Seth Lloyd - Physics of the Observer

Does the concept of observation have deep relevance in fundamental physics? What about in quantum physics where some kind of observation seems to be needed to transform “wave function” probabilities into actual events? What’s an “observation” anyway? What does it take to be an “observer”? Must it have some kind of sentience?

Seth Lloyd is a professor of mechanical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He refers to himself as a “quantum mechanic”.

Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[brunomoura]

For sure, one of my favorite channels on YouTube. I'd like to thank you Robert and Peter for such a great iniciative. It's amazing to be introduced to all these new concepts and interpretations of so many different areas of knowledge. I wish I had 'n' more lives to study most of these themes. Thanks to your Channel I sort of can reach this extra time. Congratulations for your project.

Best regards from Brazil.

[JustJohnice]

I find the more I expand my consciousness, I have no friends....But this brings me so much peace and

[unclebirdman]

I am quite happy within things being here >and< there.

[foxmlder]

I cannot express my gratitude for this show enough. Thank you!

[katherinestone]

Wigner's right. As leading edge physicist (and parapsychologist) Dean Radin says, "... more refined experiments in quantum mechanics are suggesting that there actually is no fixed reality with properties out there until it is actually observed."

[amanda]

Thank you for your bits of information

[-dwalkthroughs]

Great job Robert! There are many great minds who recognize QM's limitations.
Here your guest voluntarily binds himself to and defends QM, although admitting numerous times, QM and other theories leave one "unsatisfied" - and that won't change. I'm glad you asked him why he felt that way. It seems the only way out for him, is the multi-world theory - that he also admits, many people don't like.
Your guest seems to recoil, or is also unsatisfied by sentience or consciousness as playing a role in reality - perhaps because it forces one to accept that there is more that just matter and some levels of energy one can observe?
As you mentioned Robert, how does an electron observe, and collect information, without some level of sentience or consciousness - or without an electron being part of a field of consciousness?
If anything "won't change" it is the level of dissatisfaction one will experience, without considering other philosophical possibilities other than: matter is king, and consciousness is a rude disturbing peasant who continually resists being banished from the conversation.
Funny though, matter, like a rock for example, can't consider QM - because it's not conscious, at least on a surface level we can communicate with - although it may sit in a field of conscious energy.
So rock on with your dissatisfaction Mr Q Mechanic, like you have for years, with no hope of a solution within your self-imposed limitations, if that's what your chosen path is.
However, there are different philosophical angles which reconcile many apparent puzzles or contradictory observations - but they exist in the realm of consciousness, which is too undefinable for some and therefore considered unreal, for those who put the physical realm on a pedestal, or on an altar of the only actually true reality.
But consider one can see or observe anything with one's physical eyes, only when an outside energy allows it - namely light.
In a sealed dark room, one's eyes can't see a thing, even though the room could be full of mirrors or other objects, including a light switch. Knowledge of a light switch, could help.

With philosophical light, one can see clearly, even within this dark universe, many layers of truth, which are satisfying upon discovery. The caveat is that the philosophical truths are not just speculations, but rather tangible, higher revelations which actually resonate in one's heart and mind. Such revelations can be directly experienced within the heart and mnd, or passed on to the materially shortchanged, by one whose higher consciousness has literally been enlightened by those in higher realms of consciousness.
The proofs descending from those realms, is the source of satisfaction for each observer of both internal and external realities.
If "many worlds" could exist to explain the simultaneous position of two separated electrons, why not the possibility of many realms of consciousness, providing higher world-views to harmonize juxtapositions found in different dimensional realities?
Different angles of vision, can harmonize ideas, philosophically to a degree, depending on the dimension it's viewed through. Here's an example that comes to mind:
In Euclidean geometry, a point exists and can be envisioned, but it has no actual dimensions - but as soon as you have two points and connect them, you have a line segment which is one-dimensional. (Interesting to consider here how something comes out of nothing - dimension-ally speaking - whose only origin is in consciousness... but I digress somewhat).
Envision that line segment, viewed from the front, like a horizontal log on laying on the ground or floating on a pond - with each end of the log representing the point of an electron.
Turn that log on it's end, and view from above. The log's end point, representing the electron appears again as a single point, therefore having no dimensions from the observer's adjusted angle of vision - although the other end-of-the-log-electron, is being represented in the same space as observed from above.
Perhaps this is why some consider Euclidean geometry to have aspects of the metaphysical. The take-away I'm going for here is that measurements, relative positions and connecting energies - such as consciousness and life itself - already exists on more subtle realms that are not always subject to earthly, 3-dimensional measurement. But ultimately these subtle formations are the blueprints for those forms and energies that are revealed in the observational layering, understood by the earthly / materially conditioned 3-D mind, and measuring apparatus of different types.
The two log end points are in identical places in one form of measurement by dimension, and in two different places when seen by an observer with a different dimensional vision.
When allowing that consciousness exists as the platform of observation / perception / knowledge acquisition and storage - and allowing that consciousness can exist and expand on many levels or dimensions of reality, many very satisfying realizations of both matter and different subtle realms of normally "unseen" reality can be experienced.
It is a matter of choice, knowledge and good fortune, that observation of truths behind the normal 3-D mechanics and measurements can unfold - which is sometimes contrary to what is seen by limited physical vision and resultant breeding of unsatisfying theories. Many people seek truth and satisfaction; but we differ on the paths to find it. Free will is a good thing.

[vm-bzcd]

Seth is so refreshingly charming and open minded re this "unsolvable" problem in Quantum Mechanics. The idea of a Single Universal Consciousness that "observes" everything is quite appealing to me😀

[strongblackcoffee]

All we have are perceptions and thoughts, that take place in consciousness. Why postulate a material world outside of us? Maybe we are infinite, eternal consciousness that has localized and limited itself in time and space.🤔

[dongshengdi]

Any kind of measurement involves things that are part of the universe and these always interact, interfere with it or whatever, I don't think we have a super clear demonstration of how the consciousness determines the clump pattern instead of the interference pattern. But these experiments may potentially help us better understand consciousness or if we understood consciousness by other means we could better understand this experiment and ultimately more about quantum world.
.
"The observer gives the world the power to come into being, through the very act of giving meaning to that world; in brief, No consciousness; no communicating community to establish meaning? Then no world!" - Physicist John Wheeler

[Fendt]

Love Love Love This Channel. Thank you!

[michaelward]

Seth Lloyd is a very intelligent man he changed my perception of the universe with his book programming the universe. You would not believe the mental metamorphism and synchronicities that happens to you by observing the universe. Thank you Seth Lloyd for your book.

[factchecker]

4:14 "An observer is the measurement and not necessarily a sentient creature"
BUT WHO IS MAKING THE MEASUREMENT. Surely, there is a sentient creature who is making the measurement.

[lightkeeper]

Interesting talk and beautiful scenery.

[dongshengdi]

"Why do people cling with such ferocity to the belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the illusion of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism."
～ Richard Conn Henry is an Academy Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, author of one book and over 200 publications on the topics of astrophysics and various forms of astronomy.

[whitefiddle]

So the universe we observe is disturbed. I like the sound of that.

Likewise the observers are disturbed. Even better!

I like where this is all going. I can't wait to see how this all ends up in a useful understanding of how the universe works. 👍 (And I love how this ended with a silly chuckle.)

[Desertphile]

"Observer:" any physical system or apparatus that interacts with a quantum system and extracts information from it. In quantum mechanics, the act of observation or measurement is associated with the collapse of the wave function, where the quantum system is forced into a specific state or outcome. This collapse occurs when the quantum system interacts with the measuring apparatus or becomes entangled with other systems. So, an "observer" can be a physical device, an instrument, or any entity that plays a role in the measurement process, regardless of consciousness.

As for "up to human beings, " the arrogance of that phrase is breathtaking.

[rikkafe]

I am a complete layman but always fascinated and the observer aspect has always troubled me. Nice to see a video which explains the uncertainty that physicists themselves have about this aspect. An aspect which is normally just glossed over. I think it is very important that science explains all it's uncertainties rather than portray everything as a clearly understood fact.

[SugarRushTimes-gsqp]

“Any interaction will get information.” Love that

[hugh]

The search for knowing requires not getting stuck on believing. Counter intuitively, to believe I know, leads to rationalizing things to fit belief. Knowing arises from experiencing. Recognizing what I experience, rather than what I believe, is knowing.