Sep 9, 2025 04:13 AM
(This post was last modified: Sep 9, 2025 04:41 AM by C C.)
Video of Stanford scientist Gary Nolan talking about physicist Illobrand of Ludwiger, who actually seems to be espousing the ideas of another German theoretical physicist, Burkhard Heim. At least in this PDF document: The new worldview of the physicist Burkhard Heim.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CURT JAIMUNGAL
https://youtu.be/3qFl9ZCXfGc
VIDEO EXCERPTS: This is... Illobrand von Ludwiger. And, I mean, I don't understand the math, I don't even pretend to.
Is he still alive, as far as you know?
No, I think he's dead.
Well, according to his theory, he's not dead.
Yeah, according to his theory. But basically, this structure that he draws here at the end is a visual representation. At the top of it, through these levels of organization, consciousness would form because of it. And that then you could take away the underlying structure that formed it, and then this would continue to exist independently. Which is interesting.
The reason why I like this, and he didn't really talk about this, he talks about it in the context of biology. But if it's right, it means you could create an artificial intelligence, which was in and of itself could become conscious. Most scientists working in AI never think that we will have the ability to create a conscious machine.
I mean, anything that we create that looks conscious is just a darn good simulation. It would pass the Turing test, but it would just be a darn good simulation. But it's not really conscious. So therefore, it has no rights, human rights, as far as where... It's a big argument that's been played out in science fiction for many years.
I get interested in these kinds of ideas, that you could create an object. Humans might someday be able to, without using biology, but using purely materialistic approaches, build a sufficiently complex machine that creates an object with consciousness and a soul.
Did he say whether or not this soul would survive for an indeterminate amount of time?
Yeah. You can take away the thing that caused it, and it lives unto itself.
[...] A lot of physicists just dismiss him outright. But as with any of these theories, there's a little often cult-like following of people who are absolutely determined to prove that that author is right. In fact, the piece is written by somebody else, and writing about his findings, and collecting it into a little treatise.
[...] Look at the last sentence of this document. Fascinating emergent property, he claims...
Stanford's Garry Nolan discusses a strange theory of consciousness ... https://youtu.be/3qFl9ZCXfGc
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/3qFl9ZCXfGc
EXCERPT: The question whether a persona can also continue to exist after the decay of the soma, Heim answered in 1981: “Basically, the question should be whether there is a temporal destiny of consciousness after death or not. A positive answer to this question stands and falls with this: is consciousness primarily a side product of metabolism, or does it constitute an independent entity that is independent of metabolism? The answer to this question determines whether there can be postmortal states or not. Anyway, it can only be discussed if it becomes clear that this consciousness is in no way a side product of an already very complex metabolism. Based on my experience, I assume that this question about the independence of consciousness from the metabolic process can absolutely be answered positively.”
Both Nolan and Ludwiger are "UFOs equal space aliens" eccentrics. But AFAIK, that wasn't the case with Burkhard Heim. The structure or visual diagram that Nolan references below can be seen toward the bottom of the PDF document link above. It's an emergent view of consciousness -- that a hierarchy of multiple physical levels eventually conjures a stratum of immaterial events that are only privately presented (publicly undetectable). Contrast to the rival view that matter natively has internal states (where the manifestations of consciousness reside as hidden properties of the brain's electrochemical processes.)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CURT JAIMUNGAL
https://youtu.be/3qFl9ZCXfGc
VIDEO EXCERPTS: This is... Illobrand von Ludwiger. And, I mean, I don't understand the math, I don't even pretend to.
Is he still alive, as far as you know?
No, I think he's dead.
Well, according to his theory, he's not dead.
Yeah, according to his theory. But basically, this structure that he draws here at the end is a visual representation. At the top of it, through these levels of organization, consciousness would form because of it. And that then you could take away the underlying structure that formed it, and then this would continue to exist independently. Which is interesting.
The reason why I like this, and he didn't really talk about this, he talks about it in the context of biology. But if it's right, it means you could create an artificial intelligence, which was in and of itself could become conscious. Most scientists working in AI never think that we will have the ability to create a conscious machine.
I mean, anything that we create that looks conscious is just a darn good simulation. It would pass the Turing test, but it would just be a darn good simulation. But it's not really conscious. So therefore, it has no rights, human rights, as far as where... It's a big argument that's been played out in science fiction for many years.
I get interested in these kinds of ideas, that you could create an object. Humans might someday be able to, without using biology, but using purely materialistic approaches, build a sufficiently complex machine that creates an object with consciousness and a soul.
Did he say whether or not this soul would survive for an indeterminate amount of time?
Yeah. You can take away the thing that caused it, and it lives unto itself.
[...] A lot of physicists just dismiss him outright. But as with any of these theories, there's a little often cult-like following of people who are absolutely determined to prove that that author is right. In fact, the piece is written by somebody else, and writing about his findings, and collecting it into a little treatise.
[...] Look at the last sentence of this document. Fascinating emergent property, he claims...
Stanford's Garry Nolan discusses a strange theory of consciousness ... https://youtu.be/3qFl9ZCXfGc
