Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.
>> The Joe Rogan Experience.
>> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY
NIGHT. All day.
>> I like that.
>> Absolutely.
>> It's also there's some things that are
so awesome. It's like that's [ __ ]
awesome.
>> I I was I was trying to talk about black
holes to some high school students just
seriously earlier this week and I was I
kept saying, you know, what the f
Yeah. So, I I got nothing to pitch, but
I I uh um I the Shorewood Men's Club, I
was giving a talk there. The Shorewood,
Wisconsin is where I live. The men's
club invited me to give a talk about
astronomy last week, and when I
mentioned I was coming to the show, they
just freaked out. And so, the only thing
I have is my Shorewood Men's Club uh uh
uh water.
>> Well, shout out to the Shorewood Men's
Club. That's awesome. That's so cool
that you give those speeches. I love
your YouTube talks. They are fantastic.
>> Oh, thank you. Wow. I have watched
probably every one you've ever done.
I've I've watched at least I mean how
many have you done? I've done I've
watched at least like 10 of them.
>> Yeah. I mean, so I mean pretty much what
I did at at NASA I did a lot of sort of
the science spokesperson stuff and so so
most of that was you know I I'm more on
the NASA videos. I hosted like launch
events. I haven't done much privately on
YouTube. I'm I'm I'm thinking about
starting some stuff. Oh,
>> you should. I I'll Yeah, I'll work on
that. Okay.
>> 100%.
>> Thank you.
>> 100%. You said so many things that made
me just go, "What?"
>> Ah,
>> like here's a big one that you said. You
were talking about if the size of Earth,
if the Earth was the dot of an eye in a
book in regular print.
>> Yes.
>> That the Milky Way galaxy would be as
large as the Earth itself.
>> Actually, a little bigger. Yeah. So, I
mean, the thing is this is an
interesting thing about science
communication.
You say that if if the if the sun were
the size of a dot of an eye and you got
to remember you can fit a million earths
inside the sun, right? This is a huge
thing. So if that's the size of a dot of
an eye on text, then the galaxy would be
the size of the earth. That's when
people's eyes get big and people respond
to it.
>> So it's not just the earth, it's the the
sun. So if the sun was the dot of an
eye.
>> Yes, that's right. So let's let's make
this clear. So the sun were the size of
the dot of an eye on a page of text. So
you could fit a million earths inside
that dot of an eye, then the Milky Way
galaxy would be bigger than the Earth.
>> Yeah. I think
>> So if the Earth was the dot of an eye,
then how big is the Milky Way galaxy?
Cuz the sun is how many millions Earths
>> volume wise, you could fit over a
million Earths inside the sun. Yeah.
Yeah. The the sun is about 800,000 miles
across. You could fit about 110 Earths
across it. The diameter. We do those
things where you show the the
differences between our sun and
different stars and immense stars and
you go bigger and bigger and bigger and
you you get to the point where you're
like I can't my this is not working. I
can't get I can't process this. It's too
kooky.
>> There there's nobody that can process
it. I mean I mean one one of the the the
really kind of you know the thing about
sort of demystifying scientists is the
idea that our brains somehow work any
differently and like we can visualize
what a lightyear is, right? you know, a
lightyear is about six trillion miles.
That, you know, the distance light
travels in a year. No, we're human
beings. We we get used to using the
terms. We get used to, you know, using
the numbers, but but we've got the same
brain as everybody else. Nobody can
visualize what a galaxy really is. And
you can take pictures of them. You can
say the word galaxy, but people have no
idea what what monsters these are. and
and and then with like with the James
Webb Space Telescope, you know, all of a
sudden you're taking pictures of
billions of them and you know, they're
right in front of your eyes. This is not
something that you can argue about. It's
an image and and you see these these
foggy hazes of of of stars, you know,
basically so many stars you can't see
them individually. And that's real. And
and I mean, it still gives me
goosebumps.
>> That's awesome.
It gives me goosebumps, too. But it's so
cool that it gives it to you and you
actually study it your whole life.
>> Oh, that's that's that's the whole
point. I I mean, you know, working for
NASA was a huge huge honor. And I mean,
all of us there are doing this. I mean,
we were all science fiction fans. We all
love imagination. Um, you know, we
that was the best thing about working at
NASA was was the joy and and and the the
teamwork and the camaraderie and the
people that you're working with that uh
you know, they they think this is the
best thing in the world to do. Well, I
mean, there's a a real problem that we
have where I think that cities and light
pollution have really for, you know,
it's great that we have cities. It's
wonderful. It's wonderful that we have
all this electricity and that we can see
things at night time, but boy, we have
done ourselves a massive disservice by
not being able to see the stars all the
time. And I think people have kind of
lost the wonder of it when you're only
looking at it as images on your phone or
when, you know, the only time you get it
is on vacation. Occasionally, you look
up in the sky. Wow, look at all the
stars here. It's different here. This is
something that everyone should be
absolutely blown away by. At night, you
have a vision of the most spectacular
thing any human being has ever seen
ever. Just the Milky Way galaxy alone.
It's nuts. It's crazy to think that
those are all stars and that you can't
count them. It's insane. There's so many
of them and it's above you every day.
And we're just blas blas. We're just
like so used to it. We're so dismissive
of it. So it doesn't mean anything. It
It's exciting when someone's excited by
it because I'm like more people need to
get the [ __ ] away from the cities and
just go see how crazy this is that we
are flying through space.
>> Yeah,
it is profound. And to be that close, I
mean just looking up, you don't even
need a telescope or a pair of
binoculars. The presence of something so
much larger than you. But I mean, if
you've if you've listened to some of my
my podcasts, and I think you you know
that the big deal for me is that you are
such a part of this. You are such an
intimate, intrinsic part of this. It's
not we're separate from space. You know,
we look up and there's something
separate from us. You know, that's the
story of us up there. you know, the the
only way the universe makes atoms, the
only way that makes, you know, the
chemicals all around us, you know, the
the aluminum, the iron, the oxygen, the
carbon, you know, the phosphorus,
everything that makes me up, you know,
the only thing in the universe that
makes atoms is the interior of a star.
It's the only place where nuclear fusion
puts atoms together. So, so everything
that you are, the the story is up there.
And, you know, so you're you're not
looking at something separate and
distant, you know. I mean astrophysics
is the story of you know the end of your
nose literally I mean I mean we are part
of this beautiful bigger thing
>> that's a weird concept the I mean that's
from that old song you know we are
stardust
>> yeah we're golden to get ourselves back
yeah um that that's real that's what we
are and that's what all life is and that
that's just a very strange thing for
people to wrap their heads around as
we're sort of slowly getting a greater
and greater understanding of the
complexity of the universe itself which
is relatively recent in terms of h human
history. I mean we really didn't know
all all what we just we know now because
the James Webb telescope is so crazy
where they're seeing these new these
galaxies they're confusing like why are
they formed so early.
>> Oh yeah. Oh I I I gave a talk about
those just a few weeks ago. The the red
dots. Yes. And they never let
astronomers name anything. Right. You're
seeing something so dramatic and they
call it the little red dots, right? you
know, or you know, there's a storm on
Jupiter that's three times the size of
the Earth with 400 mph winds, and they
call it, you know, the red spot.
>> How come no one's allowed to name them?
>> Well, naming conventions, uh, well,
they're they're complex. So, so if you
if you discover a comet, you get to know
if you discover an asteroid, you get to
name it. If you discover a comet, the
comet is named after you. But anything
else has to be done by international
committee. And so, you know, they they
because of that, things don't end up
with very interesting names. They all
end up with, you know, catalog numbers,
you you know, basically phone numbers.
>> What do they call that weird hexagon on
Jupiter? Is it a hexagon?
>> Saturn. Hexagon. I think they call that,
you know, the hexagon on Saturn. They
don't even they don't really the
hexagonal storm. It's fantastic. Uh you
could fit about two Earths across that.
And it it it's a it's a hex it's a
hexagon jetream basically. You've got
super fast moving winds around the pole
of Saturn. and and Saturn is so cold,
the gas is so cold that there's almost
no friction in the gas. So unlike here,
you know, the jetream here, there's kind
of this joke. Oh, there's a picture.
Hey, that's fantastic. Um,
>> that's wild.
>> One of my favorite pictures NASA ever
took. If you look at the little dot in
the middle of that, the sort of little
eye of the storm. We actually have a
picture from Cassini where you can see
the sun glinting off of hundreds of mile
high. There you go. It's down in the
bottom there. It's in the bottom in the
middle. Yeah, that picture. One more
over. Yeah, that that that's a picture
uh from the Cassini space mission.
That's a real image.
>> Wow.
>> And that's the eye of that storm. And
and those are, like I said, hundreds of
miles high banks of clouds catching the
sunlight and the poles of Saturn. And
you know, we did that. We we went there.
We flew over that storm.
>> That's crazy. And uh uh and and yeah, I
mean as amazing as the storm is, it's um
it's at least fairly well understood as
a very low temperature jetream. You
know, I mean, you may be familiar here.
People kind of joke about like, you
know, the weather's the same. A week
from now, the weather will be about the
same as it is now. There patterns that
get set up in in the jetream of the
Earth and you you take away all the heat
and all the friction and it forms this
this beautiful storm.
>> What why what is the theories why it
forms a hexagon?
>> It's it's something called a standing
wave. the the the the the jetream
basically sets up a wave inside this
circulation and and I'm I I will admit
I'm not an atmospheric specialist, but
that that's what I know. And and and
that wave kind of kind of makes this
hexagonal shape and and then you cool
everything down without friction and
that's how the whole thing works. They
they have done computer simulations of
very fastm moving jet streams under the
conditions of Saturn and you can get
this sort of shape to set up.
>> Wow.
>> God, it's so fascinating. And it's so
fascinating that we think of that as
being so far away.
>> That's just right in our neighborhood.
>> It's just right there. It's super hard
to get to. Takes a long time, but it's
just right there.
>> Well, we're hoping to launch, when I say
we, NASA's hoping to launch a new
mission to one of the moons of Saturn.
Uh hopefully in in like 2028. It'll take
it something like, you know, six, seven
years to get out to Saturn. But there's
a there's that giant moon of Saturn,
Titan, which has a thick atmosphere.
It's the only place where the air
pressure the air pressure is actually
even a little bit greater than the room
here. And uh um it's it's very cold. You
know, it's it's you know almost close to
300 degrees below zero, but it's got
this thick atmosphere and tons of
organic molecules and evidence of liquid
water below the surface. It's one of the
places that that might be friendly for
life. And so they're they're designing,
have you heard about this? It's called
Dragonfly. It's a it's an octacopter.
It's a big drone. There you go. Perfect.
And so so so Dragonfly is going to be
this big opticopter that we're going to
land on this moon Titan. We've already
landed on this moon once with the
Cassini mission. And it's got this this
really kick-ass uh chemical uh
laboratory inside to look for the
conditions for life, you know, anything,
you know, that we might be able to find
and and obviously sample more than one
site. You actually fly around and and go
to different places. There's rain, there
are oceans, there are rivers. The only
place we know there are open, you know,
great lakesized lakes on Titan.
>> Wow. Wow.
>> But it's so cold that it's not uh liquid
water. It's actually liquid natural gas.
Liquid methane and ethane. Yeah. Yeah.
And again, you know, the the
we we've already landed there. We
actually sent a probe there as part of
the Cassini mission to land on Titan. I
mean, it's just badass that you know
that that we humans have been there.
That that's a that's an artist
conception, but that's what it would
look like. You know, we we sent a probe
there. You know, it took a bunch of
readings and then and eventually froze
to death. But uh but but some of the
readings that it took were intriguing
about the possibility of life on Titan.
>> Didn't the Russians land something on
Venus?
>> Yeah. Well, more than once. Yeah.
They're the the Soviet Union is the only
nation you former Soviet Union now that
ever landed on Venus. And landing on
Venus is way hard.
>> They got crazy pictures, too.
>> The surface temperature is about a
thousand degrees and the air pressure is
similar to being about a mile below the
ocean.
>> That's a photo.
>> Yeah, it's a photo. Yep. That's real.
And it's a photo taken in a thousand
degree temperature.
>> Yes. Didn't last long. But uh um
everything is crushed flat. I mean the
the landscape is just crushed flat by
that you know huge pressure. Uh you know
this incredible dense atmosphere. The
clouds are sulfuric acid. That's why it
looks yellow. That's real. Uh you know
sulfuric acid clouds. I mean it is like
you know classic vision of hell. It it's
it's it's heavy and deep and uh and
dense and sulfuric acid. What's so
interesting too that our understanding
of planets in terms of like just what's
in our solar system, they're all
different. They vary so much and this is
just all we know about the known
universe in terms of planets. Is it
possible that there could be some
planets out there that are set up
completely different than the planets in
our solar system?
>> Oh, absolutely. Um, one of my favorite
websites, just for fun, I mean, so the
um, it changes every day how many
planets around other stars we know
about, we call them exoplanets, exterior
planets. Um, I think we're up to about
5,000 that we know of.
>> When did we start noticing them?
>> Um, so this was at least detecting them.
>> Yeah. Yeah. This is something I was been
involved with ever since I was in
college. When when I was in college, my
uh my research adviser was a man named
David Leam and he was trying to to find
the first evidence. I mean, we we
figured other stars have planets. I
mean, it can't be just us, but but
they're hard to see. They're tiny.
They're dark. I mean, compared to a
star, right? Right? I mean, planets
don't glow themselves, right? So, they
just reflect starlight. I mean, we we
literally said it was like trying to see
a firefly around a search light from 200
miles away, right? How would you do it?
And uh I mean, now we're actually
getting so good at it, we find more
every every week, almost every day. I
mean, pretty soon it's going to be I I
think thousands of new planets every
single year. And um and
>> do you have actual images? So, for the
most part, we don't have images, but
that doesn't mean we don't have really
cool uh uh observations, including the
chemistry of their atmospheres. This is
really amazing to me. So, they're so
tiny, it's hard to actually get a pixel.
They're smaller than a pixel. But when
these things pass in front of their
star, right? So, there's a star and they
they they pass in front of it. So,
you're looking at this thing pass in
front of the star, it makes a tiny
little solar eclipse. It goes by, it
blocks a little bit of the star light.
And we find them that way. We find the
stars twinkling as little planets go
around them again and again. They have
to come back three times for us to say
it's a planet. Otherwise, it could be a
spot on the star or something else. And
um the the amazing thing is that the
starlight will shine through the
atmosphere of that planet and we can
actually we can actually probe the
chemistry of the atmosphere. So we find
planets that have you know they're the
size of the earth about the temperature
of the earth. They have evidence of
water vapor, carbon dioxide, oxygen. And
then uh last year there was this
fantastic controversial discovery. I
mean it's it's very real. We need to
follow it up. Um we think we're starting
to see the evidence of organic
molecules. It's it's it's it's not, you
know, a very strong signal yet. And this
this this was this was a press release
from the James Webb Space Telescope. And
there were some scientists that wondered
if these could be organic molecules that
that that might someday be traceable
even to the presence of life. they they
they resembled something that plankton
might might give off on an ocean world.
And then of course I the rest of the
scientists said the data is not good
enough yet. We need much better
observations before you can say that.
You know, we could maybe believe it's an
organic carbon-based molecule, but we
don't know which one it is yet. So, you
know, I mean, stay tuned. I mean, I
would never have thought the first
evidence of life outside the Earth, like
a really hard chemical scientific
evidence, would be on a planet around
another star. I thought we maybe find on
Mars or on some of the moons of Jupiter
and Saturn. But now with the James Webb
Space Telescope and the telescopes that
will come afterwards, we might be able
to actually, you know, get get enough of
a sense of the atmosphere of these
planets to start looking for life
science. Yeah.
>> So the sun, the star is passing light
through this little tiny thing that's
smaller than a pixel and through the
atmosphere where the light passes
through. What are we using to detect
that? It's a technique called
spectroscopy and it's a really really
powerful thing. I This is what most
scientists do. As as beautiful as images
are of a gorgeous galaxy or a star.
That's not really what we do. We look at
these little squiggly lines. We get very
excited. We we let the light from the
star pass through um a grading that that
actually draws it into a rainbow. You
take takes that white light. You've seen
pictures of like prism, you know, dark
side of the moon, Pink Floyd. You know,
white light goes in, rainbow comes out.
If you measure really really carefully
how much light is coming in every color,
you can tell astounding things. You you
can tell how hot the star is, how fast
it's rotating, uh in some cases, how far
away a galaxy is. That's how we measure
how far away they are from us in space.
And you can measure the chemistry
molecule by molecule. You can tell
exactly what atoms and molecules are in
that object. Here we go. Look at that.
So what you're amazing person by the way
that that's incredible. Thank you so
much. Um
>> every every every element carbon,
nitrogen, oxygen has a fingerprint in
the rainbow and it's like you know it's
that there's nothing else like it. You
know that you see carbon and nitrogen if
you see these colors of the rainbow
shining at that particular light. And
it's not just simple things like carbon,
nitrogen, oxygen, but it's it's water
vapor, carbon dioxide, um organic
molecules. Everybody has their
fingerprint in the rainbow. And so when
when the starlight shines through the
atmosphere, there you go. That's how we
tell what these things are made of. You
know, this is a dying star. This is
actually in the Karina Nebula. And uh
the most the one of the most luminous
stars there is. And we we pass the light
through a rainbow. And then looking
really really carefully at how much
light comes at every color, you can pick
apart exactly what it's made of.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah. Did Did you know that you know
helium you know the element helium,
right? You you may be familiar that the
the Greek the Greek sun god's name is
helios. Helium is an element we
discovered on the sun before we ever
knew it was here in in in the the turn
of the last century in the late 1800s
when they were passing sunlight through
a prism and they were looking at all
these patterns of light. There was one
chemical that we'd never seen before
here. And so they named it after the
sun, helium. It was on the sun but not
here. We we never knew the helium was
here. That was found later. It was later
we found it, you know, in like, you
know, a natural gas, you know,
radioactive decay. Helium is such a
light gas. It just leaves the Earth. It
just doesn't stick around. And so, you
know, helium, we saw this this pattern
of colors in the sun's light. We were
like, what what the hell is that? And it
turned out to be a new element we'd
never found before.
>> What year was that?
>> We should look this up. I don't know
exactly, but if we Google what year was
helium found, um, I'm sure we can find
it. Well, I mean, I've been thinking
about helium balloons and people who,
you know, suck helium, make their voice
go really high.
>> We didn't even know about helium until
>> 1868. There we go.
>> That's nuts. So, they figured out that
there was helium in the sun in 1868.
>> Long before we ever identified it on
this planet.
>> That is so nuts.
>> Yeah. Just think what's out there. We
didn't even know about helium. It's not
just that it's what's out there, but
that there's people out there that can
figure out how to do that. In 1868,
shout out to Pierre Jeansen,
uh, a French astronomer who figured it
out.
>> When you when you think about, you know,
I know that one thing you you you love
is the idea of uh, you know, Einstein
and time being different and all that.
>> You know, they figured all of this out
around like like 1908. It was more than
a hundred years ago. And you know, we
don't really even have a better thing
yet. You know, I mean, they they they
figured out that time isn't the way that
we experience it just by really simple,
brilliant thought processes,
observations and some years ago, 100 a
little more than 120 years ago. Yeah.
Incredible.
>> The idea that the faster you go, the
slower time is is so hard to wrap one's
head around. And one of the things that
I heard you talking about, you were
talking about GPS satellites
>> and you were saying that GPS satellites
because they're going about what are
they going like 20,000 miles an hour or
something like that. So actually if we
want to break this down a little bit
there there are a couple different
effects about time and and one of the
things that that you know NASA does is
we you know calibrates the GPS
satellites and the signal coming and and
you wouldn't I mean I think I heard that
I mean within within a day if we didn't
take into account the time difference
these things are in that we we'd be
about six miles off I mean in a in a
single day.
>> That's crazy.
>> Oh yeah it's it's a big deal.
>> That's so crazy.
>> Yeah.
>> That's so crazy. And that's just above
us.
>> Time really is something. I mean, this
this is not a theory. Time time is is is
variable depending on how fast you're
going and also how far off the Earth's
surface you are or how I should say how
far away from a big gravity body you
are. In the case of the GPS satellites,
there's there's there's two things going
on. And it's it's it's kind of fun
because it's actually the reverse for
the astronauts. So, let's want to break
this down. This is really fun. Okay.
We have clocks that are so accurate that
if you move about two feet above where
you if we had a clock on this desk and
then if we moved it up about two feet,
we could actually detect time flowing
differently because you're just that far
away from the Earth's gravity. Just two
feet. Your head and the and your feet,
we spend most of our lives say standing
up are actually going through time at
slightly different rates. If the farther
away you are from a gravitational
source, I mean you you probably like
movies like Interstellar, right? With
with you know Matthew McConna,
>> remember the big black hole? And the
closer they get to the big black hole,
the slower time goes.
>> That's not a theory. That's something we
can actually measure with clocks. And a
black hole has so much gravity it does
it a lot more dramatically. But it's
happening right in this room. Seriously,
your head is in a different time frame
than your feet right now.
>> That's nuts.
>> Yeah. And you and I mean it's
measurable. you you you need extremely
accurate clocks. But in the case of the
GPS satellites, the GPS satellites are
in what we call a medium orbit. They're
not as far away as the geostationary
satellites, but they're they're not
actually going that fast. They're only
going about 9,000 m an hour around the
Earth. The the astronauts in the space
station, by the way, are going much
faster. They're they're going more like
let's say approximately 20,000 mph. So,
the GPS satellites are going a little
slower and and Yeah. Okay. 8,000 m an
hour is is a lot. And that does slow
your time down, but the bigger effect
for GPS satellites is how far away from
the Earth they are.
>> Wow.
>> We're actually going slower in time than
they are because we're closer to the
Earth's gravity. And they're so far
away, they're actually going a little
faster than we are in time. Now, they're
also slowed down by their fast velocity.
The the faster you go, the slower your
time goes. But people don't realize
there's another factor and that's how
far away you are from gravity. For the
astronauts, the astronauts are closer to
the Earth, right? So they're actually
not so far away as the satellites and
they're going much faster. So for the
astronauts, it's the it's the motion.
It's the time dilation from the motion
that's a bigger effect. Uh if you are on
the space station for a year, you come
back about 1/100th of a second younger
than you should be. And uh you know,
obviously that's not a big deal, but
it's easily measurable.
>> Wow.
>> And in the case of the satellites, you
wouldn't get the right location. The
data wouldn't be right unless we take
into account two things. How fast
they're going. The closer to the speed
of light you go, the slower time goes.
But also how far away from the
gravitational pull of the Earth they
are. The the closer you are into
gravity, the slower time goes.
>> I think the weirdest thing that I've
ever heard anybody say is that all time
exists currently.
>> That's Einstein. I mean, that goes back
that goes back 120 years.
>> That's such a bizarre thought. We don't
know if it's true but but it's I mean
Einstein really thought there wasn't
much of a way around it because he said
okay well if everything is going at
different velocities compared to
everything else right I mean it's a
great question a kid can ask how fast am
I going through space you know and the
earth you if you're on the equator of
the earth that goes around at about uh u
you know about about 1 th000 miles an
hour you know and then you know we go we
go around the sun at about 67,000 miles
an hour in our orbit the sun's going
around a galaxy about half a million
miles an hour around the galaxy. The
galaxy is going towards a galactic
cluster at more than a million miles an
hour.
But you know how fast are we going
really? And the the only thing you can
measure is how fast are you going
relative to something else? There's no
answer.
You know, how fast am I going? Well, I
mean, am I still or am I actually
traveling close to the speed of light
right now? I don't know. So, so Einstein
said the only way he could really think
about how that would work is if the
universe was just one big thing. You
know, all of time and space exists in a
big whole thing. There's only one now.
Einstein famously said, "The past,
present, and future are, you know,
persistently annoying illusions."
Now, again, do we know this to be true?
At the moment, we don't have any better
physics. And and I doubt the physics
will get any less weird than that.
But yeah, I mean I mean that's sort of
the way modern physics thinks the
universe may be is is a big whole thing
that started from beginning to end and
is all nowish.
>> But if that's the case, so subjectively
we can measure
things. We can measure time but but what
are we measuring
if it's I mean are are we making
artificial time constraints? Are we are
we doing it oursel? When we're when we
create a clock, we create a watch
>> and the watch is, you know, 24 hours a
day it's running. What is it what is it
measuring?
>> Yeah.
>> Right.
>> That is exactly the question Albert
Einstein asked. That that is that is a
deep excellent question.
And and so that was the problem. I mean
in a famous thought experiment, Einstein
made a clock by setting up two mirrors
and having light bounce between the two
mirrors. And that was the tick of the
clock. Tick tick tick tick tick. And and
the problem was that, you know, that's
how he started thinking about the speed
of light is that if you had this thing
in a spaceship that was going a huge
fraction of the speed of light, then a
person standing watching it go by would
actually watch the light kind of trace
out a pattern like this because you it's
it's it's actually ticking between the
mirrors, but the mirrors are moving
along. And so you see the light make
this sort of bouncy movement. And that
means it's actually traveled farther
than the person on the ground who thinks
that the mirrors are just sort of the
the light is making just a straight up
and down line from mirror to mirror.
That that question that you asked is
what completely
I mean it completely revolutionized
physics. Everything fell apart when
people said, "How do you even measure
time? What does it mean to make a clock?
What are we measuring?"
>> I still don't understand what we're
measuring.
>> Oh lord. Yeah.
>> I I get it. I mean we I don't know if I
have an answer for you. I don't think
anybody does. But but but here's the
deal. So the the clock in Einstein's
experiment, so the the clock has, you
know, two mirrors and there's light
bouncing between it and then that's the
distance that it travels in one tick,
>> right?
But now you put this mirror, you put
that clock on a spaceship and the
spaceship's going really fast. And as it
goes by, you see that that that clock as
as it streams by you really fast, you
see the light make this motion.
And and this line is actually longer
than that line. This this line if you
measure it, that's actually a longer
line that I drew than the the original
one between just the two mirrors because
now it's at an angle.
And this is what made Einstein say time
has to change. If anything moves, the
tick of a clock changes. What? However
you measure time, whatever time is,
whether you measure it with a bouncing
clock or whether you measure it with a
vibrating atom like we do in the Bureau
of Standards, or whether you measure
with a spring that's slowly unwinding in
a wristwatch.
Anything you can do to measure one
moment to the next changes when motion
is involved. There's no way to get
around it. It's not just the
measurement. It's time itself is
changing. any way we have to measure
this thing we call time. And I have to
tell you, Joe, I I don't think we have
an answer to what time is. What are we
measuring?
I think I think right there, I think
you're asking for the next revolution in
physics that we don't have yet. I really
mean that. So when we're measuring time
currently, like when I w look down on my
watch, I'm measuring time in this
particular space, like where I am, what
altitude I'm at, how fast I'm moving,
>> and the watch just does a reasonable job
of calculating all that.
>> And that's and that's you. I mean,
that's what you see here, sitting still
with your watch looking at it.
>> If someone's flying by at close to the
speed of light,
>> they won't see you measure time the same
way. Yeah. But you said something else
too that freaked me out that
that if you traveled at the speed of
light, the the problem would be you
would have infinite mass.
>> Well, anything with mass. Yeah. Yeah.
That's the thing.
>> So, if a person was in a spaceship and
it traveled the speed of light, that
spaceship would have infinite mass.
>> It's basically it's what makes
accelerating up to the speed of light
impossible. That anything with mass
can't travel at the speed of light. I
mean the the equations blow up. But what
does infinite mass mean? Do you have
more mass than the whole universe? What
the hell is that? As you approach the
speed of light, if you have mass, it
takes more and more energy to accelerate
you even just a little bit more. So you
never get to the speed of light. You
know, you're speed you're going 99.9%
the speed of light. Okay, I want to go a
little faster. It it takes more and more
energy each little tiny step you make.
So it's it basically you never get to
the speed of light. It it takes an
infinite amount of energy.
So, you know, when it comes to things
like interstellar travel, I I I don't
think we're ever going to take a
spaceship and accelerate it to the speed
of light, I I I mean, I we might get
very close. There are particles in space
that do have mass, like nutrinos, tiny
little bits of mass. They travel very
close to the speed of light, but they
don't travel at the speed of light.
But to me, you know, I I think that the
the the idea of traveling interstellar
distances or even intergalactic
distances, you know, the thing that
starts to really get me is the question
of this this what is space and what is
time at all? Quantum entanglement,
>> right? Glad you brought that up.
>> Oh, yeah.
Uh I I I'm going to say I I hope your
listeners I I I I don't want to get I
don't want to I I want people to come
along with us.
>> Oh, they're coming along.
>> Yeah. I I don't want to say things that
sound so stupid. They're like, you know,
why are they saying this? So, please
stop me if we need some more background.
>> This does not sound stupid in any way,
shape, or form,
>> but the idea of quantum entanglement, we
should explain that to people.
>> Yeah.
>> And what it essentially means is that
things are entangled, they're connected
at regardless of the distance.
>> Yes.
>> And it could be an immeasurable amount
of distance like
>> any distance
>> like
>> Yeah. Literally the beginning of the
universe distance like 13.8 8 billion
life years away distance.
>> You're entangled with that.
>> It's amazing because once again, let's
go back to the idea that this this is a
real experimental fact, right? I mean, a
lot of times this this crazy stuff that,
you know, scientists will will say this
stuff and and people hear it, you know,
for the first time and they say, "Well,
that that sounds like idiotic. That
sounds stupid. Why where did they get
that from?" And the the idea that time
changes is now it's one of the most
commonly proven facts every day. Like I
said, we needed to calibrate the GPS
satellites. It's easy to measure.
Quantum entanglement was something that
that even Albert Einstein 100 years ago
um he understood that quantum mechanics
was pointing that way, but he really
didn't like it. He called it he called
it spooky action at a distance. He hated
it because he realized that quantum
mechan mechanics had this implication
that that if things could somehow be
connected quantum mechanically, you
could take them any distance away from
each other and they would somehow be
able to respond to each other
instantaneously with with no time
difference.
And you know, he didn't think that would
ever actually happen. And then back in
the in the in the mid 1990s, we started
to do experiments with atoms and we
found out that it was real. That uh uh
it it can start off pretty simply. you
you have two atoms that are in an orbit
around you know so an atom has a nucleus
of protons and electrons in the middle
sorry an atom has a nucleus of protons
and neutrons the electrons are flying
around in orbits around the uh the atom
um two electrons can be in the same
orbit only if they are spinning in
different directions they they have an
an angular momentum it's called spin and
the only way these two electrons can fit
in that orbit together is if they're
spinning one is spinning in an upward
direction one's say spinning in in a
downward ction. Hate the broken finger.
Um, so if if you take these electrons
out of the atom and you can do that, you
know that they're in different spins
because they had to be to be in that
that orbit together. So now you separate
them. You can separate them by any
distance you want. You can separate them
by centimeters in a laboratory. The
Chinese have done this up to the space
station that they run in back. You you
could conceivably do it to another
galaxy. If you take those electrons and
you separate them, you know that they
were spinning in opposite directions. So
if you take an electric field and you
change the spin of one, the other one
immediately changes in response
>> regardless of the distance.
>> Regardless of the distance and we know
this to be true. We've done this. And
the amazing thing is the universe is
saying these two things are the same
quantum mechanical system. They're
basically the same object. They're
connected to each other. They're
entangled together. And it doesn't
matter. Space and time don't matter. You
can you separate them in space any
distance you want. How does that work?
The universe says the space and time
between them doesn't matter. They're the
same system.
To me, that's the real intriguing thing
about you. Could a civilization learn
how to harness that, you know, you're
not really even having to worry about
traveling from one part to another. Have
did you watch the um uh the threebody
problem show? Yeah. So, so you have
these things called sons, right? and
sofans are entangled to this alien
civilization and they can respond
instantaneously because they're
entangled. Yes. I mean I mean that's
fantastic science and as far as I can
tell that that could be theoretically
possible. Yeah.
>> Well, that's what's bonkers is that we
are made out of all this stuff that's
entangled.
>> What's it entangled to? Is it entangled
to stuff inside a black hole right now?
Is it entangled to stuff that is on the
other side of the universe from us? If
the big bang had all of this stuff in a
small volume at once, are we entangled
to everything in some way?
>> Seriously.
>> Seriously.
>> I mean I mean are is a part of me
quantum mechanically right now in the
Andromeda galaxy? Yeah, actually that
would be the implication.
I mean talk about
I don't think we understand yet what
reality is. I really don't. What does it
mean? Are we all somehow the same
particle entangled to each other? You
know, are we connected to everything
all at once?
I mean, that could be where physics is
taking us now.
>> That's bananas. It's very difficult to
think about when you you think you're a
person in Austin. My feet are on the
ground. Yeah.
>> Here I am touching this desk. I'm going
to get in my car later and go get
something to eat.
>> No kidding. You got to feed the cat,
right?
>> Yeah. But that's not really what's going
on.
It's way more complex, way bigger. And
you were speculating that that could be
how some advanced, super advanced
intelligent life form travels.
>> It's always been more compelling to me
than the idea of taking a spaceship and
traveling somewhere.
>> That seems super crude.
>> Yeah.
>> That seems like the idea of making a
horse fly.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I I you know we we we talked
about that movie Interstellar because
there were a lot of good teaching
moments in that movie for for a
physicist. You know the idea that time
really does slow down close to a black
hole. And again we we observe this when
we observe things orbiting close to a
black hole. You can tell that that
happens and the idea that this advanced
civilization that we never actually see
in the movie somehow communicates
through basically space and time itself
through gravity. Um, you know, that's
how Matthew McConna is able to even like
go back, you know, in time and space to
help his daughter solve, you know,
gravity and all that. You know, I was
like I was like, I wonder I wonder if
that's really more what it be like, you
know, advanced civilizations.
I mean, you got to think, right? I mean,
you look around the earth and there are,
you know, things like grasshoppers and
hamsters that are fantastic, incredibly
complex beings, but I mean, you try to
teach them quantum mechanics or ask them
to, you know, crochet a blanket or
whatever. They they don't have the
capacity. And you you've got to think
that there's the similar jump where I
mean, we don't even know the right
questions to ask that sort of a
civilization,
>> you know? I mean, can they see the
universe as a whole thing? Do they know
that they're connected to everything?
And can they somehow use that to travel?
You know, maybe.
>> Maybe. And if you just extrapolate, if
you just think about where we've gone
from primitive man to what we're
currently experiencing, and you take
that thousands of years, millions of
years, whatever it is,
>> yeah,
>> you you keep going. And as long as
civilization
gets rid of war and figures out a way to
not die of disease and natural disaster,
you could potentially continue this
process of technological innovation for
millions of years. And you would imagine
that it would go exponentially
greater and greater in its ability to do
things.
>> Yeah. and its ability to
not just
not even things that we can imagine like
we have a crude understanding amazing
understanding of the universe but crude
in comparison
to what's potentially out there. Well,
we could pot we could potentially be
observing
in a physical way every planet on every
star one day.
But we're not we can't even think of
that as being a possibility now. But but
what we're doing right now is insane to
people that lived in the 1400s.
>> Yeah.
If
>> you showed someone from the 1400s a
nuclear power plant, they'd be like,
"What the [ __ ] are you guys doing?"
Like, "What is this?" See, if you showed
them a nuclear detonate, if you showed
them FaceTime on a phone, they'd be
like, "This is insanity."
>> I just got on a little metal tube and
came here from Milwaukee and I'll fly
back tonight. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.
>> And we're just accustomed to it. It it
it becomes normal. And it would become
normal as technology increased further
and further and further. And this idea
that the entire universe would be
accessible is just bananas. Have you
ever wondered if maybe the real followon
to humanity someday will be some form of
AI?
>> I think so.
>> I mean, yeah. I I mean, I do wonder if
the human brain is just kind of limited.
I mean, if you if you say there are
multiple dimensions and time is
something that changes. I mean, I just
said that, you know, I mean, scientists
are no better than anybody else at
comprehending a big number or a big
amount of space. We just kind of get
used to it, you You know, I mean, I
mean, will we have a creature someday
that we've created, an AI that then all
of a sudden can comprehend these things,
you know, is is is that really the real
evolutionary path of humanity?
>> Yeah, I think so. I think it's just a
completely different kind of life and
that we're thinking of it as artificial.
I don't think it's artificial at all. I
think it's a life. It's a just a
different kind of life that we're
>> It's an earthling. I mean, I mean,
seriously, it's our children. We we
created this.
>> Yeah. I always describe ourselves as
like we're an electronic caterpillar and
we're making a cocoon. We don't even
know why we're doing it because it's
just what we do. I mean, the thing about
human beings is we've always been
completely fascinated with innovation.
I've always said that if you looked at
us objectively for some like what does
this species do? Oh, they make better
things. They keep making better things.
They're never satisfied with the things.
Bees made the beehive and like I think
we got it, boys. This is it.
we're not satisfied at all. And so if
you just kept going with that, like
where does it go? Well, it has to go to
life. It has to go to some sort of a
human created new kind of life form that
exists out of the components of the
earth, but instead of being born out of
evolution and out of, you know, natural
mutation and natural selection, it's
random mutation. It's made out of us. We
made it and it'll probably make better
versions of it. And that would be the
new life. And that's how you get over
all the biological hurdles that we have.
You think about like the things that
trouble us, war and crime and violence
and all these different things that are
a real problem with the human race.
Well, that all goes away when you stop
being human.
And if we really are entangled with
everything, we that will be us.
It'll just be us in a completely
different realm.
>> Yeah. I I I mean I I do like this idea
that what we call AIs now isn't
something separate. I mean they are our
children. It is an Earthling. It is
something we've created.
The the question I've often wondered is,
you know, sometimes I think sometimes we
lack imagination about what might be
possible. I've always enjoyed science
fiction where the AI also learn about
about love or about the arts or about
creativity. I mean whether you want to
go with like the new battlest star
galactica or whether you want to go with
um uh a pretty profound experience I had
with a friend of mine who's an author
who has colear implants and you know he
realizes that he doesn't hear like a
human you he mean the colear implants
don't replicate perfectly what it means
to hear the way our ears do they bypass
our ears they they wire directly into
his brain and stimulate the experience
of sound
and so he's hearing in his words like a
cyborg
This is Michael Chorus, a wonderful man
that did some essays about this. And and
he he talked about how much um emotional
response he has to music now, something
he could never experience. How being a a
cyborg, quote unquote, you know, and
experiencing something in a non-human
way has added joy and depth and and
passion,
you know? Are are we so sure that
technology makes us more and more, you
know, kind of 1950s robot-like, or could
it take us into new experiences of being
connected with each other, you know, new
ways of loving each other, new ways of
understanding things? I mean, I mean,
does it have to be all bad? This
>> Well, all of our differences fall apart
if we realize we're all one thing.
>> Yeah.
>> If we realize we're all one thing, then
all of our
monopoly of resources, all that, all
that stuff goes away. If we realize
we're all one thing. I mean, part of the
problem with human beings is we're very
selfish.
>> And the reason why we're very selfish is
because that's how you had to survive.
If you wanted your genes to if you
wanted to to survive and you wanted your
genes to be passed on to the next
generation, you had to be selfish
because other people were being selfish
too. And that's the game the humans were
playing. If we get to a point of
universal telepathy,
like universal telepathy with a
universal language where all human
beings are sharing thoughts, there are
no secrets. We are all one thing.
Everyone's terrified of that. People
love secrets. Love I don't want people
listening to my phone. I don't want
people Well, I don't I don't either
because it would be people doing that
and those people have their own ulterior
motives and it's gross that they would
have control. They'd know your emails.
But what if there's no secrets? It's not
possible because our understanding of
each other is now complete.
>> Mhm.
>> It's like we read each other's minds in
a sense, but it's much more complex than
that. and much more much more in depth
like you feel what that person feels.
You are that person and we're all one
thing that that could be possible
through technology. And this is this is
where I have hope where a lot of people
are like very fatalist with AI and you
know they look at it in this dystopian
sense of these oligarchs these technical
oligarch technology oligarchs going to
be controlling off through AI and
they're going to have access to it and
power. I don't know if anybody's gonna
control it. And I have a feeling it's
going to be kind of like the internet in
a way where I don't think they really
thought what the internet was going to
be. I think they had this understanding
of being able to exchange information
through universities and I think it got
to a point where I if they knew what the
internet would be today and how little
control they would have over the
population and narratives and I think
they probably would have shut it down a
long time ago. I have a feeling that's
going to be the same way with AI and
especially AI as it integrates with us,
which I think is the only way that the
human species really truly survives.
Otherwise, we're just this archaic
biological entity living in this new
world of this ultra superior life form.
But if we integrate with that thing
through wearables, implants,
engineering, if we figure out a way, and
this is going to sound terrible to
anybody who loves being a person, but
all the flaws of being a primate,
there's a lot of these biological reward
systems that are built into us that are
really problematic for progress. I mean,
the reason why are we at war right now?
Well, because there's people with
certain ideologies and there's resources
and there's people that are making money
from their military contractors and
there's politicians that are beholden to
certain interests and then what are we
doing? We're doing the same stupid [ __ ]
that we've been doing for thousands and
thousands of years. Well, how do we get
past that? We get past that by stop
being people.
>> I think you may be right. I mean, again,
that that future is is it is frightening
in some ways, but I I'm I'm I'm more
interested in the imagination. I mean,
instead of just the dystopia, what could
this mean,
>> right?
>> You know, I mean, I mean, how much more,
like we said, I mean, when we were
little tribal groups, you know, the
little wars we had, the skirmishes
didn't really hurt the planet as a
whole. I mean, now we're getting there
so many people and we're still having
these little tribal skirmishes and and
now we're in danger of of, you know,
massive destruction. I mean, we can't
just keep going this way. I mean, it's
it's it's not it's not survivable.
>> It's not. So I mean you know could AI
help us you know tap into some kind of
group consciousness. I mean when we we
were talking about Einstein's idea that
the universe may all be this one big
thing you and this is pure metaphysics
pure conjecture but you know even when I
was a little kid and I heard that I
wondered well you know if all time and
space happens at once is there need for
more than one consciousness even are we
all are we all just looking out of you
know one consciousness looking out of
out of everybody's eyes simultaneously
and not just humans but everything in
the universe you know it's it's a
spectacular idea that you know If there
is a moment, if the universe is just one
big thing, you know, we are part now,
even now, of
beings we have no names for, you know,
super advanced beings that have figured
all of this out and can span the
universe with their consciousness, you
know, that's part of the eyes, too.
That's another part of this
consciousness that we're part of right
now. If if if there's one instant,
you know, it it reminds me of some of
the tenants of, you know, of Buddhism.
There there might be these perfectly
enlightened beings, bodhisattvas, and we
are past lives of them. We're all
existing at once.
You know, it's a it's a fantastically
beautiful idea.
>> It is a beautiful idea. And our survival
instincts are attuned to maintaining
what we are. There there's this thing,
well, I don't want to lose being a
person. But I guarantee you if you went
to an australythecus
and you could somehow communicate to
them, listen, you're going to change and
you're going to be this thing that gets
sick seven times a year and maybe you're
obese and maybe you have a problem with
cigarettes and you know, maybe you drink
too much and you like to gamble and
you're going to [ __ ] your life up here
and there, but you're going to have a
cell phone and you're going to live in a
city and you're going to be breathing
break dust every day and you, you know,
your doctor's going to give you a bunch
of stuff you don't really need because
he's trying to make money.
The Australians are probably like, "Fuck
that.
I know what I'm doing here. Sounds much
better."
>> Yeah. I I know where the food is. Like,
get out of here. I don't want any part
of that. And I think that's just part of
survival instincts. Survival instincts
don't want you to radically change into
something completely different with its
own new set of problems.
>> You you want to stay. You want to
maintain. You know, country boy can't
survive. Keep me in the woods. You know
what I mean?
people have this like natural
inclination to keep things simple cuz
they understand them.
>> But I think that's not possible anymore.
And I think we're going to just have to
let it go. Just let that idea go and
relax and uh accept whatever this new
thing is. And I think we're very very
fortunate to be born at this time while
we're experiencing it as regardless of
the outcome. This is a very unique time.
like one of the weirdest times I think
objectively in human history
>> and we're very fortunate to be
experiencing it.
>> I mean you and I are are roughly the
same age and you know I I I think that I
mean for for me having this what they
now kind of you know call the fearal
childhood right where I was unplugged
and and there were you know there were
there were vast stretches of time even
as a small child where I was on my own
you know in the neighborhood stuff and
and I loved it. I mean, I remember going
to, you know, a YMCA camp when I was 11
years old and, you know, everybody had
to show up at breakfast and then there
was an activity time and everybody had
to show up at lunch. But what you did
between that time, you were on your own.
I mean, as an 11-year-old kid, you know,
in the woods, there were activities, you
could do some archery, there was a
rifle, there was craft shop, there was
swimming, and you had to check in at
certain times. But sometimes I just went
and sat in the woods, you know, 11 years
old. I mean, can you imagine?
>> I had this similar experience in the Boy
Scouts.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And you know the thing was
you know so so you and I had this
experience of living unplugged and and
sort of the the idea of of of a quiet
mind and imagination
and but we also saw this tremendous
change and this connectivity which I
love. I mean I also love having the
internet and this my cell phones and all
of that but but but this is a real
change in human civilization that we
went through personally
and I agree with you. I I feel a
tremendous sense of gratitude for for
both ends of my life.
>> Right. We could have been born in the
1500s were the 1500s to the 1600s.
>> Not that much changed. I mean
>> for a lot of people. Yeah.
>> Sure. I mean politically things changed,
leaders got overthrown, but as far as
like the way you interfaced with the the
world
>> pretty much the same way. You wrote
stuff down with feathers.
>> Yeah.
you know, and and gratitude and like you
said, I mean, maybe instead of all the
dystopia and all the worry and all the
panic right now, you know, going forward
with gratitude.
>> Yeah. Well, I think the unknown gives
people a tremendous amount of anxiety.
>> Sure.
>> For a good reason, you know, I mean, the
unknown could potentially be dangerous
and scary and terrifying or awesome and
you really don't know and so you're
like, what is it going to be? And
there's all these college kids that are
really freaking out because they're
they're went into debt. They're getting
these co college degrees. They're
leaving with this burden, this financial
burden that they can never get rid of.
And on top of that, they have a degree
that might not be worth anything because
AI might completely eradicate their
field. That's a real concern. And so
they they I think kids today that are
graduating from college and graduating
from high school, they probably have the
most amount of anxiety about the future.
That and then there's people that, you
know, they haven't saved any money up.
They don't even know if money is going
to be valuable in the future. Like what
does it even mean? Are are we gonna
abandon all money? Like what what is
what is it going to mean when AI
completely controls all of the
resources, all of the government, all of
everything, all transportation, and you
don't have to do your job anymore? You
just get some funds from the government
where you can buy food. Like this is
what people are talking about. Like this
is a potential, you know, 100 years from
now future.
>> Very seriously so. Yes. Absolutely.
which is terrifying to people that are
thinking, hey, you know, I want to do
what my dad did and what my mom did and
I want to go out there in the world and
I want to find something that I'm
passionate about and make it a career
and like maybe that's not possible. That
to kids right now, I think is really
freaking them out because the adults,
the people like us that are supposed to
be the ones that say, "Well, let me tell
you how it all works. You're going to be
fine. This is what you have to do." And
if you do that and just cross your eyes
and dot your tees, you're going to be
okay, Bob. But maybe you're not going to
be okay. Like maybe we don't know [ __ ]
because that's the reality. The reality
is you and I, the adults, have no idea
what this world's going to look like in
50 years. And these poor kids are they
have no one to turn to. There's no one
that can explain what this and so
they're entering out into the world
having to take care of themselves for
the very first time with this real
possibility that there might not be any
jobs.
On the on the flip side of that, are you
in fact describing the Star Trek
universe, right? You know, a time where
people do not work for everybody has,
you know, anything they need as far as,
you know, apparently survivability, you
know, food, whatever. You know, and now
you have a chance to say, am I going to
be a writer or an explorer or an artist
or a captain or a musician?
>> Yes.
>> You know, I mean, does it does it I mean
I mean I mean is there something in that
that might be hugely liberating?
>> 100%. And I've talked about this as well
that this idea that you have to toil and
you have to be a hunter gatherer or you
know some that you have to do this in
order to find meaning in life is kind of
crazy because we could find meaning a
lot of ways. There's very wealthy people
that never have to work that have
tremendous meaning in their life because
they're doing things all the time
without thinking about work at all.
They're not thinking about it as work.
whatever hobbies they're pursuing or
interests or education they're pursuing,
they're doing it just out of pure
interest and fascination and love and
passion. And that could be all of us.
But there's going to be a tremendous
transition period where people are going
to have to rethink what it means to be a
human being in society. And that's
what's weird because our entire society
is structured out of getting up in the
morning, putting in the work, working
towards a future. You got a 401k, you
got investments, you got this, you got
that, you got a mortgage. And this is
how we've structured our entire
existence and what we what meaning we
gather from life. It's based on that.
We're going to have to figure out a way
to realize and to rethink this. And it's
going to be very difficult for people
that are like 40 and 50 that are just
completely set in their ways and now
their ways change. And I don't know how
many of them are going to be able to
make that switch and what could be done
to assist them in that what can be done.
And maybe that that comes with whatever
this technological interface is. Maybe
that comes with when we become what's
essentially a cyborg that you get a a
much greater understanding of what it
means to exist. And that this idea that
you exist only because the insurance
company you work for is kind of
ridiculous. And we abandon that. I mean
the in the way that now when you open up
your phone and you use perplexity, you
have access to uh
something that's as smart as every human
being on earth in every field. You can
ask it about anything and it'll give you
the state-of-the-art and whatever the
science is, whatever the the
understanding of history, whatever
mathematics,
tax law, whatever it is, it can give it
to you on your phone instantaneously.
And we've just sort of accepted that.
This is our new thing. And I think this
is like a baby step into what it's going
to what this technology could
potentially if you're looking at things
with a glass half full. It could
potentially change the way we look at
everything, the way we look at
ourselves, the way we look at what it
means to be a person and what we find
meaning out of. And this because that's
the problem. The problem is meaning and
the the the feeling like you matter,
feeling like you're important. And I
think part of that is because we're all
so isolated from each other. But that
might go away entirely if the boundaries
between all thought and consciousness.
If we realize like, oh, consciousness is
just a thing that we're all enveloped in
and what our brain is is just a antenna.
It's like tuning into consciousness. And
the depending on how good your antenna
is, you're going to be a little bit
better about how you interface with the
world and whatever thing you desire and
whatever thing you decide to put your
energy and attention to, you maybe
you'll be better at it than another
person because you have a better
antenna. But we might understand that
like we are really truly all one thing.
So all our fears about
you know finding your place in the world
that might be nonsense.
>> I really like that idea. I like the idea
of search for meaning and I agree with
you. I think that as as like you said as
you know Australopythecus as people that
used to exist in these little tribal
groups and families
um the the the modern isolated life. I
mean it's something that I struggle with
a lot. You know I I I'm always wondering
you know where is my family? Where are
my friends?
>> Right?
>> You know I I've had to to do a lot of
sort of interior work about you know I'm
just going to bring along my own
>> family inside somehow. you know, I I had
to provide this all for myself. The idea
of being of being less alone, being less
isolated.
That's one thing that I wanted from the
internet. You know, it started out on
Facebook. I could I could keep up with
my friends, you know, I I saw what they
were doing. They were posting pictures
of their life. It was it was less
isolating. And then now it's evolved to
I can't even find them on Facebook
anymore. It's all, you know, all all the
ads and everything like that. But but
but but I mean, for me, I mean, you you
talk about meaning and you talk about
solving isolation.
Tell me tell me more about that. I I
mean the the the how has your sense of
meaning in your life evolved? How has it
changed over your life? How how do you
find meaning?
>> I find meaning in what? Well, there's a
bunch of things, right? First of all,
it's the people that are in your life.
This is a a giant factor because without
people that you love and people that you
enjoy spending time with, life loses all
of its value. If you're an insanely
wealthy, insanely successful person who
has no friends, who lives alone, you're
living in hell. And if you are a poor
person that has amazing friends and
you're just getting by, you are a
happier person. But I guarantee that
poor person would switch places with
that rich person in a heartbeat because
we're programmed to think that success
is numbers. That success is what you can
what you can accumulate as far as like
objects and desired material
possessions.
But it's not. It's like true success is
happiness and the the amount of joy that
you get out of life and the amount of
satisfaction you get in what you do. So
I think for everybody that answer is a
different answer because for some people
it's going to be music. For some people
it's going to be lit. They're going to
write they're going to there's going to
be a thing that you enjoy putting
yourself into that you feel satisfaction
and you feel meaning on top of friends
and family. So friends and family I
think is foremost, but then they can get
in the way too if they don't have their
[ __ ] together. So like they have to have
a thing that they're enjoying as well.
They have to have a thing that's helping
them grow as an individual. And there's
a thing from martial arts. My instructor
told me that when I was very young that
I never forgot that was martial arts is
a vehicle for developing your human
potential. And that if you find things
that test you and you find things that
are complex and these puzzles that you
have to solve, the more you do that, the
more you get of an understanding of who
you are and what you can do and what you
can do out there in the world. And the
more you do it, the more you can do
other things. And I think that's where I
find meaning. I find meaning in doing
things and enjoying time with my family,
enjoying time with my friends, having
joy and fun and laughter and then also
difficult pursuits. I like things that
are complex, the things that are hard to
solve. I like things that are hard to do
where I I really have to force myself to
do it and then I feel satisfaction
afterwards and I understand my ability
to force myself to do things and in
doing that I find meaning and uh I'm a
relatively happy person. I think I'm
very happy in terms of like the average
person. I think that's why. But if
someone just took that all away, if all
that's gone, would you still have
happiness? Like what is happiness,
right? What is meaning? And what is it
entirely connected to your job? That
seems kind of crazy because a job is
just a constructed thing that it would,
you know, 500 years ago didn't even
exist. So what do what it do? We have to
have mean are we these complex
problem-solving biological organisms
that have this thirst for innovation and
to constantly make things better?
Are we tricking ourselves with jobs to
to be happy? Are we filling the need of
whatever? Like when a cat chases a ball,
what is it doing? What thinks it's
killing something? That's its design.
This is its biological need. You throw a
ball past a cat, it goes after it
because it's got this biological need to
chase things that are running away from
it so it could kill it and eat. And I
think we're kind of doing a similar
thing with our hunter gatherer tribal
organism that we're still trapped in
that we're we're tricking it. We're
tricking it with complex problems and
we're tricking it with community. We're
tricking it with all these different
things that that keep it happy.
>> I agree with you. Yeah, I I think that's
that's a wonderful answer. I mean, there
there's something about the, you know,
the the happy poor person, isolated rich
person thing that I I I I agree with.
But at the same time, you know, seeing
what grinding poverty does to people's
minds and breaking them down with
exhaustion and and demoralization, you
know, there there's obviously some kind
of a a sweet spot for there. You know, I
mean, I I've had to work quite hard in
different parts of my life.
>> And I I was just very aware of of the of
the of the soul grinding, you know, not
having enough, not wondering where your
next meal is coming from. and and and I
have it nowhere near as bad as some.
But, you know, the the thing that was
absolutely for me um unbelievable about
working for NASA was the idea of solving
complex problems with people you trusted
and people that you thought really had
your back and and no organization is
perfect. But, you know, the idea that
there is it's not a zero- sum game,
right? I I mean, you want the whole team
to succeed. I mean, even if there are
missions you think should have been
lower priority or maybe we should spend
more money on this and less money on
that, at the end of the day, you you
want whatever is going on to be
fantastic and you want it to succeed and
you want all the people around you to
succeed. And the idea that again, I
mean, this isn't hunter gathering, you
know? I mean, we're we're we're solving
problems. We're saying, you know, can
you take a picture of the black part of
a black hole? You know, can you actually
see the light area, the event horizon
getting sucked in? I'm talking about the
event horizon telescope, not a NASA
mission. But, you know, there were times
in my life like when I first saw that
picture come together and I didn't think
they'd be able to do that. I don't think
people really understand what happened
there. They they they were doing
something right on the on the on the
fuzzy edge of physics being possible.
You need to catch the same front of a
wavelength of light, right? So, light's
coming by. It's a wave. It travels at
the speed of light. the wavelength of
light is tiny. Let's say for a minute,
you know, that they they were they were
dealing with with microwaves. So, let's
say like a millionth of a meter. So,
something that's a a me a meter divided
by a million is traveling past you at
the speed of light.
And the Earth is is round and the Earth
is moving. And they had they had these
eight observatories all around the
planet. And they had to catch that same
wavefront, the same one. If it was if it
was one wavefront later, one one
millionth of a meter later traveling at
the speed of light, they wouldn't have
gotten the image. They needed to catch
the same wave wavelength, the same
photon, the same wave of light had to be
caught in all of those telescopes at
once. One was at the South Pole, some
were in the in the United States, some
were in Chile. They were all over the
planet. And if you caught the same
freaking wave of light,
>> here it is.
>> There you go.
>> Wow.
>> They they managed to make a telescope
that's actually as big as the Earth. And
they were able to take a picture of the
dark parts of a black hole. Now, now
that's that's something called the
shadow of the event horizon. It's
basically the event horizon where time
and space stop. We don't even know if
there really is an interior to a black
hole. All the equations blow up. Time
and space don't exist in there. and and
light. Nothing can escape that darkness.
The uh the black spot you're seeing
there is a little bigger than the event
horizon itself. It's called the shadow
of the event horizon because um time and
space are bent around the black hole.
And so some of the light that actually
gets sucked in is light that would have
gone around the black hole. It gets
sucked into the back end of the black
hole. Literally space and time curve
around the black hole. And so that that
dark part is actually a little bigger
than the event horizon. It's called the
shadow of the event horizon. And um they
said they were going to go take a
picture of it. And I was like, you have
to catch the same wavefront of light
in all of these telescopes. I mean,
that's going to depend on the height of
the mountain, how fast that part of the
Earth is moving. They did it. They
[ __ ] did it. And they they they
didn't do it just once, right? And you
know, and and and now we can take a
picture of an area right in front of
your eyes where space and time doesn't
exist. I mean to a to a lesser extent,
one of the NASA missions that I thought
was just spectacular was a small
inexpensive mission called NICER. Uh
you're like, who's the nicer person?
Nicer NICE R. It's the Neutron Star
Interior Composition Explorer. And a
neutron star. You probably know about
these, but but you know, if when a star
dies and the nuclear reactions inside a
star cease, all of that gravity of this
massive object comes crushing in and
it'll create an object sometimes called
a neutron star. They're about 20 miles
across, but they have about twice the
mass of the sun. And we study many of
these at NASA. They're they're they're
all over the place. They're real.
They're something you can take a an
image of, you can take a picture of. And
you know, these neutron stars have
physics that we don't understand. You
you take you take two times the mass of
the sun, you crush it into 20 miles. We
know that we can't describe the interior
of that thing yet. You know, we don't
have the physics that matches that type
of density. And um this this this this
crazy little little contraption, I mean,
it's about the size of a washing
machine. It was built in a lab just on
the floor that I used to work at at
NASA. It's cheap, easy to make. I
shouldn't say easy, uh, but I mean it
it's actually able to create maps of
what the surface of these objects are
like. They're 20 miles across. They're
thousands of light years away.
And you can actually create a map of
what the temperature is like. And one of
the things we see on these maps is the
distortion where space and time curves
around these objects. You know, they'll
they they rotate very fast and there are
hot spots we see coming in and off the
the neutron star. But then as the
hotspot goes behind the star, the light
bends up and over and we can actually
still see the hotspot because space and
time are bending around these objects.
You can see that that that's not a
mathematical simulation. That's not a
theory. You can see space and time
bending around these objects. You can
see space and time bending into that
event horizon. You know, I mean, it's
absolutely crazy what we've been able to
do. And whether it's a you know a huge
project like the event horizon telescope
where I I I would have bet that they
would not have been able to make that
measurement and they did you know there
there were so many hard drives of data
uh one of the uh one of the telescopes
was at the south pole and uh you wanted
you wanted the telescopes to be as far
apart on the earth as possible because
then you could basically make a giant
telescope the size of the separation of
these telescopes and uh um there wasn't
I mean there's there's pretty good email
links down to the South Pole but but the
email link wasn't fast enough for all of
this data. They they sent back literally
there was a ton a ton of hard drives to
actually they had to play them all at
the same time and make sure they caught
the same photon. If they had caught
seriously one photon following behind
the other, the image wouldn't have
worked. They had to catch that same
photon. You know, humans are incredible.
>> Some of us
>> Oh, hey,
>> some of them, I should say.
>> Maybe maybe pretty much all of us in
different ways. Yeah, I mean, you know,
I
>> unrealized potential.
>> No, I I got to go back to this. I mean,
I mean, one of my good I I have three
friends now have won the Nobel Prize,
which is always like, you know, what the
hell am I doing?
>> That's awesome.
>> Um, but group Yeah,
>> but you have good group chats.
>> Well, see, the funny thing is we we
certainly don't all get together and
talk theoretical physics. I mean, that's
not really what we do. But I was seated
next to one of them at a meal one time
and somebody came by and said, "Oh, look
at all the brain power here." And I I
actually in this I try to be kind of
nice about it, but I said, you know,
there's a single mother working three
jobs part-time, you know, who's waiting
tables over there. And I mean, the the
mental capacity and the strength of that
person is something that,
>> you know, I mean, don't look at us. Go
go go go go praise that person.
>> Well, that's brain power, too. It's just
a different thing.
>> It's survival. I mean, it's trying to
keep your life and and soul together.
the the the privilege of being able to
work at NASA and and to be able to work
with a team like that and do things you
think are impossible,
you know, that that was kind of a part
of my life you could stick a pen in and
say that meant something. You know, that
that that gave me some meaning. That
that gave me joy.
And as you said, it's not so much being
a hunter gatherer. It it's it's it's,
you know, can we ask a question that we
think is impossible and can we just go
and do it? Yeah.
>> Yeah. the ultimate expression of human
curiosity when you say that we don't
have the physics when when you're trying
to understand what's happening in a
neutron star. What do you mean?
>> So you can measure how big these things
are and you can measure how massive they
are and so then you can do a calculation
as to what the density inside would be.
And you know it I mean to put it I mean
probably the interior core is denser
than the outer regions but if you had a
teaspoon of this material it would have
about as much mass as Mount Everest.
And um the reason they're called neutron
stars is that the gravity is so intense
on these things. I mean this I mean I I
hate I hate sort of a simple view of
atoms as little balls going around each
other because they're not they're
they're waves of energy, but the gravity
actually crushes the electrons into the
nucleus. They combine with protons to
become neutrons. So they're they're
mainly little balls of neutrons. But we
we do There you go. Uh you see the big
question mark there at the core. So So
here's the problem. you you you you you
run our our basic laws of physics, our
understanding of how particles work and
you get to the density of a neutron core
and and the equations don't work.
They're not making the right
predictions. We can tell that there is
um there's actually a really great NASA
video I I would I would I would suggest
you watch it. It's called um the the
interior of a neutron star. uh well I
can help you find it but it it basically
says that that the
>> the models we have about how matter
works at that sort of density none of
them give the right predictions for the
the size of the neutron star.
>> Why is that?
>> We don't have the right physics for it
yet.
>> So so you know we run our physics and we
say if you have this much volume and
this much mass what should that interior
be like? And and none of our current
models of how matter works gives us the
right observations gives us the right
size.
>> So what are we missing? Well, um, for
one thing, you know, what you're
probably looking at inside a neutron
star is some type of interaction of
quarks, the actual the actual sort of
building blocks of neutrons and protons,
the particles that make up protons and
neutrons.
>> Oo, that's cool.
>> Yeah. There. Oh, you got it. You got it.
You're amazing. I I I have to say I'm
seriously impressed by this person's uh
ability. Yeah. So, I mean, this is a
video that it was done by uh by NASA,
Testing Matters Limits. It's a 4-minute
video and and while I don't think it's
an absolutely perfect video, I'm I think
it's fantastic. And so you see the uh
this is supposed to represent the
electrons being pulled into the the
nucleus and making neutrons. And then at
the very heart of these things, we're in
a state of matter that we have no
description for yet. We we we can't tell
you how it behaves. We we've never
created it in a lab. We we you we don't
know how this type of matter acts. It's
a new state of matter. We we don't know
what it's like.
>> Wow.
>> And uh you know it's it's made when when
one of these giant stars explodes you
know the the core of the star becomes
compressed. And then this this will take
you through us trying to figure out what
you know whether you know you have
particles as discrete particles as
neutrons and protons or whether there's
some type of quark soup inside. But but
pretty much every model so far doesn't
match what we actually measure from
these things. We we we cannot describe
them yet. We we need better physics.
>> Are there any other structures that are
similar in our lack of understanding of
them in the universe?
>> Well, we got you got two big ones right
in front of you. Neutron stars and black
holes, right? So, so I mean these the
black holes as well. You know, what is
inside a black hole? Is there an inside
if space and time don't really exist? Um
you know, and then and then much more
easy to see are these neutron stars. The
the people who study neutron stars at
NASA, they had this wonderful
expression. They're like, "With a black
hole, you can't see anything. it
collapses into an event horizon.
Nothing's coming out. With a neutron
star, you got the freaking thing right
there in front of you. You can actually
observe something. And so, you know,
they they figured that neutron stars are
much more exciting than black holes
because you can actually like do
experiments, take a picture, build a
telescope. And uh but but this
experiment was an inexpensive small
observatory that that's up on the
International Space Station. And I mean
I mean it's they're they're doing
incredible work about the the nature of
physics and and and testing where our
limits are. It's it's unbelievable what
you can do with even a a relatively
inexpensive mission.
>> When you look at the size of some black
holes, we were talking the other day
about the largest black hole where the
event horizon goes past Pluto.
>> Yeah.
>> If it was the the size of our solar
system.
>> Absolutely. that that's almost
impossible to even think about that
there's a black hole that's bigger than
our solar system. And how did it get
that big?
>> How much time does it take for it to
gather up that much matter to get that
big?
>> Well, you were talking about these
little red dots that the web telescope
is seeing. So, I mean, what you've just
done is put your finger on, I think, one
of the most fascinating unanswered
questions in astronomy right now. that
every major galaxy has a has a big black
hole in the center. You know, the the
one in the middle of our galaxy is about
4 million times the mass of the sun and
and physically it's not that big. It's
it's about let's say around about the
orbit of say the inner solar system
Mercury kind of around there. But then
the bigger ones we know in other
galaxies can get up to hundreds you know
I mean let's say you know tens of
billions of times the mass of the sun
and and those the event horizons about
the size of the orbit of Pluto.
The the question is how do you gather 10
billion times the mass of a star
together in the beginning? You know we
black holes the only thing we know that
forms big black holes like that. So a
star collapses a star dies and this you
know this tremendous crush of gravity as
the star collapses creates this
bottomless pit of gravity called a black
hole. So how do you get that many stars
to die? How do you I mean in the early
universe, how many stars what how many
generations of stars had had to burn
through to actually get that to happen?
And there was nothing that we could
figure out. I mean I mean how do you
make that big of a black hole? So these
these little red dots that we're seeing
with with with web and and when we don't
know exactly what these are, but but but
right now the observations are pushing
us in a very interesting direction.
They're they're about a million times
the mass of the sun. And at first we
thought, okay, well, are these whole
galaxies? And and that was the the
controversy you alluded to that that how
how could there be galaxies that far
back in time? We're we're looking back
to a time about 400 million years after
the Big Bang. We're looking so far away.
The light took that long to travel to
us.
So we we we saw these these these sort
of bright objects. At first we thought
they were galaxies, and that was like,
whoa, how'd they get there so fast? But
then we took a better look at them and
they don't actually shine in the same
light a galaxy would. They and they
appear to have the signature of
something inside. Some of them rotating
very fast. Very fast.
And what we're wondering is if the first
generation of stars, the very first
stars that existed were nothing at all
like the stars we have today. The
universe was denser. There was probably
more of this stuff called dark matter
that had gravity pulling everything
together. So maybe at at that time the
universe had just there were cores of
huge amounts of gas that collapsed
together. Instead of forming a star, the
core basically collapsed into a black
hole immediately and it started pulling
in material and all this sort of hot
stuff formed what they call a pseudo
star. There's all this this this
atmosphere of hot gas being heated up by
by the black hole in the middle. As as
as the gas spirals in towards the black
hole, it gets hotter and hotter. So
instead of a nuclear fusion core of a
star, you have a black hole heating
everything up on the inside,
accumulating all this mass. And are we
looking at for the first time the seeds
of these giant black holes
that instead of there being you know the
first thing was stars the way we think
of stars was the first thing huge
amounts of gas and dust collapsing into
black holes and heating up sort of a you
know a pseudo star around it millions of
times the mass of the sun and then in a
dense area like the heart of a galaxy
these things then start to combine over
time gravity pulls them together and you
build bigger and bigger black holes.
So once again, we don't know yet that
these are what what's that's what go
that these objects are. But at the
moment, it's one of the best
explanations we have and it fits the
data quite well. So you know, we will
keep observing these things. We will
keep finding new ones. Uh one of the big
questions has been why don't they give
off more X-rays? Because if there's
matter streaming down a black hole, it
should give off very high radiation like
X-rays. And then just in the last couple
of months, there are some uh some
observations coming out where we're
finding some of these are indeed X-ray
sources.
So, we may have found the answer to
where you get these big black holes.
>> And and that was one of the the big
hopes for the James Webb Space Telescope
that it would help us answer the
question of where do you get these giant
black holes in the cores of galaxies?
Where do they come from? There shouldn't
have been enough time for that many
stars to make them.
I watched a documentary around black
holes once where they were talking about
that in the center of every galaxy
there's a super massive black hole
that's 1/ half of 1% of the mass of the
entire galaxy.
>> It seems to be correlated. Yeah. The
bigger the galaxy, the bigger the black
hole. Yeah.
>> Which is nuts. And the what they were
theorizing was that if you went through
that black hole, you could potentially
be in a completely different universe
filled with galaxies all that have black
holes inside of them. through that
another universe that you would have an
infinite number of universes that exist
and all there's these like black holes
and if you can go through them all of
them and it broke my brain cuz I'm just
sitting there I'm thinking like wait a
minute how many billions of galaxies are
there?
>> Yeah.
>> Like what and each one of them has a
black hole in the center of it?
>> Yeah. Well, and and I mean we don't know
yet how many uh I mean there there are
these giant black holes in the middle of
galaxies and then there are smaller
black holes caused when massive stars
dies and you our galaxy probably has
millions of those. But the uh the ones
in the in the in the center of the
galaxies are fascinating. The um the one
in our galaxy so we're about about
25,000 lighty years away from the sky so
we're safe. But um
we actually observed stars that are
trapped around the black hole that are
orbiting the black hole. This was the
first way we found the location of the
black hole. Stars were orbiting kind of
like this angry swarm of bees almost in
every direction. And they were orbiting
around something you didn't see. And the
mass needed to make all these stars
orbit was about four million times the
mass of the sun. There was a star called
S2 we observed orbiting close to the
black hole, kind of like a comet. It
would come in and whip around the black
hole, then go back out again. and an S2
at closest approach when it whips around
the black hole. This is a star goes
nearly 20 million miles an hour as it
whips around the black hole. And then
just recently we found another star that
actually gets up to over 50 million
miles an hour as the black hole whips it
around. And this is how we test the idea
that time is different around a black
hole. We actually see these stars
whipping so close to a black hole. We
can tell that there are changes in their
orbit, that they're actually going
through different time.
And uh um and so we see these stars
whipping around the black hole at the
middle of our galaxy. They will probably
eventually go down that black hole. I
mean, maybe everything in our galaxy
will eventually kind of spiral down into
that black hole. But you know, we we
this is this is not conjectural. These
are observations from telescopes. You
know, look up S2. Look up I don't know
what the name of the one that it goes
faster. It's a telephone telephone
number, but that's real.
Now, the question about what happens if
you could survive going into a black
hole, and this is another place where we
need better physics. Quite honestly, our
physics gives up.
There are all kinds of wonderful,
fascinating possibilities. I mean,
people have pointed out this is not
observation. Now, we're going from
observation, we see these things,
they're real to conjecture. People have
said that if you take the entire
universe, the the the entire mass of the
universe and the radius that the
diameter of the observable universe
almost exactly matches a black hole. You
know, you could it be that, you know,
inside a black hole, a new universe
forms when a black hole forms. Is that
what the big bang was? Was the big bang
a black hole forming in another universe
and popping off our own universe? Are
black holes somehow connected to other
universes? These are all incredible
questions. We we don't yet have the
physics to answer them. But you know,
people have said, you know, why is it
the universe has about the same density
of a black hole, the same size and mass?
Is that just a coincidence or are we
looking at something deeper?
>> Or is it fractal? Is it the entire
universe exists inside of a black hole?
>> Yes, exactly.
>> That's bananas.
>> Yeah. There there we have the the very
large array that was at the uh that was
in Chile. That's a wonderful
observatory. There we have a a great uh
depiction. Oh, he he you found Okay.
Yeah, I've never seen a depiction like
that's the stars moving around a black
hole.
>> Yeah, the stars moving around a black
hole.
>> What's coming? What would this ejection
be?
>> Um so that Okay. What what that is is
that that's a consequence of the black
holes. Um that doesn't come from inside
the black hole. All of that swirling gas
gets really fast. We actually observe
some of the swirling gas going close to
the speed of light. Black holes, you
know, they're they're going down the
drain. They're going faster and faster
as you get closer to the black hole. And
um all of that very very hot gas
generates a very strong magnetic field.
And so what you're looking at with those
jets is that that's just the magnetic
field of the hot gas going around the
black hole. Some of that hot gas gets
directed into jets by the magnetic
field. There's nothing coming out of the
black hole. Nothing that we know of
comes out of a black hole. But black
holes are incredibly This is This is
wonderfully ironic. They're incredibly
bright because if there's gas trying to
get around a spinning around a black
hole, the gravity accelerates that gas
so fast it spins it up to in some cases
millions or billions of degrees. You can
see them clear across the observable
universe. They're the brightest objects
in the sky. And this this is not light
coming from inside the black hole. It's
light coming from stuff trapped around
the black hole as it spirals in. And
these huge jets, we we see some of these
jets going, you know, in some cases more
than 100,000 lightyears. I mean they're
they're huge jets that come out
>> 100,000 lighty years and one light years
is how many trillion miles?
>> Six trillion miles about
>> Yeah. Yeah. So
>> Oh my god.
>> And then in the uh
>> Oh my god.
>> Yeah. So I mean around uh um around
>> that video is so nuts.
>> I've never seen that.
>> Yeah.
>> When I was looking for this or stumbled
across this I saw a theoretical thing
called a white hole
>> which is potentially maybe on the other
side of a black hole.
>> You know the the
>> Yeah. No, no, no. It's it's an idea. I
mean, that idea, honestly, it had a lot
more um uh following, you know, more in
the in like the 60s and 70s. It's kind
of fallen out of favor because at first
we thought that the these hugely bright
objects were were white holes at the end
of a black hole. Maybe the radiation
went through a tunnel through space and
came out somewhere. But now we know that
these super bright objects are actually
hot gas discs around black holes. And
they are bright. Like I said, they're
the brightest things we know of in the
sky. and uh you know so that's that's
something you can see you know literally
billions of light years away is the hot
gas going around a black hole.
>> You said another thing that broke my
brain. Um you were talking about
what the big bang is and that we
shouldn't think of the big bang as an
explosion
but that before the big bang time and
space might not have existed.
>> Well pretty much certainly not in the
way we experience them. No, I mean I
mean once again, you know, no astronomer
thinks the big bang came from nothing.
The problem is once again we have no
description of what that state of matter
would be. None.
I mean the idea that everything we
observe of in the universe could have
once been at a subatomic scale.
You'll notice I'm very careful about
this. I talk about the observable
universe. We have no idea how big the
universe is. We don't know whether it's
infinite or whether it has an end. But
there's been only a certain amount of
time that light has had to travel to us.
That's not the whole universe. That
that's centered on us. That's an effect.
If we look in every direction in the
sky, we can only look back as far as
there's been time for light to actually
travel to us. And you see some
incredible things. I mean, one of the
things that uh one of my friends has the
Nobel Prize for is if you look so far
away, the farthest away we can see now,
we're looking back to a time about
400,000 years after the Big Bang. And
this is something where we are actually
able to see so far away. We're looking
back to a time when the whole universe
was hot and bright. It actually was
glowing like the surface of the sun. The
whole universe. The entire universe was
so bright. It was like looking at the
surface of the sun. And and this is is
has now this radiation has traveled a
long time to get to us. It's now lost
energy because it's traveling through
the expanding universe. And as the
universe expands, the the wave the
wavelength of light gets stretched out
by the expansion of space. This is what
we call the microwave background
radiation.
So there there's there's a there's a
microwave very low energy signal. It
comes from every direction on the sky.
And it's coming from a time it's coming
from a distance so far away that the
whole universe was as bright as the
surface of the sun. And and that's as
far as we can see because any farther
away from that the universe is opaque
literally in every direction on the sky
you eventually look back to a time when
the whole universe was so dense and
bright you can't see any farther.
>> Is this because of how we're capable of
measuring? And is it possible that at
one point in time when we get better and
better telescopes that we can look past
that?
>> Well, not with light. See, see the
universe actually does become opaque to
light at that point
>> because it's too long ago.
>> It's it's it's basically the universe is
so bright itself. Yeah. I mean, so you
know, you look in any direction on the
sky, you look back to a time, you know,
we the wonderful thing about the
universe changing is we know this is
true. The farther out we look with a
telescope, the farther light has had to
travel, the the more time it takes to
get to us. So the sun we see the light
takes about eight minutes to get from us
to the sun. the nearest star about four
years. The nearest galaxy to us about
two million years. We can see so far
away in space that the light took pretty
much the age of the universe to get to
us about 400,000 years after the big
bang. At that point, the universe
becomes opaque to light.
So there is a limit to how much we can
observe with light, how much time there
has been for for light to actually get
to us.
>> Is there a potential for being able to
observe with something other than light?
Absolutely. So your question is a really
profound one. We don't know how big the
universe is. When we talk about the
universe, we mainly talk about the
observable universe, everything we're
able to see. So the question you just
asked, can you see farther back, even if
it's opaque to light? Yes. And and this
is something that again we talk about
moments in your life where the universe
changed, where you thought people people
did something you thought was
impossible. And um I mean going all the
way back to the mid 90s I was a posttock
at Caltech and um I wasn't working with
this department but people were starting
to measure something called
gravitational waves
and gravitational waves again I I never
thought they'd be able to actually
detect these. The the universe is is
constantly I mean I mean every time we
move remember how I said time is
different from the top of your head to
the bottom of your feet. You know, as I
move, I create gravity. You know,
gravity actually is it goes out as a
wave into the universe at the speed of
light. Can you detect a wave of gravity?
Well, a gravity is actually a curvature
of space and time itself. So, you're
you're trying to say, could we detect a
wave that's actually made of space and
time? And this project is called LIGO.
And LIGO stands um LIGO stands for the
Laser Interferometric Gravitational Wave
Observatory. And it started out with
with two facilities, one in Oregon and
one in Louisiana. And LIGO has two
extremely long lasers at at a corner
that at a right angle. The lasers I I
believe are 4 kilometers on a side.
They're huge, right? A 4 km laser. They
want them to be as as perfectly the same
length as they can. And then there's a
laser beam that bounces back and forth.
And and as the laser beam bounces back
and forth, if it's exactly the same
length, they the signal kind of cancels
out.
But what happens if there's actually a
wave of space and time coming by? Space
itself compresses. Time changes. All of
a sudden, these two these two lasers are
no longer exactly the same length. Space
itself has changed as as a wave comes
by.
tiny amounts. These gravitational waves
are thousands of times smaller than the
nucleus of an atom.
>> Incredible, right? How would you detect
that? And they're traveling at the speed
of light.
So, you have these 4 kilometer lasers,
a wave of space and time comes by and
compresses space and time in one
direction more than the other. All of a
sudden, the lasers are no longer the
same length. You get a signal. The the
noise for this, right? I mean, I mean,
every time Yeah. So, this is us
detecting an exploding star this way.
I'm happy to talk about that, too. But,
but I mean, just the fact they did this,
the these lasers are under vacuums.
They're in vacuum chambers. I mean, they
try every time the UPS truck goes by,
they must go haywire. Somebody sneezes.
They're measuring things thousands of
times smaller than the nucleus of an
atom.
But over time they got this so accurate.
They did it so well that what what
happened and I I you can look up the the
year but it was um something on the
order of about 10 years ago
a long ways away millions of light years
away um two black holes spiraled
together and actually collided to form a
big black hole. That was a lot of
gravitational energy and that created a
ripple going out into the universe. And
so you know there's all of the detectors
have all this noise in them. The
detectors are detecting all kinds of
spurious signals. But then all of a
sudden in Louisiana, there was this the
whole detector went w boom. And then at
the speed of light, the detector in
Louisiana did exactly the same thing. B
the exact same waves at the speed of
light difference. And we realized, oh my
god, they did it. These tiny waves,
we shouldn't even be able to detect
them. They found them. And and now it's
a it's a routine thing. They've now done
this many, many times.
Waves in space and time itself might be
the way we can see even farther back
into the universe. Even when the
universe becomes opaque to light, the
waves of space and time can come
through. Gravitational waves can come
through that. And if we can somehow
figure out how to make these detectors
better and better, you know, could we
detect the gravitational waves of the
Big Bang? You know, can we learn
something about that moment by the way
it actually bent space and time and
created waves of gravity? And once
again, I mean, just a step back a sec.
The detecting waves of space and time
traveling at the speed of light is
something we do.
We've done this. It got the Nobel Prize,
deserved it. Um, there were there were
hundreds of people on that first paper.
Some of them were friends of mine. Um,
again, they they [ __ ] did it, you
know. I I I I I just I I cannot I mean I
I I I felt my heart just drop that day.
I mean out of out of joy. I just it's
it's like holy [ __ ] you know they did
it. Um that may give us the potential to
understand the big bang better as we get
better with that. Um you know maybe we
can I mean right now we see black holes
colliding. We actually see neutron stars
colliding. Even stars orbiting each
other maybe maybe produces sort of a
background of all these waves. But maybe
we'll be able to figure out how to see
those waves from the moment the universe
began.
>> How are we sure that of the timeline of
13.8 billion years or whatever it is?
>> Well, you know, I mean, the these things
are never sure, you know, absolutely.
But but but there there there's some
very good reasons to think it's it's
about that. So, you know, you you sort
of run physics backwards. You know, you
basically say, you know, this is how the
universe is expanding now. And Lind,
let's let's roughly say that, you know,
things, you know, came together. And as
I mentioned, you mentioned the podcast,
the Big Bang did not have a center. The
galaxies are not flying off into space
like an explosion. You what what
happened is the galaxies are all kind of
sort of standing where they are, but
space itself is expanding in every
direction between the galaxies. It was
it's a hard thing. I mean, I this it's a
huge misconception about the Big Bang
that the Big Bang was this explosion and
galaxies are flying into empty space.
The the expansion of space is space
itself. There's no space out there that
galaxies are flying into. That's not how
it works,
>> right?
>> You know, when I
>> That's a weird thought right there.
They're not flying into space, they are
space. When when I when I used to teach
this, you know, I used to I used to take
a a board and I used to have a piece of
elastic and I would I would hammer two
nails in on either side of the board and
then I would say, "Okay, the these two
nails are galaxies and the elastic
between them represents our universe."
In this case, a two-dimensional
depiction of our universe. All of space
and time anywhere light can travel is on
just on that elastic. Don't think about
up or down. There's no space or time
there. Everything our universe is is
just this piece of elastic, you you
know, and then I would take the elastic
and I would stretch it and I would say
by by by you know, the two galaxies
aren't moving. They're they're kind of
sitting there. It's the space in between
that has now stretched, has now changed.
And that's a more realistic idea. The
galaxies are not flying through space.
It's the space itself that is getting
bigger in every direction at once. And
that's why there's no center. There's no
empty center to the universe. The
universe, as far as we can map it, has
galaxies everywhere. you know there's no
center to it. The expansion is happening
in every direction at once because the
the the elastic of space and time itself
in every direction is just getting
bigger. We don't know why.
>> So if we are looking at something where
the big bang created space and time and
as space and time is expanding what was
the environment
before the big bang?
>> Yeah. And that's the problem. So you
mean I mean we have no description of
that. You know there there there are
particle accelerators. I've had the the
wonderful chance to go to us to go to
CERN a couple of times and go to the
Large Hadron Collider and you know you
know using you know incredible
accelerating magnets. You know they they
whip you know just single protons up to
very very high temperatures.
I mean, they're they're trying to
recreate conditions where, you know, I
mean, they can't recreate the conditions
of what things were like before the Big
Bang, but, you know, can you get matter
to such a high energy state that it can
recreate what things were like, you
know, a millionth of a second after the
Big Bang, you know, or maybe even
further back? And, you know, but the
idea of what was that state of matter
before that that expansion, we have no
description of yet. I think we will
someday. I don't think it's impossible.
But there there's nothing about our
current physics. I mean, it would be
like taking somebody from the 1400s and
saying, you know, describe to me what
the interior of the sun is like. They
they would have we they would have no
knowledge structure to even attempt it.
That doesn't mean we didn't figure it
out eventually. And you know, so like I
said, there's nothing about that I think
that's completely off limits. But we'll
have to understand space and time very
differently.
And we'll have to understand what you
know, you can't even really call it
matter or even energy.
All of the energy of the universe in a
subatomic space, we have no idea what
that would behave like,
>> you know,
>> and what is it existing in?
>> Yeah. Well,
>> that's that's the what I'm asking is
like the environment
>> that preceded the big bang. Like what
are we talking about where this
subatomic thing that contains everything
that's in the known universe? What is
it? How is it existing?
>> And and of course of course I have no
answer to it. I mean I mean you're
asking the question that I hope someday
humanity will have a chance to explore
and we'll know more about then I think
what will happen is that once we can
describe what happened before the big
bang there there'll be a whole series of
other questions.
>> So if it's if the big bang is the wrong
way to think about it of a a bang what's
the right way to think about it? Yeah,
>> the initial expansion.
>> I can't think of necessarily a better
term. I mean, you you know, the big bang
was meant as actually a a criticism,
right? It was it was Fred Hy um when
people first began back in the 1920s
when they discovered the universe was
expanding. And this was a big surprise.
I mean, famously, Albert Einstein, you
didn't think that it was. And then he
saw that the evidence all of a sudden
with our telescopes, we saw the universe
is expanding in every direction. you
know, uh, it was actually Fred Hoy that,
uh, you know, said at a conference as a
way of making fun of this. You know,
people were saying, well, maybe
everything went back to sort of a common
denser, you know, structure. It was
actually a uh, it was a Belgian Jesuit
uh, um, um, father, a Belgian priest
named George Lmetra who came up with
this the idea that if the universe was
expanding now, if we run time backwards,
maybe it all becomes one big, he called
it the the the primordial atom. That was
uh George Lmetra and uh said
>> what year was this?
>> Um George Lamemetra. So we would have
been talking around about probably
sometime in the 1920s. I bet we could
probably have some help.
>> So a hundred years ago.
>> Yeah. 100 years ago. So George Lmetra
says if we run time backwards, we we we
get this big lump of something,
the primordial atom.
And then Fred Hoy said, "What you mean
the whole universe started with a big
bang? you know, really there was this
big there was this atom that went bang.
So, so, so even the the term the big
bang was meant as a criticism. It was
meant to be funny.
>> It wasn't something that scientists came
up with as the best description.
>> But what happened then is everybody kind
of nodded and said, "Well, yeah, you
know, and uh I mean more people should
know about George Lmetra, you know, the
the Jesuit Belgian uh scientist that
that came up with that idea. I think he
was a fascinating man. Interestingly
enough, even as a Jesuit, um he he did
not think that this necessarily was a
biblical Genesis story. I mean, he was
he was approaching this as a scientist.
You know, what's the best thing we can
say to describe these different times
and states of the universe? You know, a
lot of my friends are u the the the
Catholic Church, the Jesuits have had,
you know, an active astronomy program
for for a thousand years. And so, uh you
know, the Vatican Observatory still has
an excellent program. So, but the
question you're asking about what came
before the big bang. I mean I mean again
what happens inside a black hole
it it's wonderful that there are these
things right over the horizon for from
us. We we we know the universe is
expanding. What was it like before? What
a what a great simple elegant question.
We have no idea yet.
>> Why do we think that it was so small?
>> There's some interesting evidence about
that. And once again,
it's not so much that the entire
universe was small. There's compelling
evidence that everything we can see was
once in a very small volume. Let me let
me just sort of say that we're limited
by this time factor. You look out as far
as you can and eventually you get to the
time of the Big Bang. You can't see any
further. The universe to us is only as
big as light has had time to travel to
us. That's not the whole universe. If
you're on a galaxy millions of billions
of light years away from us, that galaxy
sees its own observable universe, you
know, I mean, we we basically see in a
sphere around us how far we're able to
see given the time. A galaxy that we can
observe with web the web telescope has
its own sphere around it. It's seeing
into the universe farther than we can
see in some directions.
So, but we know the universe isn't just
our observable universe. So, like I
said, so I mean we we see we're here. We
can see as far back as light has had
time to travel to us since the big bang,
but then there's another galaxy over
here and it has its own view. And then
there's another one over here that has
its own view.
>> Jimmy put something up here.
>> Yeah. So yeah, I'm not even sure that I
mean that that's a a great NASA uh
depiction of where this you see as you
move toward the left back to the time of
the Big Bang, you get to this kind of
beautiful kind of rainbow colored area
and that's where what they call the the
afterglow. That that's the that's the
the microwave background radiation about
400,000 years after the Big Bang. That's
as far as we can see. The universe after
that becomes opaque.
So that's as far as our observable
universe can take us. We know that's not
the whole universe. So the whole
universe could have been huge before the
big bang. It could have been infinite.
We don't know how big it was. All we
know is our little bit of it. You I mean
for the sake of argument, let's say I'm
I'm the entire meta universe. You know,
there was a little atom of me that
expanded to become the known universe we
know. But that doesn't mean that that
little atom was the whole universe. The
universe could be huge. We don't know.
Before the Big Bang, it could have
already been infinitely large. We have
no idea. The only evidence we have is
that the stuff we can see was once in a
very close area. And that goes back to
that that that radiation, that microwave
background. The the microwave background
has been a wonderful story. It was uh it
was discovered back in the 1970s by um
two uh scientists from Bell Labs called
Pensas and Wilson. And uh they were
trying to categorize they they they were
they were dealing with Bell Labs. They
were trying to deal with microwave
signals, microwave communication. And
they built a big microwave telescope and
they started to to catalog what objects
in the sky naturally produce microwaves.
The sun produces some other things
produce microwaves. This was all for
communications.
And they discovered that everywhere they
looked in the sky, there was this
background noise. Very low level, but it
was there. Everywhere they looked, it
was the same. didn't matter what
direction the telescope was pointing.
And so what a good scientist would
assume is that that's probably a problem
with your telescope. If you have
background noise in every direction you
look, it's probably in your detector.
And the the best guess they had was that
it was pigeon [ __ ]
>> So there you go. Pigeon. Look at that.
>> Wow.
>> So So Sopenzius and Wilson built this,
you know, they they they were working
with this big microwave telescope and
little did I know that pigeon [ __ ]
actually gives off microwaves. It does.
They um they trapped all the pigeons in
the in the microwave telescope. You
could actually see a pigeon trap in the
Smithsonian where they they did this.
They they scraped out all the pigeon
[ __ ] and and lo and behold, the signal
was still there in every direction you
looked. It was exactly the same.
Exactly.
And and what they had discovered was the
afterglow of the big bang. The energy
left over from that time when the
universe was so hot it was opaque to
light. And the crazy thing is it is
exactly the same down to fractions of a
degree in every direction on the sky.
It's sort of like, you know, you look
all the way the age of the universe in
one direction. It's exactly the same
temperature as the age of the universe
in that direction. And there shouldn't
have been time for those two areas of
space to ever get to know each other.
There shouldn't have been time. It's
like, you know, everything came to the
same temperature everywhere you look.
Why?
It's sort of thinking like if I have if
I have a a coffee cup, you know, the
coffee cup eventually comes to exactly
the same temperature. You know,
everything becomes thermally
equilibrium. Everything comes to the
same temperature. You wouldn't expect
your coffee cup to be like, you know,
300° on one side and, you know, minus50
on the other. Somehow the universe had a
chance to all come to the same
temperature even though those areas of
the universe were so far apart they
should never have had a chance to touch
each other. And that became part of the
thinking that maybe at one point when
the universe was that large things were
much smaller. You know the universe did
have a chance to come to this exact same
temperature all over. Boy, I hope I I
see by your expression I should do a
better job of explaining this.
>> No, you're doing a great job. It's just
absolutely fascinating. My expression is
just perplexed.
>> Yeah. Well, no. So, so this is one of
the best proofs that things were small.
That you look back to this microwave
background radiation and we're talking
fractions and fractions of a degree. The
um uh the first NASA satellite that
observed it was called Kobe and then
there the cosmic microwave explorer and
then there was a new one uh in the 1990s
called WMAC, the Wilkinson microwave
antisotropy probe. Oh yes, good. Uh and
um they they measured this, you know,
down to to hundreds of thousands of a
degree, right? I mean, they measured it
to tiny little amounts. And uh the
incredible thing was that it was it was
almost exactly the same temperature, but
there were these beautiful large I mean
there were variations in the temperature
and the variation in the temperatures
corresponded to sound waves propagating
across the whole universe at that time.
It's it's it's deep. It's wonderful. I I
highly recommend you read about this.
Um, you know, we have this signal that
comes back from basically the first
moment the universe became transparent
to light. It was so dense it was opaque
beforehand. There was a moment light
could finally freely fly through the
universe. And and we found that we found
that signal. It goes back to a time
about a 100,000 years after 400,000
years after the Big Bang. And it is
breathtaking in its profound nature. You
can actually see sound waves go across
the whole universe.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah.
>> Wow. Now, when we think of the Big Bang,
we think of it as almost being an
instantaneous event.
>> Well, yeah. I I mean, again, you as an
experimental scientist,
there are all these wonderful theories
about about what things happened like a
a millionth of a second and a billionth
of a second after. And I I'm going to
I'm going to take all that with a grain
of salt. I don't think we understand it
well enough to be all that confident
about that. There there's a great book
called the first three minutes which has
been around since the oh gez probably
since the 1970s maybe even longer and it
sort of outlines how we think that you
know the universe in the first three
minutes basically went from the big bang
to just sort of all the hydrogen that
and helium that we have and in the first
three minutes it it pretty much
everything was done. The the whole sort
of process of the big bang was done in
in that in those first three minutes.
the the the actual big bang itself goes
back to something called the plank epoch
which you see there 10 to the minus 33rd
seconds 10 to the minus 43rd seconds. So
take a decimal point draw 42 zeros and
then a and then a 43
>> singularity infinite density and
temperature quantum gravity dominates
forces unified.
>> Absolutely. I again again big big chunk
of salt there. Yeah. I mean so so so
this is the this is not [ __ ] this
is the the best model given our
understanding of modern physics. Um do I
think this is is is right literally? No.
I think we've got a lot to understand
about how gravity works in high density
situations. Um when when gravity and
quantum mechanics come together, those
two theories, they they don't work well
together. And in order to understand how
things were like right before the big
bang or even right after, I think you
need to understand that a lot better. I
mean, all this stuff that we think may
be dark matter and dark energy, none of
that is in the current theory of how the
Big Bang started, we don't know if it's
important or not. That's a good first
step. You have to you have to take your
current understanding of physics and
take it as far as you can.
But in the case of what happened right
at the instant of the Big Bang, I don't
think we're there yet. I think we need a
better understanding of what happens
when you have that amount of density in
such an entire space. It's like it's
like it's like the interior of a black
hole. We we we don't have the physics to
describe high density high gravity
conditions.
>> Insane high density.
>> Oh yeah. Yeah.
>> I mean to the point where you you can't
even
>> take the known universe and put it
inside the you know nucleus of an atom.
Yeah. We we don't got that yet.
>> And what is it in?
>> And are there others? You know I mean
some of the the best ideas about the big
bang is that the expansion never stops.
It kind of pops off universes like you
said almost fractally all the time.
That's the uh the idea of uh um Ellen
Guth. That's the idea of of
Alen Guth's idea. Well, that's it's not
the expanding universe. I'll come up
with it later. But but back in the
1970s, uh a man at MIT, Alan Guth, uh
had his theory of how this expansion
might might never stop. So, um
we don't know that. That that may
absolutely There you go. Inflation.
Inflationary. Sorry, that was a complete
mental fart. I I I know the inflationary
universe, but uh um again, I think all
of this is a necessary first grasp using
our current understanding of physics. I
don't think we understand how the big
bang went off yet. I think we need a
ways to go.
>> Well, it's got to be so fascinating to
you to know so much and yet still have
so many things that we have no idea. You
know that that's I think you you've just
put hit you just hit it on the head
about one of the most beautiful and one
of the most frustrating and even scary
things about being a scientist. You you
have to be honest about what you don't
know. I mean you you have to say we made
this measurement and it's real. You we
we [ __ ] managed to see the in the the
event horizon of a black hole. We caught
the same wavelength of light over you
know thousands of miles. You you can say
what's real and then you can say these
are the things we do not know
and they are major you know how did the
universe begin you know what happens
inside a black hole what happens inside
a neutron star
we don't have the the ability yet to
know and it's it's hard for humans to
stop there and I mean of course we make
better experiments you find a better
theory of physics but for the moment you
need to sit with that uncertainty.
There is no one who knows what happened.
And I there there are so many things in
our life that I've had to confront where
you have to become comfortable with
stopping there at least for now. You
know, I do not understand this. I do not
have the answer to this and I don't
think anybody does.
And I I I think we'd actually benefit a
lot more in humility and joy and maybe
even compassion with each other, you
know, if we can respect that stop and
say, you know, I I I you you may not
have the same answer as to what comes
next about life or death or the
beginning of the universe or the inside
of a black hole. We can respect each
other.
To me, I find a good a good discipline
and the humility to stop and say, "I
don't know." Well, it's very important
because otherwise we're not going to
believe you with stuff that you do know.
There has to be some things that you
can't know.
>> It has to be measurable,
>> especially in the current state of what
we were able to measure right now.
>> Science science is limited deliberately
and then I think this is beautiful. I
think people don't understand
there are things that are outside at
least for now the realm of measurement
and that doesn't mean they're not real.
As a scientist, I cannot say that there
aren't, you know, ghosts or, you know,
inside a black hole or, you know, or or,
you know, alien visitations or or
whatever. There there are all kinds of
things that are wonderful to think
about.
You know, what can you do a consistent
experiment on that people all around the
world could do the same experiment and
get the same result? That's science and
it's limited.
You know, I I I've had to talk to so
many people that called into NASA saying
they had profound experiences with uh
time travel or
>> You had to talk to time travelers.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Or people would
call in.
>> Was there a time traveler hotline like
Art Bell?
>> They they would often forward the calls
to me and why you
>> um Well, I I mean I was I was doing
communications at NASA
>> and I think they just didn't know what
to do with these people and and I um I
think they they they knew and I I I
pride myself on this. I I try to be
kind. I try to lead with compassion and
I would listen to people's stories about
you know I I I was I traveled in time or
or or I was abducted by an alien or or
many things and you know and I I would
listen to them. I think that what they
mainly wanted to do was find somebody to
listen. You know I I would say to them
you know you have had a profound
experience you have experienced
something that I mean I hope you you use
you as a gift.
I would say that there's not much as a
scientist that I can do with a um an an
individual experience. You know, I can't
do an experiment on it. I can't have my
colleagues all over the world do the
same experiment about what you you know,
you you you did you have a spiritual
experience? Did you have a profound
feeling of oneness? I mean,
it's not that these aren't real.
Science has to be limited because just
like what you said, how can you trust
it, right? How can you trust people are
saying I mean why are these people at
NASA allowed to have telescopes and do
all this stuff? I mean I mean what what
makes this worthwhile?
You have to say there's a limitation.
You know what do we have clear evidence
on that everyone could do the same
experiment and get a similar result?
That doesn't mean other things aren't
real. M
>> it means that science is limited to what
is um reproducible, consistently
reproducible
and what a human experiences could be
profound and real but at the moment not
in the realm of science.
>> So you're not discounting the
possibility of people having profound
experiences but there's really no way to
measure it
>> at the moment. No. at the moment.
>> I mean, may maybe when we understand the
brain better. Um, you know, maybe when
if AIs are sharing minds, you know, I
mean, we're talking, you know,
incredible fun conjecture here. At at
the moment, we're limited with the tools
of what is reproducible,
you know, I mean, if you if you shoot if
you observe in one direction with your
telescope for a certain amount of time
at a certain wavelength of light, you
should see pretty much the same thing.
you know, whoever does the experiment,
you know, if you're doing experiment
with atoms or quantum mechanics or, you
know, whatever, it has to be
reproducible.
That that that doesn't mean that
profound things that are real are not
there. They're just not in the realm of
science right now.
When you're communicating with people
that supposedly have had experiences
with intelligent life from somewhere
else
>> and you spend so much time looking up at
space, like how much time and how much
effort do you spend even considering
that possibility of life somewhere else
or of whether or not these people have
actually experienced visitation or
whether or not it's some sort of mental
illness or whether there's some kind of
an experience that's available to
people. occasionally here that defies
our understanding of what is measurable
and what what's reproducible that
there's there's something else out
there.
>> I I I think that's a wonderful question
and I think this this may gives you give
you a little bit of a snapshot of of the
culture of science and and a a mind of a
scientist because it's it's an odd
little tight rope to walk. I'm I'm very
proud of it actually. I think it's kind
of beautiful.
Um, all of us to a person at NASA thinks
that there must be life out there. The
idea that there's only life on the Earth
seems untenable. I mean, not only do you
see the, you know, the billions of stars
in our own galaxy, but we see billions
of galaxies. How How could it just be
us? How could it? I We're all science
fiction fans. We all love the idea of
there being life out there. Um, I always
keep a bottle of uh champagne chilling.
I have for decades now. Uh in the hopes
that someday we'll have a clear evidence
of life outside the earth. You know,
we'll have a a signal that we
>> What are you willing to pop the
champagne for? Is it molecules? Is it
>> bacteria? Well, definitely bacteria. I I
I uh I I I definitely pawn scum, some
little microbe on Mars. You got it. That
champagne is coming out. And at the same
time there are the fantastic scientists
of SETI you know the search for
extraterrestrial intelligence who are
scanning the skies looking for
mathematical signals from civilizations.
Um the the question of of for me comes
down to again what is a reproducible
observation
and with the advent I mean the recent
release of these videos from uh fighter
jets and all of that I think an
interesting thing is that scientists at
NASA you know in the universities I mean
we're not getting together over a beer
and looking at these videos and really
getting excited it it it's not enough
yet you know we're seeing these things
we we can't explain
But we're trained as skeptical
scientists to sort of stop there. Okay,
we can't explain this
that that that next step that this is an
alien. We're we're not willing to go
yet. We we need more evidence than that.
But as I said, that's that's a
deliberate training of a scientist is
that skeptical stop.
the the people who have had experiences
and and no, I'm not willing to dismiss
them as being mentally ill necessarily.
I honestly don't know what it is they
experienced. It is not within It is
certainly within my realm of possibility
that what they're describing actually
happened. Um I I cannot say that that's
impossible. what what I what I as a
skeptical scientist I'm I'm stopped by I
I I would need more evidence than an
individual experience.
You know I this happens in many aspects
of life. It's not just um the visitation
of extraterrestrials. You know I have um
people that are are are extremely
trustworthy who would never lie who have
had profound spiritual experiences. you
know, they have experiences of an
afterlife and of people living on after
death and of being able to communicate
with people and um that is not part of
my experience.
But these people are completely 100%
trustworthy.
I have to live in this universe where I
I don't get to say what's real and
what's not. These trustworthy people
have experienced something profound and
it may be real. It may be that they've
done that they've they've seen people
after they've died or they've seen, you
know, visitors from other planets. Um,
that gives me joy. I sure hope we live
in a larger reality that I'm aware of.
As a scientist, I pull back and say,
"It's not my experience. It's not
something I can measure yet." And so, I
I live in this
hope that someday we'll have more proof.
I live in this hope that someday
there'll be a signal we know is
artificial. We see something we can't
explain otherwise. We are visited
clearly.
You know, I I I
live in this sort of skeptical
tightroppe with hope that someday things
will become more clear.
>> That's a great place to be. I love that.
>> I actually like it. I to me it it it it
I think humility and compassion,
>> you know, I think we could the whole the
world could use a lot more of that just
for sure.
>> Yeah. Just just I mean reserve judgment.
Think about how different a human
experience is. We don't understand what
consciousness is. We don't understand
how the human brain works. You know, is
it possible somebody had a different
experience of time? Maybe it is. You
know, in science, what can we measure is
powerful. We we do things we should not
be able to do, like catch waves of space
and time, see light and space curve
around a neutron star. And that's real.
That's a measurement. Stick a pin in it,
it's done. And leave humility and
compassion for the experience of other
humans.
>> How much are we limited by our senses?
>> Oh, yeah. I mean I mean is is is space
and time a construct of our our brains
actually. Seriously. I mean not just I
mean for a while now ever since the late
1700s we've known that there is light
that our eyes don't detect.
Mind-blowing. The human eye only detects
a tiny amount of light that exists in
the universe.
Colors of light you know that our eye
just doesn't detect at all are real. You
know they were some of the first
measurement was William Hershel back in
the late 1700s. He he discovered
infrared radiation.
Is it even deeper than that? You know, I
mean, are there, as I said, you know,
friends who have experiences with with
with with people who are dead? Are there
people that are sensitive to that and
other brains are not? Maybe. You know,
is it is it possible that people have
very different experiences of reality? I
mean, I've um I I I will admit I I'm a
chicken. I' I've never uh I've never
actually done any hallucinogenic uh
drugs. I have been tempted because I do
sometimes wonder if under that sort of
influence the filters of our brain are
different. I mean are could you actually
have an experience of something that
could be real because your filters how
we perceive space and time in the
universe are changed by the drug. I I
like I said I'm just I'm too much of a
chicken but I've always been curious
about that. You know is it possible
different people have seriously
different ways of experiencing the
universe? Yeah. Yeah. Maybe
>> what what about it makes you a chicken?
>> I'm not sure I trust an unleashed mind.
In my case, I have um I think there
there are people who suffer or or are
gifted um by very extreme dreams. I'm
one of them. I'm often exhausted by my
dreams in the morning. Actually, I had a
night last night. I I I was the the
dreams were a lot to recover from. And
um I'm a little worried. I I I have I
some of sometimes my dreams are
wonderful and sometimes they are
horrible and I remember them forever.
There are things I really would like to
erase that I' I've dreamt about
I'm not real confident in letting my
mind be unfettered.
>> Yeah.
>> Why do you think it it's unfettered?
What why do what about uh a psychedelic
excuse me a psychedelic experience makes
you uh consider it as an unfettered mind
>> I guess I mean that may be sort of the
propaganda of the you good and bad trips
right people have you know people
sometimes have wonderful experiences and
sometimes very terrible ones
>> do you know why though
>> no
>> it's control you're trying to control it
for the most part most people that
describe bad trips it's they're trying
to resist it
>> because um you you're flooded with
anxiety and fear and the unknown and it
seems very strange like bizarre beyond
beyond reality. But one of the craziest
things about the most um prevalent
psychedelic is that the mind produces it
which is dimethylryptamine. The brain
produces it. It's produced in the liver
and the lungs is very very weird. The
most potent psychedelic known to man is
actually made by the human body.
>> Fascinating.
>> It's one of the weirdest ones too
because your body brings it back to
baseline very quickly. It's a very quick
experience. It's like 15 minutes. And
they think part of the reason why your
body processes it so fast is because
it's indogenous. It's it's so common to
the human body that your body gets this
big flood of it. It's like, "Oh, I know
what to do with this." And it brings you
back to baseline very very quickly.
>> The weirdest part about that experience
is that it feels way more real than
reality itself. And that's what
everybody describes. So you might be
correct in that what these things may be
able to do, especially something that
the the actual body, the human body
produces on its own, that you might be
able to experience things that are there
all the time, but you just lack the
ability to interface with them.
>> Yeah.
>> Because there's some sort of a a
chemical gateway that's opened by these
things.
>> I can entirely believe that. I mean I
mean again I mean stepping a little bit
away from science into conjecture um
that makes perfect sense to me. I mean
physics shows us that time and space are
not the way we perceive them. We know
that we don't know what they are but we
know they're not a simple flow and you
know space is just nothing. I mean, we
we know space and time can bend and
change and
>> and so the idea that our brain filters
this somehow
entirely possible and that people may
have slightly different filters. I mean
I I think
>> well I always wondered that about
schizophrenics
>> like what are they experiencing? Are
they in a constant dream state? Like
really profoundly schizophrenic people
that are just they're having voices and
communication like
>> what what a I mean I would I don't want
to do it but could you imagine if you
got some guy ranting and raving on the
street corner if you say just let me in
there for 5 seconds. Give me five
seconds. What is what is reality like to
this guy and what's wrong what's wrong
with his interface? What is happening
with him that's he's seeing things that
none of us see. He's experiencing things
that none of us experience, but he's
doing it all day long constantly. He
like lives in a crazy fantasy world.
>> Well, I I may be interested. I mean,
I've also, you know, I mean, not just
the experience of physics, you know, and
people have talked about being able to
see colors and sorry, see sounds and
hear colors. I think that would be
fascinating. But a lot of people have
talked to me as well about the benefits
for grief. And, you know, that that's
something that, you know, I'm I've just
I got knocked on my ass by grief. I
still am. you know, I'm trying to figure
out, you know, you know, how how you
sort of, you know, get beyond that. And
I' I've heard as well that uh that
psychedelic drugs can be a treatment for
that.
>> Yeah. It's a lot of it is also for
people that have end of life anxiety,
people that are dying from cancer,
particularly psilocybin for some reason
>> has a profound effect on people like
experiencing it, letting it go. I
remember do you remember that show
Dallas?
>> Yeah.
>> Remember
Larry Hagman? Is that what his name was?
Yeah. So, uh, he was on CNN once and he
was talking about life and death and he
said that he had an experience on LSD
that completely released him from his
fear of death and it was the most
bizarre CNN interview ever.
>> Sounds fantastic.
>> Yeah, I know. But like there like I
don't think they expected J.R. Ewing to
say this, you know, the guy from Dallas
who was like this bad guy. Here it is.
>> Talking to Joy Behar on headline news.
It's very I mean
>> Yeah. Oh, it's headline. Is that CNN?
>> Except it's some very similar own by the
same.
>> I I would like that. I would like to
lose my fear of death.
>> Listen what he says.
>> Crosby Stills and Nash turned you on to
LSD. Um, what was that like? Tell me a
little about that.
>> Oh, how much time we got?
>> 30 about a minute. But you can do a lot
in a minute.
>> A minute.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Uh, it took the fear of death
away.
>> Really?
That's a great answer. That's a big
That's a great answer.
>> But did it hold?
>> Yeah.
>> Do you have to keep taking it to not be
scared? No. Did it hold the fear? Did
the lack of fear of the the losing?
>> Oh, yeah. Oh, sure. Absolutely. Once
you've lost the fear of death, it
doesn't matter.
>> How did it What What happened to you?
How did that manifest?
>> Oh my dear. Um, have you heard of the
white light? Have you ever heard of
that?
>> Only when I'm GOING INTO JERSEY.
WELL, I went
I went into this this this place that
was the white light that where
everything's okay.
>> Well, that is I think that's worth
>> Yeah.
>> And I think I think it ought to be
mandatory that all our politicians
should do it at least once.
>> That now that's a good suggestion. You
know, I
>> I think Joy should do it, too. Quit the
view.
Can you imagine being in an interview
and somebody's like, "You got 30
seconds. Tell me about the most profound
experience you've ever had."
>> Yeah, that's the most ridiculous aspect
of those shows is that they're
constricted by time.
>> I I like that idea though. And I like I
like the idea that it it could help us
through things like that. I I I I really
do. I mean, I I know uh psilocybin was
legal in uh Washington DC when I was
living near Washington DC
>> when my my husband died. And you know, I
I really wanted to I really wish
somebody could have made him be happier,
you know. I was like, should I just go
get some, you know, and I I never I I
didn't, but I thought it should be a
therapy, an optional therapy.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, that that that could be
something that that you give people to
help them through that.
>> Well, you know, we are very uh
restricted by the propaganda that made
all that stuff illegal in the first
place, unfortunately. And uh you know,
I've recently went to the White House to
help make these things available for
veterans and for first responders and
people dealing with traumatic
experiences. Um because the only reason
why they're illegal was because of the
Nixon administration, the Controlled
Substances Act of 1970. And what they
did was they were targeting the civil
rights movement and the anti-war
movement. And they knew that these
people were taking these kind of drugs
and this is part of the fear of like the
hippie movement and all these people and
so they just made all these things
schedule one meaning they had no
medicinal use whatsoever. Highly
addictive, very dangerous. And it's not
true. It's not true. I mean you you
can't eat enough mushrooms to die. It's
not even possible. I mean you'd have to
eat pounds of it and most people are
going to live even then. Like it's not
what they think it is. It's not what
they said it was. And they inundated our
society with this propaganda that's
taken more than 50 years for people to
escape. It it confused the [ __ ] out of
everybody about what these things really
are. And that's why you have this fear
of the unfettered mind. I don't think
you should have that fear.
>> I I I like that idea. I
>> You also could take a micro dose. If you
found someone who could get you some,
take a micro dose and I think you'd
enjoy it profoundly and it wouldn't
freak you out at all. A micro dose is
very it's like a sub psychedelic
threshold dose where you just feel
better. You just feel wonderful. You
like feel nicer. You feel like you
better spatial awareness which is weird.
Better edge detection. It's very str
like measurable. Like they did these
studies, I think it was in the 1960s
where they gave people psilocybin and
then they had a control group and the
people that were on psilocybin were able
to detect when parallel lines varied
quicker than the people that were not on
psilocybin. So they had these parallel
lines and they slightly deviated. The
people on psilocybin were able to detect
it much quicker.
>> Yeah.
>> Which is weird.
>> Well, again I I I mean to me that makes
sense. I mean, you know, I I can imagine
that, you know, if the brain is
stimulated in certain ways, it would act
more efficiently. It could, you know,
Sure. I that that
works with me. Yeah.
>> Well, the weirdest thing about it is
that when they do brain scans of people
on psilocybin, it doesn't show a
stimulated brain.
>> All right.
>> It shows a quiet brain.
>> We understand so little about the brain.
I had a friend uh who was a
neuroscientist at Caltech. And you know,
one of the things he he really I I loved
this quotation. He said that we always
compare the brain historically to sort
of what the height of our technology is.
You know the Romans thought of it as
sort of a series of fluid aqueducts and
you know and then in in the 18th century
you had the idea of gears cogs cognition
right where we get that word from.
>> Wow.
>> And you know clockwork was their highest
form of technology and then we compare
it to a computer and it's probably about
as much of a computer as it is a clock
right I mean we we do not understand yet
how this works. Yeah,
>> we we have no idea what the mechanism of
memory, you know, you know, or I mean,
or how why do we perceive space and time
the way we do,
>> right?
>> If if the universe really does exist in
a huge infinite now, how come we think
one event causes another? How come we
think time progresses? You know, these
are fascinating questions about, you
know, our lack of understanding of what
the brain is at all, how it works. You
know, I'm I'm sure when we when we
understand quantum computing better,
we'll probably say it's a quantum
computer. I mean, however however
technology progresses, we're always
comparing it to the height of our
current technology.
>> Yeah. And when we interface with
technology, does that give us a better
understanding of how we fit into this
thing or do we just have more
capability? And are we still like
burdened with the same questions just
you know is where's that quote I think
was Dennis McKenna's quote of uh the
bonfire uh once the bonfire of
information is lit it exposes more
surface area of ignorance
>> that the brighter the fire gets the more
you realize oh there's so much I don't
know
>> yet
maybe maybe we would think that
interfacing with this technology and
having all the information that every
[ __ ] [ __ ] human being that's ever
lived has. It's still you just go
there's not enough. There's no way.
>> Yeah. Well, and that's that's the idea.
People sort of think about this. Is
there an ultimate question? Like people
say, "What happened before the Big
Bang?" And I think someday we will
figure that out and then there'll be
just a whole other bunch of questions. I
mean, I I I don't think there's any end.
You know, I uh I I I don't I don't see
why there really should be. I I I we
don't think we'll ever figure it all out
is what I'm saying.
>> Yeah. Well, that's part of the fun of
it, though, right?
Yeah.
>> Part of the most amazing
experiences that a person can have
trying to understand the universe is
that there's no answers. There's you you
get to a certain point where like
your guess is as good as anybody's like
nobody knows.
>> Yeah.
>> That's what's nuts. That's what's nuts
is that as much I mean you explaining
how they were able to get an image of a
black hole now just imagine how crazy
that would sound to someone just a
hundred years ago or 200 years ago
>> or to me right now it sounds insane and
and then to imagine that our ability to
detect things could get many many many
many layers better
>> and still we would be like there's still
some [ __ ] that's just no way.
>> Yeah, that the way that you detect black
holes and he pulled up a picture of this
uh uh telescope in Chile, the very large
telescope, VLT. Again, never let
astronomers name anything. VT, the very
large telescope. And then off to the
side there, they're currently they're
currently building the ELT, which is the
extremely large telescope.
>> No kidding. But the uh this this
technique called interpherometry where
you basically catch the same wavefront
of light in several detectors and then
you you bring that light all together
and you have it interfere with itself.
It's um it's one of these things that I
always think should people should be a
little bit more um in a in a in a good
way kind of scared about because it it's
another thing that really chips at our
idea of reality because I mean honestly
what you're doing to some extent is
you're catching the same particle of
light in many different telescopes at
once. Literally you're catching the same
photon in many different locations at
once. And when you can measure
accurately, that accurately, a
wavelength of light traveling at the
speed of light, when you're measuring
down to the accuracy of the quantum
world, where quantum mechanics becomes
the prevalent uh description of reality,
the universe just doesn't care that
these are different space points that
the photon was in. It it it it's let me
put it this way. It it is it is really
kind of true that when you do this
experiment, the same particle of light
is measured in eight different places at
once simultaneously. It's it was in
eight different telescopes. You play all
that together, you get a measurement.
Some people interpret that, not all of
them, but some people interpret that as
a direct consequence of multiple worlds
that you're you're there were eight
different versions of reality where the
photon was in each of these telescopes.
You're sort of dovetailing them together
to make an observation.
interpherometry
depending on how you interpret it. There
are many interpherometrists that don't
interpret it that way. They they
interpret it more as saying, well, yeah,
in quantum mechanics you can have
something that's in many locations at
once.
But we're routinely making observations.
We're routinely using this technology
that
doesn't space and time doesn't work the
way in the simple way our brains
perceive it. I mean that that's very
quickly becoming an experimental fact.
>> Well, that's one of the most bizarre
aspects of quantum computing's results
is that they're interpreting its ability
to solve equations so fast the way Mark
Andre described it that if you took
every molecule of the universe and
converted into a super cube computer, it
would the universe would die of heat
death before it would a be able to solve
this equation. And yet these quantum
computers are able to do this in
minutes. So, how is that possible? And
then the theory that got tossed out
there was that it's using the quantum
computing power of an insane number of
multiple universes.
>> Well, yeah.
>> You hear that, you're like, okay, maybe.
But what do you have evidence of this?
Like, this is a crazy thing to say.
You're talking about this as being
evidence of the multiverse and that's
how it's able to solve computer. Is
there any other potential explanation to
why it's able to compute so quickly?
>> Yes, but none of them are particularly
any more comforting. I mean, they're all
that weird.
>> I mean, the the idea you're talking sort
of about a superp position of states.
So, the the the faster a quantum
computer works, the more it's able
basically to not have one solution, but
have the solution be a probabilistic
distribution. In in some ways, you're
talking about multiple universes where
there are different solutions. and then
finally at the end of the calculation
popping out the one you want. And as
weird as that sounds,
it's hard to get around that. I mean I
mean if if it's not that
then it's it's something like reality
has many different versions all
connected at once and that's just what
we call reality. I mean it it's it's not
going to get any less weird,
>> right? Equally weird.
>> Yeah. So the idea that you you keep the
solution in this undefined form in a way
means that every solution that's
possible exists somewhere possibly in
one interpretation in another in a
universe where each solution exists. Or
the one some say is that space and time
is just like that. Nothing is certain.
Everything is just waves of probability.
So yeah, I mean we're in for a ride
because the you know that's going to
become something that we manipulate. We
design computers. We want them to go
faster. We want to actually get this to
work better. I wonder if quantum
computing is going to have us really
have to confront what reality is, how
different reality is from how our senses
tell us it is. Um, I don't see any way
around that. I don't think we're going
back to things being easily understood
by
>> again, this brings us back to our
limited senses we have as biological
organisms. I I I I think you know we're
going to keep pushing that envelope of
of of you know how much can the human
brain comprehend then all of a sudden
our brain just doesn't go there. Our
brain doesn't understand multiple
realities, multiple probabilities, space
and time that exist all at once. It's
not something we do. Um we we we started
that journey so long ago. I mean, you
started the interview with looking up at
the Milky Way and and one of the things
I remember was how Galileo
went through this kind of profound uh
spiritual crisis when he he he was one
of the first people to take a telescope
and look at the Milky Way, that sort of
white haze. And he realized it was made
of stars. It was made of millions of
stars that you couldn't see with the
human eye. And his question was,
why did God put stars up there that we
can't see? that we need an instrument
that we need this little glass tube to
see otherwise we wouldn't see these why
did God do that
and you start this journey away from the
human consciousness being the center of
the universe you know and then you know
you get you get farther and farther away
and you know in quantum mechanics and
relativity now you know is challenging
us to say you know we we now have
scientific proof even among skeptical
solid scientists that space and time is
definitely not how we perceive it. We
don't know what it is yet, but it's not
as simple as as the human brain makes
it. We know that we're not going back,
you know, we have to go forward into
that that that oh, that less certain
universe.
>> That is such a weird statement that the
universe is not as we perceive it.
>> Our our minds don't do it. And and and
why should we be so surprised? Like I
said, you know, take a take a wonderful
complex simple organism like an ant, you
know, how I mean, incredible social
structure, incredibly well-designed, you
know, think about the mind of that
creature, and I think they do have
minds, but but compare it to the ca
capacity of the human brain. You not the
same. And you know, I mean, who are we
to think that we're anywhere closer than
that ant is to us to understanding, you
know, the mind that will understand the
true nature of the universe? I think we
got a ways to go.
>> No, I think you're accurate. I don't
think there's any other way to say it.
And it has to be that way. If if we're
evolving and if
conscious life and intelligent life is
continuing to expand its capacities, it
just makes sense that we're we're going
to realize how one day people will look
back at people that lived in 2026 and
go, "What a bunch of silly beans. These
foolish people that thought they knew
they do it in love." Yeah. Yeah. I mean,
and and that's one of the things about
AI again that I I I don't like the idea
that if something becomes super
intelligent, it'll just want to kill us.
I mean, I you you probably saw that
movie Her with Yakim Phoenix, which came
out years ago.
>> Have Have you seen that movie?
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> I I actually really liked it. Was much
better than I thought it was going to
be. I thought, you know, a man falling
in love with his operating system was
going to be a really stupid story. But,
you know, that the that that was a very
interestingly profound movie because the
AIs actually fall in love with us. You
know, they they don't want to destroy
us. They become far more connected, far
more intelligent, but but they actually
love us. And then eventually, spoiler,
at the end of the movie, the AIS go off
on their own. They they find ways to
connect with each other and love each
other in ways we don't even imagine. And
they all they all leave benignely. They
don't hurt us. And you know, I mean,
just like we can be, you know,
incredibly impressed with what an ant
is, I hope what's coming next, you know,
has some compassion for us and some
love, uh, you know, about where we are
on the journey because I mean, you know,
I mean, I I I I think that compassion
goes both ways, you know. I I I I love
the idea that we're not just going to be
enemies that that it could love us, too.
>> Yeah. Hopefully,
that would be nice.
>> Otherwise, we're toast. it it and we
would imagine that if it's more
intelligent than us, then it probably
won't have any need for malevolent
behavior.
>> It won't why would it?
>> That's always been the big question
about any sort of encounter, you know,
with uh you know, with with with higher
intelligence or other beings is is is
why would they want to hurt us?
>> What what good?
>> Well, if they did, the the you know, the
question would be why haven't they?
because it would be so easy to do. So if
they really did come from an insanely
evolved, insanely advanced civilization,
they have the ability to come here.
>> They probably have the ability to do
whatever they want.
>> We probably wouldn't even know. We
probably just all fall over dead, you
know.
>> Yeah. If they wanted to just evaporate
evaporate the planet, they probably
could cuz we can.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, if we launched every nuclear
bomb that we have right now currently,
there would be no life left on Earth. So
why, you know, it obviously it can do
better than that if it can get here.
>> I don't think we can kill all the
microbes. I mean, there's always that,
you know. I uh they'll start all over
again.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It is it is amazing how
tenacious they are. I mean I mean that's
a big deal about going you know
exploring the solar system is is how how
can you I mean we know we can't
completely sterilize things.
>> Well, we're finding fungi in Chernobyl.
>> Oh yeah. Yeah.
>> Well or I mean also also things that
also things that can live on the outside
of the space station. You bacterial and
microbes and stuff. I mean to me I mean
>> weird
>> I don't what one of the most profound
discoveries of the last uh say 10 years
at NASA I mean this was even more recent
than that um was a there was a mission
called Osiris Rex and um I'm doing
pretty well with my NASA acronyms today.
Let's see if I can do this one. This is
one of the bad ones. Osiris Rex um
origin spectral interpretation resource
identification security regalith
explorer. There we go. And uh um it
brought back a sample of an asteroid.
And asteroids, as you know, are these
rocks, you know, in space that that were
never built into larger planets. And so
there there's Osiris Rex. Thank you. And
um Osiris Rex is a small spacecraft
about the size of a car. And this is an
illustration. It went to an asteroid
called Bennu. And um Bennu is about half
a kilometer across. It is a an asteroid
that comes in and and intersects the
orbit of Earth. We don't have any idea
that it will ever impact us. It may hit
Venus before it hits us. But at any
rate, um we sent a probe out there to to
bring back a real pristine sample of an
asteroid because
>> which is just nuts, by the way, that
they could land on an asteroid and then
return back to Earth.
>> Do you have Do you know about this
mission? Okay. So, so I mean the the
asteroid is going faster than a speeding
bullet. It doesn't have enough gravity
to go into orbit around really until
you're really close. We had to catch the
thing, get ourselves situated around it,
get low enough to get into orbit, match
its spin rate to get the And then when
they got out there, I love this. Um, you
we designed NASA designed this little
sort of vacuum cleaner to vacuum up a
sample of the asteroid. The whole
surface was covered with big boulders.
They were just like I mean literally
like [ __ ] it's like it's not going to
work. We there's nowhere where there are
small fine grain uh you know things we
can just suck up easily. So they survey
the whole thing. They find there are
these tiny little craters that have some
dust in them. And then they have to
reprogram the the uh the spacecraft
because it it it wasn't meant to be so
autonomous. It's so far away that a
command one way is going to take 15
minutes. You can't joystick it. It's got
to take itself down manually amidst all
these boulders. They had to they had to
make the spacecraft autonomous after
they launched it. They got there. It
wasn't going to work. They had to teach
it how to recognize where it was, how to
wave off if something was too dangerous.
This shouldn't have happened. And so
they finally vacuum up the sample. They
get it back to Earth. You know, they
drops on a parachute into the Utah test
range. They open up the sample and all
of the nucleases of our DNA, not just
little molecules, the letters of our DNA
and our RNA are in that sample.
We don't think that's a coincidence,
right? You know, the reason our biology
is based on those molecules is that
they're available. They're falling from
the sky. That asteroid uh was full of
water. At one time, the minerals were
soaked in water. They were wet. So there
there's there's the the asteroids were
delivering water and and a little bomb
of protolife. Not life yet, but but but
the but the the genetic code, the
letters of our genetic code were in that
asteroid. and and not just our genetic
code, but but there were nuclear bases
we don't even use. Maybe life on other
planet would use different nucleases,
but we can already sample them from the
asteroids.
You know, the the idea that our biology
was brought here from these these
colder, more distant parts of the solar
system, and it's literally raining down
on us. You know, I I expected to find
organic molecules. I expected to find
amino acids, you know, the sort of the
things that make up our proteins.
I I was amazed. We found all of our
nucleioases, all the letters of our
genetic code, both for DNA and RNA.
They're they're already there in the
asteroid,
>> which is nuts. The idea of panspermia
and that this is how life got here in
the first place.
>> Well, yeah, absolutely. The building
blocks just come down from space and
they I mean, they hit everywhere
>> from where?
>> Well, that's a little bit less
mysterious than you'd think. the the the
universe is great at making large scale
organic molecules. Um carbon is a sticky
atom and you make um dying stars are
great at making carbon. It's one of the
most common things that comes out of a
dying star and the electron structure of
of carbon wants to grab on to other
atoms. It it's literally the quantum
mechanics. And so you have this
naturally I mean this is building block
of the carbon and dying stars are
pumping out this stuff into the galaxy.
You know they they gets collected by
gravity into these clouds and then the
carbon starts gloming onto each other.
And so space itself is very good at
making our our chemistry carbon- based
organic chemistry. So then in the in the
icier outer reaches of the solar system
billions of years ago, you know that the
planets are forming, but there are some
smaller bits of ice and rock that never
quite got built into the larger planets.
They're they're still floating around
out there and uh you know, and then they
occasionally come in and and hit us and
deliver water, deliver organics. You
know, the the the Earth was once, you
know, a pretty much a dry hot ball of
lava after it formed. you know, all of
the, you know, a lot of the lighter
stuff probably arrived from collisions
coming in later.
>> Yeah. And I mean, the the engineering,
the audacity of of reprogram this this
this thing shouldn't have worked and
they they saved it and they they made it
work. this brilliant team of people, you
know, I mean, it it just I mean, as as
somebody who was a, you know, a minor
manager at NASA, you know, and a minor
scientist, I mean, ju just what what a
team can accomplish. I mean, not just a
single person, you know, one of the the
the big things that I really respected
at NASA was once you had your team of
people, and like I said, nobody's
perfect. Some people are higher
functioning, some people don't
contribute as much. But once you have
your team identified, trying to make
sure you get an input from everyone and
they're not going to give it to you the
same way. There are the people that are
really assertive in meetings and they've
got an idea immediately. They speak up
and they give it to you. And then there
are the quieter people that are going to
take longer to process. They they're
going to need a little more time. They
don't like to be put on the spot. You
know, trying to make sure you you get an
input from everybody on your team. And
sometimes the solutions come from the
people that you might not have even
asked. You know, the the that sort of
respect for everyone on our team has
something to contribute. You know, give
me what you got. Even if you don't think
it's good enough, even if you think it's
a stupid idea, even if you think it, you
know, give me what you got. The power of
that I saw over and over at NASA. It's
not just one type of mind, not just one
person that's going to solve the
problem.
>> That's awesome. That is awesome. Thank
you so much for being here. I really
enjoyed this conversation. It was really
great.
>> I did too. It was a lot of fun.
>> It was fantastic. And and thank you for
everything that you put online. It's so
valuable. It's so educational, so
interesting. It's awesome.
>> I'll try to do a little more and have
some fun with it because uh I like I
said, I'm retired now and uh I have a
chance to be a little more creative with
it. So, uh we'll see what I can do.
>> You definitely should do something. A
YouTube channel, something along those
lines. Yeah, definitely a podcast,
something.
>> Do it.
>> I will try.
>> Please do. Um, if people want to find
you on social media. Do you have that?
>> Well, yeah. I I mean, so I I um somebody
had taken Michelle Fer. So, I go by Dr.
Michelle Ther. Uh there's a Facebook
page and an Instagram, and I do have a a
small uh YouTube channel set up. I'll do
more of that. I I just started uh doing
Tik Tok. Um and uh so so I'm I'm I'm
just getting started, but I'll I'll try
to put some stuff out.
>> All right. Awesome. Thank you so much.
Thank you. All right. Bye, everybody.