1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:00,940
Let's get to the next one.

2
00:00:01,000 --> 00:00:02,800
How about Eric Weinstein's geometric unity?

3
00:00:03,940 --> 00:00:05,160
What are your thoughts on that?

4
00:00:06,960 --> 00:00:07,960
Eric Weinstein.

5
00:00:08,240 --> 00:00:09,680
Okay, geometric unity.

6
00:00:09,680 --> 00:00:17,480
That's where he's got a triangle that has the Dirac equation spinners

7
00:00:17,480 --> 00:00:23,240
and spin-one-and-a-half matter particles on one vertex.

8
00:00:23,440 --> 00:00:25,520
On another vertex, he's got general relativity.

9
00:00:25,520 --> 00:00:33,180
And on the other vertex, he's got the standard model with SU-3 times SU-2 times SU-1 gauged it.

10
00:00:33,860 --> 00:00:34,020
Right?

11
00:00:34,420 --> 00:00:34,740
Okay.

12
00:00:35,560 --> 00:00:39,740
I think that Eric is actually, he seems like a very bright guy.

13
00:00:39,840 --> 00:00:47,100
I remember when he had his, I think, isn't he the guy who had the mathematics encyclopedia up for a long time on the web?

14
00:00:47,620 --> 00:00:48,460
I think it was Eric Weinstein.

15
00:00:48,540 --> 00:00:53,100
Some guy named Eric Weinstein had a math encyclopedia up on the web.

16
00:00:53,100 --> 00:00:55,460
And, you know, it was pretty impenetrable.

17
00:00:55,600 --> 00:00:58,800
I mean, if he didn't already know the math, you weren't going to get anything out of this encyclopedia.

18
00:00:59,060 --> 00:01:02,000
But nevertheless, it was good.

19
00:01:02,380 --> 00:01:07,000
But anyway, here's the strength of his approach, this geometric unity.

20
00:01:07,980 --> 00:01:12,160
Basically, he seems to be saying, it sort of occurs to me that what he's saying is,

21
00:01:12,240 --> 00:01:18,480
well, we're having a hard time putting together a TOE, you know, a purely analytic algebraic TOE.

22
00:01:18,480 --> 00:01:26,720
So let's look at the geometry of these theories, of the Dirac equation and the standard model and general relativity.

23
00:01:27,040 --> 00:01:29,560
And let's see if we can put those geometries together.

24
00:01:29,920 --> 00:01:32,940
And if we can merge those geometries, then guess what?

25
00:01:33,200 --> 00:01:39,260
We're going to automatically just be able to match it with a global formal theory coupled with the gem.

26
00:01:39,260 --> 00:01:47,720
Okay, and this is, it's really kind of an innovative way to approach it.

27
00:01:47,780 --> 00:01:50,440
However, it's the way I've been approaching it for decades.

28
00:01:51,820 --> 00:01:53,900
The CTME is the Logico-Geomethe.

29
00:01:54,240 --> 00:01:58,580
It's a coupling of logic and geometry, but it's generative geometry.

30
00:01:59,720 --> 00:02:06,420
Okay, which is a fundamentally different kind than what I think Eric Weinstein is dealing with.

31
00:02:06,420 --> 00:02:10,100
Stephen Wolfram's Theory of Everything, the Wolfram Project.

32
00:02:10,460 --> 00:02:11,600
What are your opinions on that?

33
00:02:11,640 --> 00:02:12,440
Have you taken a look?

34
00:02:13,320 --> 00:02:16,800
Stephen Wolfram, he's obviously a very bright guy.

35
00:02:17,060 --> 00:02:18,640
He knows a lot about mathematics.

36
00:02:19,820 --> 00:02:24,180
You know, he's kind of an adorable character.

37
00:02:24,180 --> 00:02:34,100
What he's done, what it seems to me that he's done is he's tried to identify certain basic elements and rules of assembly.

38
00:02:34,100 --> 00:02:41,380
And then, like a bunch of tinker toys, he's trying to assemble those into the overall structure of reality.

39
00:02:43,300 --> 00:02:45,280
And I appreciate that.

40
00:02:45,440 --> 00:02:49,300
And it's entertaining to read Stephen's writing about it.

41
00:02:49,360 --> 00:02:50,720
And there's a lot of insight there.

42
00:02:50,900 --> 00:02:52,880
But it doesn't work.

43
00:02:52,940 --> 00:02:57,880
Because if you're going to have a theory of everything, you need to start with everything.

44
00:02:57,880 --> 00:02:59,260
All right?

45
00:02:59,340 --> 00:03:08,660
You're not going to take a subset of everything and then put it together and get something which is reality, which is more than the sum of its parts.

46
00:03:09,160 --> 00:03:10,180
You're not going to do it.

47
00:03:10,380 --> 00:03:15,200
You've got to start with everything, which means you've got to start with cognition and perception in general.

48
00:03:15,940 --> 00:03:18,200
You've got to logically induce your theory from that.

49
00:03:19,720 --> 00:03:20,080
Okay?

50
00:03:20,080 --> 00:03:21,940
And that's the way to build a theory.

51
00:03:23,740 --> 00:03:31,300
But as far as Stephen's writing is concerned and the other aspects of what Stephen does, I think he's a very bright guy.

52
00:03:31,600 --> 00:03:34,700
I get a big kick out of reading what he writes.

53
00:03:35,200 --> 00:03:39,320
But this is more or less right up front for me.

54
00:03:39,480 --> 00:03:41,400
The fact that he's going about it in a long way.

55
00:03:41,440 --> 00:03:42,640
He hasn't seen the big picture.

56
00:03:43,000 --> 00:03:47,320
He doesn't understand all of the criteria that have to be satisfied in order to have a TOE.

57
00:03:48,020 --> 00:03:49,080
That's the way you've got to start.

58
00:03:49,080 --> 00:03:50,260
You've got to start with everything.

59
00:03:50,500 --> 00:03:55,020
Nothing can be excluded, either implicitly or explicitly.

60
00:03:55,600 --> 00:03:58,100
You've got to have everything.

61
00:03:58,100 --> 00:04:03,300
You've got to have everything condensed or encapsulated somehow in some kind of process.

62
00:04:03,840 --> 00:04:07,520
And for us human beings, the process is cognition and perception.

63
00:04:08,160 --> 00:04:11,100
You start with those and then you build your reality on it.

64
00:04:13,460 --> 00:04:14,400
What about Donald Hoffman?

65
00:04:14,400 --> 00:04:19,520
Have you taken a look at his theories on consciousness and conscious agents interacting and so on?

66
00:04:19,520 --> 00:04:31,260
Now, yes, I think I watched a video with him and Deepak Chopra at one time.

67
00:04:31,840 --> 00:04:33,380
And I found him interesting.

68
00:04:33,660 --> 00:04:37,980
He's saying that basically cognition is deceptive.

69
00:04:38,120 --> 00:04:39,980
He's a cognitive scientist, as I would call it.

70
00:04:39,980 --> 00:04:45,860
He's saying that some aspects of how we see the world is actually quite deceptive, but adaptive.

71
00:04:46,460 --> 00:04:52,180
In other words, it helps us adapt and survive to the world if we actually don't see it correctly.

72
00:04:52,440 --> 00:05:02,220
He's got this idea of a kind of a graphic user interface that actually allows us to have cognition that is deceptive, but nevertheless adaptive.

73
00:05:02,220 --> 00:05:12,440
And basically what Donald needs is he needs an overall framework in which to insert his GUI, his graphic user interface.

74
00:05:12,700 --> 00:05:16,800
He needs the actual reality self-stimulation principle to make that look.

75
00:05:17,540 --> 00:05:19,940
He's a guy who is very much in need of the CTME.

76
00:05:20,140 --> 00:05:24,500
Of course, he's an academic, so he probably would insist that it come from another academic.

77
00:05:24,940 --> 00:05:27,580
But if that were to happen, it would be called plagiarism.

78
00:05:27,580 --> 00:05:42,800
And so I doubt that he's ever going to get to the true part of things, get really where he's trying to go, simply because I'm not a member of the club in which he belongs and in which all of this stuff comes to life.

79
00:05:43,760 --> 00:05:45,000
Okay, how about David Bohm?

80
00:05:45,360 --> 00:05:54,100
So how your theory compares in contrast with David Bohm's theories, which I would like you to explain implicate order to me because I haven't had the chance to look it up.

81
00:05:54,340 --> 00:05:57,460
And then there's someone named Henry Bergson, which is related to Bohm.

82
00:05:57,580 --> 00:06:03,620
Now, I'm not sure how they differ, but you can elucidate me and the audience at the same time.

83
00:06:04,800 --> 00:06:06,920
Bergson is a great philosopher.

84
00:06:07,320 --> 00:06:08,860
He's one of the best.

85
00:06:09,600 --> 00:06:21,900
And as a matter of fact, some of what he had to say about manifolds I find quite interesting because it very closely parallels what had to be done in the CTME, creating a medium of reality.

86
00:06:21,900 --> 00:06:26,920
As far as David Bohm is concerned, his reputation precedes him.

87
00:06:27,480 --> 00:06:29,860
There was an early Bohm and a late Bohm.

88
00:06:29,960 --> 00:06:31,840
The early Bohm was Bohmian Mechanics.

89
00:06:32,460 --> 00:06:35,840
And then later on, he came up with something called the Holo Movement.

90
00:06:35,980 --> 00:06:37,080
It's the Holographic Universe.

91
00:06:38,000 --> 00:06:42,300
I think he wrote a book on the Holographic Universe with Vassal Haile.

92
00:06:42,300 --> 00:06:44,380
Yeah, it's Vassal Haile.

93
00:06:44,700 --> 00:06:55,180
Anyway, he has this thing that he calls the Holo Movement that basically takes an implicate order and kicks out an exibitant.

94
00:06:55,680 --> 00:06:57,420
That is pure CTNU.

95
00:06:58,260 --> 00:07:03,560
Okay, this is that process is what the CTMU calls involution.

96
00:07:03,560 --> 00:07:07,380
It's just one aspect of the CTNU.

97
00:07:07,760 --> 00:07:15,860
But that aspect, he actually captured very well with that Holo Movement implicate and explicit order thing that he's doing with later Bohm.

98
00:07:15,900 --> 00:07:22,720
As far as the earlier Bohmian Mechanics is concerned, that's a little bit dicey.

99
00:07:23,680 --> 00:07:24,880
Hard to make that look.

100
00:07:24,880 --> 00:07:34,160
Would the implicate order be associated with descriptive containment and then the explicit is topological containment or there's no relation?

101
00:07:35,760 --> 00:07:42,700
Explicate order is the display, the terminal display, or the CTNU semi-language LO.

102
00:07:43,600 --> 00:07:50,140
And the other part is the CTNU semi-language LS, which corresponds to the processor instead of the display.

103
00:07:50,860 --> 00:07:52,020
That's the implicate order.

104
00:07:52,520 --> 00:07:52,720
Okay?

105
00:07:52,720 --> 00:07:53,940
It's implicated.

106
00:07:54,080 --> 00:08:04,640
It's an implicate form there in a processor where things are actually getting monolocally combined and entangled and telons are working to actually determine overall causal patterns.

107
00:08:05,120 --> 00:08:05,800
That's where that's occurred.

108
00:08:07,780 --> 00:08:11,320
You know, it's all extremely, it's very, very interesting.

109
00:08:11,540 --> 00:08:15,600
Bohm actually matured as a thinker a very great deal in the course of his life.

110
00:08:16,700 --> 00:08:18,460
There are a couple of things I don't like.

111
00:08:18,460 --> 00:08:21,060
I mean, I think Bohm was a communist.

112
00:08:21,280 --> 00:08:21,800
It was an enemy.

113
00:08:22,720 --> 00:08:30,600
Right, and that may be one of the reasons why Bohmian Mechanics came out of favor, because it was as if you were supporting communism.

114
00:08:31,460 --> 00:08:31,660
Right.

115
00:08:32,060 --> 00:08:34,320
Well, let's...

116
00:08:34,320 --> 00:08:36,280
Communism is a very...

117
00:08:36,280 --> 00:08:42,320
Marxism is a very bad theory of philosophy, and it's got a lot of holes in it.

118
00:08:42,660 --> 00:08:45,220
It's just awful in certain respects.

119
00:08:45,580 --> 00:08:53,680
So when you see a brilliant thinker like David Bohm grabbing a hold of it and embracing it, this can't help his reputation.

120
00:08:53,680 --> 00:09:00,420
You see, and I think Bohm suffered a great deal because of that, but you can certainly understand why it happened.

121
00:09:01,020 --> 00:09:01,120
Yeah.

122
00:09:01,560 --> 00:09:06,200
As far as Bohmian Mechanics is concerned, he's basically trying to concretize everything.

123
00:09:06,420 --> 00:09:17,300
He's got a pilot field, you know, that is actually, he's got the Scrodinger equation, but he's also got this, the pilot field is actually guiding the particle to its destination.

124
00:09:17,300 --> 00:09:20,260
But what is guiding the pilot field itself?

125
00:09:21,380 --> 00:09:33,260
I mean, there are a number of philosophical questions that could be asked about Bohm's theory that reveal that it is indelibly associated with the terminal side of the reality of self-simulation.

126
00:09:33,260 --> 00:09:42,220
So in other words, it's terminally confined in CTME terminology, which means that it's not really any kind of complete interpretation of quantum mechanics.

127
00:09:43,500 --> 00:09:49,680
I've been told I need to learn more about Bohmian Mechanics and Berkson if I'm going to be investigating theories of everything.

128
00:09:50,360 --> 00:09:56,260
A lot of people really like Bohmian Mechanics because it's strong points, and it does have strong points.

129
00:09:56,260 --> 00:10:01,300
But it won't really do in a theory of everything.

130
00:10:01,400 --> 00:10:04,820
If a theory of everything relies on Bohmian Mechanics, it's toast.

131
00:10:05,680 --> 00:10:08,140
There's just not enough there to pull it off.

132
00:10:09,020 --> 00:10:13,380
As far as Berkson is concerned, it's like I say, a fine philosopher.

133
00:10:15,500 --> 00:10:19,740
Okay, how about Douglas Hofstetter's Strange Loop idea of consciousness?

134
00:10:20,320 --> 00:10:22,800
You know, Gertl-Escher-Bach, I'm sure you've heard of that book.

135
00:10:22,800 --> 00:10:24,620
Yes, yeah.

136
00:10:24,860 --> 00:10:28,700
I think it was probably in my early 20s when I got a copy of that book.

137
00:10:29,380 --> 00:10:34,660
The Strange Loops, you know, pushing and the popping and all that stuff.

138
00:10:35,220 --> 00:10:37,200
Quite an intriguing book.

139
00:10:37,840 --> 00:10:40,400
Very much in fashion for a long time.

140
00:10:40,740 --> 00:10:46,380
Sort of a precursor to the reality of self-simulation in some ways.

141
00:10:47,340 --> 00:10:52,180
But yeah, Hofstetter was definitely an intellect worthy of respect.

142
00:10:52,180 --> 00:10:54,640
People ask me, who do I want to interview most?

143
00:10:55,520 --> 00:10:56,760
Douglas Hofstetter's up there.

144
00:10:56,900 --> 00:10:57,820
Penrose is up there.

145
00:10:58,240 --> 00:10:58,900
And even Eminem.

146
00:10:59,000 --> 00:11:01,480
Roger Penrose is really into that.

147
00:11:01,960 --> 00:11:04,360
Where do you see Douglas Hofstetter's theory lacking?

148
00:11:04,500 --> 00:11:05,760
What do you like most about it?

149
00:11:05,780 --> 00:11:07,760
So what dislikes and then likes pros and then cons?

150
00:11:07,760 --> 00:11:15,100
Well, you know, he relies a lot on computational principles, and I think he might be, you know,

151
00:11:15,160 --> 00:11:19,260
nevertheless, even though he's relying on a lot of advanced logic and, you know, towers

152
00:11:19,260 --> 00:11:24,460
of metal languages and levels of computation and so forth, he shows no sign of being anything

153
00:11:24,460 --> 00:11:28,840
but a physicalist in the sense that it's all computational, and computation is a mechanical

154
00:11:28,840 --> 00:11:29,500
process.

155
00:11:29,500 --> 00:11:35,580
So it looks to me like it might be, like his outlook may be basically mechanistic.

156
00:11:37,580 --> 00:11:38,060
Right.

157
00:11:38,140 --> 00:11:42,720
Which, you know, I can't agree with because that's not what reality is.

158
00:11:43,380 --> 00:11:44,120
I'm seeking you.

159
00:11:44,120 --> 00:11:50,580
Now, Penrose seems to agree with you in saying that there are many paradoxes associated with

160
00:11:50,580 --> 00:11:53,960
thinking that consciousness comes from something that's computational.

161
00:11:54,380 --> 00:11:59,000
Have you heard much about Penrose's theory of orchestrated objective reduction and so on

162
00:11:59,000 --> 00:11:59,600
with Hammerhoff?

163
00:11:59,780 --> 00:12:00,420
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

164
00:12:00,480 --> 00:12:04,780
Hammerhoff is on a lot of these, or at least was on a long time on a lot of these distributions

165
00:12:04,780 --> 00:12:06,360
if I find myself on a pierce point.

166
00:12:07,140 --> 00:12:10,720
And, you know, there is something to it.

167
00:12:10,720 --> 00:12:17,000
I mean, you know, Hammerhoff identified microtubules, cytoskeletes, as being a place where quantum

168
00:12:17,000 --> 00:12:19,960
coherence might actually be able to function in the brain.

169
00:12:21,100 --> 00:12:25,720
And there are other ways that quantum mechanics can serve itself in the moral processing as

170
00:12:25,720 --> 00:12:25,940
well.

171
00:12:26,880 --> 00:12:34,960
But, of course, he relies on Penrose for most of the physics and actually, you know, figuring

172
00:12:34,960 --> 00:12:36,600
out where it's all coming from.

173
00:12:36,600 --> 00:12:42,480
I mean, Penrose has this idea of a platonic realm or, you know, this platonic form of

174
00:12:42,480 --> 00:12:42,880
reality.

175
00:12:42,880 --> 00:12:44,680
It's a tripartite form of reality.

176
00:12:45,000 --> 00:12:52,680
It's mathematical truths that exist as, you know, these fully formed mathematical objects

177
00:12:52,680 --> 00:12:53,940
in the platonic realm.

178
00:12:53,940 --> 00:13:06,500
And, you know, he doesn't have the CTMU, the logic and other Penrose, doesn't have a fully

179
00:13:06,500 --> 00:13:08,140
formed theory of reality.

180
00:13:08,420 --> 00:13:12,600
But he's just very hard not to appreciate because he's so brilliant.

181
00:13:12,780 --> 00:13:18,220
I mean, the guy can, you know, he's just, he's brilliant to all this flurry sometimes when

182
00:13:18,220 --> 00:13:19,560
you read some of the things that he lets.

183
00:13:19,560 --> 00:13:24,800
He's, um, mathematically, he's a brilliant mathematician, he's a brilliant physicist.

184
00:13:25,440 --> 00:13:33,740
Uh, and, you know, this idea of his that, that basically, it's not just computation, that

185
00:13:33,740 --> 00:13:39,980
there is something that is undecidable going on in, in human thought, that basically, you

186
00:13:39,980 --> 00:13:46,260
know what, what, what Goodell theory implies, and so there's no, you've got a system, you

187
00:13:46,260 --> 00:13:50,720
know, there's certain, you know, a system that actually is capable of transfinite induction

188
00:13:50,720 --> 00:13:57,120
and is truly interesting, um, can actually, there are truths that cannot be derived from

189
00:13:57,120 --> 00:14:00,180
any finite set of axioms in such a system, okay?

190
00:14:00,320 --> 00:14:05,500
So basically what Penrose is saying, he's saying that human thought somehow generates

191
00:14:05,500 --> 00:14:13,200
undecidable theorems that are true on a metamathematical level, but cannot be derived from any theory.

192
00:14:13,200 --> 00:14:15,860
Like, this is exactly what the CTN use is.

193
00:14:16,240 --> 00:14:22,120
I started publishing in the same year, I think, he came out with a book, I think his, his biggest

194
00:14:22,120 --> 00:14:24,240
theoretical statement was The Amphers in the Mind.

195
00:14:25,040 --> 00:14:25,960
Recognize that title?

196
00:14:26,280 --> 00:14:26,660
That's correct.

197
00:14:26,740 --> 00:14:26,920
Okay.

198
00:14:27,260 --> 00:14:31,060
That was 1989, which is when I wrote The Resolutions Newcomb's Paradox.

199
00:14:31,840 --> 00:14:34,520
So, we started publishing at about the same time.

200
00:14:34,780 --> 00:14:36,860
He got a hell of a lot farther than I did in a matter of time.

201
00:14:37,000 --> 00:14:38,020
Then again, he wasn't canceled.

202
00:14:38,900 --> 00:14:42,900
You know, teaching at Oxford, you know, does a very great, great deal for you.

203
00:14:43,200 --> 00:14:45,140
When it comes to disseminating you.

204
00:14:46,860 --> 00:14:49,980
How about Thomas Campbell and his My Big Toe?

205
00:14:50,060 --> 00:14:50,720
Have you heard of that?

206
00:14:53,060 --> 00:14:56,440
I've heard of My Big Toe, but let me defer to you.

207
00:14:56,540 --> 00:14:58,400
You probably know more about it than I do.

208
00:14:58,460 --> 00:14:59,420
What does it say, sir?

209
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:02,160
It's a strange theory.

210
00:15:02,660 --> 00:15:04,820
Essentially, that there's another realm.

211
00:15:05,000 --> 00:15:08,420
When you mentioned that there are thoughts, and sorry, that there are data points that come

212
00:15:08,420 --> 00:15:14,940
to us instantaneously in this non-terminal realm, Thomas Campbell also says that that's

213
00:15:14,940 --> 00:15:19,580
the mechanism by which psychic phenomenon work, that it occurs to you instantaneously.

214
00:15:19,580 --> 00:15:23,520
We think that it has to travel some distance in the same way that it would have to travel

215
00:15:23,520 --> 00:15:24,500
in our space-time.

216
00:15:24,500 --> 00:15:25,760
And there's a finite speed.

217
00:15:25,820 --> 00:15:30,280
He says, no, that this other realm where consciousness operates is.

218
00:15:32,100 --> 00:15:33,540
Well, that sounds very CPM-y.

219
00:15:33,840 --> 00:15:34,180
He also has Aum.

220
00:15:34,320 --> 00:15:36,540
He calls it Aum, which you call unbounded talesis.

221
00:15:37,040 --> 00:15:39,860
He has Aum, unbounded absolute oneness.

222
00:15:40,500 --> 00:15:42,200
Or absolute unbounded oneness.

223
00:15:42,440 --> 00:15:44,700
Is that supposed to sound like Aum?

224
00:15:45,120 --> 00:15:47,380
No, I just, well, as far as I know, it's a coincidence.

225
00:15:47,380 --> 00:15:55,280
Anyway, he says that that's the fundamental constituents, this place of complete potential.

226
00:15:57,200 --> 00:15:59,900
Yes, that's CDMU consistent, yes.

227
00:16:00,020 --> 00:16:01,540
Although he says this, which I disagree.

228
00:16:01,860 --> 00:16:07,340
He says that unrealized potential is trying to do is to create order and to decrease its

229
00:16:07,340 --> 00:16:07,660
entropy.

230
00:16:08,100 --> 00:16:13,680
And I quibbled with him because I don't think that order and entropy are what people claim

231
00:16:13,680 --> 00:16:14,720
in common parlance.

232
00:16:14,720 --> 00:16:21,100
Entropy and order and disorder are not actually, high entropy doesn't mean low order in the

233
00:16:21,100 --> 00:16:21,980
way that most people think.

234
00:16:22,440 --> 00:16:26,280
And it's obvious because if you look at a coffee cup with some milk and you create some

235
00:16:26,280 --> 00:16:27,960
turbulence, that looks completely disordered.

236
00:16:28,260 --> 00:16:31,520
And then when you stir it, then it looks uniform.

237
00:16:31,640 --> 00:16:32,160
It looks ordered.

238
00:16:32,280 --> 00:16:33,820
But that actually has the highest entropy.

239
00:16:34,360 --> 00:16:41,400
You see those little machines where you turn the crank and these seemingly chaotic patterns

240
00:16:41,400 --> 00:16:45,460
are created between two different, two differently colored gelatinous liquids.

241
00:16:45,680 --> 00:16:49,140
But then when you turn it in the other crank in the other direction, it's restored.

242
00:16:49,480 --> 00:16:50,160
No, I haven't seen that.

243
00:16:50,160 --> 00:16:50,900
State of separation.

244
00:16:50,960 --> 00:16:52,060
That sounds like Maxwell's demon.

245
00:16:52,960 --> 00:16:55,200
It's amazing to watch.

246
00:16:56,160 --> 00:16:57,140
That's Thomas Campbell's.

247
00:16:58,280 --> 00:16:58,840
Okay, well, yeah.

248
00:16:58,840 --> 00:16:59,660
It reminds me of yours, though.

249
00:16:59,680 --> 00:17:00,420
Yours is more rigorous.

250
00:17:00,420 --> 00:17:05,240
Yeah, I mean, mine actually has a structure, a mathematical structure to it.

251
00:17:05,420 --> 00:17:11,300
But it sounds like he's coming up with some good ideas that are on the right track and

252
00:17:11,300 --> 00:17:14,840
can be successfully interpreted in a true theory about it.

253
00:17:14,840 --> 00:17:22,280
He also had out-of-body experiences, and he would suggest that people who are younger are

254
00:17:22,280 --> 00:17:27,340
more in tune or more naturally in tune, like you get out of tune as you get older, with

255
00:17:27,340 --> 00:17:28,760
this other realm.

256
00:17:28,920 --> 00:17:34,900
And so you can go, and what you think of as thought space is actually a real space, but

257
00:17:34,900 --> 00:17:36,340
it's another space.

258
00:17:36,820 --> 00:17:41,480
I wouldn't use the word dimension, but it's another realm, let's say, a primordial realm.

259
00:17:41,480 --> 00:17:43,920
Right, it's another terminal realm, like I say.

260
00:17:43,920 --> 00:17:46,080
That's always a possibility.

261
00:17:46,300 --> 00:17:52,100
You can create terminal realms that are not identical to physical reality, and that may

262
00:17:52,100 --> 00:17:54,920
be related more or less tenuously to it, but aren't dependent.

263
00:17:55,920 --> 00:18:00,800
If you enjoyed this Toe clipping, then the full video is linked in the description.

264
00:18:01,120 --> 00:18:05,860
You should also sign up for Toe Mail, which is, again, in the description and the pinned comment.

265
00:18:06,140 --> 00:18:10,980
You'll receive immediate access to all exclusive updates from the Theories of Everything podcast.

266
00:18:10,980 --> 00:18:14,420
It also helps me communicate directly with the Core Toe community.

267
00:18:14,620 --> 00:18:16,460
You'll also receive my top ten toes.

268
00:18:16,680 --> 00:18:19,960
Think of it as the intellectual version of Quentin Tarantino's obsession.