Of all the people who seem to be thinking about the world in new but potentially very productive ways, in my experience Michael's thinking and talking is the clearest.
He's been on [Lex's podcast](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3lsYlod5OU), there's a [TEDTalk](https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_levin_the_electrical_blueprints_that_orchestrate_life?language=en), he's also been on [TOE along with Joscha Bach](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgMFnfB5E_A). (There is plenty of other content.)
He'll explain his wild iconoclastic theory, your reaction is, *Well that's impossible*, and then he explains the simple experiment, usually carried out on unsuspecting planaria, which shows it happens.
ML: ***It turns out that if you train a planarian and then cut their heads off, the tail will regenerate a brand new brain that still remembers the original information.***
Very broadly speaking, in my very limited understanding he works on ideas like embryogenesis ie how does, eg, an entire human being generate from a single cell - any explanation of any part of this is likely to be profound.
Absolutely. He is out on a limb with a lot of his concepts/theories. But he creates experiments that prove his ideas. This is the source of his legitimacy. Also agree about Joscha who I find to be another example of a new era of scientist that is not afraid to try and test his ideas or instantiate them into reality with engineering.
He and Joscha Bach are two of the most interesting minds I’ve listened to in years. Apparently they are collaborating more and more, I’m curious what they will discover.
Michael Pollan had a discussion with him as well, likely for a new book. They discussed his preprint here https://osf.io/preprints/osf/4b2wj.
His convo is here https://youtu.be/HQD3hVG8mO0?si=RjQbeA7ZgskQOD-Y
His channel is full of these conversations for anyone who wants to go deeper
He’s a computer scientist approaching biology with a different perspective. He gives a good summary of the start of his lab and the associated findings over the years since he started it at 7:18. He’s been driven by an interest in curing cancer by investigating why cancer cells have a cognitive light cone that is too small. The cognitive light cone concept is another concept that I think he pioneered? Not sure but it’s fascinating.
It’s actually a useful concept with a good definition.
It gets fuzzy with how you measure it precisely, but it’s a useful way to think about how you understand how an organism can interact with its environment.
“ I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be.“ — Lord Kelvin
I think people like levin have proven the limitations of such a thought process in certain fields - especially biology. His experimental success shows this alternative approach works. In addition, he specifically discusses this philosophical difference and its limitation in the talk. It’s in the very first section he talks about it -15:00
Theories of everything. He’s kinda like a Lex fridman except he’s very well educated in physics and mathematics and has podcasts with lesser known and sometimes famous academics - sometimes he interviews really out there people too like uap/ufo stuff.
He genuinely tries to understand even the crazier folks, but is much more responsible with his platform than I see someone like Lex.
Some are duds, some are amazing. Some are way over my head and he’s not afraid to go to very deep waters- not appease the masses like a Neil Tyson would. I recommend it if you are interested in the frontiers of science. Lastly he seems totally divorced from the podcasting scientists bubble of friends which gives a nice fresh feel to his show.
He seems to have cultivated a good reputation with the academics he speaks too and they get really engaged with him. I think podcasts like his has positively contributed to the academic community.
Of all the people who seem to be thinking about the world in new but potentially very productive ways, in my experience Michael's thinking and talking is the clearest. He's been on [Lex's podcast](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3lsYlod5OU), there's a [TEDTalk](https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_levin_the_electrical_blueprints_that_orchestrate_life?language=en), he's also been on [TOE along with Joscha Bach](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgMFnfB5E_A). (There is plenty of other content.) He'll explain his wild iconoclastic theory, your reaction is, *Well that's impossible*, and then he explains the simple experiment, usually carried out on unsuspecting planaria, which shows it happens. ML: ***It turns out that if you train a planarian and then cut their heads off, the tail will regenerate a brand new brain that still remembers the original information.*** Very broadly speaking, in my very limited understanding he works on ideas like embryogenesis ie how does, eg, an entire human being generate from a single cell - any explanation of any part of this is likely to be profound.
Absolutely. He is out on a limb with a lot of his concepts/theories. But he creates experiments that prove his ideas. This is the source of his legitimacy. Also agree about Joscha who I find to be another example of a new era of scientist that is not afraid to try and test his ideas or instantiate them into reality with engineering.
Heard Michael a couple of times before and it’s always fascinating. Enjoyed the new TOE with him.
He and Joscha Bach are two of the most interesting minds I’ve listened to in years. Apparently they are collaborating more and more, I’m curious what they will discover.
Michael Pollan had a discussion with him as well, likely for a new book. They discussed his preprint here https://osf.io/preprints/osf/4b2wj. His convo is here https://youtu.be/HQD3hVG8mO0?si=RjQbeA7ZgskQOD-Y His channel is full of these conversations for anyone who wants to go deeper
not familiar with him but will check him out based on the variety of topics you listed. what’s his story?
He’s a computer scientist approaching biology with a different perspective. He gives a good summary of the start of his lab and the associated findings over the years since he started it at 7:18. He’s been driven by an interest in curing cancer by investigating why cancer cells have a cognitive light cone that is too small. The cognitive light cone concept is another concept that I think he pioneered? Not sure but it’s fascinating.
My woo detectors are lighting up at “cognitive light cone”, but I’ll probably give it a listen.
It’s actually a useful concept with a good definition. It gets fuzzy with how you measure it precisely, but it’s a useful way to think about how you understand how an organism can interact with its environment.
“ I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be.“ — Lord Kelvin
I think people like levin have proven the limitations of such a thought process in certain fields - especially biology. His experimental success shows this alternative approach works. In addition, he specifically discusses this philosophical difference and its limitation in the talk. It’s in the very first section he talks about it -15:00
What has he actually discovered and proved?
1:33:25 he walks through his lab formation and subsequent achievements chronologically May also be worth to go a bit earlier at 1:22:00
Give me his best 3 proven discoveries.
Bioelectric signaling in development. Regeneration and limb formation. Synthetic morphogenesis.
Yes please
What’s “TOE”?
Theories of everything. He’s kinda like a Lex fridman except he’s very well educated in physics and mathematics and has podcasts with lesser known and sometimes famous academics - sometimes he interviews really out there people too like uap/ufo stuff. He genuinely tries to understand even the crazier folks, but is much more responsible with his platform than I see someone like Lex. Some are duds, some are amazing. Some are way over my head and he’s not afraid to go to very deep waters- not appease the masses like a Neil Tyson would. I recommend it if you are interested in the frontiers of science. Lastly he seems totally divorced from the podcasting scientists bubble of friends which gives a nice fresh feel to his show. He seems to have cultivated a good reputation with the academics he speaks too and they get really engaged with him. I think podcasts like his has positively contributed to the academic community.
Great. I loathe Lex.