Quantum physics is all about uncertainty. The quantum state of a system cannot be accurately measured (superposition of possibilities) but when we observe things, their wave function collapses and one possibility is manifested as reality. This reality is a manifestaion of fundemental particles interacting by the mean of fundamental forces at a certain speed (discontinous). The theory that counsciousness is the link between potential and reality is seriously studies by a lot of great scientists.
Quantum physics is all about uncertainty. The quantum state of a system cannot be accurately measured (superposition of possibilities) but when we observe things, their wave function collapses and one possibility is manifested as reality. This reality is a manifestaion of fundemental particles interacting by the mean of fundamental forces at a certain speed (discontinous). The theory that counsciousness is the link between potential and reality is seriously studies by a lot of great scientists.
would you have to say then, that if we were not here then the physical world would not be here? if we create it then its existence is entirely dependent on our existence?
@MrDerpdeederp Well yes and no... We create the world we experience. However, its not to say that the world will stop experiecing itself once we leave.. We are simply the most powerful creators of our world. However, the universe has more than one way to experience itself other than humans.
Hadn't even heard of Deepak Chopra until I saw Finding Joe, now I can't get enough. He is a brilliant man with a wonderful mind. He plays a pretty major role in Finding Joe, if you haven't seen it: bitly .com/syDsZQ
Is the glass half empty, or half full, or somewhere in between?
Is the default position of science, that something exists, or that it does not exist?
A moderate approach would suggest that, although one may not observe a certain phenomenon in their life time, potentiality and possibility suggest that said phenomenon may exist.
What is the halfway point between no, and yes> Maybe... Maybe is the objective and moderate approach of the open minded thinking man and woman.
any model attempting to explain the universe has to include consciousness and the nervous system because that is the instrument by which we are making our theories. Like whether electrons travel in waves or particles, it all depends on what we are using at the time to observe. Leaving consciousness out of the equation goes against the basic ideas of quantum mechanics.
To share the Earth in cooperation for all generations to come, A MONEYLESS,CLASSLESS,STATELESS communities of humanity expressing our multitude of creative energies in harmony and wisdom, The current world socio-economic minority imposition is the negation and alienation of our common humanity Capitalism in corporate or state modality is the tyranical rule of RULING ELITE . The awakening is inevitable, the revolution a must
@DrFruedienslip One should examine all philosophical statements to see that nothing is truly being achieved' No one can teach anyone anything that they dont already know and simply do not know how to articulate; One cannot learn anything within simply any memorization, anyhing true has any stay in residence' What does it mean to be intuitive?
The only reason any quest within quantum mechanics exists is due to any and all existential subjectivity' its not what one knows its how ones knows anything' QM is all about explaining as much as possible within questioning what is and what can be, and where its all going, pop growth is only leading to our final destruction, if you dont know that you have no concept of why defining reality is so significant and crusual within preserving the earth and its resourses because there is no goal'
@sidewaysfcs0718 There is no such thing as spiritual' its called intelligent construal; Which is actually knowing what one experiences within any and all articulation within any physics within any exemplification; On another note I know who wrote the good book and that Jesus is a fraud, and im not going to tell you who it was about, the word science is within the word conscience for a reason, if one does not know any origins to words ones knows very little' they dont teach this is any school'
@sidewaysfcs0718 it is likely better to be known as any agnostic, I agree that one cannot know what one simply cannot construal, anything which can and does exist can be and might be exeplified in order to alieviate any question within anything which can or does exist. This actually has much to do within one might consider as any and all existential experiences, which has a great deal to do with any and all ability within actually knowing and considering any and all experiences. Existentialism'
Well if he's dead, he can't spin in his grave can he?. And even if people are mixing science with spiritual bullshit, who really cares. I mean, since consciousness is a byproduct of the brain, we're all gonna be lifeless pieces of meat someday, so what's the worse they could do, send us back to dark ages? :)
I was trying to make a point to the materialists who tend to believe that even suggesting that there might be a consciousness that supersedes death is dangerous. I really don't know for sure if consciousness is or is not a byproduct of the brain, but some of my own life experiences I have had make me lean towards the probability that fundamentally, consciousness is not a byproduct of the brain but supersedes the macro physical.
@rephaim23 "I really don't know for sure if consciousness is or is not a byproduct of the brain"
Try smashing your physical brain with a brick and let me know if you're still conscious. Or, more realistically, wait until you have a stroke in various regions of the brain known to correlate with various cognitive faculties, and observe how those same faculties are impaired. Simples.
Just remember everything you think you know you've in fact learned from a book written by someone who thinks they know from reading a book written by someone who thought he knew.
Does electron have consciousness ? Molecular biology and molecular evolution Cosmology and cosmic evolution If Universe evolves can electron evolve too? Does evolution of life begin on electron’s level? Origin of life is a result of physical laws that govern Universe. Electron takes important part in this work Question Why does the simplest particle - electron have six formulas: E=h*f, e = +ah*c , e = -ah*c, +E=Mc^2, -E=Mc^2, E= ∞ ? Electron is not as simple as we think
Does electron have consciousness ? Molecular biology and molecular evolution Cosmology and cosmic evolution If Universe evolves can electron evolve too? Does evolution of life begin on electron’s level? Origin of life is a result of physical laws that govern Universe. Electron takes important part in this work Question Why does the simplest particle - electron have six formulas: E=h*f, e = +ah*c , e = -ah*c, +E=Mc^2, -E=Mc^2, E= ∞ ? Electron is not as simple as we think
Mr. Deepak Chopra, You sir, are retarded. Nothing in physics insists in ANY way of a consciousness being a necessity to the beginning (if there was one) of our Universe. How do we see color and hear sound? Do you know any physics at all? You, like many, do not understand quantum mechanics but you decided to explain it as a whole. Real physicists don't respect you.
@dancingwithcalvin What are you? Crazy? If matter makes the brain and the brain creates consciousness than obviously matter creates consciousness. I really hope that was a bad joke because if it isn't then you know NOTHING about physics and you need to try other things that'll match your personality... Like voodoo. How about you define how consciousness supposedly creates matter. How ignorant.
Deepak chopra why are you making westerners fool with your twisted eastern mythology?
why are you in america? why are you not in himalya getting busy enlightened?
or are you one those indians who can trade their left nut to fuck a white girl ?
last thing unless you are a major in physics dont talk about quantum physics. i think you also spend time on youtube watching q. mechanics videos like me.
somewhat sad the level of knowing in our society but that is as far as i will go as i am practicing to detach from judging myself its all love, peace to all of you.
Why does he think everything is consciousness when clearly, a non-living object like a paving slab is not conscious that I'm treading on it? Also, have the findings of the double slit experiment been proven to not to occur at the macroscopic level?
@itsonelouder1 the same way that a person under anesthetic is unaware that his leg is being cut off,he is still a conscious Being,but asleep,the concrete slab is likewise "asleep" ? consciousness needs a living body to know itself.
There have been studies on the effects of intent on the outcome of a random result.
One study had ball bearings falling into one of a few chambers at random. When no one watched it, the results were truly random. When someone watched it and were told to focus on one of the chambers, more ball bearings fell into the selected chamber.
This shows some sort of large scale effect due to intention. There are other experiments like this as well w/ similar results - we do something.
@dancingwithcalvin This is what quantum rape looks like. This isn't science in the least.- and this video is about as complicated at a multiple choice test.-- This man doesn't know anything. Nor his followers.
Well actually since most ph6sicist stillknow almost nothing about quantum nature, and know absolutely nothing about consciousness, but plenty of religious text all over the world seem to meld the too, I say its a rational conclusion to entertain and, its what the evidence points to.
@dancingwithcalvin There is no evidence to point toward what you see as a connection between the fundamental forces of nature and our consciousness. All religious texts are based on faith which in its definition faces away from deduction and research. You're a lost cause and aren't worth my time. I'd say for you to watch lectures by Leonard Susskind on quantum entanglement or things of this videos nature, but you will not understand any of it. Thanks.
@dancingwithcalvin And i mean Susskind's videos, not videos like these. Videos like these dumb you down. --In fact, watch a debate with Deepak called "The future of god" << you'll see a man in red eventually and you should listen to THAT man.
Wow " lost cause...aren't worth my time" hey lets try to NOT act like an insecure school girl ok? No, not all religious text are based on faith, or else it would be made up. They are all based on mystical experiences. Ive watched all of Leonard Susskind and his Stanford videos, and I am very keen on he and Michio Kaku, and all of what the string theorist say. Non of anything they say contradicts the theory I have of consciousness, in fact allot of it falls right in line.
@dancingwithcalvin OK, what's your "theory" of consciousness? How does it all fit in? Is it as crazy as this mans conception of reality? Yes, I said you were a waste of my time because of ridiculous phrases like this, "Obviously consciousness makes matter, or else the brain (which is simply matter) would not be able to become conscious." Unless that was a real bad joke, you don't understand reality and how the brain works. We have brains, brains create consciousness. Matter exists without us.
@aqouby One; There is no motion picture of reality which assumes that there is some full accounting for everthing which takes place within the same perpetual moment' move st impressions for any unilateral sense of relality are based within any and all selective memorializations predicated within any measure of successes and failures' its simply an extremely convoluted conversation which relates more within exemplifying any and all metaphysical cause and effects which can and does exemplify any'
@DrFruedienslip What? well there is a motion picture of reality actually, it's called physics. Physics holds laws which work in any part of our Universe and hence are Universal. This shows our knowledge of reality as a constant. Any other sense of reality that we cannot bare, we use mathematics to help define the situation, and through mathematics can we learn even more then we could through observation. I don't know who you are, but you're no doctor of science.
@aqouby First of all there are no laws of physics, there are only principles, secondly give me any example within how you have defined reality using only mathematics without using any observation; reality hs two kinds; Any physical observation and the metaphysical which determines any and allconsequencial cause and effect; there are individual reality tunnels and then all else which is taking place which is simply toomuch to keeptrack ofall atonce, What didnt you get? Thereis nocamera inthe sky
@DrFruedienslip How about gravity and electromagnetism-- This is ridiculous, how can you be so arrogant as to claim that quantum mechanics includes the metaphysical when it indeed does not. You're uneducated about the fundamental laws of physics. Yeah, and I said LAWS because they are Universal LAWS.
@aqouby You know little regarding what quantum mechanics was intended to establish because you have not learned enough regarding the origins to language which has everything to do with quantum mechanics; you seem to be a bit defensive; why is that? Any intent within QM would be in regard within defining any and all intelligence or physical truths, within which to establish anything physical within the principles of our universe. There is no law, what does Law assume but any intent of control
@DrFruedienslip You're incorrect. Knowledge of quantum mechanics doesn't come from the english language. You have no understanding of physics. I'm not going to waste time on you. You'd think for someone with a Dr in front of their name would know something.
It has come to my understanding, that when under the influence of LSD. One feels a connection with everything else. There is a euphoric like feeling one singularity. I think LSD as an expression of quantum physics.
I'm not asserting that those theories are true but I'm trying to explain that there is something common amongst them. I'm doing here like the commercial on tv: The points of view expressed in my comments are not necessarily my point of view and I don't take responsibility for them. It's just very interesting that those knowledges or theories are very interconnected to each other. You got my point fellas. Ah and no hate for nobody. My sincere respect for all the people who commented on this topic
Just read and respectfully look for the correlation of the Binary systems with the ancient IFA Oracle from Africa (which was taken by the Egyptians to Nigeria) with the modern Binary Computer Syst , the Cellular Automata, Clifford Algebras, The 8-Dimension Hypercube, Franklin Squares, The Std Model of Gravity, Quantum Physics, Kabbalah, Tarot, I-Ching, The Multi-Dimension Theory, Lie Algebra, Physical Interpretation of E-Lattices, The 4 Dimmensions of Internal Symmetry and 10^18 brain tubulins.
And please be respectful of others comments and believings since this topic pretty much is like the same topic discussions phylosophers, mathematicians, physicists, investigators, clergy and many other people of science and religion have try to understand since the beggining of times. I know for a fact that many religious people are going to understand it or at least accept it.
Some people call this bullshit but the fact is that there are theories developed by scientists and investigators and mathematically proved that the Universe has Conscience. It's very difficult to explain without the calculations and knowledge but apparently Religion has been right about the most important phylosophical point of our existence. There is a Creator or at least a Mind that conciously directed everything from the begginning till the end.
It only means that matter can store and transmit data..we already know that...my camera does pretty much the same thing. But this has nothing to do with what David Chalmers calls the "hard problem" of consciousness, i.e. why those processes give rise to qualitative et subjective experiences. Matter, or at least it's known properties, will never suffice to explain that! Consciousness HAS to be fundamental, it's the ground of all being.
Wow, none of that is true. Has he never heard of the cochlear implant or brain-computer interface technology? Heck, 10 years ago, scientists in Berkley were able to decode neural firing in the lateral geniculate nucleus of a cat and produce a computer image of what the cat saw.
Also, why tie the whole everything is energy idea with quantum mechanics? Is thermodynamics not good enough for him? After all, there's thermal energy in all matter with a temperature above above absolute zero.
Metarotica, do you think it's possible to build a metal structure with only pieces of wood? If you don't (and I certainly hope you don't), I suggest you forget about consciousness and subjectivity arising from a purely objective and non conscious substrat (matter that is), because it's exactly the same logical problem. Consciousness HAS to be a non reducible, and fondamental property of the universe. There's no logical way to fill the gap between the objective and the subjective.
@trakomako You have no idea of what you are talking about. This relativism that claims that there are no better ways of approaching reality, making all equally valid, is pure nonsense.The refuge for ignorance. Science allows us to go beyond any other view of the universe, in all its beauty and awe. And it does so without having faith in any particular idea. As Dawkins said, Science is the poetry of nature. Please make the effort of honestly approaching true science. It's a real adventure.
This is the usual blah blah blah that Chopra makes so well. There is absolutely no substance in what he says. There is no quantum mechanical basis for his babbling on consciousness. Science is advancing quite rapidly on this area and, although we are still far from understanding it, we try to approach the problem seriously, not from a religious, biased and irrational perspective. Please stop pretending you know anything on quantum physics. YOU DO NOT.
@parkerjwill Just a little, mainly what I studied at university: Quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, quantum statistical mechanics and a wide range of topics where we applied QM to astrophysics (mainly stellar interiors and massice objects), solid state physics and nuclear physics too. And over the years (since then) I've been very much interested on its implications and how it can be extended in different directions. Nothing to do with consciousness.
What is this on and off at the speed of light idea? I've never heard this before.
The Vedic literature's contain information on the Absolute Truth. All these things scientists are re-discovering, all this stuff about consciousness being primordial/fundamental, has been in the Vedic texts since their creation. Humans were more advanced in times past. Don't fall for the non-sense propaganda of mainstream science. Mainstream ANYTHING is for the sheeple. Bhaaaaa!!
@parkerjwill Scientists are not "rediscovering" in the Vedic literature nor in any other written nonsense superstition. Science is truly enlightening us and making philosophy more and more far from the big questions. There is no such a thing as "Absolute truth" except of course for the fanatics. Read a bit or real physics and you might get astonished of how much of the beauty of the universe can be understood (and how much is missing). Hope that Chopra shuts up some time.
@parkerjwill Ther si no such a thing as "the most sophisticated language". Please read a little on language structure and you'll find out (a well known fact) that all languages, from Amazonian tribes to most modern,
are equally complex. Don't be pretentious and invent such nonsense. Don't you have enough with quantum mechanics misinterpretation?
"What makes Sanskrit compatible to computer softwares is its extremely well structured form with finer distinction of vowels and consonants based on pronunciation. That has been endorsed by NASA, which has said that the world’s oldest spiritual language is the only unambiguous spoken language on the planet."
You may have lots of schooling (not real education but societal training for your mind) but you have no common sense, which is the ground for all scientific thought.
@parkerjwill Poor of me, poor education, such a closed mind. Oh boy, thanks for opening my mind. But be careful with yours, as someone said, "If you open your mind too much, your brain will fall out" (it's a joke, please don't reply offended and saying that the brain cannot fall). I see you don't wantto understand. Different languages have different properties, which can be measured. That don't make them "better" than other nor "more perfect". Do you (want to) see my point? Go and meditate!
cmzuppe, I would like you to prove to everyone that reality really does exist "out there" independant of our minds. You will find this impossible because there is no real way to look at reality objectively, its simply a collection of subjective observations. In fact based on the copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, the act of measuring/observing a particle (or anything made up of particles) actually settles the particles "wave function" into a definable state.
@trakomako what it comes down to is the capacity for critical thought -
The truth may be stranger than we can currently even conceptualise within our present thought structures which are governed by and reflected in language. What if we had to invent a whole new language just to make these things vaguely understandable?
Like rewriting the code for a computer programme, without the new "language" the programme wont run.
I might not saying thats necessarily wholly true, but maybe partly true ;)
@trakomako does it have to be just one or the other? only "human standpoint" or "God"? Religion OR Science? Is there a possibility that neither present useful working models of reality? Or that both do? Maybe some elements of some religions do? Maybe some elements of some scientific theories do? I'm not sure much is gained by striving for conclusions for their own sake. What about keeping an open mind and accepting mystery whilst being scientific and objective :) They are just thoughts.
@trakomako actually through observation they percieve a possible working model of reality and try to disprove that it does NOT work to within a certain statistical probability - they dont "make up" a theory and "try to prove it" at all - that is NOT scientific method. Scientific method is disproving a negative hypothesis which is the inverse of what you (and many others to be fair to you) think happens and it is much harder, much more rigourous than "proving a positive hypothesis". Google it :)
just like marko rodins vortex math. everything is a positive/negative with the emanation of the energy in between. the world and experience we exist in is a binary triplet. now we can see that other people are beginning to discover the same thing, just in different places. more people discovering the pos and neg and energy from the center, will bring us closer to a more profound understanding of this place we occupy
To arzoyan. I like what you said. You just verbalized what I have thought many times over. I know see why Marxism is attractive. However, it takes Yoga philosophy to to humanize Marxism.
Capitalism is the historic evolution of private property relationship of alienation,exploitation and suffering of humanity in a modality of commodity production for abstract process of capital accumulation and concentration . A system of wage slavery in a MARKET system of suppression and dehumanistion. We need to transcend this false limits to our creative cooperative energies for a moneyless,classless,stateless communities of humanity expressing our energies in freedom of being.
"...make up a theory and try to prove it... imagine it."
In order for a theory to be accepted as part of science it has to make testable experimental predictions and withstand rigorous pier review and scientific scrutiny. If it fails, out the window it goes and the author who invested a lot of time and work has to reluctantly let it go. Science ain't about being superficially familiar with the subject, deliberately misinterpreting it and mouth-farting to those who understand even less
Mayans sacrificed humans to bring the sun back but to claim that the fact that so many of them held that to be reasonable made it so would be argument from majority. Reality ain't relative. The rocks in space would still be there even if our conscious minds never came into being to recognize and agree upon their existence. We can't each have our own version of reality any more than 2+2 can equal to 4 for some and 5 for others. Please set your reservations aside and watch those videos.
I'm sincerely sorry to offend a figure you seem to have such admiration for but this guy is completely clueless, with merely tourist amounts of pseudo-knowledge to only impress a lay person. To be fair, in contrast to the Peter Popoffs of the world, he is relatively harmless. Nonetheless, his intellectual dishonesty must be pointed out! I'd recommend a documentary called "Enemies of Reason" (should be on Google video) as well as this interview with Dr. Vic Stenger: watch?v=Ayst78EjjS0
there are 3 standards of truth, starting with highest:
1-self evident truth, which are THAT: we are, we feel, we percieve. these MUST be 100% true.
2-WHAT we feel, because truth is based on honesty, not the other way around.
3-WHAT we percieve. This is where the scientific method comes in, with well established and tested scientific theory being the highest in this category.
A moneyless,classless,stateless communities of humanity expressing our freedom in creative harmonious cooperation for a world that is so POTENTIALLY AND ACTUALLY nourishing. Capitalism in any form, Statist or Corporatist is the denial of our common humanity in a politically manipulated,tyrannical armed MARKET SYSYTEM of artificial scarcity that is designed to perpetuate the enslavement of immense humanity for material interest of the criminal ruling elite.
@elfunkeado@elfunkeado Obviously you haven't read any of the recent comments. He is not "illuminated", and he has not helped you to "understand". In fact not only do you now not "understand" but you are now even more ignorant in regards to QM than had you not even watched the video. Not only has he not informed you of anything but he has misinformed you.
No, the child is not aware that I am speculating, just like the example of our unsuspecting friends here who are being treacherously deluded by the speculation of this man. As for the last part of your comment, there is a difference between a theory and a scientific theory. A a theory as in a guess or an idealistic presumption (which this man is an expert on) differs from a scientific theory which is supported by evidence.
@Hipster420 just because we are the dynamic force between our atoms as opposed to the atoms themselves doesnt mean we can control reality like doctor mahattan out of the Watchmen movie.
Having said that, we can change reality just by being more aware of how things are.
we have 8 'circuits' or systems of thought, popularised by Dr Tim Leary nd Robert Anton Wilson, takn from ancient knowledge including vedic chakra system and teutonic pre roman stuff.
You see this is "new age" distortion. So much of this is true regarding the mechanics of the holographic theory but we dont CREATE the physical world we simply EXPERIENCE it differently. Yes you can bring different experiences into you life by changing your thoughts and perception but you are not reordering or recreating the physical world, your mind is simply accessing parts of it, it previously was unable to decode. e.g.you could see more visible light but you haven't made the world lighter.
I'm curious as to whether Chopra has actually managed to convince himself of the bull that he goes on about. There is simply no solid natural mechanism to anything he says. His entire discourse is nothing more than unfounded new-age assumptions, none of which are connected together by any discernable mechanism, interspersed by some extremely inaccurate portrayals of quantum physics. This is nothing less than utter ignorance of science and its methodology.
@Metarotica He is not bullshitting at all. Although, his credibility is low because he is talking about quantum physics and has no degree in physics. He is talking about 2 types of universe, the String Theorist universe (M-Theory) and the Holographic universe. M-Theory is a very well respected theory developed by Edward Wittan, who is considered the predecessor of Einstein. It solves the source of all types of energy, Gravity, Electromagnetic, Weak and Strong force.
The holographic universe that Chopra is talking is a theory that the universe is actually flat (2 dimensional) and the other dimensions that our mind creates is reality. The holographic theory is not widely accepted by physicist, only some aspects. Although M-Theory is widely accepted as true. The problem is it is very difficult to prove it because "Strings", that make up all forces is extremely small. It is the size of a tree relative to our entire solar system. Read about it.
@youngstunna79 I'm well aware of what M-theory is, although Chopra makes no allusion to it, nor does he make any specific reference to there existing only 2 dimensions of space with our mind filling in the rest. I'm not overly familiar with the holographic principle, so I'm not going to try and rebut anything there. The main fault I am referring to is Chopra's assumption that the "discontinuities" of the universe (presumably he's referring to quantisation) give rise to consciousness.
@youngstunna79 He then attempts to extrapolate this to "the universe existing within us". Again, he gives no mechanism for it, and true to the new age "science" he is pioneering there's no evidence for it either. Physics works on what is mathematically necessitated by the fundamental models considered. Chopra has a model, but no mechanisms with which to extrapolate this to the effects he describes. From my understanding of quantum mechanics I would say the model itself is ungrounded also.
@Hipster420 If speculate that the earth's core is made of marshmallow, and then tell my child that the earth's core is made of marshmallow, is that informing him or misinforming him?
@FightThePrograming There's a difference..Is the child is aware that what you are saying is speculation? Or are you stating your speculation as a proven fact? Speculation and theory are exactly that and are not intended to be taken as fact.
@Hipster420 I think the discrepancy that needs to be exposed here is that there is a huge difference between outright woo woo (thanks Shermer) that sounds scientific and actual science. To realise this one needs to be at least a little knowledgeable of the quantitative aspect of quantum mechanics and one also needs to know how science ACTUALLY WORKS. Unfortunately most people can't see this difference; to them, this is as good as real science.
My thoughts exactly. The "Likes/Dislikes" ratio of this video really worries me as do comments like "Deepak you are really illuminated! thanks for explaning us in an easy way to understand all this things."
@Hipster420 yes you can but only if the speculation is interpreted as fact the part of the speculator is mereley that....to speculate. the listner must decide if said speculation is intellectual and fact based or a bunch of biased stabs in the dark
@Metarotica No I dont think he has and the evidence for this is the way he completely failed to defend himself when confronted by Dawkins. I was a Chopra fan up until that point. Dawkins didnt even ask him any particularly challenging questions, and Chopras defence was "quantum physics provides an interesting metaphor" - hang on... when in any material, including this peice does Chopra qualify the Quantum Babble with "this is just a metaphor" he doesnt! he presents it as fact.
@Metarotica i see this statement made over and over again...yet i don't see anyone retorting any statements he makes about quantum physics with real facts, why don't you enlighten us then
@cmzuppe I would love to. He claims that reality is made up of discontinuities; "on" and "off". This is a reference to the quantization of energy into discrete "packets" (eg the photon, electron and so on) hence "quantum" physics. Chopra makes the mistake (completely contrary to what quantum mechanics actually says) of thinking that within the "off", ie an absence of a quanta, there lies consciousness. This is simply crap-talk. Like thinking consciousness lies between balls on a tennis court.
@cmzuppe Further, he claims that "not all scientists accept" his "quantum mechanical model". This is an understatement. I know of no physicists who accept this "model", purely because it is only speculation. There is not even the theoretical backing of rigorous mathematics that physics is so accurate for, let alone empirical observations as support. There is no "new paradigm" in science; science is science, substantiated by evidence and butressed by the scientific method.
@cmzuppe Chopra goes on to claim that "we create the physical world when we perceive it". This is true in a sense: what we see is a model of reality constructed by our brains because that model was helpful in our survival during our evolution. He is incorrect in thinking though, that the physical world is then "in" us, in any literal sense. It seems to be a misconstruing of the double slit experiment, which has its roots in quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg principle.
@cmzuppe As far as mathematical framework and empirical evidence is concerned, reality exists independently of the models we conceive of it in our minds. This is why common sense is so wildly inaccurate in modern physics in general, and in quantum mechanics in particular. The theory is unfalsifiable, not backed by any mathematics, and as far as I know makes no predictions from which evidential support can be tested for. This is not science, but utter crap-talk. Unreliable, in a word.
@Metarotica - just scanned your comments. you guys know very little and that may be a very dangerous thing when combined with your apparent arrogance. you wouldn't know the math or the evidence if it slapped you in the face if your comments are anything to go by. do yourselves a favour and exercise a bit of humility, reserve your judgement until both your knowledge base and your ability to comprehend develops beyond the infantile
@Metarotica - Have you ever tried to explain non linear math to a dog? Prove to me that you are able to think laterally with an open mind and I may consider making an effort. If you understand this comment there may be hope, but if you take offence then what can I say?
@llirrb The ad hominem isn't necessary. I am currently doing a double degree in mathematics and physics and I would consider myself capable of understanding at least some of what you can throw at me, and if not I can go further and look it up anyway. I am curious as to how non-linear mathematics applies to quantum mechanics. My experiences with it so far have been as an extension of linear algebra in the Hilbert space. May I also ask what your background in this is? Just out of curiosity.
@Metarotica If I had said, "unlike you I am not young enough to know everything" your answer may have been justified.
Your contextual interpretation of the discourse leaves a lot to be desired, but perhaps I am being unkind due to your garrulous and ill informed attack on a worthy friend.
You will do yourself an enormous favour if you reserve judgement, always leave the door of your mind open to new possibilities and trust also of course that abductive reasoning has its limitations. Good Luc
@llirrb I was interpreting Chopra's ideas in the context of quantum mechanics, which, considering that's what this is ultimately about, seems reasonable. I am open to learning more about it provided that it has at least theoretical support to back it up, and I just haven't seen any from either Chopra nor any other proponents of these ideas and so I dismiss the idea. Simple conservative logic. If there is some evidence or theory I am missing which necessitates this idea, then please let me know.
@llirrb If you have told one lie, that makes you a liar. If you have stolen one thing, that makes you a thief. JESUS said; if you look at a person with lust, you commit adultery in your heart! Ever used GOD's name in vain; then you are a blasphemer and can't enter heaven! Revelation 21v8 says; "All liars will have their part in the lake of fire!" The bible says; No thief or adulterer will inherit heaven! You broke GOD's laws; but JESUS paid your fine! Repent, and trust the Savior!
@llirrb Quantum Mechanics has many parts' the physical and the metaphysical' what is the point within any exemplification if no one sees what anyone is attempting to acknowledge? Its not mathematics but any logical exemplification within any and all actual intelligence, or rather any and all true physical associations. its simply too vast a subject to exemplfy within which all would agree; unless exemplified within bits and pieces which make sense within the physics of any linguistical merit.
@1nevitability I would love if you could correct any mistakes I have made. I am really quite open, provided that the topic in question is reasonable to me.
@Metarotica You can find a comprehensive model of consciousness based on string theory and experience, on Amazon: "A Matter of Mind: Exploring the 11Dimensional Cosmos" As far as I can see Chopra's thoughts are in line with the model in that book.
@olavdr Thankyou. A truly helpful reply. Is the author an expert? I know almost nothing of string theory myself but theoretically at least it seems promising. Thanks.
@Metarotica I think he may know just a bit more about this subject matter than you do. You just made yourself look completely ignorant. Know your place.
Be aware, Chopra's work is to promote a fundamentalist-Hindu cult: Transcendental Meditation. This is their agenda: at the wiki site mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/leak/tm-governor-course-2005.pdf. Google the query on Deepak Chopra+Transcendental+Meditation and see for yourself. Just saying, not all as as it is dressed.
To put it simply, what he's saying is that there is an objective world and a subjective world and that the objective world cannot exist with the subjective (conscious) awareness of it. I can agree with that. But if he tries telling us that through mere conscious awareness we can alter the physical world I'd say he's going to far. Stand outside in a snowstorm naked and try to convince yourself that it's not cold outside and find this out the hard way.
@9samten Can you please enlighten us on all the things that Chopra knows nothing about? Not that I doubt your understanding of these matters, I just find it curious that you seem so confident that Chopra knows nothing of Quantum physics and consciousness. This causes me to assume that you yourself have the answers that Chopra appears to be ignorant of. Can you please explain your statement?
@S3raph02 I also agree that Chopra is a fool when it comes to quantum mechanics. Saying that you should have the answers to questions Chopra cannot answer before you start correcting him is idiotic. The point is that Chopra associates God with quantum mechanics. He also talks about quantum healing. All the things where he adds the name 'quantum' to, are bullshit, because they have no scientific basis. There hasn't been a single rational scientist who found proof for a quantum field.
@FearThisChannel Chopra's "God" is consciousness. Anyone who knows anything about Chopra understands exactly where he is coming from with this clip. He never claims to be a scientist, or to have all the answers. If you approach this clip without a knee deep perspective in scientific materialism, this clip will make much more sense. Do I agree with everything he says? No. Do I disagree with everything he says? No. I'm open minded and skeptical. Also, rational is nothing more than a state of mind.
@S3raph02 Listen, I don't really care what Chopra says, but what concerns me is that he claims that things like "the quantum field" are real and proven by scientists. That's what Chopra is wrong about.
@FearThisChannel Unless you understand the perspective that Chopra is speaking from, there is no point in continuing this argument. Everything he says in this video clip has valid reasoning behind it. If you don't really care what he says, there is truly no point in arguing further. I would suggest looking at quantum mechanics from an entirely philosophical point of view if this stuff even remotely interests you. If not, have fun with your current materialistic viewpoint.
@S3raph02 You either don't WANT to understand what I mean, or else you're just ignorant. For the last time, he may say WHATEVER he wants about quantum mechanics. He may say that this and that is God and that we are all conscious beings that are not really our bodies, fine! But what bothers me is that he says that the things HE claims are PROVEN BY SCIENTISTS. I hope you finally got the point.
By the way, I'm not materialistic. And even if I were, you have no reason to judge me about that.
@deskset24 Haha, exactly. You just put the name "quantum" before anything and it's science, peer-reviewed without doubt. That's the problem with Chopra. Quantum self, quantum consciousness, quantum healing, quantum god, quantum anomalies, quantum touch, quantum ego.
No wonder he won the lg- Prize for quantum foolishness!
@FearThisChannel First: yeah, yeah. I know I'm posting anonymously on YouTube - not exactly peer-reviewed forum with real names - so I could be lying like crazy.
Anyway, my area of expertise was in one tiny little subarea (differential resolvents) of an even smaller subarea (differential algebra) of mathematics.
Given any polynomial P(t) in t over a differential field - sorry, I can't type math here - that means, the coefficients of the powers of t are themselves differentiable functions
@deskset24 No, dude, I'm not skeptical at all. I know you could be a liar, but I don't believe that. If you can tell me what you've found out, than I can check it and see whether there's some logic in it.
@FearThisChannel .. of some other variable, say, x, compute the smallest-order linear differential equation (the order of the DE will be less than the degree of P(t) in an efficient manner.
Actually, I'll stop here and send you a private message.
@S3raph02 Tell it yourself: how are you so sure that Chopra know a lot about quantum mechanics? Has he done research?
Dude, this guy read books like The Dancing Wu-li masters and The Tao of Physics! If you are seriously doing this, you mustn't read those. In that case, you better read books written by serious scientists.
I suggest you have a shot at Robert Park's "Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolisness to Fraud." If you read that, you will understand exactly why I don't trust Chopra.
@FearThisChannel I understand perfectly what you are saying. I think it is you that doesn't understand me. I really, really, really don't feel like arguing with you if you don't understand what this clip is really about. There are hundreds of thousands of scientists in the world, I was unaware Chopra would have to check in with you to decide if they were credible or not. Just because something isn't posted in a scientific journal doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
@S3raph02 I also want to add that you're hypocritical. You accuse me of being arrogant and needlessly critical. First of all, you're the one who is arrogant, because you're the one trying to debunk me and trying to show how Chopra is right.
Secondly, you're exaggerating. Scientists, and especially serious scientists, are a rarity. On top of that it doesn't even have to mean that every single one of them has the ability to find evidence and put them in journals.
@FearThisChannel There are plenty of scientists who have done work in this field. I'm going to already assume that you will say they are ignorant fringe scientists whose opinions don't really matter in the scientific community. You are more than welcome to have that opinion. I suggest you look up people like Dean Radin, Dr. William Tiller, and Tom Campbell. You need to open your mind before you become so needlessly critical and arrogant with your opinion.
love the work here
simysimss 1 day ago
Quantum physics is all about uncertainty. The quantum state of a system cannot be accurately measured (superposition of possibilities) but when we observe things, their wave function collapses and one possibility is manifested as reality. This reality is a manifestaion of fundemental particles interacting by the mean of fundamental forces at a certain speed (discontinous). The theory that counsciousness is the link between potential and reality is seriously studies by a lot of great scientists.
JayMark2049 6 days ago
Quantum physics is all about uncertainty. The quantum state of a system cannot be accurately measured (superposition of possibilities) but when we observe things, their wave function collapses and one possibility is manifested as reality. This reality is a manifestaion of fundemental particles interacting by the mean of fundamental forces at a certain speed (discontinous). The theory that counsciousness is the link between potential and reality is seriously studies by a lot of great scientists.
JayMark2049 6 days ago
i enjoyed this vid
alexasmithy 1 week ago
Deepak Chopra = garbage in, garbage out.
hawkinscraig05 2 weeks ago
@hawkinscraig05 wats sad is how he became rich being total garbage.
fthis1234567 1 week ago
would you have to say then, that if we were not here then the physical world would not be here? if we create it then its existence is entirely dependent on our existence?
MrDerpdeederp 3 weeks ago
@MrDerpdeederp Well yes and no... We create the world we experience. However, its not to say that the world will stop experiecing itself once we leave.. We are simply the most powerful creators of our world. However, the universe has more than one way to experience itself other than humans.
BomaBoi 2 weeks ago
Hadn't even heard of Deepak Chopra until I saw Finding Joe, now I can't get enough. He is a brilliant man with a wonderful mind. He plays a pretty major role in Finding Joe, if you haven't seen it: bitly .com/syDsZQ
FrandyAncis 3 weeks ago
Oh no, no he didn't. Did he just drop the Q bomb?
MrHumphreyDavy 1 month ago
Is the glass half empty, or half full, or somewhere in between?
Is the default position of science, that something exists, or that it does not exist?
A moderate approach would suggest that, although one may not observe a certain phenomenon in their life time, potentiality and possibility suggest that said phenomenon may exist.
What is the halfway point between no, and yes> Maybe... Maybe is the objective and moderate approach of the open minded thinking man and woman.
rephaim23 2 months ago
any model attempting to explain the universe has to include consciousness and the nervous system because that is the instrument by which we are making our theories. Like whether electrons travel in waves or particles, it all depends on what we are using at the time to observe. Leaving consciousness out of the equation goes against the basic ideas of quantum mechanics.
hailerisnpraisebob 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
To share the Earth in cooperation for all generations to come, A MONEYLESS,CLASSLESS,STATELESS communities of humanity expressing our multitude of creative energies in harmony and wisdom, The current world socio-economic minority imposition is the negation and alienation of our common humanity Capitalism in corporate or state modality is the tyranical rule of RULING ELITE . The awakening is inevitable, the revolution a must
arzoyan 3 months ago
Human Nature is the only science of man; and yet has been hitherto the most neglected.
~David Hume
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip One should examine all philosophical statements to see that nothing is truly being achieved' No one can teach anyone anything that they dont already know and simply do not know how to articulate; One cannot learn anything within simply any memorization, anyhing true has any stay in residence' What does it mean to be intuitive?
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
The only reason any quest within quantum mechanics exists is due to any and all existential subjectivity' its not what one knows its how ones knows anything' QM is all about explaining as much as possible within questioning what is and what can be, and where its all going, pop growth is only leading to our final destruction, if you dont know that you have no concept of why defining reality is so significant and crusual within preserving the earth and its resourses because there is no goal'
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
this man understands SHIT about quamtum mechanics ...lol .....
Richard Feynman would turn in his fucking grave if he saw how ppl are mixing science with spiritual bullshit.
sidewaysfcs0718 3 months ago
@sidewaysfcs0718 Fuckin' damn straight. They're lucky Hawking can't walk because if he could move his legs, he'd be KICKING SOME ASS.
aqouby 3 months ago
Comment removed
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@sidewaysfcs0718 There is no such thing as spiritual' its called intelligent construal; Which is actually knowing what one experiences within any and all articulation within any physics within any exemplification; On another note I know who wrote the good book and that Jesus is a fraud, and im not going to tell you who it was about, the word science is within the word conscience for a reason, if one does not know any origins to words ones knows very little' they dont teach this is any school'
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip did i mention i am an atheist? i dont believe in anything that isnt logical or proven.
quantum mechanics has nothing to do with the mumbo jumbo in this clip ...
sidewaysfcs0718 3 months ago
@sidewaysfcs0718 it is likely better to be known as any agnostic, I agree that one cannot know what one simply cannot construal, anything which can and does exist can be and might be exeplified in order to alieviate any question within anything which can or does exist. This actually has much to do within one might consider as any and all existential experiences, which has a great deal to do with any and all ability within actually knowing and considering any and all experiences. Existentialism'
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@sidewaysfcs0718
Well if he's dead, he can't spin in his grave can he?. And even if people are mixing science with spiritual bullshit, who really cares. I mean, since consciousness is a byproduct of the brain, we're all gonna be lifeless pieces of meat someday, so what's the worse they could do, send us back to dark ages? :)
rephaim23 3 months ago
@rephaim23
"consciousness is a byproduct of the brain"
What is your evidence of this?
AstralEtheric 2 months ago
@AstralEtheric
I was trying to make a point to the materialists who tend to believe that even suggesting that there might be a consciousness that supersedes death is dangerous. I really don't know for sure if consciousness is or is not a byproduct of the brain, but some of my own life experiences I have had make me lean towards the probability that fundamentally, consciousness is not a byproduct of the brain but supersedes the macro physical.
rephaim23 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rephaim23 "I really don't know for sure if consciousness is or is not a byproduct of the brain"
Try smashing your physical brain with a brick and let me know if you're still conscious. Or, more realistically, wait until you have a stroke in various regions of the brain known to correlate with various cognitive faculties, and observe how those same faculties are impaired. Simples.
BlankVellum 1 month ago
@sidewaysfcs0718 science and spirituality is the same thing
sophiamiasma 2 months ago 2
Deep shit, but shit nevertheless! The ultimate charlatan, tha's what he is!
GeoCoppens 3 months ago
I actually feel dumber having had watched this video!
EXALTEDDIRT 3 months ago
Just remember everything you think you know you've in fact learned from a book written by someone who thinks they know from reading a book written by someone who thought he knew.
IIemzyII 4 months ago
hokus-pokus!!
MrMaverickOne 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
socratus1 4 months ago
socratus1 4 months ago
50 REAL physicists dislike this video.
aqouby 5 months ago
Mr. Deepak Chopra, You sir, are retarded. Nothing in physics insists in ANY way of a consciousness being a necessity to the beginning (if there was one) of our Universe. How do we see color and hear sound? Do you know any physics at all? You, like many, do not understand quantum mechanics but you decided to explain it as a whole. Real physicists don't respect you.
aqouby 5 months ago
@aqouby
BRo dont be silly. Obviously consciousness makes matter, or else the brain (which is simply matter) would not be able to become conscious.
dancingwithcalvin 5 months ago
@dancingwithcalvin What are you? Crazy? If matter makes the brain and the brain creates consciousness than obviously matter creates consciousness. I really hope that was a bad joke because if it isn't then you know NOTHING about physics and you need to try other things that'll match your personality... Like voodoo. How about you define how consciousness supposedly creates matter. How ignorant.
aqouby 5 months ago
@aqouby i hope deepak chopra eats dog shiit and dies...i can't believe this piece of shiit made so much money off his books...
fthis1234567 1 week ago
@fthis1234567 People will believe anything.
aqouby 1 week ago
Quantum is all the rage in fashionable thinking today. It is so funny to see grown men of every field trying to squeeze into quantum panty hose.
3877michael 5 months ago
A response from someone who used to adore Deepak
Search for Julia Sweeney critica a Deepak Chopra
Don't worry, it is in English and is as obvious as it is hilarious regarding Deepak's "philosophy".
mageduley 5 months ago
Deepak chopra why are you making westerners fool with your twisted eastern mythology?
why are you in america? why are you not in himalya getting busy enlightened?
or are you one those indians who can trade their left nut to fuck a white girl ?
last thing unless you are a major in physics dont talk about quantum physics. i think you also spend time on youtube watching q. mechanics videos like me.
Indian
reens79 6 months ago
this guy talking about quantum mechanics:
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH...
Disgraceful.
davidcarvalho52 6 months ago
somewhat sad the level of knowing in our society but that is as far as i will go as i am practicing to detach from judging myself its all love, peace to all of you.
soladiamante 6 months ago
Why does he think everything is consciousness when clearly, a non-living object like a paving slab is not conscious that I'm treading on it? Also, have the findings of the double slit experiment been proven to not to occur at the macroscopic level?
itsonelouder1 6 months ago
@itsonelouder1 the same way that a person under anesthetic is unaware that his leg is being cut off,he is still a conscious Being,but asleep,the concrete slab is likewise "asleep" ? consciousness needs a living body to know itself.
eaglerock999 5 months ago
@itsonelouder1
There have been studies on the effects of intent on the outcome of a random result.
One study had ball bearings falling into one of a few chambers at random. When no one watched it, the results were truly random. When someone watched it and were told to focus on one of the chambers, more ball bearings fell into the selected chamber.
This shows some sort of large scale effect due to intention. There are other experiments like this as well w/ similar results - we do something.
looncraz 5 months ago
@itsonelouder1
Its complicated.
dancingwithcalvin 5 months ago
@dancingwithcalvin This is what quantum rape looks like. This isn't science in the least.- and this video is about as complicated at a multiple choice test.-- This man doesn't know anything. Nor his followers.
aqouby 5 months ago
@aqouby
Well actually since most ph6sicist stillknow almost nothing about quantum nature, and know absolutely nothing about consciousness, but plenty of religious text all over the world seem to meld the too, I say its a rational conclusion to entertain and, its what the evidence points to.
dancingwithcalvin 5 months ago
@dancingwithcalvin There is no evidence to point toward what you see as a connection between the fundamental forces of nature and our consciousness. All religious texts are based on faith which in its definition faces away from deduction and research. You're a lost cause and aren't worth my time. I'd say for you to watch lectures by Leonard Susskind on quantum entanglement or things of this videos nature, but you will not understand any of it. Thanks.
aqouby 5 months ago
@dancingwithcalvin And i mean Susskind's videos, not videos like these. Videos like these dumb you down. --In fact, watch a debate with Deepak called "The future of god" << you'll see a man in red eventually and you should listen to THAT man.
aqouby 5 months ago
@aqouby
Wow " lost cause...aren't worth my time" hey lets try to NOT act like an insecure school girl ok? No, not all religious text are based on faith, or else it would be made up. They are all based on mystical experiences. Ive watched all of Leonard Susskind and his Stanford videos, and I am very keen on he and Michio Kaku, and all of what the string theorist say. Non of anything they say contradicts the theory I have of consciousness, in fact allot of it falls right in line.
dancingwithcalvin 5 months ago
@dancingwithcalvin OK, what's your "theory" of consciousness? How does it all fit in? Is it as crazy as this mans conception of reality? Yes, I said you were a waste of my time because of ridiculous phrases like this, "Obviously consciousness makes matter, or else the brain (which is simply matter) would not be able to become conscious." Unless that was a real bad joke, you don't understand reality and how the brain works. We have brains, brains create consciousness. Matter exists without us.
aqouby 5 months ago
@aqouby One; There is no motion picture of reality which assumes that there is some full accounting for everthing which takes place within the same perpetual moment' move st impressions for any unilateral sense of relality are based within any and all selective memorializations predicated within any measure of successes and failures' its simply an extremely convoluted conversation which relates more within exemplifying any and all metaphysical cause and effects which can and does exemplify any'
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip What? well there is a motion picture of reality actually, it's called physics. Physics holds laws which work in any part of our Universe and hence are Universal. This shows our knowledge of reality as a constant. Any other sense of reality that we cannot bare, we use mathematics to help define the situation, and through mathematics can we learn even more then we could through observation. I don't know who you are, but you're no doctor of science.
aqouby 3 months ago
@aqouby First of all there are no laws of physics, there are only principles, secondly give me any example within how you have defined reality using only mathematics without using any observation; reality hs two kinds; Any physical observation and the metaphysical which determines any and allconsequencial cause and effect; there are individual reality tunnels and then all else which is taking place which is simply toomuch to keeptrack ofall atonce, What didnt you get? Thereis nocamera inthe sky
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip How about gravity and electromagnetism-- This is ridiculous, how can you be so arrogant as to claim that quantum mechanics includes the metaphysical when it indeed does not. You're uneducated about the fundamental laws of physics. Yeah, and I said LAWS because they are Universal LAWS.
aqouby 3 months ago
@aqouby You know little regarding what quantum mechanics was intended to establish because you have not learned enough regarding the origins to language which has everything to do with quantum mechanics; you seem to be a bit defensive; why is that? Any intent within QM would be in regard within defining any and all intelligence or physical truths, within which to establish anything physical within the principles of our universe. There is no law, what does Law assume but any intent of control
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip You're incorrect. Knowledge of quantum mechanics doesn't come from the english language. You have no understanding of physics. I'm not going to waste time on you. You'd think for someone with a Dr in front of their name would know something.
aqouby 3 months ago
Read the "tell tale brain" by V.S. Ramachandran or watch the documentary "phantoms in the brain" here on YouTube.
xknowledgeisfreex 7 months ago
0:39
"It's going on and off at the speed of light"
Doesn't make sense.
The frequency with which something goes on and off can't be measured in meters per second.
xknowledgeisfreex 7 months ago
i read richard fayman and dirac's qm not from medial doctor
vjpillay 7 months ago
Takes 1 2 understand 1
Akshayphadke 7 months ago
metarotica, i agree with you 100%
theJumbie1 8 months ago
It has come to my understanding, that when under the influence of LSD. One feels a connection with everything else. There is a euphoric like feeling one singularity. I think LSD as an expression of quantum physics.
hellounderestimate 8 months ago
I'm not asserting that those theories are true but I'm trying to explain that there is something common amongst them. I'm doing here like the commercial on tv: The points of view expressed in my comments are not necessarily my point of view and I don't take responsibility for them. It's just very interesting that those knowledges or theories are very interconnected to each other. You got my point fellas. Ah and no hate for nobody. My sincere respect for all the people who commented on this topic
crisriv37 8 months ago in playlist ampu
Just read and respectfully look for the correlation of the Binary systems with the ancient IFA Oracle from Africa (which was taken by the Egyptians to Nigeria) with the modern Binary Computer Syst , the Cellular Automata, Clifford Algebras, The 8-Dimension Hypercube, Franklin Squares, The Std Model of Gravity, Quantum Physics, Kabbalah, Tarot, I-Ching, The Multi-Dimension Theory, Lie Algebra, Physical Interpretation of E-Lattices, The 4 Dimmensions of Internal Symmetry and 10^18 brain tubulins.
crisriv37 8 months ago in playlist ampu
And please be respectful of others comments and believings since this topic pretty much is like the same topic discussions phylosophers, mathematicians, physicists, investigators, clergy and many other people of science and religion have try to understand since the beggining of times. I know for a fact that many religious people are going to understand it or at least accept it.
crisriv37 8 months ago in playlist ampu
Some people call this bullshit but the fact is that there are theories developed by scientists and investigators and mathematically proved that the Universe has Conscience. It's very difficult to explain without the calculations and knowledge but apparently Religion has been right about the most important phylosophical point of our existence. There is a Creator or at least a Mind that conciously directed everything from the begginning till the end.
crisriv37 8 months ago in playlist ampu
BULLSHITSHITSHITHSHITSHITSHISHIHSTIHSIHTSHIHTSIHTS!!!!
666IRONMAN666 9 months ago
@666IRONMAN666 read, analize and try to understand Penrose, Hameroff, Sarfatti, and Zizzi. Just investigate and then become a critic.
crisriv37 8 months ago in playlist ampu
you´re right Metarotica,same question here.empty phrases there thrown at gullible people,eager to reach enlightenment and power the easy way.
luluna53 10 months ago
It only means that matter can store and transmit data..we already know that...my camera does pretty much the same thing. But this has nothing to do with what David Chalmers calls the "hard problem" of consciousness, i.e. why those processes give rise to qualitative et subjective experiences. Matter, or at least it's known properties, will never suffice to explain that! Consciousness HAS to be fundamental, it's the ground of all being.
Curiousguy1972 10 months ago
Wow, none of that is true. Has he never heard of the cochlear implant or brain-computer interface technology? Heck, 10 years ago, scientists in Berkley were able to decode neural firing in the lateral geniculate nucleus of a cat and produce a computer image of what the cat saw.
Also, why tie the whole everything is energy idea with quantum mechanics? Is thermodynamics not good enough for him? After all, there's thermal energy in all matter with a temperature above above absolute zero.
KingOfMadCows 10 months ago
Metarotica, do you think it's possible to build a metal structure with only pieces of wood? If you don't (and I certainly hope you don't), I suggest you forget about consciousness and subjectivity arising from a purely objective and non conscious substrat (matter that is), because it's exactly the same logical problem. Consciousness HAS to be a non reducible, and fondamental property of the universe. There's no logical way to fill the gap between the objective and the subjective.
Curiousguy1972 10 months ago
@trakomako You have no idea of what you are talking about. This relativism that claims that there are no better ways of approaching reality, making all equally valid, is pure nonsense.The refuge for ignorance. Science allows us to go beyond any other view of the universe, in all its beauty and awe. And it does so without having faith in any particular idea. As Dawkins said, Science is the poetry of nature. Please make the effort of honestly approaching true science. It's a real adventure.
jaumesisa100 10 months ago
This is the usual blah blah blah that Chopra makes so well. There is absolutely no substance in what he says. There is no quantum mechanical basis for his babbling on consciousness. Science is advancing quite rapidly on this area and, although we are still far from understanding it, we try to approach the problem seriously, not from a religious, biased and irrational perspective. Please stop pretending you know anything on quantum physics. YOU DO NOT.
jaumesisa100 10 months ago
@jaumesisa100 What do you know about Quantum Physics?
parkerjwill 10 months ago
@parkerjwill Just a little, mainly what I studied at university: Quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, quantum statistical mechanics and a wide range of topics where we applied QM to astrophysics (mainly stellar interiors and massice objects), solid state physics and nuclear physics too. And over the years (since then) I've been very much interested on its implications and how it can be extended in different directions. Nothing to do with consciousness.
jaumesisa100 10 months ago 2
very dubious, certainly not empiricism
ascott58 10 months ago
What is this on and off at the speed of light idea? I've never heard this before.
The Vedic literature's contain information on the Absolute Truth. All these things scientists are re-discovering, all this stuff about consciousness being primordial/fundamental, has been in the Vedic texts since their creation. Humans were more advanced in times past. Don't fall for the non-sense propaganda of mainstream science. Mainstream ANYTHING is for the sheeple. Bhaaaaa!!
parkerjwill 10 months ago
@parkerjwill Scientists are not "rediscovering" in the Vedic literature nor in any other written nonsense superstition. Science is truly enlightening us and making philosophy more and more far from the big questions. There is no such a thing as "Absolute truth" except of course for the fanatics. Read a bit or real physics and you might get astonished of how much of the beauty of the universe can be understood (and how much is missing). Hope that Chopra shuts up some time.
jaumesisa100 10 months ago
@jaumesisa100 Did you know that Sanskrit is the most sophisticated language on the planet? Do you even know what the phrase Absolute Truth even means?
parkerjwill 10 months ago
@parkerjwill Ther si no such a thing as "the most sophisticated language". Please read a little on language structure and you'll find out (a well known fact) that all languages, from Amazonian tribes to most modern,
are equally complex. Don't be pretentious and invent such nonsense. Don't you have enough with quantum mechanics misinterpretation?
jaumesisa100 10 months ago
@jaumesisa100
"What makes Sanskrit compatible to computer softwares is its extremely well structured form with finer distinction of vowels and consonants based on pronunciation. That has been endorsed by NASA, which has said that the world’s oldest spiritual language is the only unambiguous spoken language on the planet."
You may have lots of schooling (not real education but societal training for your mind) but you have no common sense, which is the ground for all scientific thought.
parkerjwill 10 months ago
@parkerjwill Poor of me, poor education, such a closed mind. Oh boy, thanks for opening my mind. But be careful with yours, as someone said, "If you open your mind too much, your brain will fall out" (it's a joke, please don't reply offended and saying that the brain cannot fall). I see you don't wantto understand. Different languages have different properties, which can be measured. That don't make them "better" than other nor "more perfect". Do you (want to) see my point? Go and meditate!
jaumesisa100 10 months ago
What the hell is he going on about. It's as if he came up with an idea and assumed it was right
qwertypluss 10 months ago
cmzuppe, I would like you to prove to everyone that reality really does exist "out there" independant of our minds. You will find this impossible because there is no real way to look at reality objectively, its simply a collection of subjective observations. In fact based on the copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, the act of measuring/observing a particle (or anything made up of particles) actually settles the particles "wave function" into a definable state.
murkenemsoftly 11 months ago
Who is the master who makes the grass green?
Thecorrectopinion 11 months ago
@trakomako what it comes down to is the capacity for critical thought -
The truth may be stranger than we can currently even conceptualise within our present thought structures which are governed by and reflected in language. What if we had to invent a whole new language just to make these things vaguely understandable?
Like rewriting the code for a computer programme, without the new "language" the programme wont run.
I might not saying thats necessarily wholly true, but maybe partly true ;)
streetfightsecrets 1 year ago
@trakomako does it have to be just one or the other? only "human standpoint" or "God"? Religion OR Science? Is there a possibility that neither present useful working models of reality? Or that both do? Maybe some elements of some religions do? Maybe some elements of some scientific theories do? I'm not sure much is gained by striving for conclusions for their own sake. What about keeping an open mind and accepting mystery whilst being scientific and objective :) They are just thoughts.
streetfightsecrets 1 year ago
@trakomako actually through observation they percieve a possible working model of reality and try to disprove that it does NOT work to within a certain statistical probability - they dont "make up" a theory and "try to prove it" at all - that is NOT scientific method. Scientific method is disproving a negative hypothesis which is the inverse of what you (and many others to be fair to you) think happens and it is much harder, much more rigourous than "proving a positive hypothesis". Google it :)
streetfightsecrets 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am the way the truth and the life, no one cometh to the father but by me. †
mec554 1 year ago
Chopra suck my socks!
Victory9767 1 year ago
just like marko rodins vortex math. everything is a positive/negative with the emanation of the energy in between. the world and experience we exist in is a binary triplet. now we can see that other people are beginning to discover the same thing, just in different places. more people discovering the pos and neg and energy from the center, will bring us closer to a more profound understanding of this place we occupy
eljefeo 1 year ago
To arzoyan. I like what you said. You just verbalized what I have thought many times over. I know see why Marxism is attractive. However, it takes Yoga philosophy to to humanize Marxism.
hiphopolopulus 1 year ago
Capitalism is the historic evolution of private property relationship of alienation,exploitation and suffering of humanity in a modality of commodity production for abstract process of capital accumulation and concentration . A system of wage slavery in a MARKET system of suppression and dehumanistion. We need to transcend this false limits to our creative cooperative energies for a moneyless,classless,stateless communities of humanity expressing our energies in freedom of being.
arzoyan 1 year ago
Interesting theory...
GTRrocker666 1 year ago
@trakomako
"...make up a theory and try to prove it... imagine it."
In order for a theory to be accepted as part of science it has to make testable experimental predictions and withstand rigorous pier review and scientific scrutiny. If it fails, out the window it goes and the author who invested a lot of time and work has to reluctantly let it go. Science ain't about being superficially familiar with the subject, deliberately misinterpreting it and mouth-farting to those who understand even less
wakeupfist 1 year ago
@trakomako
Mayans sacrificed humans to bring the sun back but to claim that the fact that so many of them held that to be reasonable made it so would be argument from majority. Reality ain't relative. The rocks in space would still be there even if our conscious minds never came into being to recognize and agree upon their existence. We can't each have our own version of reality any more than 2+2 can equal to 4 for some and 5 for others. Please set your reservations aside and watch those videos.
wakeupfist 1 year ago
@trakomako
I'm sincerely sorry to offend a figure you seem to have such admiration for but this guy is completely clueless, with merely tourist amounts of pseudo-knowledge to only impress a lay person. To be fair, in contrast to the Peter Popoffs of the world, he is relatively harmless. Nonetheless, his intellectual dishonesty must be pointed out! I'd recommend a documentary called "Enemies of Reason" (should be on Google video) as well as this interview with Dr. Vic Stenger: watch?v=Ayst78EjjS0
wakeupfist 1 year ago
@wakeupfist I am affraid I mistakenly responded to you when I was trying to respond to wakeuplist. Sorry.
jaumesisa100 10 months ago
there are 3 standards of truth, starting with highest:
1-self evident truth, which are THAT: we are, we feel, we percieve. these MUST be 100% true.
2-WHAT we feel, because truth is based on honesty, not the other way around.
3-WHAT we percieve. This is where the scientific method comes in, with well established and tested scientific theory being the highest in this category.
we must ALL KNOW THIS.
thank you.
natmanprime 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A moneyless,classless,stateless communities of humanity expressing our freedom in creative harmonious cooperation for a world that is so POTENTIALLY AND ACTUALLY nourishing. Capitalism in any form, Statist or Corporatist is the denial of our common humanity in a politically manipulated,tyrannical armed MARKET SYSYTEM of artificial scarcity that is designed to perpetuate the enslavement of immense humanity for material interest of the criminal ruling elite.
arzoyan 1 year ago 2
Deepak you are really illuminated! thanks for explaning us in an easy way to understand all this things.
elfunkeado 1 year ago
@elfunkeado@elfunkeado Obviously you haven't read any of the recent comments. He is not "illuminated", and he has not helped you to "understand". In fact not only do you now not "understand" but you are now even more ignorant in regards to QM than had you not even watched the video. Not only has he not informed you of anything but he has misinformed you.
MrRotormaster1 1 year ago
No, the child is not aware that I am speculating, just like the example of our unsuspecting friends here who are being treacherously deluded by the speculation of this man. As for the last part of your comment, there is a difference between a theory and a scientific theory. A a theory as in a guess or an idealistic presumption (which this man is an expert on) differs from a scientific theory which is supported by evidence.
FightThePrograming 1 year ago
If what he just said is true, why O why have we created such a brutal reality for ourselves?
Hipster420 1 year ago
@Hipster420 just because we are the dynamic force between our atoms as opposed to the atoms themselves doesnt mean we can control reality like doctor mahattan out of the Watchmen movie.
Having said that, we can change reality just by being more aware of how things are.
we have 8 'circuits' or systems of thought, popularised by Dr Tim Leary nd Robert Anton Wilson, takn from ancient knowledge including vedic chakra system and teutonic pre roman stuff.
We are kept in the 1st 4, causing all the sht
natmanprime 1 year ago
Fascinating! I remember reading about this in one of Deepak's books. It was either Creating Wealth or the Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire.
What a concept of blinking in and out of existence and consciousness.
philippematthews 1 year ago
You see this is "new age" distortion. So much of this is true regarding the mechanics of the holographic theory but we dont CREATE the physical world we simply EXPERIENCE it differently. Yes you can bring different experiences into you life by changing your thoughts and perception but you are not reordering or recreating the physical world, your mind is simply accessing parts of it, it previously was unable to decode. e.g.you could see more visible light but you haven't made the world lighter.
1madaboutguitar 1 year ago
I'm curious as to whether Chopra has actually managed to convince himself of the bull that he goes on about. There is simply no solid natural mechanism to anything he says. His entire discourse is nothing more than unfounded new-age assumptions, none of which are connected together by any discernable mechanism, interspersed by some extremely inaccurate portrayals of quantum physics. This is nothing less than utter ignorance of science and its methodology.
Metarotica 1 year ago 2
@Metarotica He is not bullshitting at all. Although, his credibility is low because he is talking about quantum physics and has no degree in physics. He is talking about 2 types of universe, the String Theorist universe (M-Theory) and the Holographic universe. M-Theory is a very well respected theory developed by Edward Wittan, who is considered the predecessor of Einstein. It solves the source of all types of energy, Gravity, Electromagnetic, Weak and Strong force.
youngstunna79 1 year ago
@youngstunna79 spell witten right
weirdkid66 1 year ago
The holographic universe that Chopra is talking is a theory that the universe is actually flat (2 dimensional) and the other dimensions that our mind creates is reality. The holographic theory is not widely accepted by physicist, only some aspects. Although M-Theory is widely accepted as true. The problem is it is very difficult to prove it because "Strings", that make up all forces is extremely small. It is the size of a tree relative to our entire solar system. Read about it.
youngstunna79 1 year ago
@youngstunna79 I'm well aware of what M-theory is, although Chopra makes no allusion to it, nor does he make any specific reference to there existing only 2 dimensions of space with our mind filling in the rest. I'm not overly familiar with the holographic principle, so I'm not going to try and rebut anything there. The main fault I am referring to is Chopra's assumption that the "discontinuities" of the universe (presumably he's referring to quantisation) give rise to consciousness.
Metarotica 1 year ago
@youngstunna79 He then attempts to extrapolate this to "the universe existing within us". Again, he gives no mechanism for it, and true to the new age "science" he is pioneering there's no evidence for it either. Physics works on what is mathematically necessitated by the fundamental models considered. Chopra has a model, but no mechanisms with which to extrapolate this to the effects he describes. From my understanding of quantum mechanics I would say the model itself is ungrounded also.
Metarotica 1 year ago
@Metarotica I too wonder whether he manages to convince himself with his own lies.
I also wonder whether he feels any shame at all from so falsely misinforming people with such speculation.
FightThePrograming 1 year ago
@FightThePrograming Can you misinform with speculation? I think not.
Hipster420 1 year ago
@Hipster420 If speculate that the earth's core is made of marshmallow, and then tell my child that the earth's core is made of marshmallow, is that informing him or misinforming him?
FightThePrograming 1 year ago
@FightThePrograming There's a difference..Is the child is aware that what you are saying is speculation? Or are you stating your speculation as a proven fact? Speculation and theory are exactly that and are not intended to be taken as fact.
Hipster420 1 year ago
@Hipster420 I think the discrepancy that needs to be exposed here is that there is a huge difference between outright woo woo (thanks Shermer) that sounds scientific and actual science. To realise this one needs to be at least a little knowledgeable of the quantitative aspect of quantum mechanics and one also needs to know how science ACTUALLY WORKS. Unfortunately most people can't see this difference; to them, this is as good as real science.
Metarotica 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Metarotica
My thoughts exactly. The "Likes/Dislikes" ratio of this video really worries me as do comments like "Deepak you are really illuminated! thanks for explaning us in an easy way to understand all this things."
wakeupfist 1 year ago
@Hipster420 yes you can but only if the speculation is interpreted as fact the part of the speculator is mereley that....to speculate. the listner must decide if said speculation is intellectual and fact based or a bunch of biased stabs in the dark
PowerOfThySword 1 year ago
@Metarotica No I dont think he has and the evidence for this is the way he completely failed to defend himself when confronted by Dawkins. I was a Chopra fan up until that point. Dawkins didnt even ask him any particularly challenging questions, and Chopras defence was "quantum physics provides an interesting metaphor" - hang on... when in any material, including this peice does Chopra qualify the Quantum Babble with "this is just a metaphor" he doesnt! he presents it as fact.
streetfightsecrets 1 year ago
@Metarotica i see this statement made over and over again...yet i don't see anyone retorting any statements he makes about quantum physics with real facts, why don't you enlighten us then
cmzuppe 11 months ago
@cmzuppe I would love to. He claims that reality is made up of discontinuities; "on" and "off". This is a reference to the quantization of energy into discrete "packets" (eg the photon, electron and so on) hence "quantum" physics. Chopra makes the mistake (completely contrary to what quantum mechanics actually says) of thinking that within the "off", ie an absence of a quanta, there lies consciousness. This is simply crap-talk. Like thinking consciousness lies between balls on a tennis court.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@cmzuppe Further, he claims that "not all scientists accept" his "quantum mechanical model". This is an understatement. I know of no physicists who accept this "model", purely because it is only speculation. There is not even the theoretical backing of rigorous mathematics that physics is so accurate for, let alone empirical observations as support. There is no "new paradigm" in science; science is science, substantiated by evidence and butressed by the scientific method.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@cmzuppe Chopra goes on to claim that "we create the physical world when we perceive it". This is true in a sense: what we see is a model of reality constructed by our brains because that model was helpful in our survival during our evolution. He is incorrect in thinking though, that the physical world is then "in" us, in any literal sense. It seems to be a misconstruing of the double slit experiment, which has its roots in quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg principle.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@cmzuppe As far as mathematical framework and empirical evidence is concerned, reality exists independently of the models we conceive of it in our minds. This is why common sense is so wildly inaccurate in modern physics in general, and in quantum mechanics in particular. The theory is unfalsifiable, not backed by any mathematics, and as far as I know makes no predictions from which evidential support can be tested for. This is not science, but utter crap-talk. Unreliable, in a word.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@Metarotica sorry i asked.
cmzuppe 11 months ago
@Metarotica - just scanned your comments. you guys know very little and that may be a very dangerous thing when combined with your apparent arrogance. you wouldn't know the math or the evidence if it slapped you in the face if your comments are anything to go by. do yourselves a favour and exercise a bit of humility, reserve your judgement until both your knowledge base and your ability to comprehend develops beyond the infantile
llirrb 11 months ago 30
@llirrb If I made a mistake I would be happy if you would correct me.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@Metarotica - Have you ever tried to explain non linear math to a dog? Prove to me that you are able to think laterally with an open mind and I may consider making an effort. If you understand this comment there may be hope, but if you take offence then what can I say?
Keep on Barking!
llirrb 11 months ago
@llirrb The ad hominem isn't necessary. I am currently doing a double degree in mathematics and physics and I would consider myself capable of understanding at least some of what you can throw at me, and if not I can go further and look it up anyway. I am curious as to how non-linear mathematics applies to quantum mechanics. My experiences with it so far have been as an extension of linear algebra in the Hilbert space. May I also ask what your background in this is? Just out of curiosity.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@Metarotica If I had said, "unlike you I am not young enough to know everything" your answer may have been justified.
Your contextual interpretation of the discourse leaves a lot to be desired, but perhaps I am being unkind due to your garrulous and ill informed attack on a worthy friend.
You will do yourself an enormous favour if you reserve judgement, always leave the door of your mind open to new possibilities and trust also of course that abductive reasoning has its limitations. Good Luc
llirrb 11 months ago
@llirrb I was interpreting Chopra's ideas in the context of quantum mechanics, which, considering that's what this is ultimately about, seems reasonable. I am open to learning more about it provided that it has at least theoretical support to back it up, and I just haven't seen any from either Chopra nor any other proponents of these ideas and so I dismiss the idea. Simple conservative logic. If there is some evidence or theory I am missing which necessitates this idea, then please let me know.
Metarotica 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@llirrb If you have told one lie, that makes you a liar. If you have stolen one thing, that makes you a thief. JESUS said; if you look at a person with lust, you commit adultery in your heart! Ever used GOD's name in vain; then you are a blasphemer and can't enter heaven! Revelation 21v8 says; "All liars will have their part in the lake of fire!" The bible says; No thief or adulterer will inherit heaven! You broke GOD's laws; but JESUS paid your fine! Repent, and trust the Savior!
EXALTEDDIRT 3 months ago
@llirrb Quantum Mechanics has many parts' the physical and the metaphysical' what is the point within any exemplification if no one sees what anyone is attempting to acknowledge? Its not mathematics but any logical exemplification within any and all actual intelligence, or rather any and all true physical associations. its simply too vast a subject to exemplfy within which all would agree; unless exemplified within bits and pieces which make sense within the physics of any linguistical merit.
DrFruedienslip 3 months ago
@DrFruedienslip Wrong.
aqouby 3 months ago
@Metarotica
that word u used... "ignorance", actually sums you up...
1nevitability 11 months ago
@1nevitability I would love if you could correct any mistakes I have made. I am really quite open, provided that the topic in question is reasonable to me.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@Metarotica You can find a comprehensive model of consciousness based on string theory and experience, on Amazon: "A Matter of Mind: Exploring the 11Dimensional Cosmos" As far as I can see Chopra's thoughts are in line with the model in that book.
olavdr 11 months ago
@olavdr Thankyou. A truly helpful reply. Is the author an expert? I know almost nothing of string theory myself but theoretically at least it seems promising. Thanks.
Metarotica 11 months ago
@Metarotica read, analize and try to understand Penrose, Hameroff, Sarfatti, and Zizzi. Just investigate and then become a critic.
crisriv37 8 months ago in playlist ampu
@Metarotica I think he may know just a bit more about this subject matter than you do. You just made yourself look completely ignorant. Know your place.
xxMafia101 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Be aware, Chopra's work is to promote a fundamentalist-Hindu cult: Transcendental Meditation. This is their agenda: at the wiki site mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/leak/tm-governor-course-2005.pdf. Google the query on Deepak Chopra+Transcendental+Meditation and see for yourself. Just saying, not all as as it is dressed.
DeoneBenn 1 year ago
To put it simply, what he's saying is that there is an objective world and a subjective world and that the objective world cannot exist with the subjective (conscious) awareness of it. I can agree with that. But if he tries telling us that through mere conscious awareness we can alter the physical world I'd say he's going to far. Stand outside in a snowstorm naked and try to convince yourself that it's not cold outside and find this out the hard way.
JackKangaroo1 1 year ago
Comment removed
S3raph02 1 year ago
Chopra talks about things he know nothing about. Got owned few times already.
9samten 1 year ago
@9samten Can you please enlighten us on all the things that Chopra knows nothing about? Not that I doubt your understanding of these matters, I just find it curious that you seem so confident that Chopra knows nothing of Quantum physics and consciousness. This causes me to assume that you yourself have the answers that Chopra appears to be ignorant of. Can you please explain your statement?
S3raph02 1 year ago
@S3raph02 I also agree that Chopra is a fool when it comes to quantum mechanics. Saying that you should have the answers to questions Chopra cannot answer before you start correcting him is idiotic. The point is that Chopra associates God with quantum mechanics. He also talks about quantum healing. All the things where he adds the name 'quantum' to, are bullshit, because they have no scientific basis. There hasn't been a single rational scientist who found proof for a quantum field.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel Chopra's "God" is consciousness. Anyone who knows anything about Chopra understands exactly where he is coming from with this clip. He never claims to be a scientist, or to have all the answers. If you approach this clip without a knee deep perspective in scientific materialism, this clip will make much more sense. Do I agree with everything he says? No. Do I disagree with everything he says? No. I'm open minded and skeptical. Also, rational is nothing more than a state of mind.
S3raph02 1 year ago
@S3raph02 Listen, I don't really care what Chopra says, but what concerns me is that he claims that things like "the quantum field" are real and proven by scientists. That's what Chopra is wrong about.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel Unless you understand the perspective that Chopra is speaking from, there is no point in continuing this argument. Everything he says in this video clip has valid reasoning behind it. If you don't really care what he says, there is truly no point in arguing further. I would suggest looking at quantum mechanics from an entirely philosophical point of view if this stuff even remotely interests you. If not, have fun with your current materialistic viewpoint.
S3raph02 1 year ago
@S3raph02 You either don't WANT to understand what I mean, or else you're just ignorant. For the last time, he may say WHATEVER he wants about quantum mechanics. He may say that this and that is God and that we are all conscious beings that are not really our bodies, fine! But what bothers me is that he says that the things HE claims are PROVEN BY SCIENTISTS. I hope you finally got the point.
By the way, I'm not materialistic. And even if I were, you have no reason to judge me about that.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel Favorite Chopra excuses:
Quanta ate my homework.
Quanta made me do it.
I quanta believe I ate the whole thing!
Quantum YOU!
deskset24 1 year ago
@deskset24 Haha, exactly. You just put the name "quantum" before anything and it's science, peer-reviewed without doubt. That's the problem with Chopra. Quantum self, quantum consciousness, quantum healing, quantum god, quantum anomalies, quantum touch, quantum ego.
No wonder he won the lg- Prize for quantum foolishness!
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel
I forgot to add: Chopra flies only Qantas Airlines.
Also, he's a huge Cwant.
deskset24 1 year ago
@deskset24 In one of your comments you said that you published peer-reviewed math papers. Tell me about it. I'm interested.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel First: yeah, yeah. I know I'm posting anonymously on YouTube - not exactly peer-reviewed forum with real names - so I could be lying like crazy.
Anyway, my area of expertise was in one tiny little subarea (differential resolvents) of an even smaller subarea (differential algebra) of mathematics.
Given any polynomial P(t) in t over a differential field - sorry, I can't type math here - that means, the coefficients of the powers of t are themselves differentiable functions
deskset24 1 year ago
@deskset24 No, dude, I'm not skeptical at all. I know you could be a liar, but I don't believe that. If you can tell me what you've found out, than I can check it and see whether there's some logic in it.
Forgive my sucking English, I'm Dutch.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel .. of some other variable, say, x, compute the smallest-order linear differential equation (the order of the DE will be less than the degree of P(t) in an efficient manner.
Actually, I'll stop here and send you a private message.
deskset24 1 year ago
@S3raph02 Tell it yourself: how are you so sure that Chopra know a lot about quantum mechanics? Has he done research?
Dude, this guy read books like The Dancing Wu-li masters and The Tao of Physics! If you are seriously doing this, you mustn't read those. In that case, you better read books written by serious scientists.
I suggest you have a shot at Robert Park's "Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolisness to Fraud." If you read that, you will understand exactly why I don't trust Chopra.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel I understand perfectly what you are saying. I think it is you that doesn't understand me. I really, really, really don't feel like arguing with you if you don't understand what this clip is really about. There are hundreds of thousands of scientists in the world, I was unaware Chopra would have to check in with you to decide if they were credible or not. Just because something isn't posted in a scientific journal doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
S3raph02 1 year ago
@S3raph02 I also want to add that you're hypocritical. You accuse me of being arrogant and needlessly critical. First of all, you're the one who is arrogant, because you're the one trying to debunk me and trying to show how Chopra is right.
Secondly, you're exaggerating. Scientists, and especially serious scientists, are a rarity. On top of that it doesn't even have to mean that every single one of them has the ability to find evidence and put them in journals.
FearThisChannel 1 year ago
@FearThisChannel There are plenty of scientists who have done work in this field. I'm going to already assume that you will say they are ignorant fringe scientists whose opinions don't really matter in the scientific community. You are more than welcome to have that opinion. I suggest you look up people like Dean Radin, Dr. William Tiller, and Tom Campbell. You need to open your mind before you become so needlessly critical and arrogant with your opinion.