SAM HARRIS & BRIAN GREENE FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER! Physics, Religion, Consciousness & more!
2024 ж. 25 Сәу.
110 895 Рет қаралды
#samharris #briangreene #atheism #atheist #atheistviews #atheistvschristian #atheistsofinstagram #atheistrepublic #secularism #god #religion #religiousbeliefs #jesus #bible #christianity #pangburn #pangburnphilosophy #physics #aliens #ufo #uap #neuroscience #neurophysiology #evolution #science
Sam Harris & Brian Greene - Toronto - Sept 5th 2018
For the first time ever, Sam Harris & Brian Greene sit down for a conversation. They discuss science, reason, AI & more.
JOIN US IN NYC ON JUNE 1st for ALEX O'CONNOR vs DINESH D'SOUZA on "IS THE BIBLE TRUE?" Tickets available here: www.pang-burn.com/tickets
D'Souza is a masochist. He gets slaughtered in every debate.
damn I wish I still lived there 😢
Is the Bible true? Snooze... settled argument. Nothing new under the sun. Went sailing. Met Poseiden. Changed my whole operating system. Is Poseiden true? Talk amongst yourselves. Does literature have truth value? Poetry? Is it true? Difference between truth and wisdom?? Time for a nap.
D'Sousa? Really? Isn't he a convicted felon?
Bla bla bla
Truly miss conversations and discussions like this. A dying breed.
Not looking and engaging in the right place
@@thebritishbushman8389 agreed
Brian Greene really inspires me to learn more about math and physics. Seems so elegant how things work in this realm.
"Fabric of the Cosmos" was the first physics book which clicked for me. The way he combined theory with experimental results and really clear explanations just made sense all of a sudden. PBS spacetime is amazing too. Got me through lockdown....
That was AWESOME!! Up there at the top of list for best communucation and conversation from both of you. What a joy and priviledge to be witness to the exchange of ideas, growth of knowledge, and really good humor. Thank you Sam and Brian, you bring so much richness to our lives and learning.
As an atheist since age 13, I agree Dr. Harris. "You can only hit so hard with a carrot." Most people are just too brainwashed to reason with.
Also, lets remember. Everyone is built different, not to mention their unique work environments. Rational-thinking scientists are no exception. Some popular science educators are less comfortable offending Christians/Muslims than others. Sam is not afraid to wrestle in the mud, despite his calm demeanor whilst donning a smart, black suit. Others in a teaching positions in academia, say Professor Greene, may have religiously affiliated peers/students to contend with on weekdays, may be cautious of backlashes.
You should stop listening to jews
@@ssotkow "cautious of backlashes" Depends how much you want to hit people with that "carrot" - it is bound to get someone to hit back (hopefully proportionately and not loss of a job). The idea that atheism is so so *SO... clear in all its positions, would raise an eye brow🤨 from many atheists (not just theists)
Speaking from experience? No matter what, you're going to pick up a intellectual stink no matter where you go. Being brainwashed is something no one escapes, yourself included. The sooner you realize this, you gain the ability to choose what brainwash you get. What you think doesn't exist probably doesn't exist. That doesn't mean there is no God. I am really curious what it belief means. There are things I know to be true, like the earth is an oblate spheroid that revolves around the sun. I can't make myself believe the earth is a flat disk. Just like you know there is no God, I don't know if you can make yourself believe in God. I don't know if we have control over what we believe in.
As a university lecturer I can attest to the backlash potential. Depts are vigilant and context can be lost in the retelling of a so-called incident.
Conversation is brilliant and comment section is awesome.
My neighbor leaned over our yard fence and stated, "I did not come from apes" while eating a banana.
I scratched my armpits while contemplating your comment.
Did you remind him that he and apes came from the same ancestor?
And that ancestor looked a hell of a lot like an ape
Was he wearing a maga hat?
@@frankmay1563 We humans and apes are all considered Great Apes or hominids.
Longtime benefactor of Brian Greene's brilliant perspectives on quantum physics and the state of reality and our interaction with it. Always grateful for his holistic, humane, and interogative approach.
So good to hear Dr Harris talk about something that isn’t religion. And so good to get these two people together for a chat. We are lucky.
This talk was around 5-6 years ago.
@@FISHDINHO And in the meantime, it looks like string theory isn't all that was hoped for. Seems to me that progress in physics is hitting a wall.
@@Micas099theres a clear pass scientists been whispering among themselves, but main stream cant stand it. Theres tone of good leads and ideas connected to multi universe theory. But it opens can of warms. Many uncomfortable questions, scientists dont wont to face.
He leads great meditations
Frequent listener of Sam Harris' Making Sense podcast. Read both their books. Brian Greene's book is quite complex mathematically, despite the physicist's best effort in simplifying concepts for the laymen, whereas some of Sam's deep dive pieces on morality are complicated in terms of philosophical labyrinth. Thank you for merging great minds.
Absolutely loving this discussion of time. I am very interested in understanding time more effectively. Thank you to these men.
I can't ever get to watch a discussion between Plato and Newton... but this will do just fine
Hehe. Love that. Me too
Diogenes and George Carlin.
AI may, give an idea. Hmmm.. i never thought about it before. Ask AI to creat conversation between famous philosophers.😊
@@alexb6695 what a nice idea.. if we have a lot of content then this will happen... for those who miss their loved ones and have enough content to feed the AI about how their loved ones spoke, their views on myriad topics.
Great comment.
Excellent. It’s so much fun to mute and watch Brian’s hands! Same message!
Brian Greene has hand and arm movement when he speaks Exactly i mean Exactly as my father did while he was alive. Every time i see Brian Greene it reminds me of my dad. Interestingly they come from the very same area of New York!
Fascinating conversation. Thanks.
Oh man. Thank you! Fantastic conversation
Brilliant format. You’ve found something with it. More more more videos like this please. Keep up the good work. Respect
<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="98">1:38</a>:47. Brian’s curiosity is legit. How did atomic particles create humans? The whole mechanism of how these subatomic particles have created humans over last 4 billion years is described in the book titled ‘Journey to Center of DNA’ ..it’s about the journey of these atomic particles into the DNA. A Noble Prize worthy research into evolution of life and living world. I thoroughly enjoyed the this fascinating read..
thank you for this ..
Perhaps we should understand that skepticism is the lynchpin of science, and science is actually an advanced and revolutionary ideology. Thanks for your work.
Brilliant conversation ! Thanks !
Agree! Now read the comment section and feel your faith in humanity crumble. Can't believe what I'm reading. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Thank you for your sensible and positive comment! 😊
@@darktower0603 😭😭😭
Absolutely love both of these guys, and appreciate the discussion, but I didn't think they really meshed as well as I thought they would.
On the right car driving age. Couldn't we if we somehow had the ability, take all the possible arguments for each age (that's most likely to be around the right age to allow driving) and then analyze all those propositions which would in many cases will be based on values or what is important. Which then would have separate propositions for why a certain value is more important then another. If you go far enough to evaluate all of those if only we could and then we could "solve" , this is more important then that and somehow come to a score. That would than give us what age would be better or worse even when we are at the blurry zone rather than at the extremes where it's clear what's worse or better. So could we not somehow solve the blurryness closer at the place where the best possible ages for allowing driving exist, if only we had the reasoning power to analyze all arguments and then assign scores to which value is more important is more important and wherever it all took us to figure out a right age. Isn't it just that it's currently too much to figure out rather than there is best answer or rather than it's merely arbitrary
Brian Greene does not encounter the problems that are faced by biologists. I suspect his views about the threats of religion to our understanding would be different if fundamentalist religions that subscribe to Genesis decided that it was blasphemous to assert that there is a limit to the speed of light.
Well some of them belive the earth was created 4000 years ago
Around <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="3000">50:00</a> Brian talks about ultimately the reading from the instrument doing the measurement of a quantum state needs to be seen by some conscious agent and thus some may think consciousness has some role. That is a very misleading analysis. There is a confusion between two events: - event E1 where a instrument (say a video camera) makes a measurement on a quantum state to make it collapse and records the reading - event E2 when a conscious entity - say Alice reads that recorded reading and groks what it was. Note this can happen 10 years later and 1 billion miles away. - event E3 when a conscious entity - say Bob reads that recorded reading and groks what it was. Note this can happen 20 years later and 2 billion miles away. sure. But Event E1 is when the collapse happened. The lab may even have been destroyed the next day after the instrument with recorded reading was taken out and sent first to Alice and then to Bob. What does it even mean to talk about Alice collapsing the quantum state after 10 years, when the lab was destroyed the next day. That is absurd. E1 is not the same as E2 E1 is not the same as E3 E2 is not the same as E3 but the measurement only happened at E1 and the quantum state collapsed then. So this shows us that a instrument like a video camera - which every one will agree collapsed the wave function. Sure a macroscopic, conscious entity present in the lab could have done the "measurement" to collapse the wave function, but not because it is conscious, but because it is macroscopic. The labs that develop quantum computers do not shiels the quantum state from consciousness of human lab personnel. They put the quantum state in vaccum separated from air molecules lest they will destroy it. SO can we please stop bringing in consciousness into Quantum Physics context from now on?
BOTH THESE GUYS ARE AWESOME! Love to hear them speak!
Existence is time. Change is flow of time. When there is a sub system of the universe that is cyclic, only then we can measure the rate of flow of time with the resolution of period of the cycle or fractions there of. Time only flows in one direction - before to after. When universe reaches an equilibrium and where the entropy is maximum, as long as there is change in configs time still flows. NOTE: I am talking about time of physics - not psychological time that humans perceive.
Thank you
Great respect. Imagine, inform, enlighten.
Its an honour and a privilege for everyone. Thank you for sharing. The flip side…. Is the more you know the more you are responsible. Assume you know nothing, and assume complete responsibility for yourself. Everyone everything will fall into place. None of which will be an outcome of our design. Just do what needs doing. Love you guys. Jeremy
Wish they’d just read written questions. Even when they say be brief these people can’t resist their big moment!
It's easy to say that, just as it is easy and known why we have not travelled to any other system or actually beyond our own yet.
Sam Harris talked about the difficulties in communication because of ideological differences in our societies causing extreme polarization with no remedy in sight. The US Constitutional system certainly is broken and the cause is political parties which are not constitutional. The Constitution does not call for political parties so they are not given a legitimate role to play. They are outliers and function in their own interests which is to amass power for themselves. There is no constitutional remedy for this state of affairs. But science can serve to drastically mitigate the ideological divide. Conservative and liberal aspects are found throughout the world, throughout the nature of things, which can be instructive to our social systems. For example, comparing our social systems to our anatomical systems can be insightful. Our immune systems, for instance, need to make judgements about what belongs in one’s body and what does not. What is harmful and what is not. And it does this within liberal and conservative margins. However, an immune system can be too conservative and also too liberal in its judgements. A too conservative immune system identifies things that belong to the body as not belonging resulting in autoimmune diseases like multiple sclerosis. While a too liberal immune system does not, or is too slow to recognize invasive viruses. A social body makes the same kind of judgements with respect to liberal and conservative margins. Overly conservative judgements by the likes of a Stalin, Mao or Hitler, et al., result in the destruction of those who are not threats to the social body and are even valuable contributors to it. On the other hand, too liberal an outlook allows for harmful deviations to be allowed. The open border policy of the Biden administration, for example. In order to be accurate a social body's assessment of what is and is not harmful to it must be contained and balanced within the bounds of conservative and liberal margins. That is a law of nature relevant to social bodies as well as human bodies.
<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="2673">44:33</a> "essentially everything that can possibly happen - happens somewhere" "if it's compatible with the laws of physics" ERROR: "Laws of physics" are written📜 ✒by what? The scientific rules 🔢themselves could change in an alternate universe
Around <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="2460">41:00</a> Brian says that in the current funding environment it is hard to build a particle accelerator of the size of a galaxy (duh of course), but misses the same point of funding about String theory. The point is not that String theory is still young because the issues it is dealing with are difficult, and will eventually give us some good results. The issue is that of funding. String theory had dominated the physics community and gobbled up majority of the available funding for extended period of time. This was done at the expense of other promising theories. Also some String theorists behaved like gatekeepers and prevented other theories from getting funding. Eric Wienstein rants about this all the time, to the point of being annoying itself, but has the core truth in it. That is the point Brian is missing, may be even intentionally ignoring as he is a member of String theory community. Maybe the time has come for String theory to a back seat for a while, give other theories a chance to flourish and come back for a second bit at the apple in 30 years.
Why can’t people not just ask their damn question:-)
❤
If consciousness is a quantum mechanical process, which many like Sir Roger Penrose thinks it is, and in reality it is rather unreasonable to think its not, then it actually DOES play a role, a rather simple and reasonable role at that, in the notion of taking measurement, without having to insert some wu-wa into the mix. It may not be essential, but the process of consciousness simply might be another tool the universe uses to achieve decoherence and make sure the wave function collapses. Otherwise conscious beings might be able to see the whole wave function, which the universe prohibits. It's probably just some complex iteration of entanglement between the whole system of consciousness and everything it interacts with.
Had the following thought with respect to the vegan question and the question of free will; If it is not by free will that one chooses to be vegan or to remain a carnivore it seems ludicrous for vegans to preach to meat eaters that they should choose to be like them.
These men obviously have read "Our Amazing Minds" by Neville Gazing
Would Brian say that the question of how many birds are in flight is underdetermined? - Possibly, but we know that at any one time there is an answer. The driving age question can be considered to be similar. At any one time we could say there is an optimal answer in that there is a point at which benefits outweighs negative consequences, but it would still be inevitable that this point would vary constantly.
It's an inadequately formed question because when we ask what the "right" minimum driving age is, we're not defining right. Most likely to minimize accidents? Most likely to increase social mobility for families? Most likely to ensure a smooth flow of traffic? A complex factoring that weighs all of those priorities by particular degrees? "Right" is subjective until you apply some criteria to measure it by. The question "What is the best age if your goal is to keep fatalities below X threshold while increasing the potential growth of poor households' overall incomes?" is answerable in principle of not in practice, much like the birds question. The more we learn about socioeconomics, traffic patterns, cognitive development of young brains and so forth, the better of a job we can do of honing in on the answer. But to simply ask what the "right" age is assumes some likely shared priorities different people will weigh to different degrees, most of them having a rough consensus about a certain range but no consensus over specifics. So in that situation, all we can do is settle on a rough range of potentially valid answers and then debate our priorities further from there to narrow it.
"A significant number of Americans will say fuck your cosmology" was not a sentence I would ever have thought would make sense let alone been spot on...
The only free will is virtue.
Nobody has complete answer because truth is emotional and logic and science are the tools To get to truth one needs only humility and not knowledge and it is totally personal experience Logic and science are the mechanism of nature that includes everything that includes emotions However great is an computer that has no emotions is no match to anything that has life and emotions
There are many electrons and each of us are one of them. They bond together by magnetic pole and observe particles within the wave, or frequency, that is created by that bonding. This is my theory but see Tao Of Physics video.
To solve the Fermi Paradox, remember how long it takes light to reach us from "out there", we are seeing the past not the present when we look "out there". Where were we that long ago?
What about if aliens know about earth ,but don't visit because their bodies have advanced immune systems that they know we don't have .For example , they may not want to infect us with some sort of "hyper covid " virus that they know could wipe us out......The same way humans wouldn't visit some rare Amazonian Tribe if we knew they didn't have vaccines from measles , flu etc. .
I understand u my friend
❤❤❤
When Brian is talking about how he doesn't agree with how many atheists attack theists, or otherwise aggressively defending their positions, instead choosing a more peaceful approach.......Brian reminds of a parent who is about to have their first child, and he talks about how he will never get angry with their child and he will always be understanding and will gladly answer all his child's questions..... And Sam, who already has 4 children, who are now adults, and Sam is looking at Brian, slowly shaking his head thinking...."This man has no idea what he's talking about. He will soon realize the folly of such beliefs." There are some theists out there where peaceful interactions are not just impossible, but they aren't deserved by these theists. Dealing with willfully ignorant people is very taxing. And there are only so many times you can hear things like..... "Evolution is only a theory, not a fact.". Or..."God is going to send you to hell for eternity, but he loves you.". ....and not eventually lose your cool.
All that typing just to say something so stupid
@@tonycucca4499 All that typing? lol Oh yeah, all that typing. It must've taken a whole 3 minutes to type. My hands were all cramping up. I don't know how I do it! I'm curious......Have you said those things I mentioned in my comment? Is that what's got you so sensitive?
@@tonycucca4499 I just want to point out something that's really REALLY bothering me. And this doesn't really have anything to do with you tonycucca4499. And this comment will be a long one, certainly by your standards. Read it......Don't read it. I don't really care, I just need to vent for a minute. It has to do with KZhead, and how much I am hating this site more and more as time goes on. It has to be run by absolutely incompetent people. My comment to you tony was not entirely the comment I had intended. Basically, you called my comment st***d. And by all means, you are allowed your opinions. I essentially called your comment st***d right back, for the reasons that I put in my first response to you. Yet, for some unfathomable reason, my comment would be immediately flagged every time I would try to send it. This confused me. Certainly it wouldn't flag a comment for using the word st***d, of all things, would it? Not to mention, it was used by tony in his comment which was obviously not flagged and removed. So why do they continue to remove my comment? And that is the big problem. It is KZhead's ridiculously unfair and extremely vague rules and policies. What gets one person flagged, others will get away with. It's making me despise a site that I've been a huge fan of for many years.
@@jeremybr2020I don't think you were hugged enough as a child
@@tonycucca4499 What spot on deduction skills you have. You nailed it. Because I'm annoyed at KZhead's perplexing ways......clearly it was because I wasn't hugged enough as a child. What brilliance. lol You know, for someone who thought my first comment was st***d, you have done nothing but surpass that st***dity with every comment you make.
The comment section = Dead Internet Theory
I never thought there was any paradox in Fermi’s statement. Brian’s “ant” analogy has to be a possibility. The 150 lya v 92 billion lya gotta rate up there too….
The Soul is not redundant. It does not need an opposite experience of every option to exist in reality. The Soul has come here with a database of expertise and clear ideas on what Virtues and Abilities to master in this one. Almighty Creator, Pure Consciousness and Emptiness, is not redundant. Multiple timelines occur when the Soul has advanced in its learning and wants to learn 2 lessons simultaneously, where a part of the Soul branches off and experiences the opposite of a decision for the purpose of Mastery. Every decision does not have an opposite, as that is super redundant.
Sam and Brian remember carry thy comfort with Thee! Thank you for attending!
And there’s no need to use BOTH sides of the toilet paper.
A question. If the primary function of every form of life known is to evolve, what is the ultimate purpose. A tool, a weapon, reproduction? Is there evidence of design. Or is it simply the mindless play of enthalpy verses entropy.
Perhaps there isn’t one?
❤❤❤❤❤
The universe and life didn't exist before we were born, right? From our prospective. It only exists because we are here talking about it. Eventually when we die we will be non existent again and from our prospective there will be nothing. Life has given us a window into reality for a very limited amount of time! Some would say, in a blink of an eye.
If we have a perspective that is separate from others can you really call that nothing. Isn't a perspective still a something?
If intelligent life never evolved, then no one would be asking this question. Fish and other animals just live and die without questioning why there was something rather than nothing. Just like stars are born and eventually die or atoms react with other chemicals and turn into something completely different. They are going through the motions or processes. I guess consiousness is the difference. Only we are questioning our place in the universe.
@@philippointon Yes, you already said that. how does that answer my question?
I was just thinking aloud 😊. Yes I will answer your question. To come at it at a different angle. Mabe there is no such thing as nothing. After all "nothing" is a human word to describe emptiness. "Nothing" doesn't really doesn't exist in the universe. The word is used to describe situations in our everyday lives. Not the fabric of reality or what reality is made of. Perhaps it's a language thing.
I suppose it comes down to our anthropocentric view of everything. We are trying to describe things from a viewpoint that is only relevant to our everyday lives. Something or nothing is how we describe things around us, and is useful and necessary for us to navigate our lives. It's not really relevant to describe reality or why we are here. I think it is immensely more complicated and we are unable to describe it using classical thinking.
All biological creatures (of necessity, and for survival), from the simplest amoeba to the most advanced human are simply pattern recognition machines (some with a more elaborate form of communication than others). But nothing said so far (up to <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="713">11:53</a>) falls outside that. We just have more advanced tools for exploring patterns than other biological creatures. But all of these tools must serve some adaptive purpose or we would not be discovering them. Some of these tools will allow a form of evolutionary progress not achievable without them. But it's all Darwinian evolution. Darwin all the way down. I don't think we have reached the point where we are outside of that yet. Now AI adds a whole interesting new twist to this because of what Mustafa Suleyman said recently in a TED talk: AI is just us. All of humanity distilled down into a tool we can interact with. Presumably it will be either the best of us, or the worst of us (or possibly both), but the evolutionary advantage it provides if we train on "the best of us" will be, I believe, exponentially accelerating in terms of evolution.
I agree with the guy who says its impossible for us to meet aliens we couldn't understand. Theres a difference between us and dogs, ants etc. We understand our place in the world, they dont. They dont understand what intelligence even is, let alone how intelligent they are compared to us. We do.
Why is "String Theory" called a theory when it's not testable. String Hypothesis is what it should be called.
exactly. except i think its called a theory more due to its math and physics proofs.
Need to be called horse shite
if it's testable , will no longer be a theory.
@@bornatona3954science ain’t bs
@@kennypowers1945 I agree but this isn't science...just fantasy covered by artificial formulas
Finally!
Love Brian. But just realizing what a fun and learned fellow Sam is too.
Yes Brian. Yes. You are processing beautiful
Sam is absolutely hilarious 😂
Don’t worry my friend brian, i am stepping down, i already thought that
NO WAY!
i guess the saying is then: "if no one is there to observe IT, did IT really happen"
Sam Harris, please look into the work and theories of Salvatore Pais on the SuperForce and His theory of everything? Please Please take his work Seriously. Take it seriously, as if its already been proven in secret. ;) "Its not new physics, its a new perspective on old physics", "String theory is the final theory of everything"-Salvatore Pais.
-GR & QM can’t mesh? -views on Double slit? -Nobel prize guy proving SPACE time is dead??? -consciousness fundamental? ^plz discuss why or why not…or SOMETHING new (at least)
Double a penny a day for a month doesn't give you a billion dollars or more. It's just over 5 million over a period of 30 days.
Why cant we see this in something better than 360p?
Are classical world phenomena objective reality or is a conscious observer necessary for the classical world to materialize? When we look at a mirror we see an image there. But what does a mirror “look like” when unobserved? There can’t be an image in the mirror. It has no capability of producing one. All it does is reflect photons. And what about the universe? What would IT “look like” without observers? There would be quantum particles here and there and everywhere going about their business in their superpositions. But, like an unobserved mirror, no hint of our classical world to be found. There’s nothing to see if no one is looking. If no one is looking at the moon we can’t really be sure that what we see when looking is still there. I would say the quantum world phenomena that we process to see the moon are there but without a particular life form present to perform the processing of that phenomena the image of the moon that we see would not be there. The classical world has no intrinsic presence in the quantum world. As far as the quantum world is concerned the classical world doesn’t exist. So, it can’t produce it. Although the classical world is a product of the quantum world. How can that be? This is a troubling conundrum. What is also troubling is the collapse of the wave function. Wave function collapse happens when, say, a position measurement is made on a quantum system causing its superposition state to be confined to a single location. This collapse is thought to be an anomaly. But is it really? Our sense perceptions are all conducted at the quantum level and do they not act like the measuring devices that cause wave function collapse? Cone cells, for example, take the measure of wavelengths of light by which our sensations of color are produced. Are those light waves not collapsed by those measurements just as they are by our measuring devices? As for our sense of smell, molecules emitted by, for example, a perfume are received by receptors in our noses from which an aroma is created. Once a specific molecule is attached, its cloud of superposition must collapse just as it would if measured by a physicist’s device. Aromas like colors do not exist except for our experience of them. Color is part of the so-called classical world. EM waves have no color. So color is seen as separate from the quantum world. And molecules of a perfume’s scent have no aroma themselves. Also nothing solid exists as far as the qw is concerned although we feel it does exist in the cw. We can stand on a solid floor but our feet don’t actually come in contact with what we perceive to be a solid floor. The electrons we’re made of repel the electrons that the floor is made of. Contact between two things happens at a distance of 10^-8 meters apart from one another. So, our experience of the cw seems entirely different from the qw. But the quantum world is the only world of which the classical world is a particular instance produced by insensible interactions at the quantum level. So, it seems the classical world is a representation of the quantum world by the quantum world.
Remember it's ok to correct one another nor to bring to remembrance and comes with comfort concerning...together!
And old McDonald had a farm.
space and time .. sounds like shades of Wolfram
Somehow I missed Sam in Toronto, again. Big sad.
What is this comment section? haha 😂
Self aware..?
What a low effort and tired comment. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Hilarious.
I love you now, thanks
MAN!!!! Haven't seen this yet
<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="2480">41:20</a> why not just simulate a universe made of super strings?
"You can't test it? You can't even think of a way it could feasibly be tested? Ok... let's park that for now then." I don't understand why this isn't the aproach to string theory. Go and do something useful.
If Brian is this smart with vegan nutrient deficiencies , he would solve String Theory as a ketogenic ' Carnivore '.
Funny to see the difference of the amount of gesturing of these two people. Brian a lot. Sam not so much.
ahh I remember, _Thick Milky_ ... this one was hard to get thru without wanting to scream at both of them.
Brian Greene doing the math in <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="85">1:25</a>:19😂
They're just floating there in their chairs!
Because of their farts?
In the darkness of their own smug presuppositions
It seems silly to compare the intelligence of a dog or other animals to a human being especially when there are 2 types of intelligences using physiological intelligence or the intelligence using tools. Physiologically dogs can run faster than humans, they can hear and smell things better than humans and the list goes on especially for other animals. Sometimes human intellect doesn't really have any substance in the real world of survival, unless of course they're using tools 🤔
So desperate for views he's reposting old videos with new and deceptive titles. Looks like nothing has changed.
been watching a lot of Neil Turok lately, he is a string theory skeptic, would be interesting to hear a discussion between Greene and Turok
I feel the moment alien life is confirmed, be it "intelligent" or "primitive" it'll rock the human species to its core. First I imagine religion will in a sense crumble, from all of the claims of us being only life in the galaxy, to there being more life out there, just life in general, will make a lot of people question religion, majority of religious people. Unless the religion at the time has moved past us being the "chosen" species of god, and can only be one out in the galaxy. Who knows, maybe we'll be similar to Warhammer 40K, or something like Dune, or whatever sci-fi version of humanity there is. Sadly won't likely be there once life outside our planet is discovered
Nah. Nothing will happen. Science orientated people will be interested, religious people will adapt ("God created them as well"), normies will hear it and shrug
Religions like Islam will gladly and easily claim aliens are creations of God. I've already seen Muslims rule that possible aliens would be.
@@michaelkupfer3723 Depends on the religion that will be around, yes the sheep will always follow suit, and swallow whatever lies religion feeds them. But some will wake up, and see how idiotic religion truly is. Depending on what type of religion will be present
Nope only your corrupt reasoning and ignorance will be what dooms you and your kind of anti human
I mean - who knows WHAT’S gonna happen…?
Sorry i am so sleepy u both have a wonderful night
Is like where name nor names, #'s, and formulas came from? Keep watch! Will recognize!
You will find the demon within you..
And to ask what is infinite? Merely a conjecture.
That he had to stop talking to poor tells our story, historically.
These people aren’t bad !
The "brain" size of aliens and thus thier intelligence could make us like ants in comparison. Mega structures with thier own computational abilities is probably near precipice of universal intelligence.
Why did the parent of that crying child not take it out.? Selfish in the extreme.
Deism v Atheism God exists v God does not exist Whichever position you choose it is not based on knowledge. There is no proof of either position. It’s all a matter of what one prefers to believe. That nominates agnosticism as the only realistic position. And it seems to me that atheism is less about opposing belief in God and more about deposing religious dogma. Religions compound the problem of believing in God, each one insisting that theirs is the one true God. These religions are, however, in agreement when it comes to not accepting the way in which God created the world as described by science. They all reject evolution, for instance. In that rejection, their belief in different Gods comes into question. It points to an agreement that all the different Gods created the world in the same way. In that agreement, then, all religions believe in the same God. Furthermore, if there really is one God that created the universe our different versions of that God assert that we really have no idea about who or what that God might be. But the agreement that there is one God is tantamount to an admission that the different religions actually believe in the same God. Our different versions of that one God are merely cultural concoctions that have no real bearing on the one and only Creator. Imagine God as an enormous river with various isolated tributaries branching off on either side where various groups people have settled and regard their particular tributary as God, the giver of life providing the food and water necessary for survival. The people of a particular tributary apply certain characteristics to their God and these are different for each and every tributary. So, they might think their Gods are totally different from one another, but they are actually all part and parcel of the one God. The same is true for all the Gods that we believe in. They are all the same God. The God that created nature, created the nature of things, created the universe as it is. So, it seems entirely reasonable to propose that belief in all Gods is assumed from whatever was responsible for the creation of the universe.
They talk about making collider the size of the galaxy... What if the universe is one giant collider? Science would prove it is so. 🤯
Sam Harris ties himself in knots when it comes to animal exploitation. There is no such thing as a happy animal who ends up in the food chain, although a very tiny few do lead far better lives than the vast majority. He knows however that they all get stabbed during their childhood years, they all get sent to the same slaughter house and they all have selectively bred bodies that are not conducive to a life of health and well-being. Sadly Sam clings to his steak in a muddle of attachment and delusion. Love Brian Green, brains and compassion 💚
What is famous? Better yet what is who am I famous? Going to public places look at me! To be glorified by men in front! Keep watch!
Thy Lord suckled thy prong mightily.
The comment section has been lobotomized.
Thank you. Please describe what you see or comprehend. I suspect you are correct on more levels than currently calculated. Teach me something. (To be fair I will hold you accountable) Tread cautiously Not for my benefit.. but do so for everyone. Thx :)😅 Jeremy
Reality is a play of ideas on substance that is the answer.