Did anybody see this back in the last century? it’s about the impact on society of new discoveries in physics. I think I’ll watch it again and see how well it has held up
Yessss, excellent movie. Well worth watching.
Well that was fun, took me most of the day, but I did a detailed viewing. Nice summary of a certain kind of thinking.
____________________________-
Mindwalk and the crisis of perception
(A casual annotation)
MINDWALK (1990)
[26:55] “(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uec1CX-6A38&t=1615s) The Crisis of Perception. That’s where it begins! (27:50) - It’s not just a problem of “our perception of the world around us”. It’s also a problem of our lack of perception of ourselves,… as part of this greater whole that is Earth’s biosphere and all those related creatures out there. (31:15) We need more than “a new vision of the world”, we need a new vision of ourselves. What kind of new vision? Could start with a realistic understanding (an internalizing) that we are evolved sensing organism, creatures of Earth’s evolution, we aren’t alone, we have ever receding relatives all around us, and so on and so forth.”
“Seems to me only by internalizing our connects to Earth and other creatures, as deeply as we internalize our children & family, can we learn to live constructively, as opposed to today’s race towards multiple catastrophes.”
34:00 Public Opinion
35:22 People’s perception of the world.
37:55 Francis Bacon, his monster side.
40:30 Why the patriarchal obsession
40:50 “The two great principles functioning in the entire living world …
“… what’s wrong with giving the female principle a chance.
50:30 Atoms and “the vast regions of space of empty space” between electrons
{Cc. The error is at 53:15 nucleus and electrons are not “pebbles” or “grains,” they spin so fast they are spread out energy fields - the pebbles or grains. Another error is, not considering what happens when individual atoms are scaled up, and why that matters to us living beings.}
53:45 “Having to think with radically new concepts - the evolution of math explaining what physicists were observed in their ever more penetrating experiments.”
54:35 “They had to question the conventional ideas of the very existence of matter. … they had to admit that matter doesn’t exist with certainty, rather it shows tendencies to exist. “
{Cc. again neglecting to consider this is at the Planck scale, our biological universe exists within an entirely different reality.}
{Cc. Seems to me this is where a deeper exploration of our own “mindscape” might be more fruitful than “questioning the very existence of matter”.}
57:04 “Electron doesn’t move, or stay in one place, it manifests itself as probability patterns.”
{Cc. But what is being kept silent is that this has crossed over into the mathematical realm of trying to explain observations. Map/Territory.}
{Cc. These are mathematical explanations that are confined to mathematical limitations. These mathematical limitations are periodically reimagined my geniuses who’s intellects invent new mathematical tricks to explain ever more unreachable realms of our reality. Mathematical is a creation of our collective human mind, it is of use to us, but doesn’t matter to anything else, living or cosmic matter. This is the realm of our “mindscape,” and that doesn’t get addressed.}
How does it matter in our realm?
58:02 “How are there objects in our realm?”
58:10 “This simple question, what makes this room of rock so solid goes way beyond our power of imagination. … “There’s no metaphor for it”
{Cc. How about emergent properties? Nucleus and electrons are not “grains” they are smeared out energy fields, pile one on top of another and repeat a few gazillion times to get up to our scales, why shouldn’t those incredible submicroscopic force fields not create solid matter?}
{Cc. I just don’t understand it, seems more like Conditioned Confusion. This right here is at the roots at my sense of indignation at most philosophers and the way quantum reality has always been forced down our though it just had to unimaginable. Why. Why is it so tough to recognize the reality of Scaling? We’ve had a century to digest it. What does it come down to? That no mathematician has been smart enough to land on the absolutely perfect formula to explain it? So what?}
58:45 “Matter is solid because of probability patterns are difficult to compress?, Yes, that’s as good as it gets.” (59:30)
{Cc. Matter is solid because matter is solid. Probabilities Patterns don’t make matter solid, ‘probability patterns’ help scientists explain it through math. Here’s another place where a sober assessment of the divide between our thoughts and that solid matter we’re always pounding our heads against is in order.}
59:44 “it’s a lousy visualization but no one did it better.”
{Cc. Again, where’s the reminder that these are mathematic estimates that create different visualization. Based on observation, sure, still limited observations at that, processed by limited mathematics.}
1:00:00 “if is probability patterns of what?, Of interconnects”
{Cc. could also say, constant feedback loops, since inputs effects outputs.}
- 1:01:25 “everyone knows this (3 note) chord, it carries a very distinct feeling. Individually the notes are (indifferent), … therefore the essence of the chord lies in its relationships. And the relationship between time and pitch, make melody. Relationships make music.**
> {Cc. Very cool observation, well said.}1:02:45 “We are two separate bodies.” { & you both are having an effect on the other} “… yes, we are all part of one inseparable set of relationships.”
1:06:00 “What do you do with it (the new understanding)”
1:06:00 “It’s the physicists fault, they made The Bomb.” ‘Littering is a reflection hopelessness and its disregard.’
1:10:40 ‘We were never tough to think about the future. … The noble pursuit of science? But the military pays for 70% of science.’
{Cc. Rejecting the “truth of science” interesting concept that one. “Truth.” It dances with the question of facts vs. what we make of those facts. Which is true truth, or is that a misplaced concept?
Seems to me this brings us right back to the need for a fundamental reckoning with the distinction and boundaries between reality ~ mind. Ironically, mind is all we have for understanding both reality and itself.}
1:14: 53
{Cc. Ecological thinking requires a personal connection, an internalization of our biological evolutionary origins, which has cascading impacts on one’s perspective. But requires learning and acquiring a knowledge base to be able to blossom both intellectually and emotionally. When the lessons of Evolution’s deep-time and the beat of changes that enabled, new epochs, which in turn became the staging ground for further leaps, quite often driven by radical changes in the environment and ecology, well beyond the established creatures prior experience, the drive to survive, drives genetic changes.
{Cc. Internalizing and personalizing our kinship with Earth’s creatures and landscapes, and oceans and the global heat and moisture distribution engine that drives our living conditions.}
1:16:40 “In 1968 Nixon won the youth vote, 1980, 1984 Reagan did the same thing.”
{Cc. Wow, doesn’t that explain a lot of the past half century. If we aren’t changing minds we are losing.}
1:17:10 “Thinking about processes, rather than structures.”
1:21:30 “There is a theory that puts things into one coherent scientific framework,” “Systems Theory” theory of living systems, (ecology, biosphere, also applies to climate engine.)
1:26:28 “System science provides us with an outline for an answer to the question what is life.” What is life? In system language the answer would be, the essence of life would be self realization. Life is self-organizing.” - - - "It means something specific. It means that a system is self-maintaining, self-renewing, self-transcending.” - - - patterns - - - life has an inherent tendency to transcend themselves, (striving to be more).
1:30:40 “Evolution more than adaptation to environment, environment itself is a system that adapts itself to changing conditions.”
“Evolution as ongoing dance, conversation.” “We evolve with the planet.”1:32:20 “The trouble is our obsessive pursuit of growth, it must stop.” “We have to give importance to the next generation.”
Not that I remember. I’ll have to watch it later, but it sounds like it might be interesting.
I think this movie might be right up your alley … 
It sounds interesting.
Here is another movie that may be right up your ally.
It’s a british Sci Fi called “Frequencies” and is free on YouTube.
1 Like
Another movie suggestion. Ehrmann is doing a discussion event for it. Jesus of Montreal. Sounds kinda fun, but I can’t make it.