XenoSphere Originals
What if consciousness isn’t magic — but math?
From atoms forming bonds to the first spark of awareness, this film explores the scientific search for consciousness through physics, information theory, and artificial intelligence.
We’ll dive into Integrated Information Theory, algorithmic complexity, and the Free Energy Principle, before stepping into Federico Faggin’s quantum-field perspective — a daring view that consciousness might not live inside the brain at all.
A journey through physics, computation, and the mystery of being alive.
⏱️ Chapters
00:00 — Intro
00:36 — Chapter 1: Life Itself
01:43 — Chapter 2: Measuring Awareness
03:34 — Chapter 3: Why AI Isn’t Conscious
04:19 — Chapter 4: Another Perspective: Consciousness as a Field
05:35 — Chapter 5: Where We Land
#consciousness #physics #sciencedocumentary #artificialintelligence #neuroscience #quantumphysics #philosophyofmind #iit #karlfriston #federicofaggin #informationtheory #complexityscience #aiconsciousness #mathematics #scienceexplained
Source
Wow .. a massive amount of information condensed in a nice, short but beautiful video. Well-done!
My intuition tells that you are going to hit 1 million soon.
I will write on some other occasions how these religious and nationalism idiots have been using certain grey areas terms of science to make me and public fools. So in my case nearly all YouTube videos are corrupt by religious and nationalism idiots. These bastards have been doing this nonsense using public taxes. Religion, military and politics this trinity is the most rubbish people on earth. To be honest If I am the ruler I will not even employ these three idiots as peon of knowledge university because these three are the idiots on the earth.
Before math there is life. No before life, it was math because Life and natter follow maths language. I think human brain does work on database accumulated in our brains because when a baby is born his or her brain is empty and that starts correspondence with the environment and whatever is in environment the choices are being made inside the baby personality. So no mystery or spiritual or devine outside of our bodies. Consciousness is awareness of ones self based on the data about external so no Sufi or priests or devine drama. To be honest my living, working and online environment, everything is corrupt by religion and nationalism promoters idiots.
Consciousness doesn´t predict anything it only is the situation that every sensory experience is a new one and isn´t influenced by previous experiences or the outside world in the moment of perception. Consciousness is the natural human state.
When there is one little part missing the answer can't be found. Consciousness is the right balance between intuition, kind and subconscious memory.
really amazing contents!! top notch! thank you so much. enjoy all of them! 🙂
search astral projection
We're all eldians
U deserve much better❤
Makes me think of a quote I read somewhere and stayed with me for years: 'Consciousness is the universe experiencing itself.'
Consciousness creates the physical illusion.
At 5:32 I quit. Drone and pilot? And inside the pilot is like another drone and a pilot? etc ad infinitum. One thing is for sure, we'll never get an intuitive understanding of how intuition works, that would require infinite regress.
Extremely interesting
Top notch quality content!
consciousness is outside the brain. The brain is interfering with the possibility to become conscious. The subconscious memory has to be processed.
The production value and work put into this is mad! Absolutely wonderful. Keep them coming.
I believe in dualism of properties and Panpsychism, neuroscience can explain the correlations between the mind and the brain, but it can't explain why we have a subjective experience, you have multiple ways to defend dualism such as the Mary room experiment, the philosophical zombie, chinese room argument, but i also remember an argument from the atheist philosopher Michael Huemer wich is based on Theseus ship paradox "if you change all the pieces of a ship, is it still the same ship?" Michael says that we have the same identity from birth to death, so there must be an immaterial part inside of us that survives the physical changes, and that thing is what we know as the soul, maybe i don't believe in a mystical soul, but i'm fully convinced that mind cannot be material.
IIT leads me to panpsychism because all organism have certain level of consciousness, the unit measurement is phi (Ø) it can be low (plants) moderate (animals) pr high (humans)
Great video + keep working my friend ♦️
The Eternal Mathematic of our Consciousness,
is pictured in the Rainbow, it is the Basic-Developing-Circuit,
Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo,
Instinct, Gravity, Feeling, Intelligence, Intuition, Memory.
(We are Gravity-Beings about to become Feeling-Beings)
'This Device', is a technical composition of programmed Consciousness.
Automatic, Power, Sensors, Logic/Order, (*), Harddisc.
(*Intuition need more text to really explain, but in this level,
it is the Idea and Satisfactory.
So, the Rainbow picture our Over-Consciousness, Colors our Under-Consciousness
= Day-Consciousness and Night-Consciousness.
At night We move our Day-Consciousness to the Night-Bodies, (Deep-Sleep)
one by one via our Coupling-Body, (REM-sleep).
We are the Only Real Steady Point, in Existence, We can't See our Self,
but We can Think about our Self.
(Intelligence can Never be artificial)
Intelligence means Logic and Order,
the Perspective-Princip, means all relations relationship,
Perspective + Intelligence = Mathematic.
Federico Faggins experience is named Strong Intuitive Impulse,
or Cosmic Glimpse, the nature of Intuition.
I think it was Federico Faggin that said something like, we are trying to use math to figure out consciousness but we have to have consciousness to have math.
What about the non computable consciousness by Roger Penrose?
This is my favorite channel, can't wait to see this channel grow… Please keep dropping gems like this
I believe that Mathematics is greatly responsible for my consciousness. Everything started from a singularity. From nothing came everything because they are references to one another. In our reality nothing does not exist while in Mathematics it exists represented by the number zero. Then came space-time and Mathematics grew circles all around intersecting this singularity. The space-time curved by the law of action and reaction against anti-space-time. Mathematics did not have this problem because Mathematics is abstract. The circles of Mathematics grew so much that its arcs became a straight line where lies the past, present and future of the universe at zero hour. It is possible because for Mathematics the infinite is accountable by the formula of the sum of the terms of the infinite GP: S = a1/ 1-q. From this zero hour I was born and after death when I don't have one second of life anymore I will be back to zero hour where I started. I am now here as a baryonic matter entangled (arguing) with my anti-matter inside the singularity and to balance the differences between me and my anti-matter is located my perfect self at zero hour Mathematically in the time line of the universe. That's my consciousness. Zero hour is found in the event horizon and speed of light also. PS: This also explains origin of life and evolution for a perfect self at zero hour would work retrocausality and come from the future and interfere here today to guarantee its own existence via quantum entanglement.
Love the editing ❤ but sound design you guys have to work on and overall everything will be crazy good
you are an aspect of reality and you think about yourself. so do I. so the answer is yes.
great job yo've done
Thanks for the video!
Any defined entity is in need of absolutely everything that exists! I call this the trans-dimensional emergence. An n-dimensional, recursive tensor of the whole being. So consciousness can't be solely explained by an artificially defined source. The whole being always is the source of whatever appears in one's mind. But that's, like the video and it's content, just a concept, trying to explain one's own experiences. Why? Because we needed to understand our environement to survive. Now our world has become endless in space, time and complexity thus we try to find an explanation for whatever we get awarness of.
Impulse detection, pattern recognition, interpretation, falsification, evaluation, verification, and again detection of the next impulses.
Boss great work 🔥🔥🔥🔥
Reality does not think about the self,because it doesn't have a mind. It is the first born 'ego' which does and sacrifices itself by abject surrender and dissolved, remains unmanifest again after that together with the mind.
This is called intuitive knowledge.
Next level man wow
This video is too good! Super informative and the editing is top-notch. Loved the creativity and out-of-the-box ideas
nailed it! i just know this youtube channel will be bigggggg 💥
That was a quality video, bravo 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🎯. I don't think I've watched this channel before but I was impressed that the subject was handled so intelligently 😊🇦🇺
I am a physicist and I explain why science leaves not room for the possibility that brain processes can be a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness, which means that consciousness cannot be just a product of brain activity. It is a scientifically established fact that a mental experience is associated with numerous distinct microscopic processes that occur at different points; as I will explain, there is no physical entity that connects all these distinct microscopic processes, therefore the existence of mental experience requires a connecting element that is not described by current physics. This missing connecting element can be identified with what we traditionally refer to as the soul (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations).
Many believe that complex systems can generate new properties, considered as emergent properties. However, I argue that such emergent 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 constructs, 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 subjective cognitive 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 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 consciousness can only exist as a property of an indivisible element. This indivisible entity must interact globally with billions of microscopic processes that occur in the brain; 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 billions of distinct microscopic processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience.
Clarifications
The brain itself doesn't exist objectively as a mind-independent entity. The concept of the brain is based on separating billions of microscopic particles from everything else and considering them as a single entity. This 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 conventionally chosen people. The same goes for the brain.
Brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of distinct microscopic processes involving distinct microscopic particles located at separate points. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just subjective abstractions used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct microscopic processes. Considering an entire sequence of processes as a whole is a subjective abstraction that does not refer to any mind-independendent reality, which implies that consciousness cannot exist as a result of a sequence of processes.
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 microscopic processes or properties, which are described directly by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties.
In science, we devise approximate models to overcome the limits of our intelligence, since we are unable to find exact solutions in situations where many particles are involved. These approximate models are only a product of our mind and do not correspond to any mind-independent reality. In fact an approximation is only a cognitive construct and not a mind-independent reality because a mind-independent reality is exactly what it is and cannot be an approximation of itself. 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. To assume that emergent properties do not depend on the mind is to commit a map-territory fallacy, that is, to confuse a simplified representation (the "map") with actual reality (the "territory"). In this analogy, the underlying microscopic processes are the territory, and emergent properties are the map, that is the simplified conceptual models we use to approximately describe the underlying microscopic processes. By the way, simply labeling consciousness "emergent" doesn't explain it . There is nothing whatsoever in the laws of physics that predicts consciousness as an emergent property of matter. That being the case, claiming that consciousness emerges from physical processes without ever providing the beginning of a logically coherent physical explanation of its supposed emergence from physical processes is tantamount to claiming that consciousness magically appears without any explanation.
Conclusions
My arguments show that physicalism is incompatible with the one of the most fundamental aspects of scientific knowledge (the fragmentary nature of molecular and biological processes) and that brain processes alone cannot be a sufficient condition for consciousness.
Since mental experiences are associated with many distinct microscopic processes occurring at separate points, it is necesssary that a connecting mind-independent element exists and that such element collectively interprets all these distinct processes as a unitary mental experience. A mind-independent element can be intrinsically indivisible only 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
Beautifully made
I used to love videos like this BUT not any more. Sounds good but in reality solves nothing.
Wow! what a combo you have made!!
the idea of consciousness being entangled with quantum world is crazy.. Loved the video!
It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first.
What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing.
I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order.
My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461, and here is a video of Jeff Krichmar talking about some of the Darwin automata, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Uh9phc1Ow
if it can, then it only means one thing. that god is thinking about himself regularly too.
4:16 Mic drop
there are more comments about editing than the purpose of this video, lol
Where we can Learn such editing style?
I am wondering how much time it takes to create such a video from idea to posting it on YouTube?
Bro, what editing tools do you use for your videos? They look awesome! 🔥
bruh your editing skills is very doppppppppp. please tell me how you make storyboard for this ?