306. Fear of a Black Universe (8)
2 (1h 19m 35s):
So, so yeah. The idea now of unification in that sense is that there's an ambiguity or like, you cannot distinguish these forces from each other. So one idea is that imagine you have the world of, you know, you have the notion of you have consciousness, you have the realm of consciousness, you have the realm of, of matter and matter, and fields and forces, things like that. Maybe at some unified level, none of those concepts, right? They're all, all, because there's a symmetry between them. They're all, it means that they're, neither of them are, are, are good descriptions of actually, of the universe.
2 (1h 20m 16s):
But basically there was some symmetry breaking and this, this consciousness, this the distinguish between matter and con all these things, space and time, right? Is some kind of symmetry break in that now where these things appear to be different phenomenon of something that's, that, that, that, that supersedes them. That, but those things are not, they don't exist at that level. But I don't, that's just, I'm just carrying, I'm just doing that inference that kind of the same type of inference we do. Right? By analogy, with what we've learned so far in the unification process in physics, which is the symmetry break in, there's this notion that things cannot be distinguished at that level.
2 (1h 21m 1s):
And those descriptions are not useful descriptions for, for that, you know, unified description.
1 (1h 21m 9s):
Do you think mind or consciousness needs some kind of substrate to run on
2 (1h 21m 14s):
Based on the, what we've learned from Albert Einstein, which is the idea that you see gravity, the gravitational force rests on a principle called background independence that you have to give up actually the very notion of a background space time, right? Because any background is as good as any other background. So therefore, if any, if they're all equivalent, you have to give it up. So it's as you have background independence. So if you take this background independence principle to the furthest extent when we believe it actually is fundamental, then I would say that it would not require a substrate to run on.
1 (1h 21m 54s):
Hmm. Interesting. I think that's what Deepak thinks. I think he would agree with that. That it, it is its own thing that doesn't need a material machine to run on. Right? So then that takes it into a different realm. Do you ever wish you could come back like 500 years from now and find out what they discovered? Like, Oh, dark energy, we figured that out 200 years ago. Here it is. Oh yeah, I would, right?
2 (1h 22m 20s):
I would, I would. And you know, I, you know, one of my guesses is that I think there was Ayman corps, which is like, you, you'll come back and realize that how stupid we were. And it was like something really simple, you know?
1 (1h 22m 30s):
Right, right. Why didn't I think of that? Right? Like Huxley, when he read Darwin's book, he go, Oh, why didn't I think of that? It's so obvious.
2 (1h 22m 38s):
Exactly. Right.
1 (1h 22m 39s):
Right. But we didn't. Right. So it's just the way it goes. Right. All right, let me wrap this up by reading your final passage in the book, which I really loved. You know, again, it's, it's, you know, just sort of this speculative
2 (1h 22m 53s):
Creative means so much to me that you like my book, by the way? Oh,
1 (1h 22m 56s):
By, oh, here it is. John Joe,
2 (1h 22m 57s):
Fan of your
1 (1h 22m 57s):
Writing. Thank you. Yes. Well, John Joe McFadden, that's who he referenced in the book. I had him on this show. He was talking about something completely different, but then we got off on consciousness and he started talking about field. So yes. Gave him proper credit for that. That's right. So you write here in your, you know, the cosmic mind is contained in the local minds, though hidden from our everyday local experiences. What this means for you and me is that our consciousness contains an aspect of the cosmic mind veic philosophy. This is referred to as the atman or the self. This conclusion to some might seem awe-inspiring or preposterous. When I set out to write this book, there is no way I could have imagined presenting this argument.
1 (1h 23m 40s):
If you find this line of reasoning preposterous, it's even crazier that we came into being, to even be able to ponder these questions. Giving a shout out to the distinguished Indian physicist who you quoted earlier, No one ever died from theorizing. So congratulations on the book and go for it. Keep, keep theorizing because who knows, right? There's so many great unanswered questions.
2 (1h 24m 2s):
Well look forward to having a cup of coffee in the near future, in person and, and continue the conversation.
1 (1h 24m 9s):
Yeah. When you come to, when you come to California, Southern California, I'll take you to see Feynman's van. It's pretty cool. We'll take pictures of it and you can use that as your author photo for your next book.
2 (1h 24m 19s):
I will hold you to that.
1 (1h 24m 20s):
Okay. All right, Ste. Thank you so much.
