Superconsciousness: Is the universe a conscious mind?

What if the universe is self-aware? Is there a cosmic superconsciousness? Could it be a giant brain? Is the universe a conscious mind? There is a short but lazy answer, and there is longer but more intriguing answer. The lazy answer is: We humans are made of pieces of the universe. We are conscious, so the universe is conscious through us.

This is the standard short answer to the question of a conscious universe. But could the universe have a consciousness separate from us or any other conscious being? Could it be a kind of super consciousness? This concept has a name. It is called panpsychism.

The concept of Panpsychism has been around for thousands of years. It is an essential aspect of many religions, from the Old Testament's omnipresent God to the Brahman of Hinduism and Buddhism. In fact, in Buddhism, nothing exists except consciousness.

Theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson, the man who conceived of the Dyson sphere, embraced panpsychism and said that the universe not only operates through our consciousness but a consciousness of its own.

Could this be true?

First we have to establish what consciousness is. Neuroscientist and psychiatrist Giulio Tononi, at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, has proposed a way to measure how conscious a thing is. He proposes that consciousness has to do with how much control a being has over itself or things around it. He even invented a measurement unit called phi to label how conscious something is.
#superconsciousness
This theory separates intelligence from consciousness, which are two different things. Super computers for example, which are highly intelligent, can routinely out-think humans and beat them at chess and Jeopardy, but they don’t have a will of their own. The programmer controls it. So intelligence and consciousness are two different things.

Based on this line of thinking we can say that a tree is more conscious than a rock. A worm is more conscious than a tree. A cat is more conscious than a worm. A human is more conscious than a cat. And the ultimate consciousness could be the universe itself.

If this is the way consciousness works, then the complexity of an organism’s brain has something to do with its level of consciousness. And scientists do have good evidence that the seat consciousness resides in brains. If we are more conscious than all the other animals, as we appear to be, it surely is no coincidence that we also have the most complex brain.

Consciousness seems to be an emergent property of highly interconnected and communicating systems like the brain which is an interconnected network of neurons that can fire chemical and electronic signals. Consciousness is not a property of individual neurons but results from the interactions of many neurons.

And what are neurons? They are triggered by certain stimuli and can send signals to each other. And large complex networks of these neurons seem to emerge into consciousness. The more complex the network, the more conscious something appears to be.

So is there some kind of network such that a “communication” of sorts might be happening at the quantum level between entangled pairs of particles. There is a humongous network of galaxies in the universe, many hundreds of billions of galaxies. This is not dissimilar from the network of the billions of interconnected neurons in our brain. The difference appears to be that each of our brain cells can communicate or at least fire a signal to other brain cells. Do the galaxies have such a communication mechanism between them?

It doesn’t appear so, but you have to remember that at the center of almost all galaxies, there is a black hole. It’s like the nucleus of a brain cell. What’s happening inside a black hole? We have no idea…because all our physics equations break down at the event horizon of a black hole – this is the point where time and space cease to exist and Einstein’s equations don’t work.

#superconsciousness

Is it possible that something is happening here that we just don’t know about? The black hole could only be analogous to a brain cell if somehow they were connected to each other and could send signals to each other.

If that was the case, a vast network of communicating trillion black holes would act like a gigantic information processor, and indeed be intelligent and possibly conscious. This would truly be a kind of super consciousness that could theoretically control not only our universe, but perhaps time and space itself.

But I think I’m getting way too excited about a completely speculative possibility. Practically, we have to ask, does the universe need to be conscious in order to arrive at its present state. In other words, does what we see around us need a consciousness to direct the events that lead up to what we observe, that lead to life? Would what we see right now be any different if the universe was utterly without consciousness? See the answer in the video above.

[dr.drakeramoray]

best thing about this guy is that he keeps an open mind about everything. ask a good question and he WILL answer it, no matter what side of "philosophical spectrum" it is on, so to say

[Mavrik]

Today I learned a new word: Panpsychism.
Thank you.

[tommyvictorbuch]

Perhaps our brains are tiny Universes, that contains beings pondering about the nature of it.

[hlmco]

Great approach. Different views are presented in an objective, rigorous, not biased way. That's why I like your vids. Btw, nice intro

[hdebbache]

Thanks for the video, I have a few objections:
- we don't know if the universe or part of it changes it's behaviors based on what happens around it. Our body cells can't even see our environment because a. They don't have the required senses and b. If they did they would see a bunch of dirt and sand and other random cells and wouldn't even understand "our environment"
- the universe or a sub part of it which may be conscious may operate on vastly different timescales absolutely inaccessible to us.
- when we look down from our level to a cell, then molecule, then atom etc, we see order. None of these elements could suspect the presence of another level above, even if they had the intelligence or the senses required. A molecule would never see the cell because for the molecule only other molecules exist and interact in a certain way. Thus it seems pretentious to assert we would be the last level in a seemingly infinite or vast universe
- laws of nature are not indicative of the intentional or changing behaviors of the universe. After all, our cells and ourselves always obey the same laws

Thank for the video!

[tatiananikolskaya]

Thank you Arvin for your great work, your open minded nature and your talent to explain complicated things! Your channel is now my favorite! I’m a scientist myself, a biologist and your videos have brightened my days and broadened my horizons!! Thumbs us!!!

[indytheshredder]

this man knows that we stoners love his channel 😂

[akostarkanyi]

This was excellent! Clear, interesting, based on facts and easily understandable. I mention that Teilhard de Chardin's theory about consciousness arranging its own emergence and development throughout the history of the Universe fits here.

[Sulerix]

Great overview of the concept but the conclusion they presented as the most likely was constructed from a false premise and major oversight. The premise being that there is no apparent communication between galaxies. This premise is intrinsically false and is most easily proven to be by the simple fact that we can see other galaxies. To see anything requires photons to interact with an object and then transfer that information to your eye, so the simple fact that we can see other galaxies proves that galaxies are transferring information between eachother and are thus communicating.

Though that is only one means by which they communicate. Entangled particles, cosmic radiation, neutrinos, gravity, intergalactic asteroids & meteors, "dark matter & energy" etc are all examples of intergalactic force and information transfer. Gravitational influences and exchanges in matter and energy between galaxies also cause physical changes, as resources are being exchanged and in gravitationally interacting galaxies the very motion of galaxies are changed.

The universe as we see it, down to its most fundamental components, could not exist if it's components were not interacting, exchanging information and altering each other, which is what communication is by definition.

As interactions and information exchange, both subatomic and intergalactic, are intrinsic and fundamental and the evidence of this communication abundant, it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that the universe should be regarded conscious, in at very least an expanded definition of the word.

[currently]

Brrrruuuh. My room is just starting to fill with smoke my man, This guys is on it!







But seriously, I just watched his video on Einstein's relativity, the one that he released a few months ago, and I have got to say this is one of the best science channels. I am absolutely fascinated with the way that he is able to present the information in a way that a simpleton like me can grasp. I think that, if during the lock-down, more kids were able to watch this type of content, then they would be much more motivated in their studies. Normally, the factors that allow kids to thrive in school are beyond just the simple subject matter as any library could offer that. Rather, it is the professors, teachers, students, and the subject matter coming together that gives the student the drive to succeed. I really hope the best for this channel, to a level of success that some of the better known YouTube channels have, like Sci Show or Crash Course. Those shows are great for their audience and for what they cover, but this channel is offers a deeper dive into certain questions that many people find absolutely fascinating, and that deeper dive could be what sets off a new generation of astrophysicists and philosophers.
Thank you for your videos----

WHAT A MAD LAD! I expanded the "see more" on the video's description, and there was the video summary in text form. Do you know how helpful that is for memory recall! There are a three main senses that facilitate our learning: auditory, visual, tactile. Some people learn better from reading, others from listening, others from doing. I don't think that it is much of a stretch to say "doing astrophysics" is not a tactile activity. having the visuals in the video along with the auditory narration really helps people learn. And then, to top it off, this guy goes ahead and places the video summary in the description. THIS GUY JUST WANTS TO SEE THE WORLD LEARN!

[noelwalterso]

If there is a god then physics is the study of it's anatomy .

[JRichardson]

I’m 22 seconds in but want to comment before I watch. I love the synchronicity of the timing of this video and my personal realization of what cosmic consciousness is, and why I always felt like we are “one” but never understood what the heck that meant or how that’s possible. I feel it more than I believe it or know it.

[Khatz]

It's not so much that the Universe reacts and changes course, rather, as Carl Sagan famously put it, that "we are the Universe experiencing itself subjectively." Thanks for making a video on this!

[paxanimi]

Carl Sagan: “we are a way for the cosmos to know itself”.
I wonder if he ever considered a universal consciousness, aside from religious gods.

[periurban]

Another excellent video.

Tononi's definition (as you describe it) would make fire conscious. That definition ducks the question by denying the advent of self, which is the only worthwhile test of consciousness (I Think Therefore I Am).

Consciousness is described as an emergent property of complexity by those who do not know where consciousness resides! Certainly, it resides within the brain, but also in the dendrites of the rest of the body, as we discover following certain transplant or reducing surgeries, where tastes and preferences may be lost or transferred to a new host.

Consciousness is quite likely derived from quantum wave collapse operating at the smallest level in the microtubules of the neurons, within benzene rings that are contained within the incredibly complex and highly refined chemistry.

The galaxies are part of gigantic structures which are linked by plasma. They do look very much like neurons in the way they connect, and they are much more complex and interlinked than the standard model of a 13.5 billion year old galaxy would allow.

If the universe has any consciousness at those scales then thoughts might take trillions of years to form.

It is not scientific of you to imply that science denies the possibility of a universal consciousness, especially with regard to the evolution of living things, not least because science as yet has no explanation for the origin of life. Which is not to say a pre-existing consciousness is required, but science cannot rule such a thing out.

As for the Big Bang, there are so many inconsistencies with the theory (which is really only supported by the red shift observations) that I am almost certain it is wrong. Where is all the lithium? Why has no proton decay been seen? Where are the very large elliptical galaxies?

Many observations within our own sight cannot be explained by the laws of physics as they are applied currently. Hence the need for inflation, dark matter, dark energy (as well as the previously mentioned proton decay). We have no idea how to reconcile Einstein and quantum theory, and I agree that a guiding super-consciousness is not required. However, with so much unknown and so many observations not matching what we think we know, it is hubris to suggest that the things we do not yet know will conform to the structures that we do know.

Every time we look at something new we discover things that we could never have predicted, and our theories and philosophies struggle under the weight of new facts.

None of what I say is meant to diminish science, because I think it's by far the best mechanism we have to find out what's really going on.

Koch is also incorrect. His definition gives an autonomous robot consciousness. Again, denying the self.

We have no idea whether or not the universe is the same everywhere. Indeed, tantalizing new research implies just the opposite! Uniformity is assumed from the mechanism of the Big bang, even though what we know of physics tells us that we should expect to see the opposite. As the early universe expanded faster than photons could travel the different parts of it should not have been able to influence one another to gain the kind of uniformity that we see around us today.

Are you really suggesting that the effects of a conscious universe would be visible to us? Or understood by us? If the universe was actively conscious, as in having Godlike powers over time and space, it would be able to hide its presence from us very easily should it wish to do so. What makes you think that the effects of a universal consciousness would be seen within the universe? Or in this part of the universe?

The believer, the panpsychist and materialist are all guilty of filling the gaps in their knowledge with philosophy, as the Ancient Greeks did with regard to the strange lights they saw wandering about the sky. That philosophy lasted until Galileo and Newton understood what was going on and described planets and gravity.

The Taoist turned out to be the most correct thinker of those early days, because he points out (a bit like Donald Rumsfeld) that you cannot know what you don't know, that the known is not the unknowable, and that the unknowable will never be known.

The answer to the question posed by the title of your video - Is the Universe A Conscious Mind? - is, how could we ever know? We have no way of knowing what such a thing would look like, or where its effects would be seen.

[SpudHead]

I thought of this concept myself many years ago when I was bored one day in University. I had no idea that others had done so too. One thing though, I think you’re assuming human like motivations and thought processes to something that would be so unimaginably more intelligent than we are, that it wouldn’t think anything like us at all. And I don’t see why being conscious means you have to manipulate other things, like planet formation etc. why can’t the universe be ultra conscious, and just be?

[eddd]

The universe in your dream appears to be completely different from the one you physically live in. I think consciousnesses itself can be relative.

[gothama]

Buddha taught everything about universe except some scenarios where normal human mind cannot understand unless if he is in a higher state of consciousness. Buddha always taught how to end the cycle of suffering of our lives through the consciousness of the universe

[hoarder]

Did this video really just start with a weed smoking reference... I love this guy

[shethtejas]

Arvin Ash, THANK YOU as always for continuing to include us, your viewers, in your journey to know the Universe. This Video can serve as a very good cross between science and religion. There are grey lines between the two sides. Standing on those lines, both the sides seem to be saying the same thing. All pervasive, omni-present god versus supermassive black holes making a magnanimous, humongous interconnected conscious blob. Great video!