George Paul

I will search one and give you a link. Maybe a youtube movie would be better. I find one.

@cetus56 But if we came here , I want to say something that Leo missed in Quantum debunk reality videos. I wasn't expecting that. There is one experiment that is repeated continuously, maybe right now, since 1971. It is Alain Aspect / Bell inequality experiment in which there is proved indubitably that matter do not have an objective existence. I am shocked of how few people is talking about this, and I am ashamed I learnt about it just several years ago, before finding Leo, That is the supreme argument , no need for any other lecture.

I only came across the quantum computer made from qbits, if that is related somehow. I know that with few qbits it can compute all the universe interactions. Still I think it is not the direction to go, because I believe that no computing is ever made in this universe when it works. I mean there is no one who computes anything from frame to frame, it is just happening. Unless the simulation theory is valid.

Ha, shame on me. I watched Krishnamurti but not Bohm. Kinda I got sick of everything science says lately. It made me dizzy with all their multidimensional theories. It cant be like that

My pleasure, u made me curious about Bohm, I will drop an eye. BTW, in my understanding , I never thought that there was a conscious observer of quantum experiments like double split. Instead there was a much deeper truth, which very late after I graduated i barely understood.

How do you know ? Usually he is very accurate in defining the things he refers to. This one escaped.

Nope, haven't read Bohm. Actually I haven't read any physicist that wrote philosophy. Quantum mechanics is all you need to say goodbye to reality.

You are half right. Only I want to point to the fact that Leo is using a human intelligence concept without broadening it so that it would apply to infinity. I am saying that if he tried to redefine this term, no video would have been made.

As regards spiritual learning, I am 90% with Leo's ideas. Some of them I discovered by myself from discussions with another physicist. We gave up long time ago (20 yrs) the idea of a deterministic universe. Since than , we came up with many theories of our own, and Leo is the closest author i found so far to our direction.

I graduated from Physics, theoretical physycs speciality. I dont give a shit now on it.

Moreover, I see thoughts as any other object in the Universe. It is not thoughts we are discussing here, but it is a concept that so far had only materialistic/thought implications applied unmodifieed to infinity

The problem is the others don';t say anything. Who said something about this subject? Point me one.

Sounds like mechanics. Reminds me of holy spirit from Christianity. So by having infinite intelligence, existence supports its existence (is running). Consciousness created world but this infinite intelligence makes it run. Sounds plausible.

Yes, no other clue for now . But not necesary. I admit extensikon of the definition to any phisical (for now) system than reacts to external stimulus.

For now, the only meaning is the one that people gave it to it: "an ability of the brain to solve problems". Other variants are the ability to make connections between concepts in your brain, etc. All seems to be related to the efficient organization of people brain. A first order expansion of this concept would it be: "the ability of a system to adapt to the environment changes" All of these are materialistic concepts. I have no idea how a pure idealistic definition would lock like. Looks like to be intelligent means to respond somehow to external stimulus.

At 16:40 Leo says that in the next trip he will ask the universe" Why are you intelligent?" . If we were to expand the word intelligence with its definition, lets say "the ability to solve problems", or anything else, you can put anything there, the question Leo was supposed to ask the universe becomes: "Why are you able to solve problems? " See ? WTF ? How can you ask God this thing? It doesn't make sense. If you can come with a definition that would make sens , please write here, it would be an interesting exercise.

Nope, he repeatedly says that intelligence is a property of consciousness, or infinity. So consciousness is intelligent. Why would it be ? For what reason ? Any problem need a solution ? And he nowhere explains what is to be intelligent ? What that means ? What the consciousness does so that it can be cataloged as intelligent ? And what is intelligent anyway when it comes to God ? A catch 22

If he said that it is ok, must have been only a flash in his video, because to much time has been spent talking about infinite intelligence, which equals consciousness, which has been presented in many other videos. This was a waste, and dangerous because people might think now God is intelligent.

@Azza In some videos Leo is teaching, in others he gives instructions and in others he is sharing his experience. This particular video fall in the kind of videos where he introduces new concepts, such was the one with what is ego, consciousness, life is a dream, etc. But this time he did something wrong: he mixed a word that is defined purely inside matter, without redefining it. I am ok with redefining concepts in the sens of broadening them and applying at a higher level of conceptualization. But this time he didn't define the new word intelligence. He started talking about it (after IQ introduction) and applied directly to God. If he tried to redefined it to make sense , this video had not been made. Because what he talked about was consciousness which encompasses the so called intelligence that he thought about. I know what he meant by infinite intelligence, but this is nothing else but consciousness. It can't be other way because if let's suppose we broaden the concept intelligence and we come with something like this (ilustrative example): the capacity of something to have a solution to a problem. I can't imagine now where a broadening concept may lead, but in any way, God is not posed to any problem to solve. Because all is God, he can make things without figuring out how to.

@Alex bliss Yes and no. At this point there is no need to ask a realized being. And that's because what I want is to prevent importing a material abstract artificial concept to the world of infinity. So, before asking a realized being about the intelligence of infinity, I propose not even open mouth speaking about it, what about making a full movie about this. Lol, and I am talking about it all day

Exactly. The ratio is there. Period. Try to grasp this. It is not intelligence even from materialistic point of view, here is why: what were the chances that 1+1 to make 3 ? None. So, if 1+1=2 is the only possibility, there is no other situation from which nature to chose from so that it made a "clever" choice. This is a pure materialistic argument. Mathematics does not imply intelligence at all. It is the way things are. The ability to solve equations can be attributed to a materialistic sort of intelligence, which is another story. Another story is also the intelligence of the God. 1+1=2 is a property of created matter. You should question if the one who created that matter is intelligent or not, To resume, the universe is not intelligent, including maths. It's creator might be, but it's not.

@lmfao Materialism is not true long before Leo issued this last video. And it is not because of "infinite intelligence". Materialism is not true because the the infinite consciousness creates the existence. Meaning that mater exists only as a thought of God. When it comes to intelligence there are two facets of it , one of which is rejected by Leo, and the other being adopted by Leo in his last video: - first one (rejected one, materialist origin): there exists intelligence as an emerging property of matter, think about "brains" that can solve mathematics equations. Leo rejects this, and he says that even this intelligence is the property of God. Maybe he wanted to say that all matter is a property of God, no sense to talk about emerging intelligence, but it is not undestood like this, maybe I was not paying enough attention. - the second one: infinite intelligence, being a property of God, with the meaning that this existence looks so perfect that God must be intelligent. In my opinion both are wrong because intelligence is an abstract concept that does not exist in both of the worlds. In first case, the ability so solve mathematics is relative not absolute. We can only define intelligence as a comparison between two systems that are supposed to solve some kind of problem. One is more efficient than another. If we want a term to name it, we can chose "intelligence" but it is only a cover. In this aspect, this is an emerging intelligence of matter, it is not the creator's intelligence, and here is where Leo is wrong. The second aspect is also debatable because there is no need to qualify the infinity with any property, including intelligence. The problem is tricky because we are used to the materialist concept of intelligence from case one, Trying to bring this artificial construct to the infinity comes with a lot of problems such as : if existence is intelligent it is limited not infinite.

Yeah, Leo's unmistakable style.

@Outer Thinking has led human race to the point it admitted that matter has not an objective existence. Also thinking make us believe there might be a creator. Now I try through thinking to figure out if there is a need to qualify the creator as intelligent

I have a question though about Leo, guys . Does it matter if he is or not enlightened ? I believe that what matters for me here and now, is to understand a little piece of philosophical / logical / scientific problem: the definition of intelligence. Using thinking of course, not direct experience. As bad as Leo might be in your eyes, so far I have heard far more interesting things from his mouth than from your keyboard.