philosophies.de

Philosophyblog & Scienceblog

[philosophiesde]

🧠💻 The Big Fallacy: Why Our Brain Is Not a Computer Scientists, engineers, and doctors tend to view biology through the lens of our own machines. Why? Because we humans can understand, program, and manipulate machines. It satisfies our basic need for control. But the popular brain-computer analogy falls completely flat—and competent neuroscience has known this for a long time. The brain does not run on code; it functions fundamentally differently from any computer. 🛠️ The Myth of Hardware and Software With computers, the division of roles is strict: the hardware is the rigid box, the software the flexible program that can be installed at will. With the human brain, this separation is simply impossible: • Permanent physical restructuring: As you read these lines and think about them, your synaptic connections are already changing at this very moment. • Experience is structure: Every action, every sound, and every experience leaves a physical trace. The brain doesn’t just learn like software; it constantly rebuilds itself as “hardware” every second. • No dead shell: A biological organ cannot be frozen and reprogrammed—it is a dynamic, living process. 👥 In Dialogue: The Embodiment Paradigm It is precisely this reductionist perspective—which reduces the mind to mere data and algorithms—that we will be examining in this Zoomposium. Our guest this time is one of the leading international figures in phenomenological anthropology: Prof. Dr. Thomas Fuchs from Heidelberg University Hospital. In his work “In Defense of the Human” and in this interview, he impressively explains why current neuroconstructivism falls short. Consciousness and cognition do not arise in isolation within the “central computer” of the head, but are inseparably bound to our living, sentient bodies (enactivism and embodiment). 💬 Discussion prompt for the network: Why does our tech world cling so stubbornly to the image of the brain as a biological hard drive? Is it the longing for perfect optimization, or are we overlooking the essential qualities that define us as human beings? I look forward to hearing your perspectives in the comments! 👇 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/1ouxs6P3Enc 📎Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/11/20/das-verkoerperte-bewusstsein/

[philosophiesde]

🌌🔭 Cosmic Consciousness vs. Astronomy: Why the Universe Transcends Our “Embodiment” “People who like to ramble on about cosmic consciousness have no idea about astronomy. Those distances are beyond our embodiment—it’s simply impossible.” With this unambiguous statement, we dive into a topic that divides opinion. Why does the spiritual concept of oneness fascinate us so much, while harsh reality shows us clear limits? Human consciousness is inextricably bound to our bodies and our immediate surroundings (embodiment). The astronomical distances of the cosmos completely shatter this biological framework. But where does the true boundary between mind, space, and matter lie? These are precisely the questions we’ll explore in our Zoomposium with a scientific boundary-crosser: Dr. Dr. Walter von Lucadou. As a physicist and psychologist, he navigates the tightrope between the natural sciences and the fringes of the human psyche. 🧠 Systems Theory at the Frontiers of Physics Instead of resorting to esoteric patterns, von Lucadou uses systems theory and models of quantum physics to make inexplicable phenomena scientifically tangible. In this interview, he offers astonishing perspectives:

• 👻 Hauntings as “embodiment disturbances”: When psychological tensions within an individual can no longer find a physical outlet, they may manifest as macroscopic effects in the surrounding system. For him, “hauntings” are not the work of ghosts, but rather tangible system disturbances. • 🔗 Macroscopic Entanglement: Drawing on C.G. Jung’s concept of synchronicity, we discuss whether a generalized quantum theory can explain non-causal interactions in macroscopic everyday life. • ✨ The Mystery of Near-Death Experiences (NDEs): How far does the biological explanatory model take us at the threshold of death, and where do the tools of empirical natural science reach their limits? Whether astronomical vastnesses or the microcosmic mysteries of the quantum world: The discussion shows how important it is to cast aside dogmas and openly question the limits of our knowledge. 💬 Discussion prompt for the network: Is the concept of a “cosmic consciousness” really just sheer ignorance of astronomy, because our minds are inevitably bound to our local biological embodiment? Or do systems-theoretical entanglement models perhaps offer room for a deeper connectedness that we are only just beginning to grasp physically? I look forward to your thoughts in the comments! 👇 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/TPCADLkSBWM

📎 Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/03/12/grenzen_physik_psychologie

[philosophiesde]

🧠🌐 Consciousness: The Unity of All Things – Where Does It All Come Together in the Brain? Perhaps the most fascinating phenomenon of our mind is the so-called “unity of consciousness.” Everything we experience in this moment—sounds, colors, memories, and feelings—does not appear to us as isolated fragments, but as one large, interwoven whole. The most intuitive explanation for this is obvious: there must be a supreme center at the top of the brain’s processing hierarchy. A final “control room” where all data streams converge and constitute our sense of self. But does this hierarchical model even correspond to biological reality? This is precisely where our Zoomposium with renowned neuroscientist Prof. Dr. Wolf Singer begins. Under the title “Can the Brain Understand the Brain?”, we question the classical notions of mind and matter. 🗺️ Highlights of the presentation at a glance: • From Center to Network: Instead of a rigid headquarters in the head, Wolf Singer proposes the architecture of the cerebral cortex connectome as a complex, self-organized system with nonlinear dynamics. • The high-dimensional state space: How does a decentralized, dynamic system without a “boss” manage to generate the experienced unity of all things in our consciousness? • The naturalistically closed explanatory gap: Can we resolve the notorious “hard problem of consciousness” (the mystery of the first-person perspective, the self, and qualia) purely through neurophysiology? • Free will or neural determinism? If brain processes are deterministic—how much room is left for freedom and responsibility? And does quantum physics ultimately play a role in the “warm soup” of the thinking organ after all? Conclusion The search for the neural correlates of consciousness (NCCP) forces us to rethink the brain: away from simple, hierarchical circuits, toward highly complex feedback mechanisms. Whether this architecture is sufficient to crack the riddle of our experience—or whether our own thinking organ remains fundamentally closed off to us—you’ll find out in the full interview. 💬 Discussion prompt for the network: Do you believe that consciousness requires a central “bottleneck” in the brain to simulate the unity of the world, or does this sense arise purely virtually through the global synchronization of decentralized networks? We look forward to your perspectives and comments! 👇 📺 Watch the conversation: https://youtu.be/C2FVIbAyaH4 📎 More information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/03/22/kann-das-gehirn-das-gehirn-verstehen/

[philosophiesde]

☀️📐 Solar Intensity & the Solar Constant: Cosmic Power, Calculated with Third-Grade Math How much energy does the Sun send our way every day? The answer is the fundamental basis of our solar technology and surprisingly easy to calculate: Welcome to the world of the solar constant. It describes solar intensity—that is, how many kilowatts of pure energy per square meter strike the Earth’s outer atmosphere. To determine the total power of our home star, no quantum formulas are needed. You mentally draw a sphere with the Earth’s orbital radius around the Sun, relate this sphere’s surface area, and multiply. It’s basically simple multiplication from third grade! 🌌 From the Simple to the Mysterious: Natural Constants Put to the Test But while the solar constant can be calculated wonderfully clearly, with other fundamental values we reach the limits of our understanding. It is precisely this transition that we ventured into in the new Zoomposium. We had the honor of speaking with physicists Prof. Dr. Thomas Naumann (CERN) and Dr. Ilja Bohnet (DESY) about their book “THE MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE” and dissecting the most burning questions in the natural sciences: • Fine-tuning: Why are the constants of nature so perfectly tuned for life? Are multiverses still cosmology or already metaphysics, defying Karl Popper’s principle of falsifiability? • Beauty & Truth: Is the aesthetic elegance of a mathematical theory (such as string theory) a reliable criterion for its physical correctness? • Science on the Couch: Why does research tend to avoid unsolvable problems, and what role does humor play in everyday research? From the simple rule of three for solar radiation to the multiverse: The universe becomes all the more fascinating the closer we look. 💬 Discussion prompt for the network: The fine-tuning of the constants of nature has baffled scientists for decades. Do you think we will eventually crack these ultimate mysteries purely through physics, or do we inevitably drift into philosophy and metaphysics once we cross a certain threshold? I look forward to your comments! 👇 📎 Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/10/26/zoomposium-naumann-bohnet-das-raetselhafte-universum/ 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/k22eSYJgPD0

[philosophiesde]

🧠🤖 AIM for the Brain – How AI and Neuroscience Come Together

At the kickoff event for the new workshop series “AIM for – Artificial Intelligence in Münster for Science” organized by the Center for Data Science and Complexity (CDSC) at the University of Münster, it quickly became clear that: This wasn’t about science fiction or speculative visions of the future of AI, but rather cutting-edge research at the intersection of neuroscience, machine learning, and data-driven modeling. What I found particularly exciting was the ease with which different disciplines engaged in dialogue: Neuroscientists, data scientists, and computational researchers discussed neural dynamics, perceptual processes, and modern analytical methods together. 🔹 Daniel Durstewitz impressively demonstrated how recurrent neural networks are used to mathematically reconstruct dynamic processes in the brain. 🔹 Tim Kietzmann spoke about the connection between computational neuroscience, deep learning, and visual perception—and how artificial and biological neural networks can be compared. 🔹 Ricarda Schubotz presented research on predictive processing: the brain as a system of continuous prediction and sensory anticipation. 🔹 Joachim Gross demonstrated how MEG and EEG data are analyzed using modern statistical and machine learning methods to visualize neural activity patterns.

The event made it clear where modern science is headed: away from isolated disciplines—toward interdisciplinary research spaces where neuroscience, AI, statistics, and theoretical modeling are increasingly converging. This is perhaps one of the most exciting developments in contemporary science. Further information about the event: https://indico.uni-muenster.de/event/4011/ or: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2026/05/18/aim-for-the-brain/

[philosophiesde]

🚛🔥 Hydrogen in Internal Combustion Engines: The Game-Changer for Heavy-Duty Mobility? When we think of hydrogen in transportation, most people immediately think of fuel cells. But in logistics and heavy-duty mobility, a very different, pragmatic revolution is currently making its way onto the roads: Hydrogen directly in the internal combustion engine! What was long considered a theoretical niche is now being brought onto the road in significant numbers. What makes this technology special is that it not only works in new vehicles but is also ideally suited for retrofitting—that is, converting existing truck fleets. Instead of completely scrapping existing vehicles or relying on extremely heavy batteries, the proven principle of the internal combustion engine is utilized. Only now it’s clean and sustainable. 🌐 The Big Picture: The Solution to the Energy Trilemma? This development in the truck sector is a perfect real-world example of a much larger, global challenge. In our Zoomposium, we discussed exactly this with a leading expert: Prof. Dr. Christopher Hebling, Director of International Affairs at the renowned Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE. Together, we dissected the so-called energy trilemma: How do we strike a balance between environmental sustainability, energy security, and economic viability, while global energy demand is expected to rise by more than a quarter by 2040? Highlights from our Deep Dive: • The energy source of the future: Why green hydrogen is the cornerstone of decarbonization, and what role Power-to-X processes and e-fuels (such as methanol) play in global transportation. • Global Bridges: A look at major projects like the Desertec Foundation—why the technology for solar power and electrolysis is ready in North Africa, but political implementation is still stalling. • Batteries vs. Hydrogen: Where do direct electric applications make sense, and where do they reach their limits (for example, due to raw material availability like lithium)? The hydrogen combustion engine impressively demonstrates that the mobility of the future isn’t just being designed on the drawing board, but is gaining momentum right now through smart, feasible technological updates. 💬 Discussion prompt for the network: Is the hydrogen combustion engine the pragmatic solution for existing transport fleets, or is it ultimately just a transitional technology? How do you assess its economic feasibility? I look forward to your perspectives in the comments! 👇 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/E62Kij5i_Ck 📎Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/12/17/wasserstoff-als-loesung/

[philosophiesde]

🧠✨ Consciousness and Structural Realism: Descartes’ Philosophy as a Metaphysical Foundation 🌌 Let’s imagine that the entire physical universe were to suddenly cease to exist. What would remain? René Descartes already recognized in a brilliant thought experiment: The only thing whose solitary existence we can logically conceive of is pure consciousness. While everything material around us could theoretically be a dream or an illusion, psychological experience is absolutely certain. Thus, properties of consciousness are the only qualities that are completely intrinsic—that is, existing in and of themselves—and not relational (based on relationships). It is precisely here that modern philosophy of mind builds a fascinating and highly relevant bridge to structural realism. If modern physics describes the world primarily as a pure network of mathematical relationships (structures), the fundamental question arises: What does this structure actually rest upon? After all, a relation requires relata—fundamental carriers that connect and sustain the network of relationships in the first place. The radical thesis of modern panpsychism: The only thing that could underpin the nature of structures without itself being merely another mathematical structure is the mental. The world, therefore, rests on a mental foundation. As elegantly as this metaphysical solution resolves the ontological puzzle of our description of the world, it poses a radical challenge to cognitive neuroscience. For purely material, brain-centered research, this fundamental role of the mind presents an enormous theoretical conundrum that must first be solved. In our Zoomposium, my colleague Axel Stöcker and I explored precisely these deep waters of metaphysics. We had the great honor and pleasure of speaking with the renowned philosopher Prof. Dr. Godehard Brüntrup SJ (Munich School of Philosophy). The central themes of our two-part interview: • The metaphysics of consciousness: How can the persistent explanatory gap between phenomenal experience and neural activity be bridged by concepts such as liberal naturalism or the process philosophy of Alfred N. Whitehead? • The bridge to structural realism: How is the fundamental assumption justified that consciousness constitutes the inner properties of physical relata? This conversation takes us right to the limits of pure physicalism and invites us to completely rethink the nature of our minds and reality. What do you think? Must the structure of the universe ultimately rest on a mental foundation, or can the world ultimately be explained in purely material and relational terms? I look forward to your perspectives in the comments! 👇 📎 Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/09/27/metaphysik-des-bewusstseins/ You can find the full interview, including the fascinating segment on near-death research, on our YouTube channel “Zoomposium”. 🎥 Interview: https://youtu.be/hoqiI_TElv4

[philosophiesde]

The Mystery of Consciousness🧠: Why the Philosophical “Zombie Assumption”🧟‍♂️Is Misleading ❌ Could there be beings that behave exactly like humans on the outside but possess absolutely no inner experience, no true consciousness? In the philosophy of mind, David Chalmers’ concept of the “philosophical zombie” is a famous thought experiment. But does it hold up to neuroscientific and logical scrutiny? In our Zoomposium, we take a critical look at this myth. To claim that a biological “zombie” would behave identically to a conscious human being lacks any logical or empirical basis—it is about as contradictory as a square circle. Why the zombie assumption fails from a scientific perspective: • Consciousness has a clear function: Countless psychological experiments show that a conscious human behaves fundamentally differently from a system that acts purely unconsciously. Consciousness is not a useless byproduct (epiphenomenon). • The evolutionary spotlight: Our brain selectively activates consciousness as a tool. It becomes active whenever automated, unconscious processes reach their limits—that is, in completely new, complex, or life-threatening situations.

• The conscious self as interpreter: This ties in with our in-depth interview with the renowned neurobiologist and philosopher Prof. Dr. Dr. Gerhard Roth. His famous metaphor illustrates this interplay: Our conscious self is like a “government spokesperson” who interprets and legitimizes complex processes that have been prepared unconsciously. Yet it is precisely this conscious attribution that significantly alters how we act in and with the world. The notion that one could simply subtract phenomenal consciousness and human behavior would remain exactly the same ignores the functional necessity of our mind. What do you think? Is consciousness the indispensable guide of our flexible actions, or do we underestimate how much a purely unconscious “machine” could theoretically simulate? I look forward to your perspectives in the comments! 👇 📎 Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2021/12/05/wie-wirklich-ist-bewusstsein/ 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/0LG4gU_jfik

[philosophiesde]

⚛️Quantum Physics: How Observation Shapes Reality! 👁️✨ Does our mere existence create the world we live in? Quantum physics offers one of the most fascinating and, at the same time, most enigmatic answers in modern science: Reality only comes into being when it is observed. But behind this concept of the “participatory universe” (according to John Wheeler) lies a widespread misconception: It does not necessarily require a human mind or a highly developed consciousness. It is entirely sufficient for a physical system to be coupled to its environment—for the environment to, so to speak, “know” what the system is doing. Interestingly, elementary particles behave in a surprisingly human way in this context: Just as we usually behave differently when we feel observed (and then perhaps do fewer forbidden things 😉), even the tiniest particles abruptly change their behavior as soon as an interaction with the environment takes place. In our Zoomposium, my colleague Axel Stöcker and I took a close look at precisely this fascinating fabric of reality. We had the great honor of speaking with the renowned experimental physicist and bestselling author Prof. Dr. Gerd Ganteför. The key questions of our discussion: • The role of the observer: How exactly does the environment interact with quantum systems, and where are the limits of our knowledge? • The Immaterial in Physics: Does classical materialism truly capture the entirety of reality, or must we understand information as a fundamental element? • The Metaphysics of Time: Is the directional arrow of time even tenable in the quantum world? Gerd understands better than almost anyone else how to convey these highly complex frontiers of physics in a way that is understandable, profound, and laced with a healthy dose of scientific humor. What do you think: Is the universe an interactive, participatory fabric, or does hard reality exist even without any interaction at all? Join the discussion in the comments! 👇 https://philosophies.de/index.php/2023/04/16/zoomposium-gerd-gantefoer/ You can find the full interview on our YouTube channel “Zoomposium”📺: https://youtu.be/V4pUEEtFCUo

[philosophiesde]

🧠 Brain vs. Computer💻: Why This Analogy Is Misleading 🚫 We love to understand things by recreating them. Our modern technology is the measure of all things: what we can build, we believe we can also understand. But when it comes to our brain, we hit a limit that we often ignore. We tend to view the brain as complex hardware and consciousness as software. But in our new Zoomposium, Prof. Dr. Thomas Fuchs fundamentally challenges this perspective. Why the comparison falls short: • Irreducible: A complex life process cannot simply be broken down into data and algorithms. Consciousness is not a “program” running on biological circuits. • The Embodiment Paradigm: We do not think with a “brain in a jar.” Our cognition is inseparably linked to our bodies. We are not “data processors,” but living beings in an environment. • The trap of feasibility: If we view humans solely as machines, we reduce them to manipulable data points. This fails to recognize the uniqueness of our lived existence. In our interview, we discuss the following topics with Prof. Fuchs, among others: 👉 Why neuroconstructivism is reaching its limits. 👉 Whether machines can ever truly develop consciousness—or whether we are falling for a technological illusion here. 👉 The danger of confusing intelligence (data processing) with consciousness (experience). It’s time for a new paradigm: moving away from a mechanistic view toward an “embodiment of consciousness.” What do you think? Is our mind really just the sum of neural computations, or is there something that no computer could ever capture? Share your thoughts in the comments👇 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/1ouxs6P3Enc 📎Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/11/20/das-verkoerperte-bewusstsein/

[philosophiesde]

📚 📈Words Evolve: Why Language, Memes and Brains Follow the Logic of Evolution 🧬🧠 In this episode of the Zoomposium series on consciousness, philosopher Daniel C. Dennett explores a powerful and provocative idea: words are not just internal mental representations — they are real entities in the world that exist across brains, books, sound waves, screens and signs. From this perspective, language behaves less like a static system stored inside the brain and more like a living evolutionary process. Words spread, mutate, compete, and persist — much like genes. Dennett connects this directly to the concept of memes and cultural evolution: ideas do not need to be “alive” to evolve. Even viruses, he reminds us, follow evolutionary dynamics despite not being living organisms in the traditional sense. What emerges is a striking shift in perspective: the brain is not the sole location of meaning, but one node in a vast, evolving ecosystem of information. Language lives between minds as much as within them. The conversation also touches on Dennett’s broader philosophy of mind — from consciousness as a functional process to his multiple drafts model and his naturalistic approach to cognition. Together, these ideas challenge intuitive notions of self, meaning and mental representation, and open the door to thinking about intelligence — biological or artificial — as an evolving pattern rather than a fixed substance. A fascinating exploration of how evolution doesn’t stop at biology — it continues in culture, language, and thought itself. 📽 Interview: https://youtu.be/M2qiVz95ZYk 📎 Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2023/12/25/naturalistic-view/

[philosophiesde]

🤖AI as a Muse🎨for Science🔬? A Lecture by Mario Krenn on Creativity, Physics, and the Future of Research

Last week in the Applied Physics lecture hall in Münster: Mario Krenn’s lecture on “Towards an Artificial Muse for New Ideas in Physics” impressively demonstrated just how rapidly our understanding of science is changing right now. At the heart of it was a surprising idea: Artificial intelligence could not only compute and analyze, but also become a kind of “muse” itself—that is, inspire new scientific ideas and experiments. Particularly intriguing was the question of what creativity in science actually means when AI systems suddenly find solutions that humans cannot. Will the machine become a tool—or a true partner in thought? The lecture spanned quantum physics, machine learning, and the philosophy of science, making one thing clear: We may only be at the beginning of a new form of scientific collaboration between humans and machines. The afternoon demonstrated one thing above all: how many fundamental questions about science, creativity, and knowledge remain unanswered. More at: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2026/05/13/ki-als-muse-der-physik/

[philosophiesde]

“🧠Thinking and acting💪 are complementary.”

In this Zoomposium with Dr. Dr. Walter von Lucadou, we explore the boundaries between brain research, psychology, systems theory, and quantum physics. A central thesis here is:

Mental and physical processes cannot simply be fully translated into one another.

Even with perfect brain scanner resolution, we will never be able to fully “read” what a person is thinking—just as thoughts cannot directly control physical processes.

Instead, von Lucadou describes consciousness and action as self-organizing feedback processes in highly complex systems.

The interview touches on fascinating questions: 

🔹 How are thought, body, and consciousness connected? 

🔹 Are there parallels between psychological processes and quantum entanglement? 

🔹 What does “embodiment” mean for paranormal phenomena? 

🔹 Can near-death experiences be explained scientifically? 

🔹 Where are the limits of empirical science?

At the intersection of systems theory, neurophilosophy, and the open questions of modern physics, an extraordinary perspective on the relationship between mind, body, and reality emerges.

📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/TPCADLkSBWM

📎 Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/03/12/grenzen_physik_psychologie

[philosophiesde]

✨“Consciousness doesn’t just arise in one specific location🗺️ in the brain.”🧠 In the Zoomposium with renowned neuroscientist Prof. Dr. Wolf Singer, we explore one of science’s greatest unresolved questions: How does consciousness arise—and can the brain understand itself? Singer describes consciousness not as a “thing” or a center in the brain, but as a highly dynamic state of activity in the cerebral cortex. Complex patterns of excitation, feedback loops, and self-organized neural processes are crucial here. Without the modulating systems of the brainstem, the necessary dynamics are missing—but that by no means implies that “consciousness resides” there. The talk addresses fundamental questions in neuroscience and philosophy: 🔹 What are the neural correlates of consciousness? 🔹 Can the “hard problem of consciousness” be explained naturalistically? 🔹 Could complex feedback mechanisms eventually lead to strong AI? 🔹 Is free will merely a social construct? 🔹 Do quantum effects possibly play a role in the brain after all? At the intersection of neurobiology, philosophy of mind, self-organization, and AI research, a fascinating perspective emerges on what is perhaps the greatest mystery of all: conscious experience. 📺 Watch the discussion: https://youtu.be/C2FVIbAyaH4 📎 More information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/03/22/kann-das-gehirn-das-gehirn-verstehen/

[philosophiesde]

🧬⚛️ “Science does not demystify the world—it makes it more mysterious.”

In our new Zoomposium, we speak with science historian and science communicator Ernst Peter Fischer about a fascinating thesis: 👉 Modern science has become romantic. What sounds paradoxical at first opens up a completely new perspective on quantum physics, genetics, and the limits of scientific knowledge. Between DNA, quantum leaps, Goethe, and Heisenberg, a science emerges that not only explains but also inspires wonder. 🔬 Topics of discussion: • The romantic dimension of science • Mutation, DNA, and the creative power of scientific models • Rosalind Franklin, Watson & Crick • Goethe and the “primordial plant” as a precursor to genetic thinking • Quantum mechanics and the limits of objectivity • Heisenberg, Heligoland 1925, and wave-particle duality • Science between precision, metaphor, and mystery • Why describing nature may be more honest than “explaining” it 💡 An exciting journey through the history of science, philosophy, and epistemology—between rationality and romanticism, formula and imagination.

📎Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2026/05/10/romantische-revolution/

🎥 Interview: https://youtu.be/PlXoYAQ8xV8

[philosophiesde]

🌞The Sun – The Billion-Year Energy Mystery!⚡ We take the sun for granted. But from a physical standpoint, it was long a colossal mystery. The chemistry known at the time simply could not explain how the sun could radiate such immense amounts of energy over billions of years. Coal, combustion, or conventional heat sources would have lasted only a few million years—not the actual 4 billion years. It wasn’t a small correction factor that was missing, but a factor of billions. This is precisely where one of the greatest “energy scandals” in the history of science lies: The known models could not explain the reality of the cosmos. It was only with modern nuclear physics and Einstein’s theory of relativity that it became clear that the sun’s energy comes from nuclear fusion—from the conversion of mass into energy. In Zoomposium with Prof. Dr. Thomas Naumann and Dr. Ilja Bohnet, the discussion centers precisely on such fundamental open questions in natural science: How does science deal with unsolved problems? Where does physics end—and where does metaphysics begin? And why do dark matter, consciousness, and the fine-tuning of the universe remain enigmatic to this day? Because science thrives not only on answers—but above all on good questions. 📎Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2022/10/26/zoomposium-naumann-bohnet-das-raetselhafte-universum/ 📺Interview: https://youtu.be/k22eSYJgPD0

[philosophiesde]

🚗⚡🔥 Internal combustion engines vs. fuel cells – what will the future of mobility really look like? The debate over the future of mobility is often reduced to a simple “electric cars vs. internal combustion engines.” But the reality could be much more complex. In a Zoomposium with Prof. Christopher Hebling from Fraunhofer ISE, it becomes clear: 👉 Hydrogen technologies and fuel cells could play a decisive role in the energy and transportation transition. What’s interesting here: Decades ago, BMW demonstrated that hydrogen can even be used in conventional internal combustion engines. At the same time, the fuel cell is considered a highly complex electrochemical system with enormous future potential. So perhaps the real question is not: “Which technology will win?” But rather: 👉 How can we simultaneously combine energy security, economic efficiency, and climate protection? The focus here is on: 🔹 Green hydrogen 🔹 Fuel cell technologies 🔹 E-fuels and Power-to-X 🔹 Solar energy and global energy projects 🔹 Resource issues surrounding batteries and lithium 🔹 The energy trilemma of environmental sustainability, energy security, and economic viability The mobility of the future will likely not be monolithic, but will consist of different technologies—tailored to applications, infrastructure, and global resources. One thing is certain: The transformation of our energy system is not only a technical challenge, but also a social, economic, and geopolitical issue. 📺 Interview: https://youtu.be/E62Kij5i_Ck 📎Information: https://philosophies.de/index.php/2024/12/17/wasserstoff-als-loesung/