Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I apologize if you have all seen this already, the dude is actually pretty smart.

Half of it was kinda over my head.

Thoughts?

I remember two years ago probably I used to love watching his first few videos that he made because they were so hysterical. It's always funny to go back and view them again.

Stream: www.athenelive.com/brykon
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/Brykon50?feature=mhee

agreed. this whole science research shit kind of caught me by surprise.

Good stuff, if I understood correctly this is not a ToE but more a statement that we need to keep knowledge open, stay open-minded and skeptical and keep investigating. He explains how the brain is susceptible to bias and resistant to new ideas. It does a good job at explaining the current problems in physics as well as outlining a lot of knowledge in neuroscience and physics, without being sensational, calling conspiracy and making crackpot claims.

His take on quantum mechanics is basically the "observer causes collapse of the wave function" interpretation applied to the universe as well as our consciousness.

Now this interpretation states that all that we perceive is that way because we are observers and measure what's around us, and if we weren't the universe would basically be an uncollapsed cloud of "fluff" (everything is in wave form until observed in the form of particles) since it has no observer, thus what we observe is abstract. (This is where the Shrodinger's Cat paradox comes from)

It brings alot of philosophical questions. What exactly constitutes an observer? The first living cell? The first thinking specie? How can we explain what seems to have happened before that then, or did they?

C=Hf is an equation saying that our consciousness is energy (C seems to be a poorly defined constant, I'm not sure if this is a serious equation and I don't really understand it, it seems to also say that all energy is conscious). That reminds me of when Carl Sagan said "we're made of star-stuff, we are a way for the universe to know itself".

The important message is at the end, and it hits like a truck. Summed up in three sentence: "The more we cling to belief systems, the least likely we are to make truly free choices. By observing this we are able to enhance our free will. If the laws of physics are down to probability, then it's logical to say that we need to work together to figure out the odds of what will benefit us the most."

I'm not sure what a "metaphysical correlation" is.

Also, Joklem, you realize the brain doesn't have anywhere near 100 billion neurons? It SAYS 100 billion on Wikipedia...but if you check the citation, that's not actually the figure quoted. Also, because of the limitations of human perception when viewing very small objects only a few molecules in size, the portrayal of those neurons is completely unreal. This movie is a pander to people like you who confuse legitimate science with "really cool looking stuff".

...interestingly, my brother initially had what you would call severe dyslexia, but with training, today can read and write better than 99% of the population.

...Humans are fundamentally irrational, to treat irrationality as "primitive" or undesirable or contrary to intended or proper operation of the brain is pseudoscientific and represents nothing more than social bias...this is why I say psychiatry is a pseudoscience.

Self and social awareness correlates, but is not causally linked with, dopamine or any other neurotransmitter, this is another bit of pseudoscience. No more than using drugs is causally linked with being on top of the world. Perception =/= reality, but that doesn't mean reality is unreal and entirely defined by perception.

Part 2:

The concept of "living vicariously" predates neuroscience; changed nothing, just added a bunch of false assumptions...

"Self awareness" is the province of philosophers and not neuroscientists and the concept of self-awareness as a morally positive state is as old as classical philosophy. It has absolutely no scientific basis, however. Movie loses all all scientific basis when it makes an argument for mind/body dualism.

Group behavior is an extension of survival of the fittest; there is no contradiction. There is no such thing as the "objective self". Science cannot produce ethics or an "ethical paradigm" ; any such claim is pseudoscientific.

"Labelling" and "imposing expectations" are not "maladaptive behavior"; this claim is flatly contrary to science. Essentially, it's putting them on the level of the appendix. Those behaviors exist because they have definite utility. Selfish behavior does objectively exist but scientists don't deal in such terms.

Continuing viewing/commentary...

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Woohoo, baseless Aestu-assumptions! I don't state or even hint at an endorsement of the observer causes collapse interpretation, I simply explained it so that watchers here knows what he has in mind.

His video points out scientific findings in neuroscience and physics, I can't personally attest to the neuroscience ones being accurate, but his physics ones are mostly accurate. He then has an idea or opinion and makes a correlation. The goal is to encourage people to think. There's no reason to ridiculize it, unless you're a pseudo-intellectual under the illusion that you know everything and that you're better than everyone else.

E=hf, if C=hf then E=C

Breaking down:

C=mc^2
Cϕ = Hamiltonianϕ
ΔCΔt > h/2
Δ(C) = work

According to that equation, your coffee mug is conscious, the planet is conscious, every atoms are conscious and all motion is conscious choice, and obviously that seems not to be the case. And that's just one of the problems, there are many problems with the observer causes collapse interpretation itself which is clearly outlined in the Shrodinger's Cat paradox. It's also a violation of the anthropic principle, which while not set in stone, is a good thing to have in mind when doing science.

I personally see no need to quantify self-awareness in physics, I was merely pointing out that he has an investigative mind.

This is not an announcement of a groundbreaking discovery, it's a statement and I think it might get people who watch his videos interested in the science. He admitted to this in a Q&A. Nitpicking facts where he's wrong in this video is pointless, if this was a valid scientific theory it wouldn't be in the form of a video.

The video is about thinking, and thinking about a mindfuck like the interpretation he outlines is fun, actually.

I'm not sure if the video is just a troll or the producer really is on your wavelength in terms of having a taste for slick pseudoscentific metaphysical ramblings, but the point I'm making is that there is no science here.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

You're right, there's no new science in there. There's an underlying message though.

And you wouldn't expect that message from Athene of all people, which underlines his statement about bias at the end.

1) People will ridiculize him for making a video without getting the message and/or intent.

2) Some will blindly follow his theory because it's cool.

This is going to be interesting.

It's not a "theory" and theories aren't judged on being "cool". His "message" is to be open-minded, and if you need to listen to a 45m rant about pseudoscientific BS to know to be open-minded, you must not be very open-minded at all.

Athene is a self-promoter and that's all. He just wants to seek further aggradization by trying to contrast his persona as a raging nerd with being some sort of deep thinker. The mantle is a popular one but it has no more basis in fact than it does with you.

Deep thinkers don't go for slick flicks, they think in terms of ideas and substance. There's a reason that superficial documentaries rely so much on this kind of fluff and real ideas, in philosophical works and scientific journals, are typically presented in a no-nonsense, matter-of-fact manner.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

We agree about the hypothesis/idea (my use of theory refers to the title of the video), so I think we can stop this "debate".

Thinking funny and weird things when you start learning about quantum mechanics is basically a rite of passage. There's nothing wrong with enjoying thoughts and stories if you have a clear line drawn between reality and imagining the possibilities of the unknown (for your information, a process essential to progress in science - an idea, or guess is needed before computing if it's right or wrong). I watched his Q&A, and it seems like the guy has that line drawn despite his obvious ego and publicity.

You seem to think that I'm trying to say that he's going to revolutionize physics overnight.

I see no reason to ridiculize him for this, remember that this is who we're talking about here:



Edit: That's funny, and his documentary video might get people interesting in learning more about science so I'm not going to shit on it.

I was wondering if this was the same Athene that inspired my hate for Italians.

Following in this thread: Aestu claiming that I push pseudoscientific BS because he doesn't actually read the posts he's replying to.



Same, I didn't think it was the same Athene that I saw in videos I watched a few years back until I looked into it.

Don't make me fist-pump you into oblivion.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Basically what I got from that video is that Athenes neighbors hate him and he keybinds everything to his number pad like I have for the past 5 years.

9 level 90s and 10 85s, Damn I need another hobby.

Bosonic string theory that needs 26 dimensions and tachyons would disagree. Those hold up on paper but you don't hear about them because they're not falsifiable, thus not taken seriously as an answer to current problems in physics.

There's a few string theories, M-theory is a particularly interesting one.

And of course, there's the part where no one understands a god damn thing about what string theorists are talking about.