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors) normalized length. It's vector math, I simulate it on my computer.
I think his style/demeanor can be a little offputting sometimes, but I was just thinking how I actually can follow and understand this guy compared to some of the other science speakers that lose me within minutes
Why does the camera guy NOT show the slideshow? I understand that Dr. Krauss is talking but common sense says, if you are videoing a lecture, YOU VIDEO THE SLIDESHOW FOR CONTEXT!!! 😂 I mean no disrespect by any means. Good lecture.
He's expressive enough to pull it off
Also probably wants you to buy the book now that Amazon takes 50 percent off the top
Math whizz and super genius's geniuses sure never see monopoly coming an or think they could cash out before the tumor is full grown
Guess we need to attend the show/lectures
@@scottkleyla7752this comment actually swayed me away from agreeing with OP into actually thinking about it first. And I felt like a dirty cheap ass.
I agree. People should attend these. This guy is one of the mainstream scientists that’s kinda underrated.
@@wessla Next time he's giving the lecture in northern Maine, I'll be sure to go. In the meantime why make a video of it then?
@@thepiper5522 Well sure, it would help to see his graphs and drawings. I just realised that i could see this entire thing for free at home. So atleast i got to see the entire thing, and for that im grateful.
My name is Marco Biagini and I am a physicist; I would like to explain the reason why, contrary to what it is said at 1:39 in the video, the idea that the collappse of the wave-function is caused by a measurement device or by the interaction between two particle is logically inconsistent.
The time evolution of the wave function is determined by Schrödinger's equation, but this equation never determines the collapse of the wave function, which instead is imposed by the physicist "by hand"; the collapse represents a violation of the Schrödinger equation, and the cause of the collapse is therefore attributable only to an agent not described by the Schrödinger equation itself. The point is that any measurement device and all the interactions involved by the measurement device are described by the Schrodinger equation.
After one century of debates, the problem of measurement in quantum mechanics is still open and still represents the crucial problem for all interpretations of quantum mechanics. In fact, on the one hand it represents a violation of the Schrodinger equation, that is, a violation of the fundamental laws of physics. On the other hand, it is necessary for the laws of quantum physics to make sense, and to be applied in the interpretation and prediction of the phenomena we observe. Indeed, since the wave function represents infinite possibilities, without the collapse there would be no event; for there to be an event, then there must be one possibility that is actualized by canceling all other possibilities. This is the inescapable contradiction against which, all attempts to reconcile quantum physics with realism, break.
Quantum mechanics does not describe reality as something that exists objectively at every instant, but as a collection of events isolated in time (i.e. the phenomena we observe at the very moment in which we observe them), while among these events there are only infinite possibilities and there is no continuity between events.
In fact, the properties of a physical system are determined only after the collapse of the wave function; when the properties of the system are not yet determined, the system is not real, but only an idea, a hypothesis. Only when collapse occurs do properties become real because they take on a definite value. It makes no sense to assume that the system exists but its properties are indeterminate, because properties are an intrinsic aspect of the system itself; for example, there can be no triangle with indeterminate sides and no circle with indeterminate radius. Indeterminate properties means that properties do not exist which implies that the system itself does not exist; actually photons, electrons and quantum particles in general are just the name we give to some mathematical equations. The collapse represents the transition from infinite hypothetical possibilities to an actual event.
Quantum mechanics is therefore incompatible with realism (that's why Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics); all alleged attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics with realism are flawed. The collapse of the wave function can be associated with the only non-physical event we know of, consciousness. Therefore, events can only exist when consciousness is involved in the process. However, the fact that properties are created when a conscious mind observes the system in no way implies that it is the observer or his mind that creates those properties and causes the collapse; I regard this hypothesis as totally unreasonable (by the way, the universe is supposed to have existed even before the existence of humans). The point is that there must be a correlation between the existence of an event (associated to the collapse of the wave function =violation of the physical laws) and the interaction with a non-physical agent (the human mind); however, correlation does not mean causation because the concomitance of two events does not imply a causal link.
No cause of collapse is necessary in an idealistic perspective, which assumes that there is no mind-independent physical reality and that physical reality exists as a concept in the mind of God that directly creates the phenomena we observe in our mind (any observed phenomenon is a mental experience); the collapse of the wave function is only a representation of God's act of creation in our mind of the observed phenomenon and is an element of the algorithm we have developed to make predictions and describe the phenomena we observe. This is essentially the view of the Irish philosopher George Berkeley, and in this view God is not only the Creator, but also the Sustainer of the universe. The fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics is that reality is not described as a continuum of events but as isolated events, and this is in perfect agreement with the idealistic view which presupposes that what we call "universe" is only the set of our sensory perceptions and that the idea that an external physical reality exists independently of the mind is only the product of our imagination; in other words, the universe is like a collective dream created by God in our mind. Idealism provides the only logically consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics, but most physicists do not accept idealism because it contradicts their personal beliefs, so they prefer an objectively wrong interpretation that gives them the illusion that quantum mechanics is compatible with realism. In my youtube chanel you can find a video about the unphysical nature of consciousness.
Marco Biagini
What?
Humans 'consciously' are delusional and are motivated by subconscious Forces. The evidence constantly shows .It destroys the Natural Habitat it depends on . Time after Time .All Civilisations throughout its evolution . Have the same self destructive behavioral traits.
@3DFLYLOW Don't even bother with that one, it took me about twenty minutes to look up some of the word salad he is laying down, and either he is ultra brilliant on an entirely new level......or he uses words and concepts very loosely to push a dualist view of the world. Quantum wave collapse is actually quite mundane, and it has no relevance to God or souls.
@@marcobiagini1878
1) Gods are imaginary.
2) The wave function never collapses.
A mind or consciousness is never required for an observation to be made.
@@3DFLYLOW
Translation: Marco is a pseudoscience quack who doesn't know what he is talking about.
That phrase 'I don't know' just don't exist anymore. When I ask somebody something that they don't know they just make something up instead of saying 'I don't know'.
I've been observing this condition for years now and it's baffling.
It seems like people have somehow decided that they can decide what to believe. When they shuffle together some crazy ideas they immediately launch into the ideas as being "real".
I have no idea how they are able to do this, nor do I understand why someone would do this.
I can try to imagine the chain of reasoning that leads one to embrace fantasy as real, but knowing the difference prevents me from building said chain.
It's not a new thing but it seems to me that it's a product of widespread ignorance. Extreme, willful and stubborn ignorance.
People really do believe just about anything they choose to believe regardless of the body of existing knowledge that so many brilliant minds have worked to collect.
It's a terrible development in my opinion and it's just a matter of time before the threshold is crossed from beyond which there is no way to recover.
What's worse, I don't see any solution.
@@bryandraughn9830 I think it has something to do with television or media in general. It's making people stupid. That's why I don't watch it. I don't even own one and UA-cam and Discord is the only social media I use.
I know
LOL....sounds like a personal problem.
It's funny how all it takes is to use the right words in the right sequence to explain something. Five years trying to understand electromagnetic waves and suddenly BOOM
1:48:17 my favorite coincidence that happened to me is that I was actually "studying" coincidences (for counter-apologetics purposes-long story), and I was stuck somewhere, so I just opened up the nearest book, which just so happened to be _Metaphors We Live By_ by Lakoff and Johnson, and it just so happened to open up to page 143, where I just so happened to stumble upon "the solution of my problems" (that's literally the metaphor that section is about! 🤣)
OK😊
Considering our Species is seemingly involved with the current mass Earth extinction event . It is comforting to know we have all these Incredibly Intelligent, trained Scientists ,Teachers and Philosopher's .
I am new to philosophy and a scientific one is number 11 on my understanding education.Nice and repeatable experiments make it scientific?
@@scottkleyla7752 Try 'The Republic', by Plato. Whatever our Species claims consciously. Its actions clearly show. It is a Species, dominated by subconscious 'seriously dangerous' Forces .
Dr. Kraus helped me get over my fear of death.
And my fear of life?
How?
4 hrs well spent - cheers and ty "O)
Indeed! I didn't expect to watch this in one go.
If you fall asleep before the lecture and hear it two hours later did the space time continuing alter reality?
For those who understand that we don't know about consciousness... It proves positive that AI is not here. AI is only a brand name. People assume it has consciousness because of the name, but in order to do that we would have to be able to define that term. AI and machine learning is going to advance us, but the sky is not falling. Thank you Professor Krauss for enlightening some people to this aspect. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love
We don’t know how consciousness emerges from our brain processes but we know when something is conscious. We know the people around us are conscious. Likewise, we could infer when AI achieves consciousness.
Intelligence does not imply consciousness.
@@CliffSedge-nu5fv Yes, it’s much more than just knowing things. But we recognize consciousness in others so we should be able to recognize it if it emerges in computers. I envision a series of tests being developed just as doctors today infer how conscious patients are that have brain diseases and injuries.
If AI isn't a biochemical and electrical reaction then it isn't conscious.
as a software engineer I don't find anything "intelligent" about our current AI, although yes they can do amazing things... But only one (playing chess or generating images or answering questions based on answers we've already given it)
Plato’s cave has a deeper meaning. It is literally due to not having free will. We become mental products of our memories and their emotional state. We live through that experience till we realize we are not those experiences. Buddha teaches it too. “All that we are is the result of what we have thought. It is founded upon and based in our thoughts.”
Being from Plato's cave, i can certainly say those shadows on the wall are real and measureable, even though I know now how they are caused. I certainly prefer living outside the cave and contemplating the sun. I don't want to return to the cave, but the shadows are as real as you want them to be.
It's doublespeak with a positive connotation.
It both works on the explicit literal definitional front, and from the metaphorical implicit front
I am some basic particle of the periodic tables of minerals and electric pulse from fluid dynamics and an instrument according to CHIPPEWA mysterious voice ho-wah-kan, a message from "Gray Eye's" blood brother of "Lone Wolf" father of corn.
Dude, I’d love to tell you that’s not bollocks, however, the absence of “free will” has arranged this comment and yeah that’s bollocks. Complete bollocks 😂😂 You’ve no shame, shameless, what’s that like to be? Pretty fucing ugly I’m guessing😎
@@Psy0psAgent Umm, that’s why I’m not you or the neighbors dog. Did you come up with that all by yourself?
At 25.06, when the photo is taken, is it not a case that: the camera's 'shutter' speed is so slow, compared to the speed of light, that light has sufficient time to reach the camera imaging plate?
I am a system of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. We need to move beyond the notion of “We” because we as humans is a loose premise at best. In essence, the body conduit has no fixed predicate in the abstract lens. What is it of us that knows that?
We should begin to define ourselves as a set of a’ priori modes. A set that allows for systemic alignment. A set synthesised with realities structures and stresses. This is the next step. Everything else is tied up in a field of inverted axioms and that path is a dead end.
Schrodinger ex. dT divisor "time reversal" orchestrates memory 4 bil years later in maze-solving protozoa -- "consciousness" started there.
I have 2 questions: 1 - If photons have zero mass, then how can they be multiplied by 90? Isn't zero times ninety equal to zero? And so does that illuminate the idea that perhaps photons do have mass just very little? And perhaps their mass is only equal to zero within certain circumstances (like the world that we live in). 2 - Could it be that the epileptics who had undergone the surgery, which separated the two halves of their brains, were not able to recollect, verbally, the visual experience of the snowfall, was due to a potential reality that consciousness is dependent upon language/communication? So the hand that identified the shovel did not, in fact, do so consciously, perhaps.
He said "protons".
Referring to a quantum measurement as an observation or needing an observer is what threw the woooo crowd a bone.
love the talk , badly filmed
I care but not much...😮
I am a physicist and I will explain why scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated solely by the brain; this leads us to conclude that our mental experiences cannot be purely physical/biological.
The brain operates in a fragmentary manner, with many separate processes happening simultaneously. I prove that such fragmentary structure implies that brain processes are not a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness; therefore, something else must be involved-something indivisible and non-physical, which we often refer to as the soul. (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations).
Emergent properties are often thought of as arising from complex systems (like the brain). However, I argue that these properties are subjective cognitive constructs that depend on the level of abstraction we choose to analyze and describe the system. Since these descriptions are mind-dependent, consciousness, being implied by these cognitive contructs, cannot itself be an emergent property.
Preliminary considerations: the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what can exist objectively are only the individual elements. Defining a set is like drawing an imaginary line to separate some elements from others. This line doesn't exist physically; it’s a mental construct. The same applies to sequences of processes-they are abstract concepts created by our minds.
Mental experiences are necessary for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and cognitive constructs; Therefore, mental experience itself cannot be just a cognitive construct.
Obviously we can conceive the concept of consciousness, but the concept of consciousness is not actual consciousness; We can talk about consciousness or about pain, but merely talking about it isn’t the same as experiencing it. (With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams)
From the above considerations it follows that only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, and consequently the only logically coherent and significant statement is that consciousness exists as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because there is a well-known correlation between brain processes and consciousness. However, this indivisible entity cannot be physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience.
Clarifications
The brain itself doesn't exist as a completely mind-independent entity. The concept of the brain is based on separating a group of quantum particles from everything else, which is a subjective process, not dictated purely by the laws of physics. Actually there is a continuous exchange of molecules with the blood and when and how such molecules start and stop being part of the brain is decided arbitrarily. An example may clarify this point: the concept of nation. Nation is not a physical entity and does not refer to a mind-independent entity because it is just a set of arbitrarily chosen people. The same goes for the brain.
Brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a subjective abstractions used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole (and therefore every function/property/capacity attributed to the brain) is a subjective abstraction that does not refer to any mind-independendent reality.
Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. However, an emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess; my arguments prove that this definition implies that emergent properties are only subjective cognitive constructs and therefore, consciousness cannot be an emergent property. Actually, emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described directly by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option/description is possible). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes. Emergence is nothing more than a cognitive construct that is applied to physical phenomena, and cognition itself can only come from a mind; thus emergence can never explain mental experience as, by itself, it implies mental experience.
Conclusions
My approach is based on scientific knowledge of the brain's physical processes. My arguments show that physicalism is incompatible with the very foundations of scientific knowledge because current scientific understanding excludes the possibility that brain processes alone can account for the existence of consciousness.
An indivisible non-physical element must exist as a necessary condition for the existence of consciousness because mental experiences are linked to many distinct physical processes occurring at different points; it is therefore necessary for all these distinct processes to be interpreted collectively by a mind-independent element, and a mind-independent element can only be intrinsically indivisible because it cannot depend on subjectivity. This indivisible element cannot be physical because the laws of physics do not describe any physical entity with the required properties.
Marco Biagini
Do you then conclude that a soul exists?
@@mazklassa9338 Yes
@marcobiagini1878 thanks for your reply. I appreciate your essay, it was interesting.
Oh my brain friend, the tests given my darpa program indicate (random pattern access core recall) photographic and kinetic values operation ESP,with remote viewing capacity therefore tuned to most frequencies cosmic and magnetic with paranormal tendencies.The perfect radar and radio equipment operations specialist.I AM
@@marcobiagini1878
Nonsense. There are no gods. The wave function never collapses. Consciousness is never needed for real events to have measurable properties.
Your combination of pseudoscience and pseudo-mysticism is embarrassingly stupid.
I'm sure your word-salad has convinced a lot of gullible people to think you know anything about quantum mechanics, so congratulations on your successful trolling.
Is the universe, time, actually moving backwards while we experience it as forward. Collapsing.
Ill be the judge for that!!!
YES❤
(..) this is an artistic proof of a created universe. When you paint a shadow it's the opposite color of the object that made the shadow. Nobody knew what the opposite color of white was so the artists avoided painting white on white. The opposite color of white is baby blue and baby pink. The first artist to figure it out was Norman Rockwell. I was the second artist to figure it out. I saw it in the corner of a white room. The lighting was perfect to see it.
How he did the metal trick?
What does LK think about the illusion of the safe and effective psyops campaign that is really homicide & genocide?? Plz & thx u.
I know I am definitely motivated by homicidal tendencies from military programs,hee hee ha ha
Nice presentation, i would argue that the reason why the result is important is not just that itnis inconsistent with Galileo, thats pretty much down to whether you consider the effect to be background dependent or not, if it is just environmental, like a wind you experience by running through air, then its pretty meh. The thing that shows an inconsistency without relativistic physics, whether it is a material artifact or something fundamental, is the ability to both meaaure the speed of light on a round trip, directly, and to. Measure the strength of electromagnetic forces directly. If one can change while the other does not, then there is some trouble, either they both change together, which would result in some strange physics abscent more things changing along with it to make it unobservable, or one changes compared to the other and the formula for the speed of light just isnt correct in that frame, either way it is an issue with the theory, abcent some for of relativistic transformation properties, i think he went a bit far a bit fast woth the implications of that, but can't fault him for not being perfect, he did push stuff forward, and general relativity is a jewel to be sure.
The world appears from the ignorance of Consciousness and disappears with the knowledge of Consciousness, just as a snake appears from the ignorance of the rope and disappears with its recognition.
This is what it means by saying that the “Universe is an illusion”.
I don't know if illusion is the right term for this dynamic.
Projection might be a little better.
Some part of it must be real, or it wouldn't be useful.
I'm just not so sure the world appears, so much as we conceive of ever more accurate and precise projections to place on it.
We think our ancestors lived in a world of illusions, just as our ancestors will think the same of us. (Because they'll have better projections.)
Multiversity believer,time alters with speed,no clocks are synced but with the atomic clock of Grenwich England or 0° latitude of 360° equilateral position of ground zero
@ the 1:18:30 mark he's telling us about asking questions, and it struck me that I had seen a video or read and article that states, for the past 50 or 60 years we have taught gorillas and chimpanzee's sign language equal to the speech of a 4 or 5 year old child, and in all that time not a single one of them has asked a question.
Awesome that they need nothing we offer,smart species😊
@@scottkleyla7752 no they ask for things like food, toys, hugs, tickles, play, all the time, but they never ask abstract questions like why the sky is blue
I'd like to know what Highschool had Plato's Cave in one of its books? Any info would be appreciated.
Cave-in-Rock High School, IL.
See page 11 in Lawrence M. Krauss his book from 2017 "the greatest story ever told ... so far, why are we here?"
Any high school philosophy book will have Plato's Cave.
@@alanstarkie2001dude
We came back for more punishment...lol
Dudes bizzar @42.06
Is observation a superconductor?
Great comment!-Goethe said it is because of Light that the eye is born which suggests that Light Beings not only build the eye (Somehow they Super Conduct the organ of observation (the eye) but we only get an image....Obviously it is a Cosmic Mystery on What is Willing this incredible Deed.....of architecting our organs...
only if theory a semiconductor.
@@jaymanier7286 but theorizing does not manifest. Not here and now anyway.
No.
@@CliffSedge-nu5fv thanks, that clears it up🙂
25:00 mind blowing 🤯
Illusion of Krauss
(ToT) the human body is burly, gnarly and surly like a fractal.
sir, who are those ppl? Are they rich ppl of that country golf club?
I don't know how you got Dr Kraus but well done.
It seems incomplete education is key at old age.
The key to AI is asking detailed analytical questions using technical terms which aren't in the common vernacular.
Any different than any other field, such as medicine?
@@karagi101deep thought time,thank you pro person.
Is it me or does Krauss seem to oscillate his voice a lot? I had to change the volume throughout the lecture, because he would be hard to hear, then tend to burst out yelling.
Bad microphone.
He is pro lecturn,modulation for sleepers in audience
Super lecture again, explaining the difficult, counterintuitive behaviour of Nature. HOWEVER, once again, camera operators dont care about what is being said or most important, of what appears displayed on screens, which was specially critical here. This is now normalised. Maxwell? Where was he? It looks like he had a beard.... Much easier (and cheaper!) would have been to dispense with the camera operator, leave the camera steady and avoid any editing by keeping, for example, the framing at 9:30 or 31:30 all along. Anyway, next time.....
Quantum measurement is like traveling in time to pass even if I can u can not get back without leaving a footprint, blueprint of u somehow interact inevitably
Deja vu moment
Just tell her Lawrence, you cannot "observe" a particle.
If the intellectual approach is not working for you, (spinning top in mud 😀)investigate the teachings of ECKANKAR. You will never be the same again.
Also hum,checking this resource for something splendiferous 😂
@@scottkleyla7752 👍
@@ashmeadali interesting platform,I rode my Harley-Davidson for all my errands yesterday with newfound insights about experiences.Yhank you
@@scottkleyla7752 👍
JUDGMENT DAY!!
The prophecy according to my cemetery stone cutter is 26June2024,a parting of the Eastern Sky shall prelude the return of the Great Creator.GMO organisms are spliced together with a golden pellet propelled at near light speed into two different life forms combining DNA in process.Are we a product of meteor collision?🎉
Science teaches the student of science that the student has many illusions of the world based on faulty and incorrect guesses
which appear out of no where to have been the best work possible by people masquerading as scientists while practicing entertainment.
Science teaches US that even those with the best theoretical training and what is called the most advanced knowledge
including the most advanced tools have and continue to have, due to the continued excuse of 'this is the best thing we've got',
no clue how the world actually works as the frauds among them spend all of their time regurgitating nonsense to the sense less.
Then Actual Science proves to actual scientists the actual observers of the actual world, why the illusion held by the pseudo scientist masquerading as an entertainer is wrong by proving to the Actual Scientist how the world actually is given the tools provided by arithmetic and geometry the only two consistent scientific tools available to the thinking crowd for what amounts now to the longest possible period of time
still observable by those of us still here aka about five thousand years and counting now...
What Larry is doing here by stating as a professional scientist that 'science tells us that the world is an illusion'
is creating and fostering an illusion about the word science that any first year science student should be able to see through
but apparently the nonsense where a wave becomes a point because someone looked at it sideways becomes the ugly truth
exposing a pile of frauds pretending to have done their homework when all they did was stand in front of a mirror and preach.
no bueno.
Muy no bueno
Krauss says life is an accident of circumstances. Well, accepting this, it would be an avoidable “accident of circumstances” to spend my time listening to Krauss’ hubristic rant.
( ；∀；) consciousness is the particle and wave double slit experiment. The cones and rods of your eyes preserve the particle and wave duality so your vision don't look like a flat screen television. It's supposed to be a violation of physics but it is the only exception in the whole universe.
( o´ｪ｀o) We need to popularize the idea of getting God married. Getting God married is a good use of someone's time. You are supposed to make the environment intelligent so no God is needed. We fixed the video and audio for the best experience possible. Cameras are supernatural and all of them captured 3D that not a gimmick. The audio loud don't make violence so has depth. Nobody has to buy anything for it to work.
Even a fool knows his on shadow…
Own. His own shadow. Platos cave is meant to show how our knowledge is limited by our frame of reference. The people in the cave only see shadows of the world outside, they have no idea that a much more complicted reality exists beyond the cave they dwell in. Similarly, Plato theorises there exists a realm that we cannot perceive, but from which our reality is derived.
@@joeldobbs7396brother, “one of these things is not like the other”
I’m familiar with the theory. I’m saying regardless you know your body is not 2D and that you even chained at some point must realize the something is different.
Your shadow is darker than mine,why?
@@scottkleyla7752 psychologically or literally? Maybe you have a pocket full of sunshine lol by that I mean time of day. Mines darkest in the evening both literally and figuratively
You are a physics professor. I saw you debated a Muslim,
If you do not lie, be fair, and search for the truth, then when you debate a Muslim, you should debate a Muslim, a physics professor like you.
Quran 18:51 "I did not make them witness to the creation of the heavens and the earth or to the creation of themselves, and I would not have taken the misguiders as assistants."
Allah descends knowledge gradually according to each era,
Qur’an 15:21[And there is not a thing but that with Us are its depositories, and We do not send it down except according to a known measure."]
Allah is the greatest,🙌❤️🌍🌿🌘🌞🕋
I dont mean to politisize this, dr Krauss's lectures are always great to listen to, that's why I don't really understand the point of that joke about Palestine. as an educator he should know that the youth of all times generation does have to have high standards both, academically and morally. luckily they do a great job on that, they stand up against genocide, against the suffering of other people because us, the older generation allowed the representatives of our governments to fall for money, to betray our values, to let the zionist lobby control all aspects of lives. the crimes against humanity are happening before our eyes, I hope that dr Krauss ethnicity does not come before his morality.
@ibite100 what?
Zionist lobby controlling all aspects of our lives?
Genocide?
Next, you will say that Hammas and its followers didn't commit any heinous acts when they attacked on the 7th October.
( -д-) It's intelligently designed that if you master evolution it just makes you a baby doctor.
The ice crystals look like a marijuana plant. Nature is trying to say past marijuana law....lol
Pass it bud,be Kool like that!
(/_;)/~~ The universe was created in 1976. It is too hot to make a universe at the time of the big bang. It can be created at anytime. God is slow and easy. A human can do a lot with their lifespan. I got the hunk. God got the chunk. Everyone else can have the rest. That is song spirit of ''76 by The Alarm.
No, the world isnt an illusion, but you are.
Lol 5 minute mark zinger
Majik by PFM
Allah descends knowledge gradually according to each era,
Qur’an 15:21[And there is not a thing but that with Us are its depositories, and We do not send it down except according to a known measure."]
Allah is the greatest,🙌❤️🌍🌿🌘
Fundamental Energy Density = Sum(VectorDirectionDifference)/Volume = increased path = time dilation (speed is constant, while path length increases) = (frequency). [path of least resistance = fundamental equation for the universe = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors) normalized length]. This is not a space warping, but rather a curvature of motion flow with respect to another motion flow, which is the density of Sum(VectorDirectionDifference)/Volume = energy density, quantitatively. And really we shouldn't even think of energy as a wave (at quantum gravity scales), but rather modes of angular motion polarization (continuous flow). these inverse quantities emerge via this simple beautiful equation = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors). No extra nonsense required to highlight the true fundamentals. Space/time doesn't warp, motion flow directions warps on local intersect with a inverse motion flow direction differential density = energy density. (h) = a circumference length of motion flow relative to the radius (hbar) [is the dominant mode length of motion flow storage in the universe, and permeates all of space, while mass is the displacement of this mode], and this drives mass formation and gravity wells around the mass. The universe is a large scale path of least resistance algorithm, quantifiably denoted (mathematically and computationally). Path of least resistance = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors).
Why don't u write a book
@@Joe-ym6bwBecause everything he wrote there is pseudoscience gibberish. In fact I have copypasted it to use as an example. Whomever wrote it would say I am just too dumb to understand it, or perhaps that I have been brainwashed by established science and am doomed to graze with the other sheep. Either way, it won't be their ability to communicate that is at fault.
Maybe they are friends with a certain actor that claims 1+1=1? I think i will point out some of the ways in which it makes no sense and see if i get a coherent defense or just abuse.
You know, there is nothing stopping you from learning real science. You might actually be good at it, but you would have to stop pretending you know things you don't. The world doesn't need another Deepak, stringing words together and pretending its something more than creative writing.
If this is not nonsense, explain some of your terms; What is Fundamental Energy Density? What is it fundamental to? Try saying it like this: just as an understanding stochiometric chemistry is fundamental to understanding internal combustion engines, particularly those with computer controlled fuel injection, an understanding of _________________ is essential to learning about ______________.
Oh my, a fundamental equation for the universe! Could you please cache that out a bit? Separate it from the other terms so a dummy like me can understand it, please.
The sad part is, you probably have no shortage of people that give you positive feedback. I am going to suggest less time on the internet, and some CBT.
@@joeldobbs7396 What's real science? Fundamental Energy Density = Sum(VectorDirectionDifference)/Volume. Path of least resistance = (sum of local vectors/number of local vectors) normalized length. It's vector math, I simulate it on my computer.
I think I need to talk to you. I have equations that may explain this.
Lawrence Krauss may be a brilliant man but he is a terrible communicator.
Maybe it would help if they showed the slides and graphs and charts he's talking about. Otherwise its just like watching radio.
Let's play a game,is there a scientist?
I think his style/demeanor can be a little offputting sometimes, but I was just thinking how I actually can follow and understand this guy compared to some of the other science speakers that lose me within minutes
Terribly best selling author too.
I can't listen to him long
🤮🤮🤮🤮