A Relativistic Theory of Consciousness 

6:43 The existence of an observer 😊😊

Excellent work! I enjoyed reading Nir's paper.

1:02:03 The time to get over the obsession with the physical matter was not easy for any ordinary guy to comprehend..

There’s no gap because consciousness dissolves absolutely just like everything in your reality outside of time and relativity (flow state). Non dual respective is how. Collapse the duality. The fact that you can collapse it just by shifting your experiential perspective reveals the relative and absolute illusion. That’s why consciousness is a hard and easy problem because you will go in circles trying to define it until you experientially step outside the set. Like swimming sideways in the current instead of with the current.

This is a fascinating talk but it's also highly abstract and intangible. I don't think you and your clone can ever be an actual equivalent point of reference because as soon as the clone is created the experiences begin to deviate. Heart rate, blinking.. Even if you put them in white boxes with the exact same experiences surely there would be deviations in the physical properties of the human body which would alter the feedback loop of consciousness. I've possibly missed the point but regardless I enjoyed the video. Nice interview.

1:07:13 Experience and neurological patterns are all equal and the same thing it is just a different frame of reference 🙏🙏 Interesting new thought

Extremely interesting. Thank you.

What if I'm a neuroscientist observing my own neural patterns? Wouldn't this put me in two frames of reference at the same time? Or even more precisely, I'm the same frame of reference observing the "same" phenomenon, but I see it two different ways.. doesn't a paradox arise in such case? (Relative to this theory)

16:32 The Existential Reality being same 2differrent observers observe some portions of it and think it as different. So both of them will need to observe reality from all angles to get to the existential reality. This capability is what is consciousness and The human neurological and cognitive capability makes it possible for all to understand the single existential reality 🙏🙏🙏

3:45 Childhood fantasises are so powerful understanding how the human being evolves❤❤ Time machine

Great interview I donate to Nir's research!

47:30 Measurements by all elements that is observing😊😊 so well said. The reference makes it very very interesting 😊😊

1:04:06 Understanding that the experience is beyond logic physics and measurements but just experiencing 🙏🙏🙏

1:05:17 Realisation is another term that is now acceptable in scientific World as something that is real🙏🙏🙏

26:52 Sleep is also a conscious state where in you know that you exist and are at rest. If someone calls you out you answer and respond😊😊😊 Understanding that is what is missing and would love to know more on that❤❤❤

It's awesome hearing about a completely novel theory, and it seems sound. Recently was reading about craniopagus conjoined twins, specifically Krista and Tatiana Hogan; given their anatomy, its interesting to think about their described experiences through the lens of this.

8:46 Consciousness is something different. It is real physical and relative.. so lovely

IMO a lot of the debate around "what is the philosophical/scientific framework that allows for consciousness as we experience it" is fairly settled in scholarly physics and neuroscience, and any modern debate is more or less a religious/ideological one to try to (consciously or unconsciously) preserve certain cultural status quos or historical narratives that inform how we treat other people and respect autonomy. It would be fun to see you interview a neurologist that works with people with missing parts of their brains. All of your frames of reference in your mind require active physical systems that evolved those frames of reference, it's completely apparent in sensory processing systems (including aggregate systems like grid cells) of the brain while emotions are muddier since it's a distributed function. And then there are frames of reference for the frames of references and more. A mouse apparently has 7 separate mappings of their whiskers per hemisphere for example, in a mirrored layout to the whiskers on the face. Some self awareness has plenty of room in a very sophisticated system like that and is basically required in complex adaptive systems. Now why the universe ended up this way IDK I blame entropy.

32:09 Everything a feather or an iron ball falls at the same speed .. would like to understand the context of such observation and inference . Very interesting 😊😊

This guy Nir is cool as hell

Hello: Im going to quote one part they wrote: "In order to understand how relativity dissolves the hard problem, think about a different relativistic phenomenon, constant velocity. First, let’s choose two observers, Alice and Bob. Bob is on a train that moves with constant velocity and Alice watches him from the platform. There is no absolute physical answer to the question “what is the velocity of Bob?” The answer is dependent on the frame of reference of the observer. From Bob’s frame of reference, he will measure that he is stationary and Alice, with the rest of the world, is moving backward. But from Alice’s frame of reference, Bob is the one that’s moving and she is stationary. They have opposite measurements, yet both of them are correct, just from different frames of reference." 1) First there is an absolute answer to the speed of bob, there may be different perspectives, but they are perceptions not measurements, if you use a speedometer you will have the velocity. The answer not JUST rely on observers, but equipement, machines that give accurate messures. 2) There is a mixing between what is an actual answer and just an opinion. If one of them says Stationary, men, he is not fit to answer the question of velocity, that get ruled out, if you ask for velocity and not just movement. I may myself see stationary but i know the earth is moving at a known speed. 3) Its so... absurd to say, "when we realize that consciousness is a relativistic phenomena" The hard problem dissapear and all questions are solved and all now is seen as never before. This is for sure, in my 22 years of studies, the worst approach by far. Sure they got paid to say that or respond to certain agenda. Hey guys i just see neural movement, therefore there are no more misteries nor nothing. There is nothing in this "theory" (actually an assumption) that, due to different opinions, solves anything about consciousness. When you realize that about consiousness, your are just talking about your opinion (as seen from you argument of bob and so) And the thing that you do not see more than neural activity and therefore your opinion imply that maybe is just that, is a joke. You mix what is relativistic regarding ways of perceiving due to OUR means of knowledge, relative to our means, not to the object it self. You can have relativistic perceptions, but thats does not allow you to say that those affect the properties of consciousness of have anything to do with the hard problem nor any problem regarding consciousness as it is, since it is something and not two things right, if its two things both are esential so what the heck matters if we due to a human condition can see things aparently different? If this two components of consciousness are apparently different, there are not two but one, so if that one, becomes two or ten, just because how many people look at it, forget it, this is nonsense. Consciousness is just one thing and you start saying we can see from inner perspective and from outer and both are ok, but wait, non of the two have any answer about any problem regarding consiousness at all, they are just observations and non of the two is seeing actually any totaliry of consciousness, so you assume that you can relativize a thing without actually knowing it.

Is subjective experience, including perception, just a kind of physical measurement? The theory presupposes physicalism and therefore cannot account for the Hard Problem.

40:11 The non physical life atom or soul can be understood, realised and experienced 🙏🙏. Please connect if interested.

Many others Physicists before Him had the same theory, like Dr. Peter Russel (Primacy of Consciousness). and Thomas campbell (my big T.O.E.) consciousness and theory of everything

34:00 Equivalence principle links will be helpful...

55:37 The something beyond the brain is the soul or life atom which I can explain 🙏🙏 anybody can evaluate and validate but no machine made of physical atoms can give any results.

how much does the personal experience matter? i have a feeling that our stories are more important than we think, even on existential level. as in... your relationship to your parents or standing up to a bully may be more important than world war and the birth of galaxies. on a personal level for the experience of your own life this is obvious but i have a feeling it goes deeper than that but perhaps im wrong. i know this is solipsistic thinking, but so what.

29:35 Entanglement paper published by Einstein make interesting reading on this relativity...

I like the way consistently riding the veil feels😂

wow big thanks

Maybe Consciousness is a Logical Process, not a Physical one. The "gap" occurs because the relation between logical processes and physical processes is not a bijection, except in trivial cases.

Minute 44:00 we don’t need what why ?!?

Life is but a dream

5:37 Very interesting that neurosciences can not solve the hard problem of consciousness 😊😊

An unconvincing argument. The brain patterns may be just the signifiers that experience is taking place. I don't see how the relativistic comparisons have any validity.

@42:40 Sorry, but the zombie argument doesn't state that. Chalmers wants to show that physicalism is false. Zombie Argument: (premise 1) If you assume that Physicalism is true, then Philosophical zombies are not (metaphysically) possible. But (premise 2) Chalmers contends, Zombies are concieveble. And (premise 3) if they are conceivable, then they are (metaphysically) possible, Therefore, (conclusion) physicalism is false. The notions of 'conceivability' and 'possibility' are thecnical philosophical notions dealing with modal logic (specially the notion of 'Possibility') Personally I don't like this argument, but this is what it states.

Einstein's models are simplistic and severely flawed, and don't account for a huge portion of the gaping holes we have in physics.

Article I, Section 7 Rights of conscience; education; the necessity of religion and knowledge. All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience. It's interesting that most states have laws protecting the worship of God Almighty, but more importantly they include the human conscience. There is also tax exemptions provided to churches. Why do you suppose most states constitution provides law supporting the conscience as being genuine. Unless you imagine the "conscience" as an imaginary thing that doesn't exist, why write it into law? If a conscience exist and is supported by law? Is it not logical to then proceed to the human psyche? But wait, there is no such thing as a soul, mind, or spirit. We just created terms and definitions for things that do not exist. The human psyche is non existent, so why do we pay psychologist? 𝐏𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐞 - the human soul, mind, or spirit. 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 - an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one's behavior. I'm not sure our psychologist or psychiatrist actually understand their own conscience. If they trust the scientific model which tells them they do not have a soul or a spirit, basically they are trying to comprehend a psyche they do not even believe exist. They are simultaneously trying to provide therapy to people and help them cleanse their conscience of corruption while lacking an understanding of the human psyche. How can you counsel or provide therapy for people if you don't even understand the human psyche or the human conscience? If you are a therapist and you claim intellectual superiority and yet you do not believe in God, you do not understand the human psyche how then can you provide psychological therapy to anyone? The human conscience is made up of three distinct parts. The soul, the mind and the spirit. If God doesn't exist, why do churches not pay taxes? Why is a conscience and the right to worship God Almighty protected inherently and indefeasible? 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 - not able to be lost, annulled, or overturned. 𝐏𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐍𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐜𝐲 - Human psyche in proper alignment, the soul, mind, spirit all in agreement.