Klee Irwin - Scientific Clues That We Are Living In the Matrix

so take it away Clete okay all right so plain to the clues that we are living in the matrix that's my little plug for my favorite movie of all time a self-organizing program as opposed to a program that was programmed by some programmers so reality might be pixelated at the level of space and time itself Heisenberg believed that as a particle moved a very small distance between points a and B that it teleports or jumps without covering the space in between patrol injurer believed that in most cases the particle moved classically smoothly from point A to B traversing an infinite number of points in between Heisenberg was furious about this because he's the one who started this it was roediger who came in after him and Heisenberg was planning to create a whole revolution in thinking a new paradigm that once and for all leaves the ancient notion of smooth space-time and moves us into the digital which was ironic because that wasn't a digital age at that time this was 100 years ago so he was ahead of his time so he insisted that the evidence which he's developed clearly pointed to the fact that there were only jumps that's it and and that we that we need to boldly move away from the ancient notion of smooth motion croninger did not argue that there was evidence for smooth motion he admitted that there is no evidence for smooth motion but he said it sounds unrealistic can you blame them if you don't see the matrix and you don't have an iPhone and you lived a hundred years ago and there's literally horses and carriages outside of your office it would sound crazy and we need a digital pixelated reality what is pixelated even mean they write they don't nobody had a monitor back then so so what so what roediger said was um if we are still going to put up with these damned quantum jumps I am sorry that I ever had anything to do with quantum theory um and in fact the vast majority of the Titans of the scientific community of this turn-of-the-century era agreed with Schrodinger that evidence or not it is far too radical and aggressive to imagine that reality is pixelated in the way that Heisenberg was arguing for what happened to Schrodinger's view prevailed if i rana Klee Heisenberg's view was more logical and true nature added ad hoc this idea that there's smooth motion so the old evidence showed that a particle is here and then it is here and so Heisenberg said let's deal with that the data that we know and it's a new paradigm and then Schrodinger said come on that's just not even realistic what is it has magic and so we should imagine that even though we have no evidence of it the particle is smoothly traversing and so because of these old guys deciding this I mean they were old at the time so they were in an old era and they were old at the time so today a hundred years later we have the majority of scientists still believing can using Lee in a reality where somehow pixelated jumps of an electron between two atomic orbitals they admit to that but yet in other situations an electron just smoothly moves in the old classical way again traversing in a literal infinity of points between so what was happening a hundred years ago in my opinion is that nature was whispering in our ears of the scientists at that time she said I am smooth I am pixelated at the pella at the Planck scale which is the smallest pixelated scale of reality I am I am pixelated both in time and in space we understand what that means because we have video monitors imagine these guys a hundred years ago if nature was saying that to them they'd be like I'm sorry I don't know what I'm talking about it was just it was weird to them it's weird to us but it was way more weird to them so that was a hard though that was a hard pill for us to swallow at that time right as a species so we invented this ad-hoc compromise which was to artificially assume smooth motion regardless of the evidence so why is mathematics explain the universe so the first piece section was to say hey we're in it we may be in a pixelated reality that's one clue that we're living in the matrix another clue that we're living in the matrix is the fact that mathematics as noted by so many scientists it's just unreasonably beautiful the equations themselves the the mathematical beauty of the universe is overwhelming to many scientists who who understand it enough to to appreciate it everything relates to e8 so I can make a HC simple to you guys e8 is a fundamental crystal it's a fundamental lattice in two dimensions one of the fundamental lattices is the checkerboard and in three dimensions one of the fundamental lattices is the way that oranges are stacked in the supermarket if you go into an eight dimensional supermarket the way that 8 dimensional oranges are stacked in that 8 dimensional supermarket is called the e8 lattice and what's so special about that way of stacking 8 dimensional oranges well you can't get any denser in fact the way we step oranges in the supermarket has been proven to be the limit you cannot make Spears in 3d any denser than that packing of the way they do it with oranges in the support so it's very special there's an infinity of ways to pack spheres but that one and only way is the densest way well that in the BCC which is sort of a twist of that but so that's what the e8 lattice is and what is it made out of it sounds like it's complicated right because it's 8 dimensional but it's actually not complicated the entire e8 lattice is made of equilateral triangles so that if I gave jabbed the stack of a few hundred equilateral triangles and he was allowed to rotate each a collateral triangle from from the other ones by just some angle which is arc cosine 1/3 which is about 72 degrees as long as he's allowed to rotate the 72 degrees into the third dimension right and then again that next one into the third into another dimension away from that away from that well he can build the whole e8 lattice with just equilateral triangles and then one rotation or with tetrahedra and one rotation so the e8 lattice like all lattices is composed of a fundamental shape so just like the checkerboard is composed of the square and the way we stack oranges in the supermarket is composed of fundamental shape called the cuboctahedron so to the e8 crystal is composed of a fundamental self or shape which is called the gosset polytope and it's very beautiful and has made all of echo lateral triangles and tetrahedra for tetrahedra however you want to look at it and why am I talking about this eh polytope is he a shape well interestingly enough all particles and forces are variant shadows of the vertex relationships in this one shape you can think of it like a higher dimensional platonic solid right so in each dimension we have a higher dimensional square I give a four dimensional cube called the tesseract and it keeps going so so you can think of these simple shapes in EA in eight dimensions it's just higher dimensional sacred geometry higher dimensional polytopes um and so you don't have to be a particle physicist to understand that everything in reality that's fundamental can be converted into everything else so what's fundamental well you've heard all the words electrons are fundamental quarks or fundamental photons are fundamental there's a few other ones like neutrinos that are fundamental and then we have gravity that's fundamental and just conceptually we imagine gravity is represented in a pixelated manner by an idea called a graviton which is just a way to think about the quantizing of it well all these fundamental things if we were to write them out on the floor there you see gosh so all of the complexity of reality is only made of a few things and what can we say about these few things so to me the most fascinating thing that we can say about them is they are all convertible into all the others you can it's called a gauge symmetry transformation it's kind of like it's in fact it's not kind of like it's mathematically exactly like this my hand is not going to change because I'm making it rigid but this shadow on the wall here is not my hand mathematically and every the way it's a different object than my hand but it's deeply related to my hand my hand lives in 3d and this shadow on the wall lives in 2d and there's another shadow this one okay this one is also deeply related to my hand and because both of the two shadows are related to my hand they can be converted into one another by a simple rotation a specific rotation and so these particles and forces like photons electrons they get converted into one another by particle physicists mathematically with something called a gauge symmetry transformation which honestly is not that much different than the rotation that you translate to get this shadow into the shadow so you can call my hand the invariant object because it doesn't change and you can call the shadows they variant objects so everything that we know of in reality which is this small list of a few things which includes gravity our variant shadows they get transformed into the others they're much into it if you realize that it should make you sort of faint holy holy crap what is the invariant thing right because we're told that those are fundamental particles and but they're fundamental for a reason not because they can't be converted into another one they're their fundamental because we believe that you can't break them apart and get another particle that builds them but they're not fundamental in terms of being the invariant thing so this is not a my theory or my idea this has been known since the 1970s that the e8 polytope is the only invariant object that unifies everything that we have in our reality that is the fundamental things because we can know how the meaning behavior of dogs and and notions of complex societal behaviors all come from these ultra simple things but the ultra simple things are all mapped to the vertexes of this EA polytope to me that's the most exciting fact that the general public doesn't know but which is not this readon among scientists it has been known since the 1970s the original strength theory in the 1970s used two copies of v8 because it's the only object that unifies all the fundamental particles and forces including gravity so the pigeons are just meant to say that if all those pigeons are the same pigeon there's several different shadows and the shadows are the invariant particles of the variants particles and the I mean the bird or the one bird is the invariant e8 polytope okay so why is this idea of smoothness so hard to shake what I'm just going to give my humble opinion I think it's common sense because ever since I was a little kid playing with my mobile that's me no that's not me I I just got the idea that there's things suspended in nothingness of course the air seemed to me like nothingness so to my my little young common-sense it was like I got it there's a bunch of things like mommy and bottles and the things in my mobile and then between them there's just pure nothingness it's really smooth I get it so besides common sense there's some ancient creation myths where an old dude from outside the system or one of the Greek pantheon gods or somebody from outside the system decides to bestow creation upon some void of nothingness and make some stuff like the Greeks indivisible Adams okay the Greeks believed that those atoms were made by someone and that they were separate as though this separate completely separate universes the dude who makes stuff and then the lucky people that are the objects within that stuff that it's made of a deep separateness so before the guy makes the stuff what was there it was myth pure nothingness smooth homogeneous nothingness and then there's stuff for something this so it's not only common sense but it comes deeply from our language our cultures all the way back to the ancients I mean even now today to modern Christians would believe that there was a nothingness and then a God created a something this so our group converts the e8 lattice into a logical three-dimensional representation and so we can call this three-dimensional point space the possibility point space so it's not physical yet it's this mathematical grid at Planck scale that has an a periodic structure that is it's not periodic like a checkerboard itay periodic otherwise generally known as quasi crystalline and and the fundamental lengths in this structure that's derived from e8 are 1 and the golden ratio we don't do anything ad hoc everything that we do comes from geometric first principles and it when you project EA you just get these golden ratio structures it's it's just what happens when you project it along one of its fundamental axes of symmetry so remarkably there's images like this that are that are out there to be researched the relationship between the earth and the moon is defined by one and the golden ratio that is the distance from the center of the earth to the perimeter of the earth plus the distance of the perimeter of the moon to the center of the moon forms part of a triangle and then again the same distance the distance from the center to the perimeter I'll talk about the core of the earth of the gravitational center of the earth to the perimeter then then that's the other length in the triangle and then drawing this line up back to the centroid of the moon you get this triangle and you might say why I've never heard of that that sounds like it's the news of the century does everybody know that is that controversial in fact no it's not controversial you can go to Wikipedia tonight get the numbers yourself and you'll see that it forms this 299 point nine seven five percent accuracy virtually a hundred percent and this is not an anomaly there's over 30 such unbelievable and and frankly incontrovertible they're just because they're they're just data points they're their empirical data points there's about 30 or so of these ridiculously unlikely coincidences in our solar system relating to the golden ratio that have been published by other scientists but the problem is Einsteins theory of gravity doesn't predict this which in another way of saying it is it doesn't allow this so you'd have to say that all these 30 things are just mere coincidence because Einstein's gravity theory doesn't allow it I think to have any theory supposes ancient smoothness it does not predict any substructure to space-time like we do and other groups do as well there's a lot of University groups working on theories of gravity that are more modern than Einsteins that suppose sub structure of the Planck scale so what we do then is we do binary selections of points to be on or off in this possibility point space so it's a binary language that's defined by quasi crystalline rules which are geometric first principles rules and so different configurations on that possibility space give you quasi crystal patterns that look like this so picture each of these tetrahedra as a three-dimensional pixel of reality at the Planck scale which would be about your height divided by 10 divided by 10 divided by 10 34 times so that's the Planck length in fact the Planck length coincidentally is about as far away from you as you are to the diameter of the universe so funnily enough humans and the sweet spot of all this good stuff like DNA like it's not just our perspective all of the interesting stuff happens right about in the middle of a 64 zero universe the most complex molecule the most known is DNA the most complex neural network is the human brain the most complex system that we know of it is the biosphere of Earth so all of these things are happening approximately around the center of a 64 0 finite universe so picture each of these that is the pixels on a screen that's one frame of a screen it's not moving yet there's no motion there's just little pixels those are the pixels then consider that I make another binary selection on the possibility point space and I create another set of pixels that's different but that follows the rules and I call that frame 2 so then you kind of imagine reality then being in this in this story of a sequence of these frozen frames frozen 3d frames so in the movie Gone with the Wind there is no time or motion that's all illusionary there is only an ordered sequence of two-dimensional geometric frames so what are some of the general things that we can say about this construct that we live in ok we don't we don't have to know for sure what it is because we're just theorizing here but we can say some things about it we can say that evolution seems to occur in the universe because we watch a stellar clouds of dust in in star nurseries self-organizing or evolving into much more complex spiral galaxies we see biospheres wherever they get going like here we see a runaway complexity because as each each species opens up new niches and so then there's more niches in second brown than there was in the first round and so do Nisha's open up from the third round the fourth and so if you leave a biosphere undone attack like and you don't destroy it with nuclear war or asteroids any biosphere will tend towards infinite complexity it doesn't there's no known stopping point is upon Nisha's upon issues which is why today we have 10 10 million species on this planet and in the history of the 4 billion years of life we've had another 90 million species that's 100 million different species in the 4 billion years that life has been going on here the other thing is emergence all that emergence means is that in a given in a given system it starts running away towards the emergent complexity here's an example we're told in high school that all of physical reality as far as matter is made of quarks and electrons that's it quarks and electrons to things and then that self-organizes to the next layer of things which is 81 stable chemical elements and then that self-organizes into countless numbers of chemical compounds and then that self-organizes into biological compounds like proteins and then that self-organizes it's a very primitive single celled things then billions of single celled a self-organizing to Geoff Ness right that the flow Jeff Ness which somehow floats on an ocean of these simpler things that don't know about him as much as he knows about them like I would say that Jeff knows more about the red blood cells the living little guys floating in his blood than they know about him although they're both interact interactive and co-creating one another that's emergence self-organization everything self-organizes crystals weather systems the biosphere our solar system things self-organized this is these are behaviors of the universe that are universal and feedback every system is in feedback with every other system via sound via magnetism by electric fields and via gravitational fields there is not one system that is not in some sort of dissonant or resonant relationship with every other in the entire universe and so feedback is a deep is a deep fundamental principle and by the way that is how that is partly how things self-organized emerge and have evolution is they feed on feedback feedback helps with something called the principle of of least action and conservation of energy so evolution emergence self-organization these are starlings so it's very beautiful these massive flocks of starlings they just start self-organizing into these non chaotic patterns and and it's hard to understand I mean people have done papers on it but how they how they how they do that it's just fascinating and feedback loops so I got a a new AEG picture here to represent feedback loops where everything is in some sort of feedback loop with everything else but what else can we say about reality besides those four things well we can say that consciousness is part of reality and we can say that it emerges right I mean there's no materialist scientist who denies that he's conscious actually there are via deaf know that there are some but it's a strong medicine but it's a small minority of hardcore materialist scientists who would actually go so far as to say that they are not conscious that they are like a robot or a zombie and so even they would admit fine consciousness somehow is part of the stuff of reality it's part of what physics does by the processes of emergence self-organization feedback loops and evolution but what defines consciousness that's a big slippery slope what is it though so these are my twin poodles I just took the picture of this afternoon that's ten and red and ten red how there's a ranked number one or number two on the most although there's like a bunch of kennel associations in this country and in Europe and they rank dogs according to intelligence and how they measure the intelligence I'm not quite sure but they rank them and these poodles either on various lists always rank at either number one or number two Standard Poodles not the toy poodles these big ones are smart I mean these guys make eye contact with me and they're just like dude what do you need I'm here for you um but are they conscious though because they're super intelligent they ranked number one or two so are they conscious they kind of seem that way they got something going on in there when I look in their eyes and they have a call that they have a lot of emotions these two dogs so this is Suzy she's also my dog unfortunately she ranks number 87 on on the dog intelligent list uh you know it would be okay if there were five hundred dogs on these list but there are only one hundred dogs on this on these lists so Suzy made me she made the list you know but we we bred the intelligence out of her to turn her into a purse top not me and my family we bought her that way but the breeders did that but we loved her anyway so and by the way I'm really glad she can't she's not here tonight because I just really talked bad about her but I must be honest she doesn't seem to me as conscious as red and Ted so I'm willing to admit that they kind of seemed conscious like that I don't think there's conscious as me because I know I'm smarter than then I think smartness has something to do with consciousness and and so I think they're more conscious than Suzy but what about a mouse because scientists tell us Suzy is smarter than a mouse that right the animal scientists they kind of rank animals they say dolphins are smarter than you know than ants right we don't have to agree that all animals are intelligence so Susie gets to be smarter than the mouse that's what they say so does that mean the mouse is less conscious than Susie if if we're generous enough to say that most of these living mammals it to be conscious they're just different gradients of consciousness that somehow map somewhat in some way to awareness which maps to intelligence right but there's some correspondence but do you think I'm being cruel with my arbitrary labeling of intelligence and consciousness or should I you know say that everything living is conscious and there's no need to label gradients and hierarchies so but I'm going to do it anyway what about my salad is my salad conscious for sure my salad is living until I cook it in the microwave but before I cook my salad it's still living though the cells are living they can still reproduce in a petri dish but do I have conscious salad my mom had a boyfriend once who would not eat salad with a fork because he believed it caused the salad pain with us with a spoon or what this young means oh yeah that's well he wasn't that wasn't logically consistent but there was just something about stabbing it with the floor but somehow the crushing of the teeth was okay so then that salad is living right so maybe we make an arbitrary cut off right because we're being cruel here about with our labeling so we can say the salad is not conscious but it is living is definitely living in fact every one of the cells of the salad acts as DNA and so we say the salad is not conscious but it is living and Susie even though she ranks number 87 is conscious and she's living so these labels are starting to feel non-scientific to me the kind of feeling man made a bit arbitrary but I do believe there's hierarchies because I do believe that Susie is more intelligent than my salad but but just the cut up like it's good for ya but because it's the cutoff point that I'd like to challenge you to find interesting because it's the cutoff point of what we get to say is living matter so all the matter is self-organized there's very little matter that has no form of organization so each of the living cells of the lettuce has DNA and that DNA happens to be about approximately as complex as the DNA of the mouse or my DNA in a petri dish the cells run from harmful substances the cells of the salad that is and the cells of my body they both run from harmful substances they chase nutrients and they reproduce and they excrete waste so what is this lettuce cell that's not a lettuce cell what does the lettuce cell and all the other single-celled organisms this is a single-celled organism so what do they have in common with us humans us big colonies we're just collins of billions of single-celled organisms where we have emergent Jeff Smith's right what we all have in common we have in common the tendency to survive and propagate our patterns we want to survive and we want to propagate our pattern we also have these things in common evolution emergent self-organization and feedback loops this whole thing is a wobbling bowl of jell-o every part of it every atom within it is conserving energy through the well established process of feedback loops but what else what else do we have in common with these little guys unpredictability you cannot predict where one of these things is going to move next you can have you can apply some problem some statistical probabilities and you can sort of narrow your odds but you can never predict it and you can never predict a human now we kind of know why you can't predict the humans behavior with absolute accuracy because we believe humans have freewill and so that's our answer you can't predict how human is going to behave where he's going to be tomorrow at you know 2:35 p.m. because he can change his mind he's got free well same thing with these guys but usually when it gets too stupid things like those and and things that we label is not living we say well we can't predict that because we believe in the theory of randomness not freewill so with us it gets to be free well that's why you can't predict us with other things we if they're lucky enough like my poodles to be bestowed with the label of consciousness I might say they have free will which is why I can't predict their behavior exactly but I might say that the pattern of a quartz crystal growing in a cave I can't predict exactly its growth pattern because of the theory of pure randomness I absolutely refuse to believe in in the atoms of that scale having any sort of consciousness or freewill or any analog or approximation of that not me I'm saying if I were speaking for the materialist scientists so all these living things are just self-organized electrons and quarks right like we're self-organized electrons and quarks this is self-organized electrons and quartz and so is Susie now what about a virus see a bacteria is similarly complex to the cells that make up me a bacteria has DNA and it has all those parts similar to the parts that I showed you but a virus is orders of magnitude smaller way way way way way smaller than a bacteria and way stupider simpler doesn't have all the good parts doesn't have DNA as it it's more like just a glob of just atoms so it doesn't seem living when you study it is fantastically smaller and more simpler and in fact a lot of the guys who got to label what is it is not living decades ago they were arguing about viruses and today many biologists think that viruses should never have made the cut in fact they argue that viruses are not living there's entire books about it academic books but some other dudes unfortunately they are obviously guys they get to make these fools in the history of science they argue that we should go a little lower that we should include viruses and even go lower than viruses and that we should label crystals as living forms of self-organized matter the reason is because they were they were serious in their arguments and they they say that that crystals take resources from the environment to perpetuate their organized pattern and that DNA should not be this arbitrary distinguisher between whether something is living organized self-organized matter or not so I can see both points of view ok but I can also see that it's just arbitrary it's just humans putting these labels on self-organized systems where all these self-organized systems seem to show a propensity to to propagate their patterns in fact these patterns will keep propagating if you don't mess with them these crystals some of them will just keep growing and growing and growing I mean they'll get even bigger than if they just keep taking research yeah that's the best of scale so easily yeah these are these caves in in Latin America where these massive crystals are allowed to form over many millions of years so ok so we talked about crystals I'm trying to be to draw controversy out here and to get you to question well maybe maybe a virus isn't living or maybe a crystal is living maybe Susie is conscious right look ok what what about the self-organizing behavior of a tornado it's pulling up resources from the ocean and from the air and it's using feedback systems with its environment and feedback systems within its own structure and it needs to keep its pattern if it's lucky it can be upgraded like these hurricanes if they're really good at what they're doing and their feedback systems are gentle enough to upregulate they're they're taking it resources from the environment you can get a clap you can get a level of one hurricane to get up to a level five that's a lucky self-organizing pattern so it seeks to perpetuate its pattern for as long as possible it has the hallmark so self-organized matter that attempts to to live exist for as long as possible and it does that with the feedback loops of environment so the point is that the simplest objects of reality do seek to self organize and perpetuate their patterns whether they get to be labeled with the blessing of DNA and our labeling systems of life or not and they do this they all all of the systems from humans to the tornados they do this in a way that is unpredictable we can only approximately predict their behavior statistically and they do it by being resonant or dissonant with everything else in the universe literally everything else all right so yes some of these self-organizing systems are more complex than others like red and Ted but in terms of the basic tendency to perpetuate pattern and survive and self-organized and being in vibratory connection with all the other systems of the universe there really is no difference so a more modern labeling system is probably in order I think so we challenged our assumptions about what life is I mean I'm not trying to define it I'm trying to just shape shape labels is all that I'm doing so we challenge assumptions about what life is and what the cutoff should be and and we challenge you know what should define consciousness because where do I cut it off red and Ted or Susie or my salad or single-celled organism viruses should they make the cut should they not I'm willing to just say that all this self-organizing stuff that seems to show a desire you know a propensity to to perpetuate its pattern by by self-organizing and entering either feedback loops it's all it's all kind of like life like so the final thing is to challenge whether reality is made of information or some other stuff so I think reality is made of consciousness and information but let's first just play along and say it's made of information because a lot of scientists now think it's made of information literally as pie is becoming a popular view so the Pat answer is that since matter equals energy according to e equals mc-squared then everything is made of energy so you ask some guy at a university what's everything made on and you'll say well you know everything is made of energy even that even even matter it's made of energy and you'd say okay so everything is made of energy all right but that's too easy I think so because I don't know what energy is what is it so we don't have time to really break it down but I can tell you that energy is information this is a well-established scientific deduction that is known even though not all scientists agree John Wheeler who coined the term black hole was one of the first Titans of physics to argue that reality was made of information and nothing else today thousands of scientists such mathematical physics professor max tegmark at MIT argue logically in right books and papers that reality is information so interestingly those who disagree that reality is made of information actually are not able to come up with an alternate definition of energy as anything other than information because the classic definition implies that it's information then just say that my position is that reality is not made of information and I know because I've challenged many of them and and there is no answer to that so the science is realizing though that reality is information are able to define what information is I'm going to try to define it and it's not it's not a big mystery what information is information happens to be meaning conveyed by symbolism symbolic languages that's us that's a known definition of information so so then what is a symbol well a simple is something which represents itself or something else for example an equilateral triangle can represent itself I can use this as a symbol to represent the equilateral triangle or it can represent something else like the Delta symbol for change so then what's language right because we're saying information is just meaning conveyed by symbolism through language then what is language so all fuzzy crystals including our e8 derived quasi crystal are languages so what is a language and by the way geometric languages are good at expressing geometric meaning so from the wave form of a photon to planets to poodles everything in reality is composed of something geometric even something as emergent and abstract as love can be traced back to its geometric building blocks so what is going on here if reality is geometric language and if this language is just information then where does all this information come from so information can only come from mind this is not a new-age notion information is the product of measurements and it requires an entity to choose to do the measurement that information is meaning it is meaning conveyed by symbolism and generated by measurements so meaning is subjective right all meaning is always subjective and therefore it requires an interpreter to ascribe meaning to it so the very textbook definition of information cannot be ever disassociated from choosers of measurement and users of the language that it that expresses the information and the subjective meaning of the information there's again this is not my this is not novel this is just this is standard stuff of what information is okay so but how how does all this stuff in the universe like how does all this information come to be so how how can an information only universe exist without the universe itself being a mind like substrate so most of you here obviously would be content to agree with me that there is a universal mind of some form of some type even if we don't understand it but the fun question though to me is always the questions of the eight-year-old child why where ha just never stop until you're satisfied so where did this universal conscious has come from so we discussed how consciousness is known by materialist scientists to be real and to exist in the universe since they think they are conscious and it is known that when an organism has no limit on its resources that it will continue doubling for example a few million bacteria on the surface of this Apple are not very influential to the apples destiny there are too few of them just a couple million because the real things that are influencing the apples destiny are you know the impede the intermolecular forces and gravity and a whole lot of other things the tensile strength but you know or the I mean it the bacteria are nothing they're inconsequential but after just a few rounds of doubling the bacteria actually switch roles to become the overwhelming the binding force that determines the very destiny of the Apple returning all of its elements back to the biosphere it becomes stronger than the intermolecular forces are gravity so I can hit the arm the times to button on my calculator 80 times in 30 seconds I thought about that how fast could I do 80 80 times doubling double double double double I can do it in 30 seconds and if we double the penny only 80 times we would have more pennies than all the atoms in all of the galaxies of the entire universe times billions times billions doesn't seem right does it that's because there's nothing in your world that's trained in the hardwiring of your mind to think of doubling algorithms doubling is a freaky thing and there's nothing that you see that ever really does that it happens with bacteria at a very small scale but what happens is they rapidly after only a few doubling cycles they use up their resources and then they stop doubling so it's very rare that we get to see a doubling algorithm come remotely close to the 80 times and in our macro scale things accelerating linear ways cars accelerate linear the lions on the African savannah would accelerate and chase us in linear ways things get faster but linear doubling is a weird thing so if human consciousness could escape the limitations of earth and just keep doubling right we can't do that here we can't keep doubling but if we could escape the limitations of earth we would be able to double with us within a shockingly small number of doublings there would be more conscious entities in the universe than all of the planets times some huge number with dozens of zeros so we started leaving the planet in 1968 and right now we're just bursting with desire I'm a major shareholder and a company here called moon Express at Moffett Field and we're now part of the new generation of private companies that are now leaving the planet to do things it's not in the hands of government anymore it went too slow this is going to happen most everything that you see in science fiction movies happens remember the flip phone from the old Gene Roddenberry Star Trek remember when those flip phones person first came out is like oh my god Gene Roddenberry he's a futurist a genius you predicted the flip phone I have one in my pocket and now if you have a flip-flop phone it's like you're a loser you're like so so past I say 12 years ago right we have these now you have tricorders now in the when they check out your temperature yes you do a tricorder gene yes another company that I'm involved with it's at Moffett Field also is called scanadu and we're producing a tricorder and we're competing to make food the tricorder so but anyways I'm gonna keep pushing because I'm not I'm not too far from the end so we're bursting with desire to do this which we've all seen in the science fiction drawings is there any thing in physics or anything with the relentless exponential doubling of Technology I mean I have a freaking the ENIAC computer was million of times weaker than this and it took it weighed tons so this is going to happen we are leaving the planet we're as good as gone what will still stay here but but we will specie 8 and we will go out and we will not be us anymore because we will specie 8 and we will double and the numbers will will not be limited by resources and so that 80 times on my calculator the times to button it will happen and in some finite really small amount of time not not Astrophysical lengths of time there will be consciousness spreading out throughout the universe right now exponential doubling of technology is actually manifesting our ability to leave the planet in extraordinary ways I mean most of us here old enough to get a feel for the accelerating nature of this weird doubling process where computer processing is doubling we're about to come into the era of quantum computation weird stuff is about to happen in your lifetime like Star Trek technology not in G run Barry's wrong Star Trek is settling in like the Year 2300 right that's not going to be the case we're going to have technologies like that and beyond probably in our lifetimes so imagine imagine if high consciousness beings were able to group their consciousness like a parallel cluster computing right um right like me and Jeff where you go into the Vulcan mind meld together and we collaborate our consciousness through some psychic technology or for some physical non-psychic technology neurobiological technology and somehow the collective combination of our of our minds is is is different what enhanced beyond what individuals and then we go back to being separate so imagine if we can do that in large numbers in no matter how far we're separated but what are some new physics that allowed for instant non-local information exchange came on the scene like a new theory of everything that allowed us to do real time instant time neural networking by the way this is the universe this is a NASA this is a scientific depiction of the tentacles of of energy that connect in filaments between galaxies this is so this is such large scale these each one of these nodes is our galaxies and this is a brain cell so the universe has the topology of a neural network so that sort of neural network is generally called what I just described if humans go out we're like all over the universe and then we develop some new technology that allows us to connect instantly then what we are technically is called a neural network that's just any network of things objects which have high connectivity between them and exchange information and then and also create new information as products of the exchange combinations simple many things are neural networks so the universe as a whole is an exchange Network because everything is connected by gravity and electromagnetism nothing whatsoever is isolated in popular Astrophysical models of the early universe say that shortly after the Big Bang the universe was a hot soup of particles called a bose-einstein condensate now this is actually the the most popular view that there was a phase which was a bose-einstein condensate and so when two or more particles are in a bose-einstein condensate you can then after that separate them and they can remain quantum entangled so this is a prediction of quantum mechanics decades ago and only very recently that we have the technology to experimental II confirm it and it was gloriously confirmed it's just weird it's like basically it means like if you have chem one particle that used to be in a bose-einstein condensate and the other particles that it was with if you have two of them let's say you separate them like one on Alpha Centauri for light-years away or one in another literally another time right another region of space-time and then you change you flip this particle it will instantly flip the particle not at the speed of light not faster than the speed of light at no speed this is it's a it's like if I have a quarter and I'm looking at the head side and I grab a little head and I turn it I just turn it you don't really ask well how long did it take for the for that side to communicate the message to the other side but it was turning it's sort of like a false question you say well no you're turning the whole thing right similarly these particles even though there's this notion of separation there they are one they are quantum entangled so they they so the particles can be separated like I said by light-years and and they're connected quantum entanglement so all the particles are likely now to be quantum entangled the early universe is much smaller there was this one phase where the mathematic shows us the astrophysicists that is that they were all in a bose-einstein condensate and then they keep going out and they get separated in space and time and they go on to form humans and form planets and far-flung galaxies and they remain entangled in an instantaneous zero time neural network so those are just two logical ways if you've caught what I've said I'm trying to say how emergent collective universal consciousness can exist I am NOT saying it is like our consciousness it is not like the old man with the beard I am saying that the whole universe if it has the topology of a neural network in instant time because everything was a bose-einstein condensate there is one a plausible could be wrong but it's a plausible logical framework to say well once you have a topology for a neural network can emergent pathways of complexity emerge because you know that's what happens in a brain and other neural networks we actually made our official neural networks now so so perhaps right we can just say maybe right and pop up how about the and then the other conjecture is well wait a minute if humans do have the ability to double and if some new physics allows us to sort of teleport to other areas of the universe then how are we going to populate the universe in other words if we don't discover new physics that allows us to remove to go non locally to another location then the way that we're going to populate the universe at the very maximum is at the speed of light ballistically like a ballistic trajectory going out from earth in all directions are descendants out but the problem is the universe itself is it is expanding at the speed of light and so we would never be able to permeate the entire universe with our consciousness and in our end our descendants consciousness but what if we could what if we could go out and simply choose coordinates and through some new physics go to these coordinates right teleport to these different coordinates it might be some physics or technology that doesn't exist well then you're going to have no limitation of resources so then humans are going to do the doubling 80 times you're going to get to just unfathomable numbers of conscious beings that actually more spread out to every location of the universe sparsely like a sponge a sponge is mostly empty space but it has the topology of sort of being on average that low density everywhere so that so if that technology emerges we and our descendants will go out and will populate populate the entire universe and it will be really sparse they'll be separated by great regions where there's no consciousness and then because of the doubling algorithm which is again freaky math it just is what it is we will rapidly in non astrological timeframes in human society timeframes we will fill in the density of the sponge as though you visualize a sponge of the queue of consciousness distribution in the universe then densifying with exponential doubling until it's complete we filled in and that's why I showed you the analogy of the bacteria on the Apple at some point the materialists would laugh and say it's just humans like the Romulans and the humans and Star Trek and they're all over the universe and they're teleporting about but they're still not a force to be reckoned with they're not like gravity they're not like some real force of nature but what happens is that some scale like the bacteria they become the dominant force that defines the destiny of the physical system of the universe so what does that mean what came first the emergent consciousness that I'm describing for all this physical stuff right this sounds like a chicken or the egg question doesn't it what comes first the emergent consciousness or all this information relating to e8 now this mathy geometric stuff this sterile math stuff bicep the e8 story is that this simple code urges and then electrons and quartz and humans come out and all this emergent consciousness and poodles right so so what comes first because all I can get how all that stuff could build up to this sponge thing and consciousness like the bacteria becoming the defining destiny of the universe I get that but don't you need the physical stuff before that and if we're saying the physical stuff is just information and the information has to exist within a mind like substrate some computational substrate of some sort then what's what's the deal chicken or the egg right well but if I asked you that question and I convinced you that that's a good question it shows your hand it shows that you believe in strict linear causality which like most of us tend to believe I believe in front living my life up with causality you know but is linear causality we're wrong if that's just a wrong thing it doesn't exist well then it would in fact this whole question that I just posed what came first the chicken or the egg the high consciousness that is a consciousness substrate or this mathematical geometric stuff what comes first right well what comes first on the clock nine or 3:00 well that's it's a false question isn't it because the numbers are on circle you know so this little illustration of the Ouroboros is a great visual symbol to represent that if you wrap a causal chain into a circle you can have logical consistency where you do not need that to ask any longer what comes first so this stands for grand unification theory and so it's just a sort of idea that there's this imagine my tetrahedra again in my eight related possibility points facing these binary things and all my story about language and code and all that and I'm saying well what does that live within if it's just information it lives within the head of the snake which is the emergent collective consciousness of the universe but where did that come from is it like the old man creating us is it separate or did we create it and so it it thinks of the primitive math the primitive math self-organizes because it's geometric math which means it's expressing through language geometric things and I've argued that everything about us can be traced back to geometry and it just keeps going and it gets up to these levels where it seems transcendent in other words at these levels you can't see it's obvious relation to the head the collective consciousness the substrate of the universe the conscious substrate of the universe because it's so different so it's like you know it's like how is genis related to quarks and electrons he seems transcendent of those things right so and also in the other direction from some grand unified theory which is the Planck scale which is way way way below quarks and electrons right it's this another realm where we can't measure it so anyway so that's the famous Ouroboros that's on some of the Theosophical Society literature as a because it has deep meaning it it is the meaning that that we didn't create God and God didn't create us we co-created one another every freewill choice that you make adds to the net amount of information in the universe and the net amount of information of the universe is part of the substrate upon which new higher orders of information can expand so every decision you make so you should be careful if you're going to be angry that day go for it but you're adding that flavor of ice cream to the universe for that day and it will never be less it will never go away but if it the information is not conserved energy is conserved but information is not conserved because you can keep using old information that's not destroyed to build your new combinatorics of new strata of information Wow you

Channel: Quantum Gravity Research

Views: 558,002

Rating: 4.4561234 out of 5

Keywords: Klee Irwin, science, theory of relativity, quantum gravity research, space, klee-irwin, qgr, scientist, math, mathematics, mathematician, physics, physicist, matrix, emergence theory, irwin, klee, irwin klee, quantum gravity, maths, quantum, schrodinger, matrix theory, planck, pixelated, pixilated, E8, E8 lattice, 8D, vertex, golden ratio, golden number, golden mean, tetrahedra, tetrahedron, consciousness, feedback loop, emergence, photon, geometry, geometric, bose, einstein, albert einstein, bose einstein

Id: fV07SJz1YXI

Length: 59min 17sec (3557 seconds)

Published: Mon Nov 16 2015

Reddit Comments

[u/Seriou]

A fantastic lecture! I'm going to return to this a few times.