My name is Marco Biagini and I am a physicist; I would like to explain the “observation” problem in quantum mechanics because it is often misunderstood, even by many physicists, and has profound philosophical implications.
In quantum mechanics the state of a physical system is described by a “wave function” and does not have defined values ​​for all the physical quantities measurable on it; the wave function  only provides probabilities for the infinite possible outcomes we might observe.  
Once the measurement has been carried out, the system will have a defined value of the measured quantity, and this involves a sudden and radical modification of its wave function; in fact the wave function generally describes infinite possibilities while for an event to take place, it is necessary that the wave function assigns a probability of 100% to a single possibility and 0% probability to all the others. If all other results are not eliminated by imposing this radical modification "by hand" on the wave function, the predictions of subsequent measurements on the same system will be wrong. The transition between a state that describes many possibilities to a state that describes only one possibility is called “collapse of the wave function”.

The collapse is problematic because it is not described by the fundamental equation of quantum mechanics, the Schrödinger equation. It is an external imposition, a violation of the known laws governing quantum systems.In fact, the time evolution of the wave function is determined by Schrödinger's equation, but this equation never determines the collapse of the wave function, which instead is imposed by the physicist "by hand". Since the collapse represents a violation of the Schrödinger equation,  the cause of the collapse is attributable only to an agent not described by the Schrödinger equation itself.  The open problem in  quantum physics is that the cause of the transition between the indeterminate state and the determined state, cannot be traced back to any physical interaction, because all known physical interactions are already included in the Schrödinger's equation. In fact,  since the collapse is a violation of the laws of physics expressed through the Schrodinger's equation,  the cause of the collapse cannot be determined by the same laws of physics; in particular, it cannot be determined by the interactions already included in the Schrodinger's equation.

After one century of debates, the collapse still represents the crucial problem for all interpretations of quantum mechanics. On the one hand it represents a violation of the Schrodinger equation, which represents the fundamental laws governing atomic and molecular processes. On the other hand, it is necessary for the laws of quantum physics to make sense, and to be applied in the interpretation and prediction of the phenomena we observe. Indeed, since the wave function represents infinite possibilities, without the collapse there would be no event; for there to be an event, then there must be one possibility that is actualized by canceling all other possibilities.

Quantum mechanics does not describe reality as something that exists objectively at every instant, but as a collection of events isolated in time (i.e. the phenomena we observe at the very moment in which we observe them), while among these events there are only infinite possibilities. In other words, there is no continuity between events; reality is not described as a continuous flow of events but as a series of discrete events. In fact, the properties of a physical system are determined only after the collapse of the wave function; when the properties of the system are not yet determined, the system is not real, but only an idea, a hypothesis. Only when collapse occurs do properties become real because they take on a definite value.  It makes no sense to assume that the system exists but its properties are indeterminate, because properties are an intrinsic aspect of the system itself; for example, there can be no triangle with indeterminate sides and no circle with indeterminate radius. People often say that a quantum particle is in many places at the same time but this is just a wrong and absurd interpretation since it implies logical contradictions; a non-collapsed wave function describes infinite possibilities and not a particle that occupies infinite positions at the same time. If the  properties are indeterminate it means that such properties do not exist which implies that the system itself does not exist. Actually photons, electrons and quantum particles in general are just the name we give to some mathematical equations that describe infinite possibilities. The collapse represents the transition from infinite hypothetical possibilities to an actual event.

Quantum mechanics is incompatible with realism because realism assumes the continuity of physical objects independent of their observation or measurement. Since the collapse of the wave function violates the Schrödinger equation, the collapse can only be associated with an agent that is not described by the Schrödinger equation. Therefore no measuring device can cause the collapse since any measuring device, as well as their interactions, is described by the Schrödinger equation. The discontinuous existence of physical properties and the irreducibility of collapse to the interactions described by the Schrödinger equation represent insurmountable obstacles against which every attempt to reconcile quantum physics with realism is shattered; this is the reason why Einstein never accepted quantum mechanics.  The only event we know of that is irreducible to the Schrödinger equation is consciousness (on my youtube channel you can find a video with detailed explanations on the irreducibility of consciousness to physical processes). Therefore, actual events can only exist when consciousness is involved in the process.

However, the fact that properties exist only when a conscious mind observes the system in no way implies that it is the observer or his mind that creates those properties and causes the collapse; I regard this hypothesis as totally unreasonable. The point is that there must be a correlation between the existence of an event and the interaction with a non-physical agent (the human mind); however, correlation does not mean causation because the concomitance of two events does not imply a causal link.

In contrast to realism, idealism provides a logically coherent interpretation of quantum physics and bypasses the need for a physical mechanism for the collapse. In fact, no cause is necessary for the collapse in an idealistic perspective, which assumes that there is no mind-independent physical reality and that physical reality only exists as a concept in the mind of God, who directly creates  in our mind the phenomena we observe (any observed phenomenon is a mental experience); in other words, the universe is like a collective and interactive dream created by God in our mind. In this view, the collapse of the wave function is not a physical process but is a mere representation of the act of creation of the observed phenomenon, an act that God performs directly in our mind; the collapse is only one element of the cognitive model we use to synthetically and quantitatively describe the phenomena we observe. This is essentially the view of the philosopher George Berkeley, and in this view God is not only the Creator, but also the Sustainer of the universe.  
Quantum physics has shown that all possible descriptions of a hypothetical underlying physical reality are incompatible with experimental data. Therefore, idealism is the most rational approach. In fact, if one assumes that there is an underlying reality independent of the mind, one must explain why this reality is indescribable and inconceivable but at the same time accurately predictable through mathematical models conceived by the human mind. The assumption of the existence of an underlying physical reality is totally useless and is not supported by any rational or empirical evidence. What we know is that our perceptions of what appears to be something external to our mind, exist and such perceptions are mental experiences. Therefore the most rational approach is Berkeley's idea that our perceptions are created directly by God in our mind and that the laws of physics are a good representation of the rational framework used by God to create such perceptions. Berkeleyan idealism is a strongly parsimonious view, because it simultaneously provides an explanation of both the existence of mental experience and the effectiveness of mathematics in predicting natural phenomena. In fact, science has shown that some mathematical models (what we call "laws of physics") are very effective in predicting what we observe in nature, even though they are a pure construction of the human mind and do not describe any underlying physical reality. Idealism also provides an explanation for the existence of correlations between brain processes and mental experiences without implying a cause-effect relationship; in fact, brain processes are considered simply a representation of mental processes. Furthermore, Berkeleyan idealism explains the discontinuous existence of physical properties, which is a peculiar feature of quantum mechanics; in fact the idealistic view presupposes that what we call "universe" is only the set of our sensory perceptions and that the idea that an external physical reality exists independently of the mind is only the product of our imagination.

I spent years looking for a physicist as profound as the giants of the 20th century—Einstein, Feynman, Schrödinger. In Sir Roger Penrose, I’ve found that same brilliance....

26:55 Reflecting on Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems and the boundary between truth and provability has unlocked insights I’ve sought for years.

26:18  truth overtuns provability

When mathematical structures in nature fit exactly with math structures in the brain we feel it. It is beautiful.

I love how he explains physics. Out of the 100s of videos I have watched he has made me understand physics more thoroughly. Thank you sir

So much truth, we are conscious for a short while.

Keep it up Roger, your work is fascinating.

The moment he appeared I felt it hard to watch. The ai mannerisms, plus a kind of virtual energy vampire vibe.

 The topic is interesting, even if I  get distracted and miss a bit of the dense presentation of ideas. One can guess what he just said.
  He fails to mention some other solutions to the fundamental conflict.  Each possibility could continue. Our consciousness, triggered by awareness of each version is limited in awareness to that version but exists in each. Many worlds.
  A touch different is the birth of awareness in response to each possibility, also becoming aware of the necessary chain of events preceding. In this many worlds version, there need be no time. Just false memories created by logical requirement, giving the impression of a past. Very Plato's cave.  And after all the idea of limitation is conditional on our experience of habitat limitations. In the vast universe,  a limit seems harder to explain than endlessness. What would be beyond the limit? If nothing,  how can there be something bounded by nothing?
 If infinite 'caves' of aware reality,  then a kind of peace is found.

Is claiming absolute knowledge without acknowledging our own limits not the foundational flaw of every generation?"

Though it’s AI, I found the video very helpful for a novice like me who tries to get their head around the mysterious OrchOR idea. Thank you 🙏

I thought they found a reconciliation between quantum mechanics and classical physics.  Where is the resultant Unified Theory?

I hate the use of the term "terrifying" in the titles of videos, it's so often a click-bait.

And what if each part of the superposition had no mass, but if mass were a result of the supersposition?

Oh.

What is the final equation to put on a bumper sticker?

There was never a supermarket when I created this universe.

Version = TEST

Newton relegated time asymmetry to subjectivity. Because acceleration is measured in units/ time squared, his laws must be positive numbers  your theory returns time asymmetry to subjectivity, adding that space time participates in the production of subjective experience. Hosannah in incelsis.

It is a simple answer you have not been granted that authority and reality does not care.