The Demon in The Machine | Paul Davies | Talks at Google 

Frankly never read anything better then this. The way Dr Davis explains the things is amazing and mesmerizing to say the least

A most eloquent and informed talk on the question ' what is life ? ' , also intelligible to the layman . Thankyou Paul Davies . Thankyou ' talks at google ' .

This is a gem of a lecture. Thank you.

Awesome lecture. Paul Davies is a fantastic science explainer and communicator across a wide variety of science topics. I truly enjoyed his earlier book The Eerie Silence, in which he tackles ideas around The Fermi Paradox and the various SETI projects. In that book he raises interesting questions about the nature of life. I'm eager to read this book.

33:19 ya, where did that code come from? Random just doesn’t feel right.

I have read the book and yes I was also amazed how approachable his writing is to just an old retired electronic engineer like me. I would like to be able to contact Dr. Paul Davies with some experiments that I had and can still do that may add an additional aspect in his field of research. I am 88 years old and in my active days my thoughts were ridiculed. I would greatly appreciate that someone would help provide a contact. I am in Arizona near Tucson for the winter until fist week of April. Willy Halpert

great talk and many good facts for future!

Excellent.... thanks 🙏.

It's interesting to see how different areas of science have something in common. Great talk.

I maintain that no machine, regardless of the sophistication and depth of it's training, can be said to be truly conscious. At best, it will only be engaging in mimicry of the behavior we're familiar with in a biological context. The effort to broaden the umbrella of what constitutes "real" consciousness is simply scientist's attempt to avoid being boxed in by nature's resistance to their understanding of what the "spark" that makes life truly is. If one simply denies that only carbon-based lifeforms can be conscious, as for instance Dr. Max Tegmark of MIT does (and he considers those with my viewpoint on this matter to be "carbon chauvinists"), then the door is wide open for you to create something that can appear to an outside observer's perspective to be conscious in every measurable sense, even though it is made from non-biological materials. I am not suggesting an effort shouldn't be made to create non-biological conscious lifeforms, but I am pretty sure it is doomed to failure. There's a knowledge firewall there every bit as impenetrable as the one that we face when looking back far enough in the lifetime of our universe.

Great Scientist Paul Davies take many years to understand we need "A New Physics" ... my compliments ... I realize that about ten years ago ... I am a good aficionado of his books ... I have "The forces of Nature" but to prove there are six forces. I also purchase "Superforce" where he declare the four forces depends of this "Superforce" and now he begin to dedicate to Life ... Time is Life ... Life can be extended and reduced depending of how you Live ... "The Mathematical Equation of Karma" is not ... immediate. Thanks.

Paul Davies is a very Wild Man of Ideas! But they're Seriously Useful Ideas that extrapolate only somewhat from what is known & what is observed. Whether he is Right or Wrong, he prompts us to frame new hypotheses about "what is life?" and the origin of life.

Reality is the interplay of a vast variety of systems and levels of systems, each of which is functioning according to different rules of logic. Looking for a dividing line between life and non-life would depend upon which system of logic is used to pose the question. Much like choosing which branch of mathematics to employ when looking for a proof.

One remark. On 39th minute Paul stated that every human unvention may be found in nature. I would object. There are at least two inventions with no analogy in nature: 1) laser and 2) electrical transfromer.

49:40 - Yes, time flows there is indeterminism in the future; the resolution of that indeterminism is the flow of time.

Great discussion, and want to grab the book. It seems like all information, in the expansive sense used here, is necessarily 1) communicable, in that it is shared across adequately distinguishable "end points" and 2) that it consists of sets of shared (if imperfectly defined) definitions (a = a). I speculate the consciousness is emergent from underlying physical and biological systems adhering to the same sort of "informational" principles, to the extent that it is sufficiently complex enough that it can be talked about AS IF it were entirely independent of its underlying physical phenomena. Likewise, the cultural outgrowths of this emergent consciousness (from natural languages all the way up to religions and worldviews, etc.), when they achieve a certain degree of complexity, can be talked about AS IF they had an independent existence (though they are necessarily entangled in nature, like everything else). Still, all these systems up and down the ladder must obey logic and behave like informational exchanges.

Great talk. What was that strange question at the end about the flow of time? Time is an abstract notion, so how can it flow? Old habits die hard.

Stuart Hameroff emphasizes it's not "integrated information" but rather music!! Noncommutative music as "negative resonance"

On the sense of the flow of time: I think the sense of the flow of time comes from the fading away of the present moment in our neural networks as it's replaced by the new moment. The perception of the present dying out neurologically. I think our experience of the universe is fundamentally digital, but experienced as a continuum. Like a movie seems continuous, although the film is a series of still images. Through over 40 years of meditation, although I'm aware of the idea of the linear progression of change (time), it's not central. I experience change as more of my consciousness being present and the past and future being constructs of my imagination. I don't believe the past and future actually exist. I set my alarm to get up for work in the morning that doesn't exist in the present, because I believe that the nature of the present is to change and the probability that a present will exist where I need to go to work will become.

look up PIerre Deymier - he's figured out quantum computing uses antisymmetric or noncommutative acoustic phonons

The world loses one of the greatest physicists in the world everlastingly. Paul Davies is more than a scientist, but also an inspirer to everyone in the field of science.

the wrong assumption is that information can only be processed by observing for measurement when it's now proven in quantum biology that the quantum coherence is due to acoustic vibrations. So this is how meditation works - the listening resonates internally in the brain as ultrasound which has a superradiance as noncommutative quantum coherence. So listening as logical inference is proven to be up to ten times faster than Fourier Uncertainty. thanks

They self organize and have purpose! because if they dont, they cant dominant their surrounding and if they do, they become prevalent and evolve towards organisms that replicate faster.

Fear will not solve but create problems. There are no demons but mankind's fear of facing the challenges of life. Demons are us not handling the problem in the right times and in the right places.

Hmm, but does Maxwells demons operates agains the gradient, or doesn’t it? Ionic channels for supe open and close via messenger molecules, however, ions flow from higher concentrations to lower ones. And as I remember this doesn’t make them Maxwells demons. I’m I right or not? 32:33

The demons of cross overs from one place to an other how to separate to big C from the little c to finding the sum ofpoint A to B plus plus the demand for the explaining so many things thanks to wave gate technology we see a multitude of platforms for universal states of electronics.

You know, it's all nice and easy to come along and say: "Biology is all X" or "Biology is all Y". Paul is saying "Biology is all Information". Well... what about biochemistry - do you get genetics without unique biochemistry? Does kinesin walk around the cell because of information or because of its ATP hydrolysis active site? What about ecology? Do you get organelles if there's no ecology to supply their parts? How are things so perfectly organized in a cell - is that information or a physical principle? I think researchers have to move away from simplifications and embrace more complex notions of living systems.

why is it titled "demon" in the machine, and not Soul in the machine

Consider the possibility that the earth has GEOLETS inside its bowels that sustain certain number of particles before, during and after appearence of every being on its own surface. And these unique numbers can be calculated by integrating particle physics (not the Standard Model, but by associating feelings of beings to perceptions of digits and the 4 basic arithmetic operations) to generation of particles at the center of the earth that enable growth of and on PLANTS through these geolets. Once we derive the mathematical model of how these geolets sustain plants, we'd be able to steer all events on the surface of the earth for eternal sustenance of all life after retracing all POSITIVELY SUSTAINABLE ones that ever moved on the surface of the earth by interacting with relevant geolets. Then what we call LIFE of any being is the ability of that being to sustain the given number of geoparticles in its own geolet by its interaction with it through relevant plants, that we now perform subconsciously, but can perform consciously after the mechanisn of interaction is discovered. At present we do't know from which plant we receive the air we inhale or to which plant the air we exhale goes, but once this mechanism is known, then we would be able to steer both, the way necessary to sustain own and other lives. Note: there is no separation of hardware (GEOLETS) from its software (PLANTS) possible as the latter is composed and sustained by the former through interaction with the smartware (THE BEINGS = ANIMALS and HUMANS), the software itself manufactures through interaction with multiple geolets.

The speakers from England are much much better educated, prepared and their knowledge is breathtaking. The other speakers from U.S India, and other countries have big ego and they seems to know very little. If you would take their laptop computer out from their hands ,those speakers are empty and won't be in able to complete a sentence without it. I wish I could have been study in England and I think this country must have a very special and very good education system.

~35:33 I would point out that just because something isnt explciitly coded for in one's genes doesnt mean that the origin or cause for that thing (epigenetic two headed in this case) inheritence islocated externally to the genome. For perhaps the cause is that one of the implicit assumptions underlying the particular orgiasisms adaptive strategy is no longer valid.

I see no reason for the separation of the interaction of molecules and information. Entropy and information are directly connected (see, e.g., Shannon and Von Neumann, Wiener, etc.). In condensed matter theory, entropy is not separated from the rest. I see no compelling reason for this separation when dealing with complex systems with feedback loops outside of thermal equilibrium. And what about Manfred Eigen's proof of hypercycles and his concept of "molecular darwinism"? I have yet to see Paul Davies consider these. Can somebody help me to find. It seems to me that the separation of information and "matter" is religiously motivated. In any case, it is readily used by creationists to claim that information cannot arise by itself and therefore must come from a higher being (their respective god). And Davies is religious himself.

The only way we can claim that Quantum Mechanics is a reflection of reality, is for the question of "interpretation of Quantum Mechanics" is resolved. Physics cannot "move its frontier" (as Paul Davies states) into biology without resolving its own contradictions, paradoxes and unresolved issues that plague it. There are no Spherical Cows in Biology - although Biology as a discipline has its own skeletons. Perhaps they can descend into the pit of ignorance and trivial pursuit together?

For this argument to make sense to me I have to believe that atomic structure is not “alive”

👍

Hello

networks = magic

To me an important word is missing, a word that gives information its meaning that word is consciousness and normally a demon is a conscious being.

Thicko Google employees.

What is the point? Decode the law of nature.

Was hoping for some science but all we get from this guy is doggy doo ...

Despite constant media reinforcement, vacuum lightspeed is NOT constant in non-constant gravity. Gravity carries light, gravity always is flowing and gravity quanta are faster where gravity is stronger. Gravity is negative energy at its core, it quantizes opposite to light, fits Planck scale with tiny net energy. Coldness dimples quark triplets, focusing gravity, enabling entanglements. Bound protons are warmer-temperature progenitors of emergent entanglement in gravity focus. Without the entanglement-merging of decision thresholds, you have no chance at a free will, you are stuck in bent space-time lockstep, your brain can never be a self-determining quantum computer. Spacetime curving is supposed to be gradual over gradual gravitational change, so gravitational frequency-shifts should be gradual over gradual gravitational change, yet textbooks suggest this shift happens at the source and is preserved on the way to observation. Opposite to every creepy standard textbook demanding space and time are red-stretched in closeness to mass instead of blue-compressed, in the gradual approach blue-shift observation starts with a redder signal in weaker gravity gradually blue-shifting as it approaches an observer in stronger gravity. But, how can that possibly make sense? Two super-simple notions are all it takes to replace curved space-time with gravity-controlled light-speed: 1.) Light waves act much like moving rumble-strips that appear to oscillate faster when detected in increased gravity. 2.) Gravity fields fundamentally flow, and will naturally produce a reversed riptide sort of pull gradient near a mass. These two simple notions allow gravity clock variations and falling-rate variations to move in the same direction as shifted frequency rate (not to mention lightspeed variations) instead of blindly following stupidly-opposing directions. I'm not going to say Einstein and his followers enjoy big lies, deep hides, or looking like intoxicated monkey short-bussed derelicts blindly worshipping gravity-independent light-speed as an accident of birth, but it is what it is. I know nothing ever bothers fob's chosen people anyway. The blind-spot there disappears in considering the pivotal difference between curved space-time and gravitationally-moderated light-speed. It has to be suppressed. Can you imagine the political/academic/religious chaos that would surely ensue if this became suddenly well-known?

Why won’t y’all leave them people alone. They not bothering you. Your very presence visiting those folk might be genocidal.

Doesn't explain how life arises from chemicals. 'Everything we've invented, nature got there first.'

You don't know how life got started Paul and yet billions do. In the beginning ...

It is called God ?

the reason why LIFE is coded GOD

Meanwhile back in heaven, the real inventor of quantum physics is YAhweh. The Father God.

Yall need Jesus!