Why all this unproved universe?

The hardest thing in writing is that articles, books, is to come up with a good title. Such that and sounded intriguing, and the content of the article described, but it did not pass completely. And so that it was ambiguous - for complete beauty and elegance. After going through a few and becoming disheartened, he decided: he would come by himself as he was writing, but for now let him be:

On quantum physics, the brain, the Gödel theorem and jury trials.

Actually, the reason to write this article was a speech in the St. Petersburg club "Key". The presentation format was 30 minutes plus 10 minutes for questions. This was called the "Guttenberg's smoking room" and implied the mention of the book, which served as the impetus for the subsequent story. I chose "The King's New Mind: About Computers, Thinking, and the Laws of Physics" by Roger Penrose. The book is wonderful, rich in intelligent thoughts and interesting presentation of difficult things. And there is a life motive in this book, there is a main question that comes through between all its lines: why is this so? That is not a question: what are the laws of the universe? And no question: how is thinking organized? And the questions: why are the laws of the universe exactly such, why does thinking exist and why does mathematics, the product of thinking, describe the real world so well.
')
When I read Penrose these questions seemed to me eternal and intractable. For many years, all the reasoning on the topic “why” was perceived by me skeptically for a simple reason - all the theories were not falsified. That is, they did not admit the possibility of any logical, calculated or experimental verification. For example, where it is easy to say “all the will of God”, add to this “God is the essence of the incomprehensible” and close the question forever.

The first hope for at least some answer began to appear when a rigorous mathematical explanation of beauty was found (in a nutshell, it is impossible to explain who would follow my articles). Since one cannot but agree that the universe is designed with a fair amount of grace (this applies not only to planets, stars and galaxies, but also to physical laws themselves), the ability to explain beauty already meant that you can now answer one of the “why”: “ why is it all beautiful? ” It was a small fraction, but it allowed me to ask the right questions further.

A significant breakthrough occurred when it turned out that in the model of the work of the brain to which I arrived, one can find analogies (not blurred, but quite specific) with all the basic physical principles, including all quantum mechanics. And not because the model was built with an eye to these principles, but because they all surfaced as absolutely inevitable.

It was here that the answer arose, which turned out to be extremely plausible for me, and most importantly - the answer that allows for a certain check.

Actually, the following video is a summary of the answer to the main question (this is the new title).

Main question:



If you have the strength to listen to this 30-minute speech, then you noticed that it is based on a certain model of the brain and on the mechanisms of thinking, behavior and emotions arising from it. To understand this is not so easy, half an hour is clearly not enough. But if time and desire nevertheless exist, then below two performances, in which the main essence is explained “on fingers”.

On the work of the brain at the neural level:



About behavior, thinking, emotions, love and beauty:



If you mastered these two parts, then it probably became clear to you that in these speeches it is gently and unobtrusively given to understand that the mystery of thinking has been solved, that you have already managed to unravel how the neural networks of the brain work, how the bark is stored and processed and its self-organization. So here, neither more nor less. But such statements must be seriously proved, there must be confirming facts, operating programs, the results of computer simulations, expert opinions, and the like. What about the evidence? I will write about it in the next section. And this part, perhaps, still call:

Why all this unproved universe?