About the author

Comments

  1. 31:00 Science will soon prove that artificial intelligence, that is artificial brains, are far superior to the human brain, (which is a product of Natural Selection). Many processes in Nature are cumbersome, and inaccurate. Science constructed brains will eventually prove superior,and will liberate and empower us like no previous phenomenon in history. Cutting edge science is now in a position to make improvements, not only in our brains, but our bodies as well. Our biggest challenge is the war we fight against disease, in all of it's, (natural), malevolent forms.

  2. In my mind this last talking point calls into question the very validity of using error bars. If the error bars represent outliers and yet the outliers are representative of the chaotic system, then the error bar data is as legitimately part the system as the main portion of the data bar. So why differentiate between the two? Is not differentiating between the two pandering to a reductionist interpretation of a chaotic system?

  3. Fair warning: TOXIC

    There are those who purport that a system in a chaotic state will never repeat… This must be untrue because there are, in any system, a finite number of variables, and thusly a finite number of combinations and or permutations of those same variables. The fenomenon these "ground breaking sceintists" are noticing when they write about the chaotic threshold of a system is simply the fact that your input has ceased to be the sole determining behavioral factor. It ceases to override the behavior, and ceases to bring the vastly blunt system of patten measurement back to a close enough approximation of initial state to repeat the oversimplified observable pattern. Upon closer inspection, one will find that the "chaos" was there all along, and did indeed manifest itself in the form of slightly differing positions of the water wheel, for example. In the same example, these positions are never different enough to effect the pattern being observed for the same reason a single drop of water, dripped from a pipet at the top of a water slide, will do nothing but roll down the water slide. Add enough water to the system, and you introduce new variables like how the gravity on the drop now has differing forces to fight and work with, namely the friction of the other droplets. This eventually gives rise to a slip and slide, which, as well as throwing water droplets out of the slide (previously a completely inconceivable idea) is also appealing to swimmers, who will use it. Add even more water and you add the possibility of the vastly complicated swimmers to enter a panicked state, die, and effect the other swimmers with their death. At such a time, the lifeguards, a differing form of swimmer, would enter the state of patrol, aided by the only truely chaotic system of government XD, police might enter the equasion representative of the population's common desires to not die or see their peers die, they will enter in a state of agitation, and close down the slide. However, considering the assumed expenature of the previously unnamed owner of the slide, the more likely outcome in this undeniably more complicated system would be to turn off the slide for a time, leading the initial scientific observer of the water droplet baffled to again observe an incredibly predictable behavior of the water droplet. This repeatable experiment will lead any scientific observer to conclude that turning up the force on a droplet waterslide system will lead to completely unpredictable behavior of any single water droplet for a time, and even more inexplicable, will eventually self correct to a steady dripping near the end.

    Satire, yes, but I dare anyone to prove me wrong when I say that every system is predictable given the ability to procces the TRUE INVARIANT of any system: the fact that it's just a bunch of variables; give me a closed system with anything other than predictable, periodic behavior and I'll give you the reason it's not truely a closed system, and a handful of variables you didn't look at. Similarly, I'll go as far as saying that everything is periodic, but we observe the vast majority of systems only once, without repetition. Don't get depressed, the Lion King is a great movie, we don't get depressed when we talk about the circle of life, keyword circle, indicating period.

  4. 5:15 This story sounds nice but is nonsense.
    At 1085 there were already numerous monasteries all over Europe, many of them having big libraries.
    It's not that capturing a single library in southern Spain suddenly would have brought knowledge back to Europe, but this was already slowly happening all the centuries before, mostly by reading and copying roman literature.

    And if Sapolsky is (rightfully) mentioning how backwards Europe was from 500 to ~1000 then he also could mention that today the total amount of books that originate in the whole Arabian world per year is not more than 250, most of them being Quran interpretations. 😉

  5. Respectfully, and I very much respect Dr. Sapolsky, it is hard to believe that between the collapse of the Roman Empire and the acquisition of the library of Toledo, Spain, people could not intuitively figure out how to solve crimes!!!???!!! I know trial by ordeal was widely used but surely at times humans were smart enough to apply rudimentary forensics? We don't need to understand the Greek philosophers to apply common sense, do we?????

  6. I am going to ask a probably stupid question. Is it possible that some chaotic systems appear chaotic because we cannot measure every component of the system and only observe or predict effects? For instance, the butterfly in Korea changing weather in Indiana. If we knew EVERY molecule, atom, subatomic particle + EVERY bit of energy affecting those particles and ALL the forces thereof, could we predict the future outcome? If so we could reduce to the starting point? (For instance, butterfly wings exert ___ energy force, knocking O2 molecule into Nitrogen, into hydrogen which hits two O2 molecules generating or consuming ___ energy, etc., however many trillions of interactions that become part of the weather pattern half a world away?)

    What I am actually wondering is, in biological systems, if we were able to look at EVERY particle in the system + all energy, could we come closer to predictable or linear systems? I understand the argument for chaos is there is no set point to return to. But in biological systems how much of the chaos is due to the vast numbers of material particles we do not understand and cannot measure within the system?

    We are only just beginning to understand biological systems with modern imaging, measurements, etc. Might there be less chaos as we get more understanding even at the atomic level in biological systems. Dr. Sapolsky was going to explain how to overcome chaos in the next lecture but I am not sure that is available here online.

    (The only reason I have the nerve to ask anything here is because I knew from the beginning the lecture would get into fractals. I am somewhat familiar with that because I am an artist.);-)

  7. One of the most interesting things i have ever heard. Much appreciation for everything/-one that contributed to making this accessible.

  8. We are considering Quantum stuff are we not? I even came up with something very cute called Quantum Cinematography. 🤭😱🥰☺️💋

  9. But variable are very important data. Thank God for Quantum biology. I just wish we were not so out there close to imposible.

  10. Gosh! It’d be so cool to have an organism forget about us and see how it shapes itself. With all the components of a human being but without telling it where and how each work. Pff!

  11. I think at some degree somehow “we” well some humans are already doing it.. autistic, Alzheimer, and so on are like a ventilation system for at least not social recognising other humans which could be a way to find a new sort of configuration that God knows what it will allow us to do.

  12. Dominance is not like the way.. Is more like dominance + something else which reduces te dominance need to sort of code in not used because I’m busy with something else!

  13. Begins to explain the "Butterfly Effect" https://youtu.be/_njf8jwEGRo?t=4119
    If you're looking for more meaning in your existence, the Butterly Effect says that the Universe could not exist without you in it. It would be a different place entirely if the phenomena that led to you didn't occur, and your existence will have significant impact on future events, forever. No matter how small we actually are, we are still meaningful because we change things, simply be being here.

  14. You lost me… I’m thinking about Dark Matter. We are just idiots trying to sustain life giving ourselves something to hold to. Ridiculous.

  15. I love his lectures, but I seriously question his understanding of Early Medieval Europe.

    One small example would be the vast trade routes that stretched down the Volga River from Northern Europe and ended in Byzantium.

  16. Thankyou I'm 50 and didn't think I'd understand these concepts but you explained it very well I got most of it….I will watch it again x

  17. Ok but a Triangle with more than 180* wouldn't then, technically speaking…be a Triangle… It would have added another face thusly become a Quadrilateral.
    Ps… Do Colleges post these videos for everyone else who cant afford to buy into their scam?
    Pss…What was the Name of the book?

  18. Is Prof. Sapolsky talking about entropy? Physicist Sean Carroll told a hilarious joke about the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics as it relates to physicist Alan Guth winning the Boston Globe's award for having the messiest office of all living physicists. Damn, I wish I could find that video — but my bookmarks are A HUGE MESS

  19. It seems strange that only 4% of the universe is "known materials", if you don't know what dark matter is, which is analogous to taking the temperature of the Sun, ..what do you know, actually?
    So out of infinite chaos, a bit of reducing those infinite qualities of existence to circumstances that we can manage or manipulate, seems to be reccomended.

    If the implication in the title of the lecture is that reductionism is philosophically unpleasant, then that's the worst interpretation of the purpose of the lectures, and totally irrelevant.

  20. 7:15 But apparently the opposite is true, God makes infinite copies of itself permanently, or the Everett interpretation.

  21. The utterly distorted picture of the movement to translate the Greek manuscripts found in the Islamic translation in Spain and Sicily turned me so off, that I stopped listening. It seems to me that someone ought certainly to make himself (or herself) familiar with a few of the standard works on history before making such sweeping — and completely false — historical claims.
    Hmm. So that anyone reading this can get some idea of my objection to this presentation, the entire aim and structure of Scholastic teaching, which started and flourished before the conquest of Toledo, was the logical examination of Scripture. Okay? Never in the Catholic Church or in its educational institutions was illiteracy dominant — on the contrary, the study of Scripture was primary. And, from the beginning, the examination was undertaken with the use of logic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *