Sir Roger Penrose OM FRS is an English mathematical physicist, mathematician and philosopher of science. He is Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics in the University of Oxford and Emeritus Fellow of Wadham College, Oxford.
What makes Joe Rogan such a great interviewer in my mind, is that he asked Roger Penrose a question that required a lengthy explanation, and he listened to his answer without interrupting him once. He didn’t interject with a dumb question or stupid joke and kept the continuity of the answer so that I could somewhat understand his explanation. I’ve learned more from his podcasts than pretty much any other platforms.
JR really is a very underrated interviewer, it's obvious Penrose is a little tense at first,likely he has never heard of Joe or his podcast but Joe does the perfect thing,just asks him the first question and lets him speak, then with his follow up questions makes it obvious he understands and has read his work,all these things clearly relax Penrose and make for a wonderful interview.Kudos to Joe...
go to wikipedia. look up Roger Penrose. follow some links to some of his papers. if you think Joe Rogan has read this shit, or could understand it, you be smokin crack. mixed w PCP.
@@ccole1255 I meant in a more general sense that he understands his ideas behind his theories, I mean what % of even scientists understand the intricacies of Penroses theories? Hardly any..
I hope you realize how big a deal this interview actually is. Sir Roger Penrose is one of the greats. It's like sitting down with Einstein, or Newton. I love that Joe just sat there and let him talk.
Seriously. I hate the notion that not having a piece of knowledge or an answer is "bad" or something to be ashamed of, to the point where people will just make stuff up. I wonder if it's mostly American culture, or just something innately human. Either way it's obnoxious as hell. Probably the best thing about the internet nowadays - being able to fact check people's BS. Like back before smartphones you might get lost driving and have to ask someone for directions. You'd never hear "I'm not sure", instead half the time it'd be complete nonsense. Infuriating. I wonder if it starts early on in public school where not having an answer is worse than having a wrong answer. Or teachers afraid to look "dumb" in front of their class.
Great interview Joe! You drew him out with minimal interruptions. You didn't use ANY foul language (which i'm sure he appreciated). You let him build his argument through pregnant pauses. You did everything right in this interview and i got the sense we saw the real Penrose as a result. Well done.
0:00 Consciousness. 3:33 Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem 7:00 Understanding 14:03 Stuart Hameroff's Letter 25:08 Animals 30:45 What is Consciousness? 35:01 Quantum. 43:00 Cosmology 56:08 Dark energy 1:06:46 Hawking Points 1:12:45 The Multiverse 1:17:53 Dark Matter 1:20:55 Other Intelligent Life 1:29:55 Truth Dance
Indeed. Argument is supported by evidence; otherwise it is simply assertion. Sadly modern life is full of the latter, posited as argument. And I include my students (top 10 global university). Our education system shifted radically in the late 60s and critical thinking was one of its main victims. Things are now such that we are teaching all incoming under grads thinking skills. This is not the fault of the students I hasten to add; they remain motivated and intellectually curious for the most part. But we haven't given them the tools to organize their ideas.
@Ezra Goldfinkelsteinberg You have lots of spare time to post comments on youtube, keep seeing you on every thread trying to undermine an 87-year-old legendary Oxford professor. I pity your desperation for attention, yet utter insignificance
@Ezra Goldfinkelsteinberg isn't that the point of science and understanding to say and ask the ifs, ands, and buts to try and differentiate what is, what was and what could be?
@Ezra Goldfinkelsteinberg Ezra have some respect. He's trying to have a general chat about some topics which, frankly, only 1% of the population can understand in all their technical details. If you need the details fleshing out you can buy his books on conciousness from Amazon. His physics papers are all online. You can see his debate with mathematicians and Philosophers on his Consciousness books from the 70s and 80s if you go into the archive of "The New York Review of Books" online. The Godel paper he mentioned is the most celebrated mathematical result of the 20th Century - it astonished mathematicians. If you want to judge it for yourself, the paper is here, be my guest www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=jacqkrol.x10.mx/assets/articles/godel-1931.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjo9ZfS26rfAhXLUBUIHQlRBnQQFjANegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw0IoYIlDKSXBEppyDz0R8vR
When someone says "I attended a lecture by Paul Dirac", you know he is a living legend. Paul Dirac was one of the founders of Quantum Mechanics. #mindblown
I was just listening to that bit and I had to go back and play the part again just to make sure I heard it correctly. I knew a little bit about Sir Roger Penrose, but I had no idea that he was associated with the giants of quantum physics.
No, he wasn't. Einstein and Bohr were. Dirac was 3 years old when Einstein published his special relativity theory -his photon theory is regarded as being the birth of QM. But Einstein refused to believe in QM, and Bohr went with it.
Well, at least I would be very comfortable to call Dirac one of the founders of QM. The formalism he created is the one still used today, and it showed that Heisenberg's and Schrödinger's theories were different representations of a more fundamental theory. Furthermore, he was the first to formulate the relativistic quantum theory of the electron and in the process predicted the existence of antimatter.
you've got to respect Rogan's genuine interest in such diverse themes, sure he makes good money with his podcast ( and well deserved) but mainstream media just can't compete with his product. I hope he keeps going for years
" I Shouldn't make a statement when I don't really know." Thank goodness for clever people who are also sensible and reasonable enough to understand they are not always right
I love the bit where Roger Penrose, while discussing consciousness, says something like, 'but this isn't my main area of study, I've only written 2 or 3 books on this, I suppose I'm better known for something I did with Black Holes...'
Ahh, Sir Rogerer penning Roses is respected a wee bit (q) 2 muc# for mine tastes. His die-gram unt rad-ideation is dimension-ally confused. Would you, Joe or most of the audience even know who was more correct in a debate, much less a hive-reading, of the story? Here is the better answer: the Penrose diagram is useful for some things, but flawed fundamental conception makes it not the thing it "says" it is, same with the Maldacena soupcan. Also, I've tugged out of reality a new, more fundamental mathematical object with current observational support: Unruh(ly)-Weiner Radiation (NOT Neal; he did not tell me if I am his cousin). I think Vunderful Person might talk t#@t s#!t. Und das Ho$$-en-FieldHer. ~_#, Dr. Yo-universe. You earned it, but EyE'm looking all up in on t#!s s#!t. Peace.
@@TheInfowarrior89 Congratulations, you are another unwitting subject in a coding experiment. If you do not understand, you have two options: de-crypt, or swipe and move along. Sooo many more of the latter. You do not have to do the former, but the dismissal of the task defines you. You may choose to remain silent.
@@TheReferrer72 This is why I Rogered the Rogerer. What Joe, Sir P-Zombie and most people know or don't know is a matter of "belief." Science has denied the true nature of reality, and 20+ yers ago, I was Rogered. Now, I am the Rogerer. A Maldacena past firewall perturbation produced the true nature of Chaos Theory and the butterfly effect. The @$$#ole physics nerds that played their game with me have lost. Joe, nothing personal, but "woo" is Academic code for: we know, and do not want you to know, or we do not know, and we don't want you to know THAT we don't know. Physics has a Pan-Info or Pan-Psych basis, and now that is a settled matter, as well as a condensed one.
This man is an absolute legend. Without taking anything away from him, this is probably the closest you can get to hear Einstein himself speak on a podcast. Thanks for this Joe, nevermind all the imbeciles saying this was boring. All of my respect to you for having guests like this. You have the most amazing platform.
In appropriate amd rude language young men. Please let's stop insulting one another and discuss things peacefully. We're privilege to have our imbecile brains enlightened by this gentleman, lets enjoy
@BLT I don't want to watch it again, but if memory serves me correctly, then he let Sir Penrose speak for about 15 minutes. 15 minutes of no interruptions was quite alarming to my senses. Lol
same time as a DMT trip- coincidence? He didn't let Hameroff speak at all despite him being present apparently! instagram.com/p/Brjcm2AH-Ee/ @@justifiedreasoning
If he understood the endogenous function of DMT, as is theorized by Christof Koch (tell Shermer it's 'Coke," not "Cock"), then a theoretical investigation of the sense experience of some of us is warranted; this is the Quantum Consciousness guru, after all. Gulio Tononi's Phi is a 1D quantum algorithm, scattering into 3 waves, giving SDRs for 3 physical dimensions and past-present-future transforms for the entire system of unconscious physics processing. Language is a level 6 HTM phenomenon, at the internal abstraction to external communication interface. There is a single (to my knowledge) ball lightning video on youtube. If consciousness can be said to be an electrical value in topology, contained by a bilateralized magnetic field as in the brain, at a precise differential, permeable membrane in a larger topological structure (Phi in theory, if I am not mistaken), then this video haunts me. What if a human brain were to take a Pineal direct hit from a neutrino, anti maybe (?). Sean Carroll and Katie Mack talked about the vague mystery surrounding tunneling events and the quantum bubble of death. Could a collapse (?) be contained into a cold (energy, not matter; second Law my A$$) fusion reaction? Brain freeze w/o ingesting anything cold, true vacuum state of the Higgs field? Not hospitable to biology.
@cloudykai The solution to consciousness at a scientific level? Brenda Dunne and Robert Jahn, what were they trying to accomplish w/ their lives? The Bro-gan-verse is made up mostly of infants who stare blankly @ a screen and try to coordinate movement in a mirror neuron role playing of real humanity in 2D. Joe "I don't know why people call me a shill" Rogan.
@cloudykai Learning on youtube is both easier and harder than it need be. My point is that sharing the answers that are objectively best has been made impossible. I will change what I can, how I can. Arrogance is a matter of prospective, impatience and frustration are more what is meant. Btw, Eric and Bret Weinstein on Rogan sent me on my path; I now find it impossible to listen to him anymore, some guests are worth learning from.
@cloudykai I like Eric's take: simple as can be coherent. The definition of intellectualism is the problem. The University system has essentially "lied" about how close we are to solving the "mysteries," and I mean the big ones, all the big ones. If it comes around faster than it otherwise might, I'm glad I have time on my finger tips. Email is a wonderful thing. If you think you have a solution to a real academic problem, the window is open. If you don't matter like me, credit is not even a question. Only change is an answer.
@@marcocano8399 I don't mean the way he dresses. Notice his hands. The hands of most elderly folk look really old. His hands look 20 years younger or more than his actual age. Same with his face, but to a lesser degree. He has aged well, was my point. But you're not wrong. He's a dapper ol' chap.
I've never seen Joe listen so intently for so long on this podcast. In fact I have always been annoyed that he derails scientists by asking them to explain everything as they begin to explain the last thing he asked lol but yeah this was excellent
I think joe had a special recently. He spent so much time thinking and working out his special. It fused into his show........ No no no. Its a new thing people have not worked out yet etc etc. Now the special has ended and its not infecting his every thought. He has gone back to listening and not correcting people compare this or gad saad as opposed to i think his name was shooter jennings
I know thought that myself. Great podcast, really interesting and I appreciate Joe listening intently to the lengthy answers without interrupting like some would. Plus its actually refreshing to listen to a podcast with no mention of C19 💯👌🏾
I'm already grateful. I rate him even more than Hawking (although all my respect is with him, too) because without Penrose, Hawking would have nor been able to succeed. This guy is a maths genius and an excellent teacher. Up there with Richard Feynman
My thoughts on what they spoke of: I personally think, based on my experiences and understanding of science, human bodies are just receiving a signal and that is why we have such a hard time understanding it. It makes sense to do. We effectively do this we drones and robots; its often better to have the main computer or pilot outside of the system and just send data to and from it...sometimes thats the only viable way to do it, otherwise the device becomes too impractical by weight and power limits, so think of it as a evolutionary advantage as the reason for it being that way. I think consciousness comes from an infinite null space / 0 point space which all reality is connected to (or represents computer code in a simulation scenario), and permeates outward through 1 dimensional space (i.e. strings in string theory, et al), then 2 dimensional space (such as branes or a surface of a black hole), and of course to 3 dimensional space where you're a meat puppet on string theory strings. I believe this works in a "natural" universe, holographic universe / one on the surface of a black hole, or computer simulated reality. I think that extra dimensions allow for the strange behavior we see in quantum mechanics; the dimensions are just small enough to so only these particles and effects can go through and then whatever stuff happens behind (or above) the 3D scene, causing the mystery. I also think that our universe is, in effect, just a representation of a statistical average; the multiverse stuff exists in a fictional way, just like the averages in a computer model don't really exist; my understanding is we filter them out, the super positions, using constructive decoherence (I think it was called?) to kind of cheat and give the most likely / average answer when we do quantum computing, and yeah I basically I think that is what reality is and why the variables we have in our reality are there as well, which is another mystery we ponder. There is another old theory, as I recall, from ancient greece, that numbers must exist some way in reality effectively for them to somehow exist in our heads. I like to think of a computer simulation in this instance, where the numbers are digital and thus do and do not exist, and I feel that is effectively the answer to that problem and others, even if computer aren't involved. Also, if what Sir Penrose said about photons is true, well we know and have managed to fuse photons together to make a solid / tangible photon of 3 photons mushed together, last I heard... so the possibility of a alien civilization coming from a past universe to ours is plausible if they could make immortal bodies of photons or other form of energy...although they would have had a very boring wait. lol
@@Alienami Consciousness does not exist, its just an umbrella made up term because we do not know how the Brain works. AI is beginning to prove that self awareness, thought creativity is indeed a computation and that Sir Roger Penrose is just plain wrong.
@@TheReferrer72 beginning to prove, yet its to early to say that what you say has been indeed proven. Why do you afirm so confidently that consciousness doesnt exist then? you should not, as sir penrose and many intelligent people not do, make statements when you really don't know.
I feel like Eddie gets a bad rep at times I don’t think he’s stupid but I think he sufferers from a small mental disorder, extremely paranoid and untrustworthy he might be autistic or have a tiny case of schizophrenia. Helps him think about grappling in a different way tho, and that’s cool as fuck. A lot of times people who are super smart at one thing are lacking in something else. He didn’t create his chain of jujitsu schools from being dumb or that competition or set of rules and having people implementing it all over the place by being dumb. Ya know what I mean dawg.
His English really is beautiful. Extremely clear, no particular class mannerisms. Plus his tone of voice is so agreeable. He is the kind of person I would love to spend a long afternoon drinking tea on a porch with, and not just because of his intellect - he just seems genuinely nice.
I mean, essentially 2.4 Million people just spent an evening with him. This is why what Joe Rogan has created is so important. The minds he's opened by having some of the most respected intellectuals on to just talk to the masses is so valuable, and I don't think he gives himself enough credit.
@@John-X You're very much right. It's good that he doesn't take credit I think, he is more pleasant to listen to because of his curiosity and humble attitude.
Joe's silence is under-appreciated, it was good in this one. He has respect for elders and is good at provoking more conversation despite not being on the same intellectual level.
You must be a 90s or 00s creation. Quality educational/intellectual discussions were much more prevalent in years past. In today's age, one must sift through a landfill of waste in order to find healthy nourishment for mind and soul
Yes, I was thinking the exact same recently, where we can watch true polymaths jump from topic to topic, and yet they seem to be expert in them all. I like Eric Weinstein in particualr.
I am going to be completely honest and admit I really have no idea what you two are talking about but this is hands down, one the most charming interviews you've done. I could have listened to Sir Roger for many hours...not having a bloody clue what you both are talking about. The grace and elegance in this scientific conversation is beautiful. Thank for introducing me to this brilliant man :)
This was one of the most captivating episodes, for me. I could listen to Penrose for hours. There's something beautiful and calming about his voice, tone and language...
@@martindisc Hey Seamus! Never thought next time we'd chat would be on a Rogan podcast. When I saw this come up today I thought "How is Joe Rogan going to talk with Roger Penrose??" Solution: don't talk :)
Explained rather badly. And I don't see how he gets from incompleteness to consciousness. Conscious beings are no more able to proof all true statements or to perceive statements as true than unconscious ones.
Taxtro that’s only true if philosophical zombies exist. Nobody knows if they do or not. But either way, there are plenty of other reasons to believe that the computational theory of mind is wrong.
@@joesilverstein9402 I don't see a reason for anything requiring consciousness to work. Apart from maybe thoughts about consciousness itself. I'm not sure what "the" computational theory of mind is, but I find it hard to deny that consciousness has something to do with information processing. I, for one, experience different things based upon the inputs to my senses and various things affecting my brain, like alcohol or other drugs. Of course I could be a Boltzmann brain that hallucinates the entire world, but apart from such speculations, if the world is anything like it seems to be, then consciousness is closely linked to computations.
@@MrCmon113 Information processing isn't the same as computation -- computation is just one kind of information processing. Mathematicians can prove theorems that can't be proven by a well-defined model, so they are doing "information processing" that isn't computation. The computational theory of mind is just the theory that the mind can be entirely explained by computations, which is what Penrose was arguing against. Just because you experience the world differently when you take drugs doesn't mean that consciousness is just a computation. All it means is that consciousness has something to do with your brain, since the drugs affect your brain. But that's obvious and doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know. Consciousness very well could be closely linked to computations (Penrose might even agree with that), but that's not the same thing as saying that consciousness is just a computation and that there is nothing else involved.
I met Roger Penrose in person when he came to JHU to give a lecture. At the end of the lecture I went and talked to him and I had him sign his book for me. Never in my wildest dreams have I ever imagined Roger Penrose on Joe Rogan’s podcast! Love you even more, Joe!
@@artembless7914 I am so sorry. You just blew my mind. Such profound words truly prove me wrong. I do apologize and hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me assuming you to be ignorant.
There was an AMA some years back where someone asked Joe about guests he would love to have, he said Roger Penrose and Harmut Neven... well done Joe, you're halfway there. Sir Roger Penrose did a pretty good job of simplifying topics without oversimplifying. It would be great to get that man some tea and let him talk for another hour.
Joe Rogan had quiet a lot of amazing guests in the last few years, probably because it has become widely known that he is one of the best interviewers in the world. Agree with you about Roger Penrose. He is a living legend, one the smartest scientists of the second part of the 20th century. He wrote two of the best books ever explaining high-level mathematics and physics to lay people.
4 года назад
@@roodborstkalf9664 Penrose is one of the greatest thinkers of all time.
It's honestly amazing how much better scientists come across on this platform. Gotta give Joe credit for asking the right questions and then getting out of the way and letting guys just go off about their subjects of interest.
It is always good to pay attention to everything which has more arms than you have. You can only control that many arms and we all know what they like doing with that tentacles.
Sir Roger seems like a refreshingly broad minded academic, well know for his open view on incredibly complex topics that really demand such an attitude, but are often lacking in entrenched academia. He also comes across as a quintessential old English gent - good humoured, humble, polite and, of course, wildly intellectual.
Joe is a legend for having this guy on. One of my all time favorite mathematicians/physicists. 'Road to reality' is probably the best non textbook on physics out there.
This is easily one of the best episodes of JRE. Sir Robert Penrose does an amazing job of communicating insights from his life work all the while remaining infused with humor; exploring far-out ideas while still strongly rooted in science. Joe is sporting the best of his conversational skills while keeping his hubris in check, bringing up interesting topics and asking relevant questions that listeners would probably be asking too. 10/10.
Edgardo G the fact that you can click on this podcast out of any video on RU-vid and still have such a close minded thought is insane. I’m not for trump in any way but that’s just stupid man
@Apollo For such people, nuance is heresy or extremism and which depends on tactical application of politics. The irony is completely lost on them I'm afraid.
he reminds me of my grandpa...he will tell a story(in a gentle way) as long as you dont interrupt him, and you wont interrupt because the story is so good. granted my grandpas stories were usually ww2 american bomber plane routes against nazis and pentagon stories as opposed to physics and consciousness but good stories and great storytellers none the less
Immediately after the podcast ended Roger let out a deep sigh "finally, I can take off this silly monkey suit" His skin started to split as blinding light poured out of his body until no trace remained of the brilliant old scientist. Joe loaded his crossbow in a panic before the same kind, clever voice came through the ball of light formerly known as Sir Roger Penrose, "Do not be afraid, Joe Rogan, I am a being comprised of photons from a prior epoch in the great cycle. I am here to teach you of times to come and also to learn about elk hunting"
Refreshing to hear some actually say "I dont really know" even though they are considered legends in the field and have devoted their entire life to the study.
@Snap C1ty Correct. It was not a critic of this brilliant man. Its a critic on people attending a college class/seminar and thinking they are economists, sociologists, political scientists, climatologists etc, worthy of "their" ideas being implemented on a global scale.
That's the difference between actual people of science, and conspiracy nuts in Joe Rogan comments. Scientists admit what they don't know, youtube commenters won't.
I really love how open minded Penrose is to complex ideas that may not be adopted by the many. He isn’t trying to hard to fit in. He is just a curious guy exploring all ideas and not making anyone else feel dumb for the ideas they have as well.
Brilliant, best one yet. I put JRE on to listen to while I work. I've done zero work in the last 90 minutes, for once I've sat still and watched as well as listening.
"British scientist, Sir Roger Penrose, was awarded the Nobel Prize for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity." Wow, Joe had a chat with a Nobel Prize winner scientist... *hits blunt*
@@bobbybana2839 It's called satire. Suggest you start reading some books regarding how to develop a sense of humor. IQ estimate slightly wrong by the way.
Yeah and that is a credit to Joe in acting that way. He understands and respects that he is talking to a math and science genius/legend. Great interview, i really enjoyed listening :)
If they had gone the full 3 hours like a Jordan Peterson interview, or 4 hours like that Eric Weinstein Interview, we'd all probably be destroyed intellectually
It's mindblowing that Joe has had from Nobel prize winners to billionaire tech CEOs on his podcast sitting on that chair. Joe should be really proud of this.
I don't even watch most of the ones with comedians (Joey Diaz is the exception)...I mean most of these guys are hilarious on stage, but interview format they lose something. I also rarely feel I learn anything from the comedians, whereas scientiests & politicians (even if I disgree with them) usually open up a new way of thinking.
