• « La musique est donc dans notre cerveau dans un certain sens. Cela ne veut pas dire qu’il n’y a pas d’ondes sonores en mouvement. Tout cela est vrai, c’est vrai. Mais ce qu’on appelle la musique, c’est ce qu’on fait avec tout ça dans notre cerveau. »

    Our concept of time is false – theoretical physicist — RT SophieCo. Visionaries
    https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco-visionaries/513288-carlo-rovelli-sophieco-interview

    SS: I wanted to also use the example of music if I may. It’s a thing that doesn’t really exist but only does because it is happening in time, right? Like instruments play together in a rhythm or a pulse that brings time alive. And we only feel something when music changes in time. And non-changing note becomes a drone and stops having meaning like, you know, my refrigerator making a noise. So if on an elementary physics level, time doesn’t matter, or it doesn’t exist, why does it matter on a non-elementary level, on a level of music, for instance? Does music essentially create time?

    CR: This is a great question. And in fact, you know, in the history of thinking about time, music played a huge role. Suppose, you’re hearing music, a song. And in some moment, right now, you’re hearing one note, not the full song. And then in the next moment, you’re hearing one note. So you’re never hearing the song. You only hear one note at the time, in every moment you hear one note. So why do you react to the song? There’s never a song up there in nature. At every moment, there is only one note at a time. I mean, this was before harmony. Most of music was just melodic. Okay, so what is the answer? The answer, if you think for a moment, is obvious. When you hear a note, your brain still remembers the previous notes. So what you’re hearing, you think of the melody, just think of your preferred melody, in a moment, you hear a sound, but at the same time, you remember the previous one. So if you think at the time, the melody itself is really memory stuff, it’s not out there, it’s in your memory that stays together. Out there, there’s one note at a time. And this shows that a lot of our feeling and perception of temporality, it’s connected to the fact that we remember. And in a sense, if you want, let me put it in some way, a stone cannot hear music. Because it doesn’t have memory. To hear music, you need memory. And memory requires a brain or a computer that has memory, not brain because we’re spiritual things different from the rest of nature. I think that we’re just pieces of nature, like everything else, but we’re very peculiar pieces of nature with a lot of wiring and neurons and stuff, and it’s this peculiarity that allows music to exist. In a very precise sense, music can only exist because we have this brain, which remembers and it’s not only that, because when you hear music (I think everybody knows music) you hear a piece of a melody and your brain anticipates what would come next. And music is all a game, that the music is coming and in part, it comes what you expect. The next note - you know what it is. So you’re happy that you get and in part it surprises you, because there comes something [else]. It’s all this game of surprising and satisfaction, which makes music. So music is in our brain in some sense. This doesn’t mean that there aren’t, you know, sound waves moving around. That’s all true, that’s real. But what we call music, it’s what we make with all that in our brain.

    • Le transcript de l’interview sur le site de Landis :
      http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/regime-change-without-state-collapse-is-impossible-in-syria-landis-int
      Extraits :

      SS: Assad has agreed to take part in early elections – can Syria in its current state hold the vote? Can there be a vote before Islamic State is beaten?

      JL: First, Syria is in such terrible physical state and so many people have been forced from their homes or left the country that it would be almost impossible to have fair elections. Secondly, and more importantly perhaps, it is hard for anyone to believe that the outcome would be different from the elections held in the past 45 years? All ended up with a 99% vote for the President. There’s such distrust between all sides. Nobody puts much faith in the idea of elections. Most people understand that lurking beneath the question of elections is another question: “Can the Assad regime stay or not?” Now that Russia has intervened on the side of Assad, it’s quite clear the Assad regime is staying and will stay. How the West is going to accommodate itself to this fact is not yet clear.

      SS: The Western-backed FSA commander Ahmad Sa’oud told AP: “What we care about is Assad leaving, not turning this from a war against the regime to a war against terrorism”. So, they don’t really care about the fight against Islamic State as well…

      JL: You’re right. Most actors in Syria have other priorities besides destroying the Islamic State. Almost all rebel groups insist on destroying Assad before the Islamic State. They refuse to be drawn into what they call a “sahwa.” They do not want to become “agents of America” and so forth. The vast majority want nothing to do with the fight against ISIS before they have defeated Assad. Many members of the Coalition that are fighting ISIS also have other priorities. That is a big problem for both for the Russians and for the U.S. Indeed, the US has other priorities as well. We saw in Palmyra, Deir ez-Zor and elsewhere, the US would not attack ISIS if it believed Assad and his military would benefit. It preferred to have ISIS take Palmyra than to be seen to be helping Assad.

      [...]

      SS: Does the U.S. have enough influence over the opposition they’re backing to make them agree to a political process in Syria?

      JL: No. That’s the short answer.

      SS: So people who represent the opposition in peace talks, are they controlling forces on the ground?

      JL: No, they’re not. The strongest militias in Syria are the more extreme and more Salafist militias. The Islamists have a real ideology to sell; they are the militias who have national reach and representation in all provinces of Syria. The US backs the weakest militias in Syria. They are the non-ideological militias and are extremely local. For the most part, they are composed of clan and tribal leaders. They may hold sway over a village or two; they may command a thousand men, perhaps two thousand, but not more than that. The Islamic militants, such as Al-Qaeda, Ahrar ash-Sham, ISIS and the Islamic Army, have purchase over a broad segment of Syrian society that stretches from north to south. The US refuses to deal with Islamist militias. It insists on dealing only with the weaker ones, which operate with some independence, but in many cases have to defer to the tougher and stronger Islamist militias that hold sway in most parts of Syria.