Most of his points are relatively rudimentary concepts in the philosophy of science, but he does an excellent job in conveying them publicly. I wish more scientists and science educators were like him.
Remarkable book and remarkable conference. M. Gleiser has that knack for explaining and sharing science like very few people do. congratulations for this one of kind masterpiece book. I would advise it to anyone interested in searching for reality. No one has to agree to all of it. For instance, the part about AI. Kurzweil's writings deserve a little more in-depth analyses than what the book provides us with. The same applies to neurobiology. So much is going in this field, I would have loved some more in-depth view of S. Deheane's work for instance (on consciousness). Other than that, M. Gleiser is not far away from a Carl Sagan's universalism in terms of sincerity and scope of knowledge.
Not only there is some sort of "frontier" which limits us inside a "reality bubble", but also individual intelligence cannot fully understand or access the collective mind, the collective conscience.
It's about time somebody took "Scientific American" to task. I canceled my subscription recently hand have a drawer full of unread issues. Thanks Marcelo.
Dark Matter is an exotic form of Gravity, which is a bending of the fabric of Space. Perhaps some millions and/or billions of years ago, at a time where we see the remote galaxies, the bending of Space was different. ¿Does this make any sense?
In theory... Yes. I think this is what he's getting at? If Science is an on going experiment then we can't be Dogmatic. You're talking metaphysics not empirical. No "is" :)
As our Universe and the Reality are sorrounded by a non accessible space, maybe this Universe is influenced by things which come from this "outside realm" in a way that changes with time and we cannot comprehend.
The body has no life of itself. Thought has no life of itself. By themselves, they are inert. They are activated by life. Life is the only Being. What is life? What is consciousness? When activated by life, thought creates the idea "I", a simulacrum of Being. Because thought is limited, the simulacrum, the representation, is limited, insufficient. Consciousness, which is life, cannot be measured - it is infinite, unknowable. Because life is infinite, the simulacrum, by reflection, wants to be complete too. So, it goes after power, position, fortune, and all the rest of it, never reaching completeness. In this ambition, it creates division, competition, wars and destruction. In this movement of becoming, the simulacrum has continuity, with all its miseries. Do I depend on thought to be alive and conscious? Who or what am I? Can I measure who or what I am? With which instrument? Am I not the unknowable, the infinite, the timeless?
