Sir Roger Penrose - What's Fundamental in the Cosmos? (Part 1)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 січ 2019
- Dig down to the deepest level of reality, the smallest things that exist, the building blocks of everything else. What do we find? What's there at the very bottom? That's what's 'fundamental'. Everything else is derivative, built up from the bottom. So what's there at the bottom? So what's fundamental?
Click here to watch more interviews with Roger Penrose bit.ly/2QD3iI1
Click here to watch more interviews on what’s fundamental in the cosmos bit.ly/2QzhrpB
Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth bit.ly/1LUPlQS
For all of our video interviews please visit us at www.closertotruth.com
![Lp. Последняя Реальность #107 РОДНОЙ ДОМ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3QKzKUlHM/mqdefault.jpg)
Sir Roger Penrose OM FRS is an English mathematical physicist, mathematician and philosopher of science. He is Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics in the University of Oxford and Emeritus Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford.
And a genius of mankind.
We know that already!
@counselthyself Oh, I wonder how much better you understand physics than Sir Penrose. I wonder how much academic merit you have. We are talking about physics here, you are talking about a religion and acting as if it had anything to do with academic merit.
@counselthyself I never claimed to be in possession an answer of any sort for said unanswerable question, nor did I imply that such answer even evidently exists.
Your argument is solely based on making false assumptions about my position. I was hoping I could have a conversation with someone whose argumentative skills are not at the level of a neonatal. I was wrong.
The notion of god is completely outside of the realm of scientific methodology. It is not provable, nor falsifiable, therefore it doesnt pertain to science. The notion isnt defined with sufficient detailedness to be a subject of research.
I have no religion or worldview. But I have every reason to have bias for models that have immense predictive accuracy, meaning that they can accurately describe the manner in which future phenomena will present themselves to our senses, and explanatory efficiency, meaning that instead of shoehorning in superfluous verbosity, said models are composed entirely of evidence-based propositions, that explain our observations and optimal flexibility, meaning that these models are sufficiently flexible so as to be open to revision in light of new evidence, but not so flexible so as to be able to subsume all possible observations under its explanatory framework thus becoming unfalsifiable.
Antibiotics, medicine, particle accelerators, spaceships, satellites, planes etc are demonstration of sciences ability to reliably explain the world with unbelievable accuracy. Do you claim to not be biased towards said models? If you use airplanes, you are biased towards science. If you use a smartphone, you are biased towards science. If you use a computer, you are biased towards science. There is no possible way for you to honestly not be biased towards science, unless you are a hunter-gatherer. And even then, you would be an idiot, because then you would be disregarding facts that are objectively verifiable.
@counselthyselfUnderstand that an objection lacking any elaboration for its rationale has no credence, no matter how confidently it is asserted.
Until you are able to present a citation from my essay that is particularly indicative of religious bias, your argument is void.
Greatest natural philosopher alive, Sir Roger Penrose. It is a privilege to watch his mind at work.
Love the channel and all it’s content. It’s also good to see that we have basically no clue so we must keep on digging for the ultimate answers.
Love watching brilliant minds discussing Such incredible ideas.
May I suggest less camera movement. It's rather distracting.
It isn't.
They are using a drone i think.
Yeah, the camera movement is weird and distracting. No real point to it.
I know gees. Was the camera man on a unicycle ? 🤣
I've always enjoyed the effect. I agree that it is a bit severe in this clip when compared to the others. It is usually more subtle.
Two minutes in and he's put the position I've been at for several years now - I do hope he explains everything; cos then I can die happy....
Jonathon Jubb
I’ve done more than u in life. I’ve launched products that keep u happy!
Your several years what may I say u gave to humanity?
@@n1k32h I hope you are not expecting an answer to that....
E
Basically says entropy in the next universe will continue to increase but we now have a new datum point to compare it to. Isn’t it also possible that multiple new universes are created from the previous one and thus entropy is distributed amongst them?
I didn't get the last part. Is there someone sticking the pin or not?
As far as I understood, no. There's not someone sticking the pin. The unlikely scenario he describes would come to happen if gravity was in the picture of the Big Bang which is why he things gravity was not involved in the Big Bang or was very very weak at the very least. (3:10) What I find more interesting is that he says the Schrodinger equation is not true at every moment across the universe.
Is he saying information that is lost in black holes resets entropy for another universe to begin?
Work it out for yourself, what he is saying is that he knows no more than you do.
I don't think so although it does sound close to like it at a couple of points.
Could one say "resets the baseline of entropy"?
Brilliant !
I was looking for something to put me to sleep before bed. This did the job.
Parliament is better for that
Is there a part 2 ?
Remarkable scientist
Great
I could talk to him and Lee all day. All year.
Thankyou
If physical reality moves from future through present to past, then entropy would be decreasing?
At least an honest answer as opposed to the other scientists that only question the question.
@@RP-ch8yn Yes, and the practitioners of science too. Though, it is difficult for people in general to shake their bias, even scientists that want 'just the facts'.
I have trouble to see the difference between maximum and minimum entropy. I think they are essentially the same. That prohibits me from following his thoughts.
I find his views to be very open to some kind of spiritual view, perhaps particularly the Vedic view.
Where is part 2?
Sir you have figured out Bigbang against the background of aeon . In our upanishad it is mentioned that pranasmi pranjnatma . Like Prakriti and purusa both are fundamental to our cosmos ,prana and rayee both are fundamental to our galaxy along with sutratma and bhutatma from unmsnifest to manifestation through coupling of imaginary time and realtime at the Bigbang
Can I have a chicken bhuna and rice with that please.
As the universe expands, might be the past (big bang) that expands to the edge / horizon of universe, with decreasing entropy and little or no gravity? So at edge of universe, there is low entropy state increasingly dominated by dark energy, from which big bang of new universe can happen?
Pls put subtitles in all your videos, as the sound volume is small and that some of the speakers do not speak clearly.
Aye ! I second that !
Was taught all this in kindergarten. Now totally forgotten
Understandable 👌
Perhaps there was no gravitational effect at the initial big bang because space-time (gravity) needed to settle down... just my pea-brained thoughts.
Was this after lunch?
Why can't I find this show on TV anymore?
as you can see 60k subs .. this is the current state of interest in the world for things like that. Kardashita is the more important thing to watch ...
@@cridr Sure, but I used also to be able to watch this on television in the morning; it's not apparently airing there anymore.
@@friedrichschopenhauer2900 We dont have any idea wth youre talking about. what cable provider, what channel?.. find out and get in touch with them maybe? The fact you thought random you tube viewers would know these details boggles the mind.
He seems to respectfully represent the physicists who think gravity is primary not quantum mechanics. Perhaps that's a crude way of putting it but this is all well beyond my expertise anyways lol.
Well quantum mechanics cannot account for gravity, and gravity cannot account for quantum mechanics, and both can be demonstrated to exist, to put it simply. This is where the Theory of Everything comes into play and it has to be respected to some degree because we have this grand contradiction at the heart of physics.
wow
Not one mention of death and taxes.
Thank God for someone like Roger Penrose...... oh wait...
As universe expands, dark energy takes over from gravity, increasing entropy in future but decreasing entropy in past?
I understand that Roger Penrose was the tutor to Stephen Hawking when he (Stephen) did his Ph.D thesis. So this makes Roger to be a very talented scientist.
And, a patient and humble one. Considering Hawking's rapidly deteriorating body, I wonder if Penrose acted more as a collaborator, than a mentor, in Hawkings thesis.
Here's my take. It's relatively conformal and cyclical with a few multiversal absolutes and quanta.
Liquid Crystal Space -- Bottom-Up Universe Thought Experiment.. Colloidal Crystal Multiverse
Constraints: 3D, minimal base rules + parts. No singularities with the infinite possible
Like charges repel, unlike attract. -ve ether balances close-packed +ve lattice cells
1 Cell volume of Ether -6, Cell +6. Pulls 6 opposites to light speed in 1 cell length
Escape velocity = light speed (C) tied to the constant time light takes to move between cells
Tunneling: stretched, faster than light front, light speed or slower rear
Tunneling cells form in phase extrons+holons that often annihilate to regular='empty' lattice
Tunneling particles reform elsewhere and their original space 'heals' as regular empty lattice
Particles: Inflows repel. 6 equatorial and 2x3 polar flows (-6 if poles flow in, +6 if out)
Extron: extra cell compresses the lattice, pulls in ether that repels as rays
Holon: ether-rich lattice hole stretches the lattice, pulls in cells that repel as rays
Dipolons: extron + holon.. Diextron: +ve + -ve extron.. Diholon: +ve + -ve holon
Junkons: lattice chunks/holes heal to in phase extrons+holons and/or/then empty regular lattice
3D polar flows are more concentrated than flat equatorial flows so effect particles more
Moving extrons push cells that -ve ethereal space behind pulls in with an inertia-providing kick
Particles make lattice and holon flow waves that can interfere and alter a particle path
Strong gravity may force (some) particle outflows to repel back to its inflows in various patterns
Charge / Entanglement: -ve inflows, +ve outflows. Polar flow count. Lattice, holon, extron charge
Close flows attract or repel, regional gravity fields affect velocity and direction
Holon charge flow is one unit so changing spin/flow direction or cutting it effects it all at once
Dipolon / Matter-Antimatter: Gravity shrinks cells, lowering phase difference resolution
Close out of phase extron+holon pairs form dipolons, in phase annihilate and radiate excess ether
A feeding black hole's core extrons+holons are forced in phase and annihilate. A universe grows
Black Hole Universes / Recursive Conformity: Big Bang = black holes colliding and merging
Pressure compresses extrons+holons, gravity blurs phases, vibes stop at light speed. Annhilation
Total energy and matter potential is conserved. No fine tuning, universes follow the same rules
Level n +/- particle lattice fields or cubic lattice of joined holons (+ free particles) feasible
Mass / Gravity / Dark Energy: lattice charge balance, charge inflow, entanglement, universe shell
Mass is (the number of) out of place lattice cells. An object's extrons + holon charge flow
Mass pulls ether pulls mass. Lattice vibes up to 1 cell radius and light speed effect matter
Outflows bounce in all directions, inflows lead to the center. Outflows tend to join inflows
Mass uses up ether so void cell repulsion increases. Open universes expand, closed shrink matter
Universe grows, shell thins, excess ether radiates, lattice expands. Shell gravity cancels inside
Photon / Light / Time: relatively quantum.. lattice compression-expansion blobs ripple holon flows
Lattice shock wave. Compressed, +ve mass/charge front and stretched, -ve rear. No mass overall
Holon charge flow has mass, transverse waves concentrate it. 2D adds effective area
Moves between cells in a constant time (+ universe expansion) as denser lattice takes more energy
Gravity shrinks and acceleration compresses the lattice so both absolutely slow light locally
Units shrink too and acceleration slows kinetic processes so vacuum light speed measures C locally
Velocity stretches kinetic processes in time as they travel more to complete. Clocks run slower
The Standard Model: the possibilities are numerous. Some SM particles may be junkons
Please publish this. I'm sure you can get a No-bell prize for it.
What's that you might ask. Well, it's a cyclical colloidal crystal that they give you. You can put it on your desk.
PrivateSi wow you’re are a genius lol
@@Robocop-qe7le .. God, that's well old.. Here's the up-to-date, simplified interpretation. The thing with these (mental!) models is they can go in many directions. This is 10 times simpler than String Theory yet still, the possibilities are numerous... I'm currently viewing electrons/positrons as spherical balloons filled with strong magnetic liquid, squeezed together wuth surrounding charge gradient Science say nuclei and atoms are spherical so they smear into spheres in various configurations. 2 pulled together form a neutrino, proton is 2 positrons wrapping an electron ball in the centre... proton+electron+proton does the same, but larger to form a proton-neutron bond in the nucleus... Strong Force + EM + Gravity unified... lol.
__
Subspace: +ve charge cells (charge quanta, base charge +1) held together by an ethereal sea of more free-flowing -ve charge.
Inertia: Energy lost by a free cell compressing the lattice and itself is returned with a kick by the lattice 'refreezing' (balancing) behind
Electron/Positron: A free cell and/or the hole left behind vibrate the lattice. 2 that are more than 50% out of phase turn to lattice, else they form a neutrino
EM Charge: Electrons and Positrons have (loops) of continuous in-out flows of -ve charge or +ve charge cells (or both, certainly when bonded)
Neutrino: More than 50% in phase Electron + Positron. Minimum 6 cells long
Proton: 2 positrons joined by 1 electron (subspace charge (free cell/hole) may be important)
Neutron: Proton + Electron. Electron joins to another proton in the nucleus, decays outside via centrifugal force on the dangling electron
++++: Chunks + holes of lattice of various sizes that quickly turn to smaller chunks and holes, until electrons, positrons, neutrinos/back to regular lattice
Gravity: Free cells are a +ve warp so attracts -ve charge away from voids that repel more and expand. Higher -ve charge density compacts the lattice.
Time: Local time/(charge outflow speed / wave frequency?)/Speed of Light slows with charge density (Time Dilation).
Velocity: Compresses the lattice=length contraction and higher charge density.
Black holes: Drag the whole lattice round (frame dragging)
Tunnelling: The intrinsic radial energy of positron and electron charge flow directed in one direction for a brief time, possibly travelling at C2, or even C3..
Particle entanglement: Particles linked by charge flows.. Stopping a flow at any point in the network breaks entanglement
Spin: particles (and flows?) spin (anti)clockwise perpendicular to the direction of travel. Could be due to substructure (6 ins + 6 outs e- / p+ model)
__
Light: Is one or more layers of lattice vibrating periodically, each lattice cell never breaking free, always returning to it's central balance point
Photon: lower lattice layers move up/down more than peak ones. longer wavelength = smaller jumps and fewer hits/s. Peak = closer up and down hits
Photon Entanglement: Subspace charge doing its thing....... I'm not sure.
--
Variations of this model can lead to Big Bang, slowly evolving and Steady State Universes, Black Hole Universes in parent universes / The Multiverse... It is quite possible the universe is NOT EXPANDING, but condensed from a hydrogen cloud, perhaps by an empty black hole core universe taking a hit from a very small, but fast moving black hole that created a homogeneous field of positrons and electrons or even hydrogen that reacted and collapsed into stars and galaxies with black holes at their centres... It is possible the lattice is compressed in a container (ie. black hole shell) so instead of voids expanding due to loss of T--ve base charge either gravity wells shrink more sharply or RED / BLUE SHIFT IS PROPORTIONAL TO GALAXY MASS, higher mass, more blue.... No void expansion from -ve base charge loss or big bang momentum.... blah, blah.
--
In the standard Big Bang model I don't see the problem with viewing the universe as as the ever-widening shell of an ever-growing sphere, with an ever growing empty core. If the initial explosion petered out over time, with the first ejected matter-energy having more speed and momentum than the last ejected matter-energy space would effectively be expanding. If you see that gravity will work more strongly laterally with other matter travelling at the same speed, in relative motion, you can see how the strands form, where gravity can then do its local centralising thing....
@@AXZ1974 It's a though experiment proof of concept that from VERY simple premises a VERY complex universe can emerge... and that the particle smashers may be a tad confused - even more than they think.. The problem with Super String Theory for instance is it's so powerful it can model whatever you want. The other problem is it achieves this using various complex maths and not 3D space + 1D time or 4D Spacetime. It is recursive, but not in a way we see in nature.. We see OLD BALLS.... Here's a simplified version, if it doesn't make more sense to you than any other model you've read you can have your money back!
__
Subspace: +ve charge cells (charge quanta, base charge +1) held together by an ethereal sea of more free-flowing -ve charge.
Inertia: Energy lost by a free cell compressing the lattice and itself is returned with a kick by the lattice 'refreezing' (balancing) behind
Electron/Positron: A free cell and/or the hole left behind vibrate the lattice. 2 that are more than 50% out of phase turn to lattice, else they form a neutrino
EM Charge: Electrons and Positrons have (loops) of continuous in-out flows of -ve charge or +ve charge cells (or both, certainly when bonded)
Neutrino: More than 50% in phase Electron + Positron. Minimum 6 cells long
Proton: 2 positrons joined by 1 electron (subspace charge (free cell/hole) may be important)
Neutron: Proton + Electron. Electron joins to another proton in the nucleus, decays outside via centrifugal force on the dangling electron
++++: Chunks + holes of lattice of various sizes that quickly turn to smaller chunks and holes, until electrons, positrons, neutrinos/back to regular lattice
Gravity: Free cells are a +ve warp so attracts -ve charge away from voids that repel more and expand. Higher -ve charge density compacts the lattice.
Time: Local time/(charge outflow speed / wave frequency?)/Speed of Light slows with charge density (Time Dilation).
Velocity: Compresses the lattice=length contraction and higher charge density.
Black holes: Drag the whole lattice round (frame dragging)
Tunnelling: The intrinsic radial energy of positron and electron charge flow directed in one direction for a brief time, possibly travelling at C2, or even C3..
Particle entanglement: Particles linked by charge flows.. Stopping a flow at any point in the network breaks entanglement
Spin: particles (and flows?) spin (anti)clockwise perpendicular to the direction of travel. Could be due to substructure (6 ins + 6 outs e- / p+ model)
__
Light: Is one or more layers of lattice vibrating periodically, each lattice cell never breaking free, always returning to it's central balance point
Photon: lower lattice layers move up/down more than peak ones. longer wavelength = smaller jumps and fewer hits/s. Peak = closer up and down hits
Photon Entanglement: Subspace charge doing its thing....... I'm not sure.
--
Variations of this model can lead to Big Bang and Steady State Universes, Black Hole Universes in parent universes / The Multiverse... It is quite possible the universe is NOT EXPANDING, but condensed from a hydrogen cloud, perhaps by an empty black hole core universe taking a hit from a very small, but fast moving black hole that created a homogenous field of positrons and electrons or even hydrogen that reacted and collapsed into stars and galaxies with black holes at their centres... It is possible the lattice is compressed in a container (ie. black hole shell) so instead of voids expanding due to loss of The Force (-ve base charge) either gravity wells shrink more sharply or RED / BLUE SHIFT IS PROPORTIONAL TO GALAXY MASS, higher mass, more blue.... No void expansion from -ve base charge loss or big bang momentum.... blah, blah.
--
In the standard Big Bang model I don't see the problem with viewing the universe as as the ever-widening shell of an ever-growing sphere, with an ever growing empty core. If the initial explosion petered out over time, with the first ejected matter-energy having more speed and momentum than the last ejected matter-energy space would effectively be expanding. If you see that gravity will work more strongly laterally with other matter travelling at the same speed, in relative motion, you can see how the strands form, where gravity can then do its local centralising thing....
PrivateSi in medical terms this is called schizophasia aka word salad/Graphorrhea.
Awesomeness but I found the camera work super distracting.
The double slit experiment shows that light and matter behave as both a wave and as particles depending on if observed or not which requires some degree of consciousness to collapse it from a wave into a particle through observation....those waves/particles go on to make up everything we see, yet follow a completely different rule set of physics.
Surely this can only mean that consciousness is the only thing that’s fundamental without it everything is a wave of potential which there’s two possible ways...1.Consciousness is the only thing that’s fundamental and the physics of the universe are simulated for consciousness to create with from outside our space and time or 2. Consciousness is the only thing that’s fundamental and creates everything from within.
The problem I see is if it’s 2. then the consciousness required to make the observation is also responsible for creating the laws of physics which require observation from the same consciousness to exist.....🤔
Points 1. and 2. Utter bull. Consciousness it biological! In humans it is the functioning of the reticular formation in the brainstem! Nothing spooky!
GeoCoppens Try proving anything without it then?
@@djjfive"wich requires some degree of consciousness..." By who or what..." An organism has consciousness!
GeoCoppens So does Schrödinger‘s cat...
So from who’s perspective becomes a factor...Still consciousness is fundamental to it all..
@@djjfive Question is: Whose consciousness? It's not some spooky substance floating around the universe...
2020 Nobel Prize in Physics🏆🏆🏆
The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave!
Nicola Tesla states, “If you want to find the secrets of the universe,
think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration”
Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles,
and creates our experience-able Universe.
Max Planck states: "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness".
Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely.
We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment.
Our job is to make it interesting!
I'm strongly agnostic, still agnostic, but I deeply hope you are right friend 🙏💞😌💛🌹
And audio + camera work needs attention .
I wish I could say I understood this, haha...
4th!
Wait… what about Adam and Eve?
I think their entropy decreased at the quantum convergence point, due to low gravity; then, there was a collapse of their wave-function (decoherence)
and they wound up in a black hole.!
They may now be waiting for the next cyclical Big Bang, that is, if their information has not been erased. (Of course, that depends on the status of the Hawking Radiation level.)
Whether or not Adam & Eve were in a state of Entanglement with the Serpent Function also depends on further research & study.
Glad you asked.!
Consciousness and meaning are fundamental. Matter can't create them.
I’ve read ‘The Road to Reality’ (2004) several times and I like that earlier Roger very much better, that earlier Roger being he who said we are going to have to make some very large, very drastic and very fundamental changes to our present understanding of the universe if we hope to improve that understanding to any significant degree. See the last paragraph of his book.
An only slight change in perspective quickly reveals that our universe is quite literally and quite plainly composed of PLASMA (the 4th state of matter) and operates as to the very powerful and diverse electromagnetic nature thereof - which electromagnetic properties / forces are (arguably) 10 to the 39 x greater than poor little gravity.
There are no such things as dark matter, dark energy, black- or worm holes, big bangs or mega crunches in an electric- or plasma universe.
As there is absolutely no information on anything or any one OUTSIDE our Universe - presumably precisely that ‘realm’, ‘sphere’ or magisteria where the creator of it all (if there is one) resides along with his, hers, theirs or it’s means, materials, methods and madnesses (reasons) to so create - then no option exists other than to say we just don’t know.
Every thing that we do know of is composed of and behaves as plasma ....... gravity (which is also a very, very weak electromagnetic phenomenon) plays an almost negligible role.
How’s that for a very drastic change of perspective, one which not at all so incidentally ANSWERS pretty much ALL of the questions and mysteries still plaguing main stream physics/cosmology.
Except who, where, when, with what and for heavens sakes WHY it exists as it does.
Are you arguing for the electric universe hypothesis?
These videos always bring out every two-bit hack who thinks they can explain the universe from their armchair using WORDS they aren't even committed enough to define. You answered ALL the mysteries huh? How about you start with ONE then? And please show your work, if it exists. Please tell the class what, if anything, can be done with what you just typed. Because so far this wall of text amounts to nothing whatsoever.
Mr Kuhn trying hard to keep up with Mr Penrose...
He is locked in for surs
lol that cheeky i dont know what you just said smile at the end
THANK GOD PEOPLE ARE CATCHING ONTO WHAT PENROSE HAS BEEN SAYING.
in universe main power is conciousness of unconciousness
knowledge captived by conciousness of conciousness is very limited in universe
because universe is dominated and fonctioned by the language of conciousness of unconciousness that conciousness of conciousness is yet doesnt know this language
the solution is to invent the physics of metaphysics
Yeah, ... Right.
I can’t let this have 666 likes 👍 made it 667 😂
Edit: ❤️
@@oscar3490 most unfunny reply ever!
@@gr33nDestiny 🖕
@@gr33nDestiny sorry mate 🌱
@@oscar3490 I'm sorry too, public comments, was just getting bored of saying great episode etc..
Halton Arp disprove's the big bang.end of story unless you still have belief's in out dates Newtonian science.Wal Thornhill has a better view.
@@vids595 wikipedia doesn't tell truth
Black holes in a black hole in a black hole....
There are no fundamental building blocks from which everything else is derivative, built up from the bottom. The whole is prior to its parts and consciousness is not derivative so a single mind is fundamental, with metaphysical explanation dangling downward from this one mind that subsumes everything.
@DigitalDan Check out my playlist: *The Case for Monistic Idealism*
Good luck formulating a formula for that
A hierarchy of detailed portions reducing to an abstract whole is an accurate characterization. For a detailed description I would recommend learning the Semantic Interpretation of quantum theory, which is explained by this gentleman: www.ashishdalela.com/2018/02/26/impatient-guide-books/
@@Robinson8491 Good luck formulating scientism into a formula
@DigitalDan So in one post you mock someone for potentially having no reasons for their beliefs, then you disparage logic and reason itself... There's just no winning with you, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't lol logic and reason is not based on blind faith, they're based on axioms which is an important distinction to make. There are proofs that can be formulated that forms of arguments like _modus ponens_ for instance is indeed valid, which means if the premises are indeed true then the conclusion must be true. You can't really deny this without sawing off the branch you sit on. You're trying to draw conclusions using logic right now from premises such as "God is transcendent" to "therefore language and logic miss the mark", you can't actually draw that conclusion without pulling from the rules of inference which you so criticize. I like how the Orthodox Christian theologian Dr. David Bentley Harts puts it
"All the great theistic traditions agree that God, understood in this proper sense, is essentially beyond finite comprehension; hence, much of the language used of him is negative in form and has been reached only by a logical process of abstraction from those qualities of finite reality that make it insufficient to account for its own existence. *All agree as well, however, that he can genuinely be known: that is, reasoned toward, intimately encountered, directly experienced with a fullness surpassing mere conceptual comprehension.”*
Source: Hart, David Bentley (2013). The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss. Yale University Press. p. 42
Cameraman making me nauseous.
Roger Caris e is a fantasy camera guy
So I'm an idiot.
Your mom
Inflation happens to explain the lack of gravitational effects in the early universe, but Penrose doesn’t believe in inflation so he’s gone and invented his own wacky theory that tries to explain what inflation already explains...
But then again I’m no expert so I’m probably wrong... lol
endoftheroad that’s correct. He is saying that there was no period after the big bang where all of the forces were unified. Gravity, in the form of waves and dark matter, lives on between aeons, albeit in an altered form.
His (and others) criticism of inflation is summarised nicely here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)#Criticisms
i think you are mistaken Roger?
So.... He doesn't really know.
@S - coefficient of Skepticism Nobody really knows, show me the statistically significant report. You believe lies dressed up as science my friend.
@S - coefficient of Skepticism Well? Do you have any evidence to back up his theories? Do you even understand scientific methods?
@S - coefficient of Skepticism You clearly have no idea what a statistically significant report is. When you understand my questions (and correct scientific methods) you'll be able to provide the statistically significant results to back up the theories you believe. You're not a scientist my friend.
@S - coefficient of Skepticism I'm afraid Lazarus is correct. Penrose only offers speculative theories without citing any evidence. The statistically significant results Lazarus asks for are standard practice for any credible scientific argument.
You may be a little out of your league here as you cannot begin to understand science or the universe by watching Ted talks or UA-cam videos. Have you ever considered taking a science degree in order to better understand experimental methods and quantitative evidence? You appear to have an amateur interest in science but you would do well to adopt a less dogmatic attitude. Science is all about evidence not confirmation bias.
@S - coefficient of Skepticism Lisa Randall? Lol! Dude you really need to check your grammar. You skeptards are all the same, wannabe scientists who can't spell or punctuate correctly. I'm with Laz on this one, where's your evidence man?
Don't ask him because he knows nothing.
He has one Nobel Science Prize more than you.
So, First, Life is Eternal Life have never been created, Life is creator.
The basic analysis of the eternal Life, is the creator, the creation-ability, and the creation. The creator is the Living, the creator-ability is the consciousness, and the creation is thought-stuff.
So, We have the Mover, the Moving-ability, and the Motion.
The most basic when We look into the macro-cosmos, called universe, is Motion, the Stuff-side of Life is a Motion-Ocean, pure Motion.
The two 'legs' all and any Stuff walk on, is 'Heat and Cold', the condition of all and any Stuff, is a relationship/balance/harmony between Heat and Cold.
Thoughts is the finest stuff, it is of electric nature, and basically also a matter of Heat and Cold.
Well, there is much more to tell, but this is the very basic of the eternal stuff-nature.
The Life-Desire, is the Motor of Life, in direct extension, We have the Will, (Life-Side) and Gravity, (Stuff-side)
(with the Will I do balance Gravity of Earth, with my own, when I lift the Cup)
All minds ( consciousness ) were created in the mind of our Creator. This is why it is written in the Bible, "man was created in the image of God". The visible bodies we know as human beings are only visible illusions that form in the world we consciously created men wake up in. In the next generation, we won't always need a body to observe other visible illusions. We will also experience life in many different kinds of bodies.
What you're talking about is idealism and is the position I hold to as well. My channel is dedicated to collecting some of the more popular and academic videos on youtube, so if you'd like to see more idealist content you can find some there. Cheers
@@MonisticIdealism I've been speaking and writing for our Creator the past 10 years. What you believe to be true was given to you by our Creator. Only a few were chosen during this temporary generation.
What you say reminds of the missing aliens: who knows they are not there because every evolving civilizations figures eventually that way into another dimension where everything material known before is not even worth the trouble.
@DigitalDan I know for sure that our Creator planned out all our experiences that we call life.
@DigitalDan You non-believers are all alike when you meet a servant who speaks for our Creator. Christians and other religious people hate us servants who do that. They're waiting for their gods to come and save them.