Asking a Theoretical Physicist About the Physics of Consciousness | Roger Penrose | EP 244
What this covers
Dr. Peterson recently traveled to the UK for a series of lectures at Oxford and Cambridge. This conversation was recorded during that period with Sir Roger Penrose, a British mathematical physicist who was awarded the 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics for “discovering that black hole formation is a robust predictor of Einstein’s general relativity.”
Moderated by Dr. Stephen Blackwood.
___________ Chapters ___________ [0:00] Intro [1:00] Is Consciousness Computational? [3:20] Turing Machines [6:30] Determinism & the Arrow of Time [12:15] Consciousness & Reductionism [17:30] Emergent Randomness & Evolution [23:00] The Tiling Problem, Computation, & AI [29:30] Escher, Brains, Bach [39:00] Pattern Recognition & Intuition [45:30] Mathematical Representations & the Physical World [54:00] Collapsing Schrodinger’s Equation [1:00:00] Consciousness-Independent Reality [1:07:00] Black Holes & Time Horizons [1:15:00] Einstein’s Biggest Mistake [1:27:00] Meaning & Consciousness [1:39:00] Hawking Spots: Potential
// SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL // Newsletter: https://linktr.ee/DrJordanBPeterson Donations: https://jordanbpeterson.com/donate
// COURSES // Discovering Personality: https://jordanbpeterson.com/personality Self Authoring Suite: https://selfauthoring.com Understand Myself (personality test): https://understandmyself.com
// BOOKS // Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: https://jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: https://jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-for-life Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: https://jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-meaning
// LINKS // Website: https://jordanbpeterson.com Events: https://jordanbpeterson.com/events Blog: https://jordanbpeterson.com/blog Podcast: https://jordanbpeterson.com/podcast
// SOCIAL // Twitter: https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson Instagram: https://instagram.com/jordan.b.peterson Facebook: https://facebook.com/drjordanpeterson
#JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus #podcast #consciousness #rogerpenrose #physics #mathematics
Source description (no synthesized summary yet).
Penrose argues that consciousness, particularly mathematical understanding, is fundamentally non-computational because it transcends any formal system via Gödel's theorem, and that the universe operates through three irreducible realms—mathematics, physics, and consciousness—connected through conformal geometry and cyclical cosmology.
- Gödel's theorem demonstrates that understanding truth in formal systems requires insight beyond the rules themselves, which cannot be algorithmic
- Mathematical reality exists independently in a Platonic realm, accessible to consciousness but not reducible to physical processes
- Conformal geometry and massless physics at the universe's beginning and remote future may represent cyclical aeons rather than linear creation
This asset isn't compiled yet
You're seeing its claims, ranked. Compile it to build the argument threads, weight them, and check each claim against your library — the full view.
If you lay down rules of proof that could be checked by a computer, you can construct a Gödel sentence which, if you trust the rules, you can see is true by virtue of your belief that the rules only give truths, yet that statement is underivable using the rules themselves.
“if you lay down the rules of what you call a proof and if those rules are such that they could be checked by a computer checked whether they've been correctly applied by a computer so computation rules in that sense then you can you can construct a sentence this is what girdle did which the by the way it's constructed you can see that if you trust the rules”
Becoming consciously aware of a highly functional unconscious system actually impairs its function rather than improving it—as in the case of suddenly thinking about automatic motor control.
“often becoming consciously aware of a highly functional unconscious system actually impairs its function rather than improving it”
Intuitive pattern recognition can be a reliable guide to insight, but when pattern recognition becomes unconstrained (as in schizotypal or paranoid thinking), it generates false patterns and errors—the system has exceeded its accuracy limits.
“i know when people become schizotypal for example they're they and paranoid that also happens in paranoia they have a lot of intuitions about patterns that might be there but most of them are wrong and so it's like their pattern recognition system has become well it's it's exceeded the limits of its capacity for accuracy and is starting to see pattern in in what's truly random”
The majority of the brain's neurons are in the cerebellum, which operates unconsciously, suggesting that conscious thought is not the primary mode of brain operation and that simple correlations between neural function and consciousness are misleading.
“the greater number of neurons in the brain which are in the cerebellum seem not to be acting according to conscious actions at all it's something completely unknown”
Evolution can use the admixture of randomness into structure to deal with the indeterminacy of the future, through genetic mutation and differential survival: organisms produce variation via random mutation, and selection acts on outcomes in uncertain environments.
“evolution seems to be able to use the admixture of randomness into structure as a means of dealing with the inter determinancy of the future and to some degree it does that through death right because of those million mosquitoes on average only one managed just to propagate itself to reproduction”
Penrose designed a set of Penrose tiles (two shapes) that tile the plane non-periodically—they can cover the plane in a non-repeating pattern that extends indefinitely while following strict adjacency rules, unlike periodic tilings where the pattern repeats.
“i had learnt i think i've seen an article in the maths maths reviews this reviews mathematical papers and so on and i'd seen that there somebody had produced a set of tiles which would tile the plane only only non in a non-periodic way”
Einstein introduced the cosmological constant in 1917 to keep the universe static (for philosophical preference), but later called it his biggest blunder when convinced of universal expansion; however, the cosmological constant now appears to be real, driving exponential acceleration.
“he introduced it for the wrong reason that's true but he was right to introduce it...einstein...said oh that was a mistake my biggest blunder he said trouble is his biggest smell that turned out to be true apparently i mean this is an argument people don't necessarily think it was people might not think it's the cosmological constant i think it was i think it's right”
A mass is a clock: E = mc² and E = hf together imply that mass and frequency are equivalent, so any massive particle oscillates at a frequency determined by its mass and serves as a natural clock.
“the two most famous equations of 20th century physics...one of them is einstein's e equals m c squared...the earlier one was neat it was um max planck's e equals h nu or e equals hf...put the two together that tells you mass and frequency are equivalent so that means that if you have a mass it is a clock”
In the very remote future of the universe, black holes will have evaporated via Hawking evaporation, and the universe will be dominated by photons and electromagnetic radiation, with effectively zero mass.
“in this universe eventually not us the black holes will all have evaporated away by walking evaporation there's swallow galactic clusters what's left in the universe pretty well photons now giving the simplified version of the theory”
Understanding, as distinct from mere rule-following, is not a computational process because it involves grasping the truth of statements that transcend any finite formal system.
“understanding whatever that word means is not computational okay it's not that that is what it's not the following of rules it's something else okay”
The Wigner interpretation (consciousness causes wave function collapse) has been held by Wigner and others, though Wigner was not dogmatic about it; however, Penrose's view is nearly opposite: an objective physical process involving gravity causes collapse, not conscious observation.
“there's one school of thought which has been going on from way back till the early days of quantum mechanics vigno in particular promoted this point of view that it's a conscious being observing the system...wigner and i talked to vigner about this yeah i got the feeling from thinking he wasn't quite as dogmatic he was made out to be on this issue he just thought this was a possibility”
Polyomino tiling problems demonstrate non-computability: given a finite set of shapes, the question 'Can these shapes tile the infinite plane?' has a definite yes-or-no answer, but there is no algorithm that can compute it—the answer is true or false, but not algorithmically determinable.
“if you're given a finite set of these polyaminos and the question is can you cover the plane with those shapes only those shapes no gaps no overlaps now that question the answer yes or no the answer is definite yes or no either you can or you can't but it's not an algorithmic process it's it's shown mathematically that there is no algorithm which can tell you yes or no whether these shapes will cover the plane”
Quantum mechanics is formally an inconsistent theory: the Schrödinger equation describes deterministic evolution of the quantum state, but measurement produces non-deterministic probabilistic outcomes following rules outside the equation, creating an unresolved inconsistency.
“current quantum mechanics strictly speaking is an inconsistent theory...the schrodinger equation tells you if you know what the state of a system is now the schroding equation tells you what it will be tomorrow if you like the evolution of that state is governed by this wonderful equation...the trouble is that it doesn't that's to say the way physicists usually use the schrodinger equation is to work out certain probabilities...and it measures it and the process of measurement does not follow the schrodinger equation”
From a photon's perspective, traveling at light speed, there is no passage of time due to relativistic time dilation at light speed; distance and duration become zero for the photon.
“if you were riding on a light the trouble is that um you can't sit on a light yes that is a problem but if you do if you were nearly going you know yeah very very fast like that the passage of time you would think it hadn't taken any time at all right except well and and and that's the same as being at the starting point and the destination”
In special and general relativity, there is no universal concept of 'now' or simultaneous events across different reference frames; whether two space-like separated events are simultaneous depends on the observer's frame of reference.
“if they're what's called space like separated that is to say you'd have to go faster than light to get from one to the other it's a meaningless statement because there is no universal concept of time in this model right it's just not there”
An outside observer watching someone descend into a black hole would see them slow, fade, and asymptotically approach the event horizon, never crossing it from the external perspective; yet the person falling would not notice anything special at the horizon and would cross it in finite proper time.
“if you were watching someone descend into a black hole from outside don't they go slower and slower then you would you would see them hovering on the horizon and then fading away very quickly actually okay just fade yeah they would fade...but they would go right through and they wouldn't notice anything at the horizon”
Maxwell's equations (governing electromagnetism) are conformally invariant: they are unchanged if the system is uniformly scaled larger or smaller, meaning electromagnetic fields cannot distinguish size—big and small are equivalent to photons.
“the maxwell equations have a very interesting property that they can't tell big from small they're what's called conformally invariant but if you have a system in which you've got some electromagnetic field and you could stretch this system to bigger or smaller it doesn't notice the difference the equations work just as well”
Penrose's cyclical cosmology model (conformal cyclic cosmology, or CCC) proposes that the big bang was not the beginning but part of an endless sequence of aeons; the model involves exponential expansion driven by dark energy and subsequent reconception as a new big bang.
“the big bang was not the beginning...the universe expands and it expands and this exponential expansion we seem to see the stars seem to be going starting to go away from us these very distant stars...and that's what's driven the dark energy hypothesis”
Fine-tuning arguments suggest that the physical laws represent one specific solution among many mathematically possible constraint sets; the question of why these particular constraints exist rather than others equally probable mathematically remains unanswered.
“there's these fine-tuning arguments you know and and the question arises well there's lots of ways these phenomenon phenomena could be interrelated but in reality it turns out that there is a very finite and constrained number of ways that they are actually related and those those are the fundamental laws and then the question arises well why that set of constraints and not you know some other set of constraints that seems equally probably probable statistically”
Penrose and collaborators published analysis in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society claiming detection of Hawking points in CMB data at 99.98% confidence level; these spots appear in both Planck satellite and WMAP data at consistent locations.
“a paper mainly one which came out in the monthly notices of the royal astronomical society about a year and a half ago and we claim that we see what we call hawking points...we have a 99.98 confidence level that they're there...the spots...there's little spots of raised temperature...they're seen both in the more sophisticated planck satellite data and if you look at the like what is it now the five strongest points in the blank data and look in the earlier w map...you find these spots exactly the same places”
Mathematical reality exists independently in a Platonic realm: mathematical truths are discovered rather than invented, they exist prior to and independent of human minds, and their truths are there to be found if we are lucky.
“the mathematical world exists independently of us and so when we find a mathematical result it's it's more like a discovery than than an intervention so you it's there already and you find it so this is certainly a feeling that as far as i'm aware most mathematicians have and the truths are there and they're there independently of us and if we're lucky we can find one of these truths”
Penrose predicts 'Hawking points'—regions of anomalously high temperature in the cosmic microwave background corresponding to gravitational wave signatures from supermassive black hole collisions in the previous aeon.
“after one of these galactic clusters gets swallowed up by black hole there's nothing left but this black hole it evaporates away by hawking evaporation all that radiation doesn't even begin until so late that by the time it comes into the next eon it's a little tiny point that little tiny point over 380 thousand years spreads out there's a little bit of an argument about how far it spreads out but what we seem to see is it spreads out to about four degrees cross which is about eight times the diameter of the full moon and that's what we see”
When a quantum system reaches a certain lifetime (determined by a mathematical formula involving mass and gravitational effects), it will undergo spontaneous collapse into one or another definite state with certain probabilities, without requiring external measurement or conscious observation.
“there is a very clear mathematical calculation there's not a question about it it's quite what you do with it you see and what you do with it according to me is to say okay it tells you that this system has a lifetime and and it will in that lifetime become one or the other without a measurement”
There are three distinct realms—mathematics, physics, and consciousness—arranged in a self-referential structure where each realm emerges from a small part of the preceding realm, creating a paradoxical loop illustrated by an impossible triangle.
“i had this picture which is sort of meant to be slightly paradoxical that each world in a certain sense comes from a little bit bit of the world preceding it and so it's drawn in a way which is like this impossible triangle which is a looks like a paradox”
Understanding simple equations like 'two plus two equals four' has an inner certainty not subject to doubt, distinct from belief—it operates at a level of necessity beyond mere conviction.
“when one understands something let's say that's the simple equation that two plus two equals four it's not a belief that that is true understanding is operating at a level that is beyond belief it has a certainty and inner certainty that is not subject to doubt fundamentally”
Only a tiny part of the mathematical world has direct relevance to the physical world; the majority of mathematics is abstract play, yet the physical world operates according to the specific small subset of mathematics that does apply to it.
“if you look at a mathematical journal you find it's almost entirely full of things which have nothing whatsoever to do with physical world they're playing around with mathematics for its own sake that part of the mathematical world which actually does have direct relevance to the way that what physical world operates is a small part of it so i have a picture of this mathematical world and a tiny bit of that comes and imposes itself or whatever you like to explains or whatever you'd like to say the physical world”
The future is indeterminately different from the present and past in a fundamental, unpredictable manner because of quantum indeterminacy, which prevents a deterministic algorithmic system from maintaining a complete predictive grip on the future horizon.
“there's a high probability that the future is actually indeterminately different than the present and the past... it's actually unpredictably different... if the future differs in a fundamental manner an unpredictable manner from the present or the past then a deterministic algorithmic system can't maintain a grip on the horizon of the future”
Consciousness may involve a correction mechanism for underlying algorithmic systems: procedural routines become automated and unconscious, but consciousness alerts to errors by detecting anomalies and focusing on their source, allowing correction before re-automatization.
“consciousness becomes alerted to the errors and then zeros in on the source of the error in some sense and corrects it...if you practice a a motor routine for a long time you build specialized algorithmic machinery in your brain that runs it but maybe you you put in an error you're playing a difficult piano phrase for example and you stumble over a note you've automatized that you play it you listen and you hear the anomaly which is the error your consciousness focuses in on that”
Creative people use lower-probability words and concepts in their speech—they venture farther into the associative field than typical thinkers—but unconstrained randomness becomes counterproductive, producing disconnected or manic ideation rather than useful creativity.
“if you study creative people we've done a lot of this there's in some sense more randomness in their speech because imagine that with if you utter a given word there's a certain probability that another word will emerge in the in the field around that the creative people use lower probability concepts and words in their approach so there's a kind of randomness they go farther out into the word association field”
AI neural networks can learn to recognize patterns (like cats in photographs) and produce outputs that resemble algorithmic programs, but there is no a priori way to determine which program the network will compute—the algorithm emerges only through the learning process, not before it.
“there is no way of algorithmically determining the program that the machine learning systems will eventually apply to the problem of identifying cats in a photograph but if you let the ai neural networks run and then you analyze their output you often get something that resembles an algorithmic program as an output”
There is an underlying unifying principle to Penrose's diverse intellectual pursuits—computability, representation, pattern—even though Penrose himself hesitates to articulate it; something feels 'right' intuitively before it can be fully rationalized.
“there must be some there's something that's not random there's something at work that's kind of a uniting principle...i don't know you're asking too hard a question i don't know i mean sometimes i don't see any overriding principle i mean there's a sort of thing you know something feels right now why do you why does it feel right i mean that could be something very subtle”
The 'meaning crisis' in contemporary culture stems partly from materialism's denial that consciousness has substantial reality, combined with eliminativism about intelligible/mathematical reality—leaving no basis for understanding ourselves in terms adequate to self-consciousness.
“there are many many people who are not it's called the for some people are the short-handed call this the meaning crisis many many people who are finding they don't they simply don't have the the resources to make sense of their lives...the dominant view right now is that these are simply constructs of the human mind or culture...don't actually have any independent reality themselves”
There is a fundamental distinction between calculative thinking aimed at achieving goals and reflective thinking about the nature of goals themselves and their worthiness; reflection on ends and purposes is distinct from calculation toward ends.
“so much of our thinking of course is calculative there's a there's a goal there we're calculating how to get to it...but to then ask the question about why this is a goal or why this is worthy of being a goal or what would make it worthy of being a goal...the kinds of thinking that you have to engage in in order to reflect upon the nature of the ends and purposes is distinct from the kinds of thinking you engage in to calculate your way to a goal”
Intuition in creative work can be understood as a deep form of pattern recognition where a sparse representation of a pattern allows one to leap to solutions without consciously working through the full pattern, analogous to solving a tiling problem intuitively.
“it's something like a deep form of pattern recognition...you don't need the full pattern to infer what the pattern might be you can have a sparse representation of it leap to what might be analogous to a tiling solution”
Physicists often invoke a 'free miracle' to bypass the problem of the universe's origin, allowing physics to proceed from the moment of the big bang onward without explaining why something exists rather than nothing; consciousness may similarly stand outside current physical theories.
“i was talking some to some divinity scholars the other day and they were laughing i suppose about physicists who say with regard to the big bang and the hypothetical emergence of everything out of nothing that give us one free miracle and we'll proceed from there”
Consciousness appears to have an intrinsic relationship to intelligible reality (mathematics) and possibly to other non-material realities (truth, beauty, morality); if human consciousness has a structure that enables understanding of these realities, then human realization (self-understanding) must be thought fundamentally through this relationship.
“it does seem to me that if these two things are connected...the nature of what we are and think that we are...somehow intrinsically...connected...it does seem to me that human realization has to be thought very fundamentally through from that starting point”
Penrose may have integrated concepts of truth, beauty, and morality into a larger Platonic realm beyond mathematics; he once drew a diagram showing the Platonic mathematical world as part of a larger framework encompassing qualities like beauty and virtue.
“i remember drawing a picture somewhere i can't even remember where now in which this platonic world was part of a larger body of things like beauty for example and qualities of virtue in fact also things qualities which are things that our consciousness is concerned with”
Penrose focuses his non-computational argument specifically on understanding, not on consciousness in all its aspects; he makes no claims about perception of color or most other conscious experiences, limiting his thesis to the specific domain of mathematical understanding and logical reasoning.
“i'm very careful to say i'm not talking about consciousness in all its aspects...i have nothing to say about the perception of the color green...i'm only talking about a very specific part of what consciousness does”
Without mass, there are no clocks, no time scale, and no distance measure; a universe containing only massless photons cannot distinguish hot from cold, big from small, or have any notion of time or distance.
“if you don't have any mass you don't have any clocks so you're not having time you don't have any time scale you don't have any distance measure so if the world is inhabited only by massless things say photons then it doesn't know big from small it doesn't know hot from cold”
Despite publication in a leading astrophysics journal (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society), the established cosmology community has not published any significant response or refutation to Hawking point claims as of a year and a half after publication.
“i haven't seen any response from the after a year and a half from the established cosmology community published in a very respectable journal it's probably the leading journal for astrophysical processes”
Consciousness appears in a tiny part of the physical world; most matter (rocks, etc.) shows no consciousness, while certain entities (humans and some animals) possess consciousness, yet consciousness itself is distinct from the physical laws that govern the rest of nature.
“in that physical world which seems to be operating according to mathematics there are entities which seem to be able to perceive and understand and have consciousness so the the acquisition of consciousness in whatever way is a small path you see the world consists of rocks and things like that which don't seem to have any of this quality but there are certain creatures things such as people in this room and elsewhere and probably other animals which may have less of it than humans”
A two-state quantum system (e.g., a particle in superposition of position A or position B) will, according to the standard Copenhagen interpretation, exist in a superposition state where it is simultaneously partly in each position until measurement; this can be visualized using Dirac's chalk analogy of a particle being partly here and partly there.
“according to quantum mechanics or particles a quantum paragraph can be here or it can be here or it can be an estate which is partly here and partly here at the same time”
Mathematical shapes in tilings have certain freedom in how they can be fitted together; if a shape clearly fits in only one way, it just repeats; if there's freedom in placement, subsequent choices may run into difficulties or allow continuation, requiring decision-making.
“you have a shape and then you have certain rules about which fit pieces will fit next to it but there's certain freedom in that rule...if it's a shape which very clearly has to fit that way next to it then it just repeats you see but if there's some freedom as to what the next one will do then you might have to make that choice and certain choices will run you into difficulties later and other choices maybe will allow you to continue”
Penrose corresponded with M.C. Escher about non-isohedral tilings (where tiles have different relationships to the overall pattern depending on position), which Escher used in his final watercolor work 'Ghosts,' the only truly non-periodic tiling Escher ever created.
“i gave him a set of little pieces of just one shape and said well can you tile with those... a little while later he wrote to me and said he'd seen how to do it but he wants to know what the underlying principle was... on the basis of that he produced what i believe with his last watercolor maybe for this last picture as far as i know thing called ghosts which is based on this”
Penrose was influenced by M.C. Escher's artwork, particularly the piece 'Relativity,' which inspired him to attempt creating paradoxical geometric constructions distinct from those in Escher's exhibition; Penrose developed what is known as the tri-bar or impossible triangle.
“at this congress i happened to see one of my lecturers and he had a catalogue which had one of these action pictures...i went to see the exhibition i was absolutely blown over by these pictures one in particular i think was called relativity...i went whether i could do something a little bit different...i tried to make a construction with bridges and roads going into possible ways and i simplified it down to this thing that people refer to as a tri-bar”
Penrose and his father published a paper on paradoxical geometric forms inspired by Escher in the British Journal of Psychology; they included reference to Escher's exhibition and Penrose's father later corresponded with Escher by letter.
“my father and i wrote an article...we decided to write a paper on this...where did we send it...my father said well i happen to know the editor of the british journal of psychology so let's call it psychology so we sent it to them and they accepted it...my father had a correspondence with airship with letters going backwards and forwards”
Penrose met M.C. Escher in person during a visit to the Netherlands, was invited to Escher's home, and was offered choice of prints; Penrose selected 'Fish and Scales,' which Escher indicated was an unusual choice since most people did not understand that particular work.
“i was driving in the netherlands...i was curious and i when i was reasonably close to escher i phoned him up...he was very nice and he invited me and my then wife to tea...he had two piles of prince and he said well this pile i don't have many left i'm afraid and he pushed the other part of me choose one...i chose one called fish and scales...he was actually rather pleased because he said well most people don't understand that one”
Penrose was able to reduce a six-tile tiling set to five tiles by observing that a certain shape in the set could only fit into one other tile, allowing him to glue tiles together in a way that reduced the total number of distinct shapes needed.
“there was a certain shape for matching and this shape only fitted into one other tile so that i could glue that the ones with it's just a slight detail point let's get glued some of the tiles together to make them five”
Multiple black holes are not the same singularity; different stellar collapses produce different, distinct singularities.
“i don't know okay okay well i mean you can link up them somewhere but no we don't apart from saying we don't know i would say no they're different singularities”
The paradoxical geometric figures (tri-bar, impossible staircase) have a limited explanatory relationship to the tiling problem; they represent different mathematical phenomena (visual representation of paradox vs. uncoverable plane-tiling configurations).
“there's not much because they seem to be they're i mean there's a play of of representation an image there”
Music maintains interest when it balances predictable form with novelty; too much repetition exhausts interest, while pure unpredictability becomes indistinguishable from noise.
“if it's too simple and repetitive it you your interest gets exhausted yes exactly it gets stale very rapidly and then as it moves towards purely unpredictable it becomes indistinguishable from noise”
The physical representation of mathematical patterns (like tiles in front of a building) allows one to perceive and understand mathematical relationships by observing how the physical objects fit together according to mathematical rules.
“it's a physical thing that's just sitting in front of the last building so that's that's a physical thing but it is represent it represents a mathematical idea...by looking at the tiles carefully enough and see how they fit together...you can see...the euclidean plane...the entire euclidean plane could be covered according to the rules of those shapes”