TEDx Talks

[stardustpilgrim]

This probably has limited interest, chanced upon it the other day. It's a short history of the songwriter and musician-singer Leon Russell. I didn't know his history as a most sought after studio musician, played on dozens of albums for others. As a youth he had a physical deformity, slightly paralyzed on the right side, and playing the piano he had to develop his distinctive strong-left-hand playing style to compensate. He said in the video, quotes, that without having this distinctive odd symmetry view ~of the world~ he would probably have ended up a car salesman. I thought it most interesting, but of limited interest to others, but sN has encouraged me to post it. 12 minutes. Just FYI, looking for this again, I found a 38 minute history of Leon, I'll watch it later.

[someNOTHING!]

Dec 28, 2023 17:04:12 GMT -5 stardustpilgrim said:

This probably has limited interest, chanced upon it the other day. It's a short history of the songwriter and musician-singer Leon Russell. I didn't know his history as a most sought after studio musician, played on dozens of albums for others. As a youth he had a physical deformity, slightly paralyzed on the right side, and playing the piano he had to develop his distinctive strong-left-hand playing style to compensate. He said in the video, quotes, that without having this distinctive odd symmetry view ~of the world~ he would probably have ended up a car salesman. I thought it most interesting, but of limited interest to others, but sN has encouraged me to post it. 12 minutes. Just FYI, looking for this again, I found a 38 minute history of Leon, I'll watch it later.

Thank you for sharing. I'll give it attention tomorrow. Sounds like a cool story.

[stardustpilgrim]

Just started listening to this, Federico Fa ggin. (The stupid naughty-word-auto-editor showed up again. Shawn had disabled it months ago). Just finished, this is totally cool, highly recommended. He was introduced by ZD in a post yesterday. Especially tenka and inavalan would be interested, he validates your views. He speaks my language, experience vs realization. It's really an astounding synopsis of reality. You can actually see him strain to put into words ~what he sees~, understands. I glanced at another interview with him, a few minutes, figured there had to be a better one. He gets to the point very quickly here, no wasted time-words.

[zendancer]

Here's the bit I found interesting while reading about Fa ggin:

In the book Italian: "Irriducibile. La coscienza, la vita, i computer e la nostra natura" (Mondadori, 2022) Federico F aggin proposed a theory on consciousness according to which consciousness is a purely quantum phenomenon, unique to each of us. This theory is supported by two quantum physics theorems: the no-cloning theorem and Holevo's theorem. The first states that a pure quantum state is not reproducible; the second limits the amount of measurable information to one classical bit for each qubit that describes the state. Therefore it is possible to postulate that a quantum system that is in a pure state is aware of its state, since conscious experiences (qualia) have all the essential properties of pure states, i.e., it is private knowledge only minimally knowable from the outside. However, the mathematical representation of the experience (the pure state) does not describe the experience, which remains private and knowable only from within by the system that is in that state. No classical machine can ever be conscious given that classical information is reproducible (program and data can be copied perfectly), while the quantum state is private. Consciousness is therefore not linked to the functioning of the body and can continue to exist even after the death of the body. The body behaves like a drone controlled "top down" by consciousness. The new D'Ariano-Fa ggin theory is based on the theoretical studies of Professor Giacomo D'Ariano's studies, who derived quantum theory from informational principles [9][clarify], and on the experiential, philosophical and scientific studies of Federico Fa ggin on the nature of consciousness.[30]

(crazy filter requires inserting a space in his name)

[stardustpilgrim]

Dec 31, 2023 13:48:01 GMT -5 zendancer said:

Here's the bit I found interesting while reading about Fa ggin:

In the book Italian: "Irriducibile. La coscienza, la vita, i computer e la nostra natura" (Mondadori, 2022) Federico F aggin proposed a theory on consciousness according to which consciousness is a purely quantum phenomenon, unique to each of us. This theory is supported by two quantum physics theorems: the no-cloning theorem and Holevo's theorem. The first states that a pure quantum state is not reproducible; the second limits the amount of measurable information to one classical bit for each qubit that describes the state. Therefore it is possible to postulate that a quantum system that is in a pure state is aware of its state, since conscious experiences (qualia) have all the essential properties of pure states, i.e., it is private knowledge only minimally knowable from the outside. However, the mathematical representation of the experience (the pure state) does not describe the experience, which remains private and knowable only from within by the system that is in that state. No classical machine can ever be conscious given that classical information is reproducible (program and data can be copied perfectly), while the quantum state is private. Consciousness is therefore not linked to the functioning of the body and can continue to exist even after the death of the body. The body behaves like a drone controlled "top down" by consciousness. The new D'Ariano-Fa ggin theory is based on the theoretical studies of Professor Giacomo D'Ariano's studies, who derived quantum theory from informational principles [9][clarify], and on the experiential, philosophical and scientific studies of Federico Fa ggin on the nature of consciousness.[30]

(crazy filter requires inserting a space in his name)

Yes, nice. He covers all that in the video linked. Thanks again.

Found the (second) book mentioned in the video. It's not their book, they have one chapter, which he said in the video describes their model. Springer books are expensive, but it looks good, Roger Penrose one author. But in the info (Amazon) it says their chapter is available, free download.
link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-030-85480-5_5.pdf?pdf=core

If the chapter doesn't come up, PDF, you can type in the title, Hard Problem and Free Will: An Information-Theoretical Approach

[zendancer]

SDP: Thanks. I'll check it out.

[stardustpilgrim]

This isn't a TED Talk. It may be interesting only to laughter. He's the one who explained to me, years ago, that electricity does not flow through wires, as a flow of electrons, but flows as fields ~around~ the wires. I've seen the video referenced, the science guy clarifies the earlier video. He does so because he was sent numerous videos by engineers explaining more carefully what's occurring.

Now, most significantly, there is a passing reference that wires are not even needed for the flow of electricity, they just make it simpler. This validates Nikola Tesla, who proposed transferring electricity without wires. The video also shows that Tesla knew this is how electricity is transferred, he may have even understood it. How do we know? Tesla invented the induction coil, and we also have transformers (just caught my spelling error, and corrected) operating on the same principle. In the video we see an example. A wire is placed beside the electrical circuit, but is not connected to the circuit in any way. Yet electricity is ~induced~ to flow in the adjacent not-connected-to-the-circuit wire. Yes, I watched the full video, it's about 25 minutes long. Basically, like the earlier video, the science guy is showing electricity doesn't have to travel the full path of the wire-circuit in order to light the LED light. It follows the shorter path through the electric field. He also explains why this is not widely known, as most books skip the part showing electricity flows through fields, not wires. At minute 2:40 he gives the misconceptions as to how electricity flows.

[stardustpilgrim]

This is preaching to the choir, but it's pretty interesting. 20 minutes, long, yes. I had never heard of Stuart Chase, or his book from the 1930s.