NK Neurokarma
David Albert – Quantum Physics Consciousness Science
Similar Posts
Peter Tse – How Brain Scientists Think About Consciousness
Sonos announces Alexa-controlled wireless speakers
Faraday Future provides a test ride of its FF91 car
22 thoughts on “David Albert – Quantum Physics Consciousness Science”
Comments are closed.
The title should be: 'What David Albert said that morning.'
Impressive precision. Fantastic. The scientific method as an approach of common sense to the world does not seem intuitively accurate. Cognitive biases, logical fallacies, and statistical rigor; being conscious of the difficulties of these does not intuitively seem to fall under the umbrella 'common sense'. 'Common sense' or more accurately 'sense' has provided a means to go further, higher. Non-intuitive mathematical conclusions also do not seem to fall under 'common sense'. Non-euclidian geometry is not common sense. Einstein used this creatively and became the most famous scientist on the planet.
Philosophers are good with describing some thing[s] using 'words' and arguing in a coherent way [sometimes using the wrong premises or facts {or straight out lies}…….but philosophers are not good with finding or stating the truth……..for that you must know God {Jesus} and His Word, [KJB]……and you need to be born of a higher dimension, of God…..cause the final, absolute Truth is spirit and no physical. Your body is merely a meat box or glove that holds your soul and spirit. What 'work' does the soul do? Well, lets see, mr Albert……without your soul your physical body would not live!
When you die, the real you, your soul and spirit will stand before God and God will Judge you for every thing you have done including philosophical vain words.
The quickest way to hell is to believe…..to be committed to a Darwinian, material, atheist worldview that cannot account for metaphysics…..and is false…..it is the 'doctrines of demons'.
Make your life count by using your brain to defend the Truth….God.
God made this world and also heaven and that other nasty place you are heading to should you not repent.
The Christian on his knees sees more than the philosopher on his tip toes.
Also view Stephen Crothers videos, and videos from actual scientists, [not philosophers] refuting the religion of material evolution……or as God's Word says……'science so called'.
Also view Greg Bahnsen.
Dynamika (motion as an entity by itself) came first, then space. Space is the medium in which matter expresses itself under certain conditions. Matter in space gives the volume of space occupied by it the property of density. Volumes of space of equal density repel each other. Volumes of space of unequal density attract each other. Thus all motion is of "a volume of a given space-density". Does any one know that 15 sq. meters on a sphere's surface is not equivalent to 15 sq. meters on a flat surface? But our maths says it is. Space-density gradient – actually part of a continuum from infinity to minus infinity – runs from a very high number (for a black hole) to say .0000000000000001 in some units – probably spacons, for material entities. Recall an atom is mostly empty space. Physical space has the property of density. Science's constants become inoperative at some point on the space-density gradient. Science doesn't want to know that. Look at the mess in the quantum mechanics . Strange probability maths had to be formulated to explain the unexplainable. Quantum physics cannot be completely understood that way. The lower we go on the density gradient , the less the applicabilty of "mathematics" and "time". But that's all that science uses for measurements. Science doesn't know that at very low densities of matter, the space density of certain voids in the human body become part of the experiment. And that I call spiritual forces, which lie in the discipline of Mind Sciences. I encourage you to watch my videos Brain-mind Complex and Mind-sciences on my channel : youtube.com/ravi sadana
Proof: Just examine the achievements of civilizations in the pre-science period of Life on Earth. Their Brain-mind complexes were not conditioned by "Time", "Money" and "Mathematics" very much UNLIKE OURS.
For one who appears to be reasonable in respect to his materialism vs dualism, or physicalism vs consciousness I find him clueless and uninformed, even ignorant of what he says he respects in philosophy or religion. Only a complete fool or ignoramus ( ie academic ) would ask “ consciousness, what work does it do. What is it for? He needs to experience the mind outside of academia. So let me fill him in on some big concepts. You are consciousness, without it…no you. Life is nonmaterial, you, and you come to the physical world through “ mind”. Mind animates matter, not the other way around. Even if the “ physical world” exist outside the subjective, most or all of what we know about it is personal and subjective.
He Albert doesn't talk about de Broglie pilot wave and noncommutative phase. Basil J. Hiley has corroborated nonlocal consciousness.
From roughly 10:15 to roughly 13:15 is one of the most brilliant articulations of the difference between the scientific methodology of living and the emotional spiritual way of living that gives both sides the fair light they deserve. I try to live by the scientific methodology but once in a while I wish that the spiritual one was true.
I took a course taught by him about a year ago where he walks you through the measurement problem and it's proposed solutions. Literally every class blew my mind further out into space.
He knows what hes talking about. The rest is BS.
I wish I had had profs like this
This is such a great clarifying interview, it's good to see the whole consciousness creates reality idea put to bed so precisely.
Dr Albert, I heard you say the consciousness theory is old and hasn't been talked about, and I heard you say it just doesn't work, but I never heard you say how you came to that conclusion. You end by suggesting physics may one day explain everything we attribute to conscious decision-making and then we will question spirits and gods. I clearly hear a world view bias, but the counter to what causes the observer effect I never hear you state. How is it such an intelligent man as yourself can so willingly toss out a theory without anything to replace it?
What a moron. Still postulating conflict thesis as a valid historical interpretation.
It is not consciousness itself but the level of knowledge of the experimenter. The experiments clearly show.
Son, where did you get those ridiculous shoes? That's what David is selling here, ridiculous shoes. The kids will love it tho. Never take reality-theoretic advice from a shoe salesman.
He confuses science with engineering. He says science is based on common sense. A toaster is fixed using common sense. But it is engineering that fixes a toaster, and not science. Science is based on math, and math is based on real numbers. Real numbers are not objects of nature, therefore real numbers are false. How can you create anything that is true using something that is false like real numbers? How can then real numbers represent common sense? On the other hand, a toaster is made of objects of nature, and therefore it is part of common sense.
Engineering is not based on science. Science makes assumptions. Engineering and nature reject all assumption. How can then science work in engineering? All of science is completely wrong. Take an example – An object will continue in motion in a straight line with a constant velocity – Newton’s first law. It is completely wrong. We have never seen such an object on earth or in space. For more examples of false math and science, including QM, take a look at – https://theoryofsouls.wordpress.com/
It will take a long time before people will stop to buy books telling them fantasies about the necessity of a conscious mind to let the universe exist.
He is a great philosopher.
Lovely Video! Sorry for the intrusion, I am interested in your thoughts. Have you tried – Tarbbatigan Endowment Capacity Tip (Sure I saw it on Google)? It is a smashing exclusive product for learning how to master quantum physics minus the hard work. Ive heard some pretty good things about it and my BF after many years got cool results with it.
Isn't he a pleasure to listen to. I can't think of another scientist who delivers talks like this man.
Hoo-boy. According to this guy Quantum Theory wins in the end. Because consciousness both does and does not produce the observable facts.
Science is a discipline that has successfully refuted the idea that we humans are the purpose and center of existence necessarily. Science is a study of the objective. It rests upon the subject object split or a measurement of "objective reality". Reality is the way we observe it to be whether we have a personal bias or stake in the "outcome" or not.
There is an issue however of downplaying subjectivity. It would be inconsistent to discount subjective experience as a way to truth since objective science ultimately depends on subjective experience. This puts the consciousness back to playing a central role. On the surface this may not seem to be a problem until we start to try and understand what consciousness really is. If we are trying to objectively study subjective awareness and experience it may be a very hard problem.
If consciousness is an epiphenomenon of the brain then at what point in complexity is that threshold met to give rise to subjective experience? What stage in evolution of life on Earth did consciousness arise? Why do we have an experience that goes along with brain function in the first place? these are questions science has no answer for as yet. Consciousness does have a huge role in science. I just wonder if "objective" materialist science will ever be able to fully understand and describe this piece of the puzzle.