Видео

Светлая песня памяти Алексея ещё обязательно будет. А это был привет другому человеку.

Какой он светлый человек был не смеши

Должно быть, у вас изысканный вкус и тонкая душевная организация.

Ага.,. И в какое место оно тебя беспокоит?, Так это не тем местом зришь., Не ну, клизму от мозгов? Эмфузория туфелька, это даже не диагноз.😂.

Что вам известно о том, чем нужно заниматься девочкам?

Thank u.:) This song means a lot to me. After everything I learned and thought through so far, I currently do think that we indeed may very well live in a simulation and the Universe as we know it may be a VR of some sort. Also for decades already, long before it became a popular theory, I thought there is an uncanny resemblance between the structure of the universe if zoomed out to imaginable maximum (the part we studied so far) and a neural network/brain. I can think of more analogies that support the statement “as above, so below” ( as deep within, so in the wide big “out there”).. it is an endlessly interesting topic. At the same time, everything can be entirely different and nothing like we are able to comprehend. Are we random moments in existence? Or are we the makers of this Universe? Or is it conscious and experiences itself through every individual and thing which are still just a part of it? Endlessly multi-dimensional. One day I hope to know and create my own worlds like type 5 civilization ;). Regarding absolute and stable… the later is hard to imagine.. cosmic entropy, perhaps? Dead abandoned world.. but even that would be relative in relation to other universes or what lays beyond ours. Or perhaps once one world dies, another one is born.. or the same one is reborn anew. How I wish to know… Regarding “absolute”…in my world and value system it would be true love. Thank u for such an interesting questions. What are ur thoughts on them? I also see a very strong connection between music and math.. both are so elegant in their beauty like two sides of a complex object, of which chemistry can be another side.

​​​@@ArsenicPoison It is my pleasure to read your comments since you never look at a coin only from one side. I am still thinking about your question and trying to clarify it (say, in mathematics, in order to understand a question, one needs to understand every word in the question). If we understand the word 'simulation' as a sort of VR, then we should distinguish at least two cases of what our relation to this VR is: Case 1: we are observers who are not a part of the VR, but embedded into it. Then, from my point of view, we have more hope to learn about different sorts of reality. If our reality is virtual, there should be a parent reality, which may also be virtual. For me one of the main questions is: is there a reality that is not virtual (does not have a parent)? This would be an 'absolute' and 'stable' one. Since we assume we are real observers, we must be a part of that absolute reality (at least be connected with it). As I understand the philosophy of science, the scientists always assume the objectiveness of the current reality and its laws. Otherwise, the parent reality may cause any unpredictable 'miracles' in the 'child' reality (the ability to predict is the key property of any science). Case 2: we are just a part of the VR. Then, from my point view, we have very little hope to learn more about the parent reality (the consciousness of each of us is an AI, which may be fundamentally weaker than the consciousness that gave birth to our reality). It would also be interesting if it was true that our reality has no parent. We could then focus only on its laws. Regarding the similarity between the universe and a neural network, there is a sort of objects in mathematics called a fractal. The main property of fractals is self-likeness. I am wondering if the universe has a fractal structure. As for the possible randomness of us (I think this makes sense only if we live in a virtual reality and are also virtual, Case 2), it depends on the will created our virtual reality. No doubt, in your channel you have already created an amazing world, which is highly recommended to entities from different realities.:) Your candidates for 'absolute' and 'stable' are very interesting, especially because some of them belong to our reality. However, if the reality is virtual, any its 'law' is not for sure. Thank you very much for sharing some aspects of your value system. Let me ask: what is your definition of true love? And let me also share the key point of my value system. In mathematics, people usually want to have as small number of axioms as possible. Building my value system, I tried to introduce a few axioms that allow to judge everything (or almost everything). I felt that I need to introduce secular definitions of 'good' and 'bad' (religious people say these notions come from God and are transcendent). They are as follows. Assume each person has freedom and it is possible to measure its level (say, the level of freedom of a person is all the actions the person can make). In this system everyone is both a subject and an object. Let S be a person that acts (a subject) and O_1, O_2, ..., O_n be all the persons that experience the action of S (one of the objects may be S himself/herself). Let A denote the action of S. I say that A is relatively good for a person O_i if A increases the level of freedom of O_i. Similarly, A is relatively bad for the person O_i if A decreases the level of freedom of O_i. Obviously, an action A that is relatively good for some person may be relatively bad for another person. I say that an action A is absolutely good if it is not relatively bad for each of the objects and is relatively good for at least one of the objects. The main idea of my value system is to make only absolutely good actions. To love an object O means to me to make more absolutely good actions that are relatively good for O.

@@sergeygoryainov I lean more towards Case1: we are embedded into this reality like gamers are embedded into a game's reality through their characters for the duration of the game (and we - for the duration of our mortal lives). Parent reality exists, but is completely independent of the "game" reality and is vastly different. And it is so much more multifaceted that "game" is just but a grain in a dessert of a "parent" reality. Just like a painting in a museum is a part of the world it is displayed at, but it is such a tiny part that it only casts the faintest of lights on the bigger "reality", not representing it in full nor giving opportunity to objectively extrapolate what the reality is truly like. I do not think that would make a parent reality stable or absolute. It may seem so from the embedded reality point of view, but a parent reality may face its own challenges or limitations which are so unreachable and impenetrable for a creature from the "embedded" reality that it may be counted as stable and absolute. For as long as equation holds. :) A painter of the painting in the museum or a game developer (architect of the embedded reality) has entirely different life/existence outside of its creation. But for its creation he/she/it is a god. While he/she/it may be just a clueless kid doing a school project in the 1st grade in his/her/its own reality. Type 5 civilization ;). We may also be those creators of the embedded reality ourselves. Playing our own games. And not aware of it for the duration of the game - to make sure we do not diminish the value of this experience. Or, like I said before, we all may be just fractures of the conscious universe that experiences itself from different points of view through our brief existence, countless times and simultaneously. Unsettling theory, but it has the right to exist just like the others. These are just my wild speculations, but I love to create worlds in my own mind. And who knows, maybe my thoughts are as real to my creations as my life is to me. Everything we know about the world are our observations, experiences and conclusions. We give things and events names, we try to make sense of what we encounter, but it is still just our interpretation. But I applaud those who tries to understand, who questions the inconsistencies instead of blindly follow without thinking for themselves. Good and bad are also a matter of perspective I suppose. Like you said, what is good for one may be evil for another. To be at peace with yourself is most important I believe. To stay true to one’s own values. One can never please everybody. We are all different things to different people. It depends on who you ask and their own value systems. I appreciate that you aspire to be as good as you can be. You are a mathematician, a thinker. From what I gather, you have courage and dignity not to partake in injustice and atrocities at a great cost to yourself. This is why I reply to you so extensively. Fractal structure of the universe is a mesmerizing topic. I am also fascinated, for example, by a seeming likeness between black holes and an eye that captures everything it sees and transmits it to the brain for interpretation, all the while absorbing light… What is your opinion on Fermi Paradox? Distances in the universe too great in correlation to density of intelligent life? Cosmic zoo or a Simulation? About true love...We can start with answer to this by asking parents. Parental love for their children is one of the purest, most unconditional and all overpowering forces I ever witnessed, both as a child and as a parent. Some may question whether it is a true emotion or just a nature’s algorithm to ensure survival of the species. It can be both at the same time, but I think there is more to it. It is not just a program. And so the organic life continues.. Biologically, this can be life's true meaning - continue to exist and spread through offspring and passing on genes. But for me the meaning is in the experience. Not the end destination, but the journey itself. True love for a partner, another being, a dream, a profession, a life’s passion, a life’s purpose, one’s ikigai is just as true for me. It does not matter what one dedicates themselves to - if it is the meaning of one's life or a huge part of it - it is true for them. Is it our "default programming" or are we getting overwritten for the benefit of the love interest by a "virus"? Still, I view it as the greatest power in this world. Greater than gravity. True love transcends life, fear of death, goes against self-preservation instincts and survival algorithms. A power that transcends the limits of this universe, its physical laws and limitations. All limits are conditional and I believe we all have the capabilities to break out from any chains and be free in our minds and our hearts. This is often a very difficult journey. Mastery demands dedication. Obstacles may be plenty. We do not choose the cards we are dealt. But it is how we deal with what happens to us that defines us. Like ice turns to water and water to steam, so can the limiting conditions be changed into a form that can escape any vicious circle, passing through it like neutrinos or higher dimensions. Not all parents love their children unconditionally, not all loves prioritize their objects best interest, but I talk about what is true for me. From such true love a mutual feeling and reciprocity can grow. This is just as valid for life’s purpose as for people. And that can lead to true happiness I think. No matter how brief..if one had such sincere true moments in their life - it is a treasured, meaningful experience. One knows if their love is true. And it is a journey worth having. This little channel is a part of my ikigai. I leave the memory, love, emotions, knowledge and a part of what I am in every song. It is meant for very specific people. But I am very humbled and grateful that it touched you too. :)

You consider a very wide range of questions and problems, see many connections and analogies between them, and keep all of these in your mind systematically. From my point of view, you are a true philosopher, and I am very grateful to you for sharing your art, thoughts and kindness so generously. I am deeply impressed and inspired, and can hardly find words to express and explain what I feel, but let me try. When I was in high school, my teacher of physics gave me a paper map of the stars visible in the sky. This map consisted of two pieces of paper. I needed to rotate one piece of paper with respect to the other and thus could predict which stars and constellations would rise and which ones would set. I was spending nights outside observing this process and was very excited. I do compare my current feeling with that one. You said you reply to me so extensively because you trust in me and suppose me not to partake in injustice and atrocities at a great cost to myself. That is true that many things are unacceptable to me. For example, to kill is completely unacceptable to me (I am a pacifist). To recognize injustice and atrocities, I always apply my definition of evil, that is, once I see that someone bereaves people their freedom (opportunities) using dubious arguments such us "security reasons", "great idea" and so on, I decide that unjustice takes place (I never partook in such kind of things). This is also my universal way to defend myself, my wife, my friends, close and not so close people. Everyone who has power and wants to decrease the level of freedom (the amount of opportunities) of these people must provide me with a clear explanation what the goal of this action is. If I am not satisfied with the arguments, I prefer nonviolent resistance instead of direct fighting. The cost of this approach to myself is that I don't get and don't want to get anything from the people whom I consider to be bad, but I am quite happy with that for many reasons. However, to my deepest regret, I cannot say that I never hurt people even though it is unacceptable to me (I mean causing pain). It happened a few times, I realized that later and still feel shame (I tried to bring my apologies to all these people sooner or later). You said you see a very strong connection between music and math. If my revelations disappointed you not too much, could you please explain what you mean? In particular, do you use any math methods to compose music, to write lyrics and polyphonic vocal parts? As for Fermi Paradox, I compare this with combinatorics, an area of mathematics that is familiar to me. I often search for combinatorial objects (graphs and certain structures in them) with use of computer. The only possibility to find something interesting is either to have not so big space for enumeration or to have a good guess where to look. The resources and abilities are very limited, and in many cases the enumeration cannot be done. The main limit in our universe is considered to be the light speed. Even if an extraterrastrial civilization is more developed than humanity, it may still be impossible to receive a slow signal and find us. However, if we are already found, we may be under observation (that is, a cosmic zoo). Also, as we know, there are alive organisms that are much smaller than people. Why don't much larger alive organisms exist? I think that our universe may be just a small part of some organism. Then the answer for Fermi Paradox could be that the sizes of civilizations are too different to establish communication.

@@sergeygoryainov Thank u. I will answer soon. And it will be long. :)