21. Chaos and Reductionism
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 тра 2024
- (May 19, 2010) Professor Robert Sapolsky gives what he calls "one of the most difficult lectures of the course" about chaos and reductionism. He references a book that he assigned to his students. This lecture focuses on reduction science and breaking things down to their component parts in order to understand them best.
Stanford University:
www.stanford.edu/
Stanford Department of Biology:
biology.stanford.edu/
Stanford University Channel on UA-cam:
/ stanford
I am 75. Due to circumstances, I was not able to go on to higher education (college). I listen to this wonderful professor and deeply regret this fact of my life. I could listen endlessly, to the way he recreates history. Thanks to all who have made this possible.
One becomes old if he stops learning.
So you are 75 but you are not old bcoz you still like to learn
Stay young forever
Sapolsky is plausibly the best lecturer I’ve ever heard, you’re getting a better lecture listening experience over UA-cam than most people ever get at college.
To be fair, most lectures by most professors lack quality authorship and are rather usually just overviews of the reading material. And generally a student is so focused on taking notes, working on assignments, and preparing for exams that there is little time to really enjoy lectures.
❤️
It is marvellous that these lectures are so accessible to non- scientists. I've now bought a book by Sapolsky which is equally fascinating and readable.
Since people keep asking, the book he mentions at the beginning is Chaos by James Gleick.
Thank you - I'm down here in the comments early to find that out. :-)
Sorry people,it takes intelligence to grasp this lecture otherwise your in the wrong place.
You Rock ✊
One of the best books I've ever read. If I recommend one book, this is it.
Amazing Book-changes the way you look at the world.
Dr. Sapolsky's UA-cam lectures are truly the most emotionally inspiring, intellectually stimulating, and flat-out entertaining free academic content out there on ANY subject or discipline. This gifted man has a knack for explaining complicated ideas and issues in the most basic and relatable of ways. Such a rhetorical skill is a talent many intelligent minds in the academy sorely lack, much to the detriment of their students' class performance. Thank you, Stanford administration, for making freely available to the public a window into the minds of your most brilliant faculty.
O hi hi guy
Well said!
If anyone is interested the book Professor Sapolsky mentions is "Chaos: Making a New Science" by James Gleick. It introduces the principles and early development of the chaos theory in a general way without complicated mathematics.
As an interesting aside: Professor Sapolsky has said the line about it being the first book he'd finished and started again since "Baby Beluga" as well as "Where The Wild Things Are." I guess the etiology of that is to be more relatable to current students. 😊
I can’t believe people still pay for education. This is just phenomenal information for free. I am literally a high school drop out in my mid 30’s and I watch Ivy League lectures all day. This is fricking amazing. This is how humanity is meant to be. Stanford is killing it. I’ve seen this guy in documentaries too and his ability to convey information is truly a blessing.
Yeah dude but those people want to get a job in the field and you need qualifications for it. Yeah it’s ridiculous to pay for education but it’s amazing how your next step is not “because it should be free “
1. You are ignoring that it is those people in the class who are paying for these lectures and the studies done there. If they did not pay, we would not see this.
2. This information is not updated, it is a good basis to start but a lot has changed.
3. To actually do anything in this field you need a qualification, you need the ability to learn and then be examined on the finer details of what you learnt. So that you can say, yes I do actually know what I am talking about.
Look dude I am in the same place as you but education is still important.
Fam this literally from a college
@Martin Čelko Incoherent. Read more, then you can stop using so many words to say so little.
@Martin Čelko Why are you bringing IQ points into it? You know that is an outdated concept anyway. The idea of IQ is to test only a specific set of information, it does not test the intelligence of a person. I know you wish to feel intelligent for reading a book but at the end of the day you are not qualified.
Dr. Sapolsky has a great sense of humor and a soothing delivery. One of my favorite professors.
How Sapolsky is fascinated by the things he is explaining is really beautiful to see
Lies again? AO Levels
thats what makes a great professor
My autoplay always brings me to these lectures, in order. I fall asleep to Alan Watts every night; I wake up multiple times a night during interesting parts of the lectures, my dreams have been very interesting.
Im not the only one!!
Same!!
Autoplay for me too....
What makes a good teacher? I'll tell you now. I've taught a lot of classes in a lot of subjects. The single most important factor is if the teacher actually understands the subject. Most high school and college teachers only have a surface understanding of their subject. This means that they have a stereotyped presentation of the material. Usually they just explain a question in the same way that it was explained to them. Sapolsky is a really good teacher because for almost everything that he presents he has indeed figured it out for himself. That doesn't mean that he is right about everything, but he has internalized everything he talks about.
patrick, no offense but aren't you the self and not the other you are objectifying as sap all asky? solipsism not in the subject but the object. No offense sir.
psient It is refreshing to read a comment that is polite. But alas you are too deep for me. I can't understand your post.
Patrick, I agree with you regarding prof. Sapolsky's profound knowledge and perfect command of the science he's talking about, which obviously is not quite common with lower rank teachers; I also agree that Psient's comment is beyond comprehension of ordinary terrestrials. Being a teacher myself I could add, that it seems to me that the best way to try to make sure you understand something fully is to try to explain it to many other people (pupils).
True, there is saying that the one who teaches has to teach it twice - first himself, then the one whom he is teaching.
I tried to explain something to my pupils once, but they just sat there in the middle of their irises, with a profoundly blank look.
...I was trying to tell them they were beautiful too, but they knew it was the irises that I loved.
Fantastic lecture. I really appreciate that the prof repeats an idea in slightly different words, just incase the first time didn't sink in. Great teacher. Thanks to Stanford for making all these excellent videos readily available.
I found that a little bit annoying that he did repeat himself multiple times over with slight modulation. But I can totally imagine that it would increase the chances of more people understanding it if he did repeat it with slight modulation. Signs of a good teacher, I suppose I should incorporate this technique.
@@measure5141 I suppose a teacher must try and find a balance between being succinct and being easily understood. I do believe the best teachers are the ones who strive to really communicate ideas and tailor for their audience, rather than simply "emitting" knowledge into a room and assuming it will be absorbed.
Repetition is especially important not only for memory but to help offset any inclination in more knowledgeable listeners to start questioning the foundational assumptions, or the extremes of characterization, in the story being told. I wonder when the notion of a hinged book was invented, or a codex instead of a roll, when the stirrup was created, when Bede wrote _De temporum ratione_ with its descriptions of the universe as a working system including eclipses, etc., when _Hildebrandslied_ (Song of Hildebrand) on identity and the self was written, or the work of disabled scientist, Hermann of Reichenau, was done. How could any such things come from such an age and place as described at the beginning? "Unlike dates, periods are not facts. They are retrospective conceptions that we form about past events, useful to focus discussion, but very often leading historical thought astray." (G. M. Trevelyan, historian, 1942)
It's fab. In a way the original intent (also) of the Internet.
@@udderhippo A lot of it is being able to gauge when a statement will stick in the head like a rule, and can be recalled word for word and gives you the whole equation, or whether it's a kind of information that needs to be pushed into the brain from a few different angles to get it all the way in. You can pretty much condense high school math into one really large infographic, you only need the equation and if you understand basic rules, you'll have no problem. The kind of information this teacher is trying to convey requires an elastic, abstract understanding of the concepts. Reductionism can be subjective if a person isn't good at it, so they end up going in the wrong direction, and that's why this teacher is working through every example he can to elucidate the concept.
Dr. Sapolsky refers to a book assigned to his students: "Chaos" by James Gleick
. Chaos is the name given to a phenomena/problem that often occurs when a human tries to model (or simulate) a system run by Mother Nature, such as "weather models" (to predict the weather), or the "3-Body problem" in Physics, (to predict the position & velocity of 3 celestial bodies a number of days, months or years after the starting point, t = 0.)
For clarity herein, Mother Nature runs "systems" (such as the weather system, or the solar system), and humans run "models" that hopefully mimic or simulate such a system. Models are usually "moved forward" in discrete increments (such as in seconds, minutes, days, months, etc..) Mother Nature seems to move her systems forward continuously, not incrementally. But Mother Nature might also be limited to "increments", if there is such a thing as the Planck time unit.
A model's initial conditions are used to calculate the new conditions one cycle (or step, or period) in the future (i.e., a second, day, month, year, etc.), which then become the initial conditions for the next cycle. If errors due to rounding (or truncation) accumulate, then that's probably a chaotic model.
(Alternatively, a model could be created with simultaneous equations, if there are enough equations to account for all the variables, however, something like that has not yet been successful, so far as I know.)
The problem is that the results are highly dependent on initial conditions. If initial conditions are slightly changed, the end-results change drastically, much as if there were an element of "chaos" in the calculations. Is Mother Nature's system also "highly dependent" on initial conditions? How would we ever know?
"Chaos" might be merely an artifact of "moving the model forward" with millions of discrete increments, i.e., millions of seconds, minutes, days, months, etc., whereas "Mother Nature" might move the system forward in a continuous manner, not by discrete increments, but in infinitesimally small units, as in Calculus. (Alternatively, Mother Nature might be restricted by the Planck time unit.)
If you vary a chaotic model's starting conditions by a very small amount, the model's (new) predictions will be vastly different a few "cycles" (or "periods") in the (surprisingly) near future.
Chaotic Models always (as far as I know) make "period by period" (or cycle by cycle) predictions, whereby the "initial conditions" are the "starting-point" of the first "cycle" or "period" and the next cycle uses the predictions of the previous cycle to make new predictions. Thus, obviously, any small change in the initial conditions is compounded in future cycles. I believe Chaotic models are always thus "self referential".
It seems like chaotic Models are "chaotic" simply because our (human) method of making predictions is literally "un-natural". When modeling the 3-Body Problem, you start with each Body's exact mass, position, and velocity (which, of course, includes direction of travel) and then calculate the instantaneous forces acting on each body to predict the position and velocity of each Body an hour later, or a minute later, or a second later, etc. This method could easily require trillions of calculations to move the model significantly into the future. This step-by-step method requires rounding interim results, which means each step "into the future" is merely an "estimate", which become the new starting conditions in the next step.
Thus "chaos" might be an "artifact" of our "discrete-cycle & rounded results" methodology, unless Mother Nature's system is also subject to chaos.
James Gleick's book "The Information" is great read also and fits well with his Chaos book.
@@JH-ji6cj Thank you.
i was hoping to find a comment with the author of the "Chaos Book". Thank you :D
@Yankee Yakuza Then, obviously, you would've already proven whether space and time are discrete or continuous, or which one is, and which isn't. Unless of course the flux only allows time-travel forward, which is trivial. I'm doing that every day, and so is everyone else
So basically the universe is a very complex deterministic system with too many fast changing variables for the human mind to understand. So really, it's not chaos, it's just complex order, but we cant prove that because it's so complex, so we call it chaos.
10:00 - Reductionism
19:19 - The failures of reductionism in cognition and neuropsychology....
Why? --> Higher processing (learning eg.) acts out in semi-randomly built neurological and cortical networks through synaptic plasticity (Hebbian theory)...
33:07 Negation of reductionistic theory in all bifurcating systems... -
-> Neurological pathways are branched out in bifurcating systems --> higher complex cognition therefore operates through bifurcating (chaotically built) systems in the cortex --> no higher cognitive process looks neurologically the same in 2 people, even though they process the same task (twin studies)....
35:53 "You can't code for bifurcating systems via genoms or "grandmother neurons", there's simply not enough neurons or genoms to do that..." --> Reductionism fails miserably at this attempt...
Hubel and Wiesel predicted that, and thus presumably changed direction of research field, in order to not confront their own reductionistic theory, when applying it to the higher cortical layers...
42:33 Westernised reductionistic theory is not applicable in biology as a "theory of everything". Other means of understanding HAS to be brought up to the forefront, in order to understand the emergence and complexity of all bifurcating systems ...
43:46 Chaotic systems --> Non-linear - and non-additive systems...
58:00 The discovery of chaos; When increasing enough amount of force on structured, reductive, linear systems there will eventually be a transition point, where it suddenly goes from high-factored predictable systems with many variables to unpredictable chaotic systems, with no periodicity and no repeating of patterns...
59:02 York's prediction of chaotic transition; Anytime you see periodicity of an odd number, you've just guaranteed that you've entered chaotic terrain... As soon as you see the first evidence of a system beginning to have three components (periods) before the pattern repeats, it's about to disappear into chaoticism - a pattern which never repeats...
1:00:17 The fallacy of negating chaotic systems in science - especially in biology...
1:02:30 Mathematical understanding of tendencies in chaotic systems vs. predictable systems. -->
Linear systems have attractor points; when you mess with it, the system will equilibrate and go back to where it was in this stable, perfect exact state (number).
Chaotic systems get's pulled by a "strange attractor" creating the butterfly winged pattern in a coordinate system. --> The numbers oscillates around the "strange attractor", but never fully hits the exact "perfect state" before it shifts direction...
1:16:09 Explanation of a fractal.
I shall consider these as spoilers.
Just kidding.
thanks
beautiful! thank you so much for this- i am understanding NOTHING so i'm going to go over this first to see if something sticks haha
Awesome.. Can you do the other lectures too!
Thank you very much
This lecture is legendary. I come back to it every month.
The whole series? 😱
The lymbic system struck me the most, but all of them are pretty great!
@@Leftyotism The whole series is great, and I rewatch every lecture every now and then. But this one is very special to me for some reason.
@@MarkoStev Ah, thank you for the reply! I am almost done listening for now.^^
This kinda stuff should be taught in public school IMO. Can you imagine how different some people would be if they were exposed to these different perspectives at a younger age? The world could be so different if people considered things in a more systematic view, non linear view, non periodic view, etc
It’s super fucking important to gain different perspectives IMO and I think that’s in a painfully short supply throughout the vast majority of society. We’d all be better off if we realized our intuitions are so often wrong and that we cannot understand something without a thorough and nuanced examination, that we need a wide array of perspectives to come to a more objective understanding, etc.
Whoever was a part of making this be available on UA-cam, you’re doing a beautiful thing IMO. Thank you, truly.
This feels timeless. I would love to be his student. His way with our language is immense. I would love to think and speak like this.
I would say that in a way you are his student.
Less personal and without q&a's but like the rest of us you are here, very far into this series.
It's worth noting that the butterfly shape as he's representing it, in two dimensions, is not possible, since it's impossible for two continuous lines to cross each other in two dimensions without ever sharing an exact same value. A system like that requires a third parameter and third dimension, like in a Lorenz System, and then follows the behavior he describes.
Thanks to Sapolsky and Stanford for these lectures. I have learned so much from them. The most notable thing I can remark on is that learning about neurobiology and neuroscience through Sapolsky, that living with major depression has gone from something delusional akin to an external agency meddling in my life to the understanding that, 'Oh my brain is doing this again.' It has really helped create some psychological and psycho epistemic space to manage it better and develop better tools.
The article he references at the end is: Reduction and variability in data: A Meta-Analysis [in] Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 1996 Vol 39 Issue 2 pp 193-203. If that's right then the crazy obsessive undergrad that did most of the work is called Steven Balt. What a legend
THANK YOU!
Well atleast the crazy obsessive undergrad should have gained some publicity by now.
ua-cam.com/video/SEwaEXno-2g/v-deo.html
Watch at 1: 12: 44.
Yup, here's the pdf: muse.jhu.edu/article/401203/pdf
I was trying to figure out how I was going to find the paper, and here it is! Thanx!
oh thank you!
Humanities and science come together in his lectures, truly enlightening and entertaining.
I would love if more universities recorded and uploaded their entire semesters’ lectures like this. I listen to this over and over instead because I can’t find anything else like it. There’s watered down lectures for the masses like Ted Talks, but I want the actual education. If I run into a problem then I’ll look it up.
Then people could get educated for free. Can’t have that kind of thing in this world. Need to keep people dumb to manipulate, and make insane amounts of money from the ones that want to be “smarter”. Our societal system of behavior is a scam…
l love it as well
Jordan Peterson has a full course on UA-cam search for 2017 personality series
Agreed, it’d be great. I’d ignore the JP recommendation above though lol
@@ismthI have one of his books but I haven’t been able to read it yet. I heard he recently deleted his Twitter or something. He may just need some time to be alone. Cleaning his room is a good idea though 😺.
This is the most amazing thing on UA-cam.
Decade later: still is
@@princesssilverblood yup
Dr Sapolsky is amazing speaker. I could listen him for hours. Thank you for sharing his lectures.
Man I wish I was going to University in the USA just to learn stuff from this Professor .. on another note I'm 47 but have more hunger for learning than when I was in my late teens and 20's. I have a sense of enormous value for knowledge now
Maybe you should answer that appetite of learning, I am 26 have a master degree in Microelectronics and I feel like I didn't learn much, so I am planning to relearn maths and physics then enroll in college again to understand the topics in depth.
@@PCWorld2ady im 36. going into immunology after teaching biology for couple of years and skating/traveling before then.
do many things. it's worth it.
I had a lot of professors in skool. Very few approached this level.
The older I get (I'm now 60) the more I appreciate knowledge. Maybe it's because we do become wi
ser as we age.
You still can. 47 is not old. I glanced at your profile, and I know that the UK has a different culture than we do, but it is a world leader in academics. I've uploaded some biking-to-work videos in San Francisco on UA-cam as well, so we might have some common ground!
Both the awesome professor and this Stanford initiative give us hope that one day knowledge will become common rather than the object of monopolistic licensing.
Knowledge is totally common and not at all the object of "monopolistic licensing". (I'm not enthusiastic about capitalism, either). What you get at university is guidance from experts, but you can learn on your own. It's all out there. University, viewed cynically, provides credentialing rather than education, necessarily. Viewed idealistically, university and gaining knowledge generally is not for "getting a job" but for the sheer interest and joy of learning and understanding at a deeper level; a university is a community dedicated to learning, where ideas spark other ideas. That's one thing you can't do on your own.
Yes... but then how do people get paid to create the material - the Systems- to begin with or to propagate them with continuing content? See 'free music' - which is most decidedly Not free, & free films : again decidedly Not free. Some system Has to be in place & Used [paid] - to allow for all the things that say allowed This very content / lecture to be given away 'free'.
Exactly. Even at my comminity (turned 4 year.) College you had to buy expensive books every semester. (Not as much as a problem if they have more pertinent info but a lot of the times they were just adding something or changing something to charge more. I actually think the reason the ethics dept wrote their own book was because it was cheaper for staff, school and students in the long run. Great ethics and honors undergraduate professors there.
@@slowpainful not bad. life is certainly what you make of it
Whoever that undergrad research assistant was: you are a bloody champion.
I think his name is Steven Balt.
All of Roberts Lectures are amazing.
The fact that we can access college level lectures at any point in our lives is incredible and makes up for the lack of useful information being taught in secondary schools. Sincerely, a very intellectually frustrated high schooler
Hey, I'm 64, with 7 years of community colleehere. (2 degrees, misc courses), I'm fina!ly going to transfer to a Cal State University. San Bernardino actually doesn't charge tuition for people 60 and older! This guy, and Jordan Peterson's older lectures made my change my major to biological psychology.
1:32:55 Takes on a whole new level of understanding 11 years later
what a realization
it's basic understanding, I can't believe there are so many people in the world who still don't get it
I actually took the 5 minute break
I take more than 5min for each video, and usually can't watch more than one per day. It's a lot of information :)
(raises hand...)
I took 2 days
@Beeblebrox One How do you fare with minute rice?
I took a 5 year break. Now I'm back with the same beard and hair to finish the rest.
Most audiences of our Incredibly Learned Professor are bewitched by his style of lecturing - his habit of avoiding too much precision about terribly complex systems, relegating marginal facts to rapid asides, or burdening his public with puzzling nomenclature, in order to focus his energy on his main idea. It may be part of the entertaining hippie image he likes to project, or a genuine personal disinclination (most likely both). For, at heart our Incredibly Learned Professor is a bit of a comedian, a performer, delighting in his Hippie looks and showmanship, his sweeping hand gestures, his amusing mimicry, the artful modulation of his bass voice, coupled with a sharp, insightful mind. And so, when it comes to the subject itself, he never shies away from navigating the enormous complexity and scope with his customary ease, following the landmarks of his notes spread on the desk in front of him.
More, he delights in his acting ability, carried away by his unstoppable torrent of loquacity, sometimes amusingly losing the arc of his main idea when tempted by a tangential development, but quickly correcting himself and rejecting the digression. No doubt, his cortex is loaded with intricate networks of fractal bifurcations that he needs to control by following the overall rule highlighted by Lewis Carroll (in his famous poem "Phantasmagoria") to combat the ever-present risk of losing one's way in complex arguments:
"But, keeping still the end in view
To which I hoped to come
I strove to prove the matter true
By putting everything I knew
Into an axiom."
This highly flexible cortex navigation is the basis of our Incredibly Learned Professor's impressive mental skills. All the synapses in his brain are working extremely well and he usually manages, avoiding the enticing traps of branching out sideways, to resolutely keep his ship towards its main goal.
This is one of the greatest lectures I've ever heard in my life
The way he builds off his last points is masterful.
i need this man's lectures as a podcast. huge fan, and super grateful for these videos.
The paper he refers to is Reductionism and Variability in Data: A Meta-Analysis, co-authored with Steven Balt in 1996.
youtube has been tenaciously recommending me this video for 8 years
do yourself a favor and start with lecture no. 1 of this very course and you'll be amazed forever.
Gratitude fills my heart: thanks to Stanford for providing Dr. Sapolsky the opportunity to make his course available to a wide variety of students. I'm a retired psychologist and simply love to learn. I just ordered "Behave" and "Zebras," and next month at least two more from his library. Dr. Sapolsky is the best professor I've had the privilege of learning from. Dr. Bobbi
This is the professor I would have loved to have. What a beautiful mind and how he explains difficult concepts in a simple and clear way is so cool
Imagine if this guy stayed in the Shtetl of Williamsburg NY.... such a gift to humanity.
Clouds not clocks might be one of the wisest ways I’ve herd to explain when to and to not use reductionism. Absolutely brilliant
Navie-Stocke's equation and Gauß's divergence theorem, mb?
*heard, btw.
Dear camera operator, it's okay to not always follow his head. Maybe also consider what he's pointing at. Okay, good talk!
do you realize you're talking to a machine?
lol
It would help to have 2 camera guys. I would do it if I get to attend these courses for free 😆
@@ameremortal Just give him a Netflix budget!
@@apetass123 That way, we could have both a great lecture and tiddies at the same time!
Fascinating. I have suffered with mental illness for over twenty years and have come to the conclusion that the brain cannot be entirely understood in terms of reductionism
Your lectures are all fascinating. Top Class. If I hadn't got mentally ill I would have gone into science in more depth.
Yes and mental 'illness' is a chaotic system is complex and misunderstood and maybe not Illness. :)
Yes taking back my mental health i understand this. Lets keep healing ❤
@@aidan9876 Disorder/s*
Just getting goosebumps during the explanation of strange attractor. Somehow the fact that there is no single pure answer and "this IS the phenomenon" hits me so hard and emotional. A lot of psychology and philosophy here.
when teaching is delivering a message not holding it hostage this Prof has us gripped/held in his most knowledgeable focus we are his eager students love this style of giving an education
Sopolsky delivers in such a comprehensive way. Thank you for the upload Stanford.
Thankyou I'm 50 and didn't think I'd understand these concepts but you explained it very well I got most of it....I will watch it again x
That "can't teach an old dog new tricks" attitude (not that you're old, or a dog) is nonsense. I know there are biological issues with neuroelasticity decreasing with age but I feel like that attitude contributes to a lot of suffering, where people feel literally incapable of adapting to change in society or tackling an unfamiliar topic because cliches like that suggest that after a certain age people are intellectually helpless. I'm glad you decided to approach a video you didn't think you'd understand, to learn that you're absolutely still able to experience the sense of awe and beauty that goes with introducing oneself to a novel set of ideas.
It’s wonderful to teach a subject matter that you don’t quite understand; manufacturing degrees and layers of unfolding chaos in a reductionist attempt. The hidden beauty of it stems from the fact that the quest for the ‘simple’ doesn’t always equate with ‘easy’, and certain functors map into the quasi-undefinable’s - albeit, in a categorically pragmatic spirit.
This came up in my autoplay (that's the kind of algorithm youtube gleans from my watches haha). I had to drop out of school due to money and health. But I will never stop loving educating myself. I have adhd but when something draws me in I laser focus. This was one of those things and I am so thankful this info is out for free. Being able to educate onesself without being wealthy is so important. Now I want to get that book, it sounds fascinating. I wish I could be in this man's classes!
Lit me
One of the most interesting things i have ever heard. Much appreciation for everything/-one that contributed to making this accessible.
I truly admire this gentleman of profesor, education is power, God bless.
This is the best teacher I’ve ever heard speak. Thank you so very much for sharing this...
Agreed. He's extremely articulate -- even more articulate than some of my favorite science communicators.
Exceptionally well explained. He is an incredible communicator. A brilliant and talented person!
TLDR:
1. Many familiar laws of nature are linear (or quadratic, etc.) We have a formula that allows us to predict the value of some parameter as a function of time.
2. For complex systems this is often not the case and we can only predict the immediately next value. There might be no formula for predicting the value as a function of time.
3. Sometimes a system develops towards a stable equilibrium, so if it's close enough to the stable point (attractor), it will in the future only get closer to it. In a sense we can predict the future quite well and the deviation from the equilibrium can be treated as noise.
4. In other cases the system diverges so starting from two states that are very similar to each other we eventually get to very different states. In such systems predicting the future is difficult because any small measurement error today will be amplified more and more in the future.
5. Many complex real world systems are of the second kind, even when we zoom in and look at it in smaller and smaller detail. In a sense they exhibit fractal-like structure.
6. Even with chaotic systems there could be statistical laws that are always followed. In such systems the high level behaviour is simple and predictable even though low level behaviour is complex and chaotic.
Oh YEAHH...
Vasily Kuznetsov
How long did it take biologist to think quantum mechanical, I believe physics changed in 1920.
heisenburg
So if the weather man could fine tune doppler & have it zoom in on high level behavior instead of the usual low level system he may be able to predict it accurately sometimes? That would be nice tho that butterfly effect would be hard to map.
How awesome would it be to just take his classes and be able to ask questions? Such a great lecturer.
I've just recently finished the book, it's really good, it really makes you reconsider the whole approach of science to problems and it's effectiveness, and Sapolsky's explanation is really good at capturing the feeling of how this is such a blow to your whole world view if you're used to good old science, this guy and Walter Lewin are probably the two best professors I've had so far, although I've never met them.
Before watching this lecture: There is nothing new under the sun
After watching this lecture: Everything is new under the sun
Can you imagine ?
I couldn’t possibly afford to attend Stanford university yet I’m learning from this amazing professor
Stanford actually offers financial aid to the majority of students. It's getting accepted into Stanford that's the hard part, money is less of an issue
If you are a resident in the city where Stanford is you can just show up, as long as there are open seats you can go to classes. Its called Auditing. You don't get the degree or any credits, but you get the info. Much like watching these UA-cam videos.
Edit: the reason for this is because they get funding from the city, which if you pay taxes to. Means you are funding the university which gives you the right to go to classes if there are open seats.
What did you learn?
Who else is watching at 1am on Saturday?
1am on a Wednesday
8pm on saturday
It is 23:11 on Saturday in Yekaterinburg right now.
.Andrew W.
Depression. 4am. Yes I've watched more of the lectures.
Sapolsky is good. Stanford should put more of his lectures online.
Imagine if a racist or stigmatising person had exposure to this.
I can't believe the anecdote Sapolsky narrated towards the end. Those findings are so cool. Oh wait.
This is a trancedental, immensly insightful, and properly delivered lecture. Thank you
oh my god thank you so much for sharing this! i love the proper use of social media. this really enhances our brains. i have not had the chance to be in school in a while and this is just what my brain needs. thank you thank you thank you
"The proper use of social media:" Truth.
Such an amazing lecture on the evolution of human thinking and evolving scientific reasoning.
If anyone is interested in the paper Dr Sapolsky developed with his student on testosterone and aggression and the reductionest approach. The title is "Reductionism and Variability in Data: A Meta-Analysis" by Dr Robert Sapolsky and Dr Steven Balt.
Oh hell I knew this dude was going to talk about philosophy from his first lecture. Hence why I leaped ahead to this lecture after seeing the enthusiasm, he expressed about the chaos book.
I doubt that logic and reasoning were ever gone in the modern human history. Just because we don't have info on the Dark Ages, doesn't mean everyone was as dumb as rocks. Great video, LOVE Sapolsky!
Sure, his account on the "dark ages" is pretty nonfactual and more like a caricature of the time and thinking. There definitely was a certain stagnation in intellectual life, and a lot of knowledge and material did get lost, which was only gradually recovered in scholastic circles (often with help by Islamic or Byzantine Greek sources), but even considering that it reflects a narrow Western and Northern Europe perspective at the time, which still wasn't nearly as backward - or as bookless - as he was painting it to be.
@@domsjuk The moon landings got lost, so maybe we are still on the dark ages...
This looks amazing. I saw it on the side while watching Leonard Susskind's lectures. I'll have to get back to see the whole series.
So much content, and ai has connected these truths with conciousness. Listen and then just look from these perspectives being presented, and all complexities become simple. Thanks for this video and this professor!
If Sapolsky starts with "I'm not sure I truly understand it", then YOU HAVE NO CHANCE.
Speak for yourself Myles. (Standish) I majored in Math as an undergraduate because it was the easiest and then did my graduate work in math.
I was an idiot in foreign languages and most of them avoided any STEM courses.
There are two cycle and four cycle motorcycles. Different strokes for different folks. AMEN RA!
If you watch the end of his last lecture you'll probably get why it doesn't matter.
Just come across this brilliant man, loving his lectures.
Why everytime i fall asleep on youtube, autoplay always brings me to this
Hey w me too
About 20 years before this lecture a friend was living Nevada next to some researchers on the genome project there. They kept telling her that there didn't appear to be enough information in the genes to produce humans. They were expecting more. It was a conundrum for them. That is a loose end finally explained. I'm glad I have lived this long.
THANX SO MUCH,WHAT A LEGEND,AND PRICELESS TO SHARE FOR SOME WHO TOOK THE LONG,HIDDEN FROM YOU,MOST THINK YOUR NUTS,EVEN WHEN THE PIECES CREATE THE ART OF LIFE,THANK YOU FROM SOMEONE WHO JUST STARTED THE BEGINING OF A TRUE ADVENTURE...
Gleick's book Chaos guided me to complex systems while preparing my essays. I then found myself on ecology of systems like Bootstrapping Complexity Kevin Kelly, and now into my present post graduate studies of the mind.
"The whole is more than the sum of its parts" - Aristotle.
only because there's noise in the system
ap4lm tree that’s synergy
This doesn't really apply to the scenarios the prof puts forth. Bc in every scenario thats suggested, not all the parts are known, hence the chance and randomness of the system. He's basically just talking about situations when reductionism is improperly used.
and Leonard Cohen
Maybe more appropriate to say a whole is less than the sum of its parts
that last bit at the very end...the monad as a chaotic system.
Liberating.
Thank you Stanford for making it public for free for all, indeed.
This is basically what you can see in Fixpoint-Iteration. Mind blown.
In the 70's I would drop/take ace (LSD). What Pro. R Sapolsky is describing/talking is almost similar to the effects of this 'trip'. The experience is lost into my brain memory of past times, but with this lecture memory is coming back...Wow
According to the simple linear reducible system, Professor Sapolsky walked back and forth about 400 times in a lecture. Respect to the operator, who never lost him in the frame!
Brilliant. This is how I figured out certain human experiments. By breaking down all the components and realized it just repeat itself.
Fact-checking: Toledo is a city in the province of Toledo in Spain and is not the same thing as the Alhambra, a fortress in the city of Granada in the province of Granada in Andalusia, Spain. Toledo is 230 miles (370 km) from the Alhambra.
I thought he said that Alhambra was the name used to refer to Spain at the time
Imagine being someone so intellectually dominant, that no one dares to talk about my overgrown beard and hairdo. Respect!
this is corona time & this lectures have became essential
This guy is simply brilliant
This is an outstanding lecture. The professor is animated, engaging and has an obvious passion for his subject. Definitely worth watching all the way through. He reminds me of James Gleick in his accessible approach to a very difficult topic and infusing it with the simple awe and wonder that such subjects should inspire. Outstanding lecturer.
those kids cough alot
+sinisa majetic You want to hear me during a Conservative Party Political Broadcast on British TV!
+sinisa majetic
Yeah. A lot of coughing. Maybe too much. Could be that it was a little too much actually.
Dammit! I didn't notice until you mentioned it!
i know!! wtf. they are so tense they cannot breathe
Me too. *cough* *cough*
Finally! Eureka!! I now know what I want to major in! I want to go to Stanford for treeology
Thank you Stanford and Dr. Robert Sapolsky for allowing me to be a life-long learner! Ha, ha, I can enjoy these amazingly enlightening lectures while smoking weed to alleviate my stress and expand my mind! I even made stacks of flash cards!
Chaos: Making a new science, by james gleick. Wonderful read, just finished it and am going to read through it again!
Don't think he mentioned the title. Are you sure this is the same book
@@theunknown4209 He mentioned the same book in the first lecture itself.
One of the best books in the world , there is more book ny same author "the information" you should read that too if you haven't I think u would love it
Thanks! I now want to read this book.
Fabulous approach to clarifying the “Butterfly Effect”!! Best I’ve encountered in a decade!!
Sapolsky is an amazing lecturer -- so engaging!
at 24:14 To hear this explained in such a manner is incredible. We've been in search of this type of explanation for quite some time; thank you!
• and so, watching you explain it and illustrate it, increased our useable terminology and overall understanding. That's so valuable.
• its like an interplay of dimensional information, in relation to cognition & experience; that leads to (perhaps?) dual representations & communications with or without mass?
...so I'm not exactly sure in which order but... chaos & reductionism/reductionism & chaos ... yields order & (elements of the) meta consciousness?
Read and seen many explanations of chaos and this trumps them all.
Watching this class in 2021, before vaccines are really rolled out in my region. That example at the end was perfectly on point. Also, the amount of coughing in this classroom is unacceptable by today standards.
In any circumstance to be honest. An amazing lecture like this now tainted because someone kept coughing during the recording
We will never know everything that's stimulating and fascinates me to no known end.
Never stop intentionally, moving.
Wow. I wasn’t expecting a great history lesson!
A few months ago, sharp-eyed commenter Z.S nicely caught our Incredibly Learned Professor’s fuzzy naming of Spain as “Alhambra” (the red one), the name of a superlative palace-fortress in the city and province of Granada, instead of Al-Andalus (Land of the vandals), effectively Spain. Its effective administrative center was Cordoba, and not Toledo, which is further north. The Wikipedia article on Al-Andalus (Muslim Spain), and some of its sources, note that each major Muslim city, including Toledo, had its share of libraries, mostly privately owned by the rich aristocrats, with a few public libraries. But the largest book collections (mostly private) and public library were in Cordoba, not Toledo.
However Toledo had built a reputation as the major center of intellectual activity in Al-Andalus., mostly for writers, research, translation (a huge business, then, involving Greek, Muslim and Jewish texts rendered into Castilian and Latin.), publishing, and marketing the new books. The buyers of those books remained the richest collectors, the owners of the largest private libraries, in Cordoba and elsewhere. The conquest of Toledo by Alfonso VI of Castile in 1085 marked the first time a major city in Al-Andalus was captured by Christian forces. The reputation of Toledo as a scholarly and publishing center continued unabated.
love sapolsky , but i think he over states the ignorance of people in the middle ages. isolated ? yes but there were crafts men and builders and artists. he makes it seem like they had no notion of cause and effect until they found a library.
I had some great professors in college but this guy is the best.
Minor correction, Spain in Moorish times was known as Al-Andalus (Alhambra being a crazily impressive fortress/palace at the very south).