#2506 - Michelle Thaller

>> The Joe, Rogan, experience.

>> Join my day Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day. [MUSIC] >> It's also, there's some things that are so awesome. It's like, that's blocking awesome. >> I was trying to talk about black holes to some high school students just seriously

earlier this week. And I was, I kept saying, what the fuck? [LAUGH] >> I got nothing to pitch, but 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 my mention, I was coming to the show, they just freaked out.

“And so the only thing I have is my Shorewood Men's Club water club.”

>> 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're fantastic. >> Well, thank you, wow. >> I have watched, I'm probably everyone you've ever done.

I've watched at least, I mean, I haven't even done it, I've done it. >> I've watched at least like 10 of them. >> Yeah, I mean, so pretty much what I did at NASA, I did a lot of sort of the science-specific person stuff. And so most of that was, I'm more on the NASA videos,

I hosted like launch events, I haven't done much privately on YouTube. I'm thinking about starting some stuff. >> Oh, you should. >> Oh, yeah, I'll come up with that. >> A hundred percent, you've said so many things that made me just go,

what? >> Oh. >> 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, 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 the sun were the size of a dot of an eye,

“and you've got to remember, you can fit a million Earths inside the sun.”

This is a huge thing. So if that's the size of a dot of an eye and text, then the galaxy would be the size of the Earth, that's when people's eyes get big and people respond to you. >> So it's not just the Earth, the sun,

so if the sun was the dot of an eye. >> Yes, that's right, so let's make this clear. So the sun were the size of a 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, so if the Earth was the dot of an eye, then how big is the Milky Way galaxy? Because the sun is how many millions Earths? >> The volume wise, you could fit over a million Earths inside the sun.

Yeah, 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 differences between our sun and different stars in the universe. >> Yep. >> And you go bigger and bigger and bigger and you get to the point

where you're like, I can't, this is not working, I can't process this. >> It's too cookie. >> There's nobody that can process it. I mean, one of the really kind of, the thing about sort of demystifying scientists is the idea that our brains somehow work any differently.

And we can visualize what a light year is, right? You know, light year is about six trillion miles, that the distance light travels in the year. No, we're human beings. We get used to using the terms, we get used to using the numbers,

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 monsters these are. And then 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 you see these foggy hauses of stars, you know,

basically so many stars, you can't see them individually.

And that's real. And I mean, it still gives me goosebumps. >> That's awesome. (laughing) It gives me goosebumps too, but it's so cool that it gives it to you.

You actually study at your whole life. >> Oh, that's the whole point. 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.

See, we all love imagination.

“You know, we, that was the best thing about working in NASA was the joy”

and the teamwork and the camaraderie and the people that you're working with. That, you know, they think this is the best thing in the world to do. >> Well, I mean, there's a real problem that we have where I think that cities and light pollution have really, for, you know, it's great. 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

Wow, look at all the stars here. It's different here.

“This is something that everyone should be absolutely blown away by.”

That night, you have a vision of the most spectacular thing any human being is 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 blazing, blazing, we're just like so used to it. We're so dismissive.

It doesn't mean it's exciting when someone's excited by it because I'm like more people need to get the fuck away from the cities and just go see how crazy this is that we're flying through space. Yeah. It is profound.

And to be that close, I mean just looking up, you don't even need to tell a scope or a pair of binoculars, the presence of something so much larger than you. But I mean, if you've listened to some of my podcast, so that I think 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 where separate from space.

And we look up and there's something separate from us. That's the story of us up there.

“The only way the universe makes atoms, the only way that makes the chemicals all around”

us, the aluminum, the iron, the oxygen, the carbon, the phosphorus, everything that makes me up. 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 everything that you are, the story is up there.

And so you're not looking at something separate and distant, astrophysics is the story of the end of your nose, literally. I mean, we are part of this beautiful, bigger thing. That's a weird concept. I mean, that's from that old song, you know, we are starved.

Yeah, we are golden. We're golden. We're golden. We're golden. Yeah, that's real.

That's what we are. And that's what all life is. And 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 human history.

I mean, we really didn't know all, all, we just, we know now, because the James Webb Telescope is so crazy, where they're seeing these galaxies, they're confusing. Like, why are they formed so early? Oh, yeah. This episode is brought to you by Squarespace.

Once you've got a great name for your business, you need a great domain. And Squarespace makes it easy to lock in a domain. You just search the name, you want, buy it, and then you're ready to build. No hidden fees, no weird upsells, go to Squarespace.com/rogan for a free trial. And when you are ready to launch, use the code Rogan to get 10% off your first purchase

of a website or domain.

Well, I gave a talk about those just a few weeks ago that the red dots, yes, they never

let astronomers name anything, right?

“You're seeing something so dramatic and they call it the little red dots, right?”

You know, there's a storm on Jupiter, that's three times the size of the Earth with 400 mile an hour winds, they call it the red spot. How come no one's allowed to name them? Well, naming conventions, they're complex. So if you discover a comet, you get, 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, because of that, things don't end up with very interesting names. They all end up with, you know, catalog numbers, you know, basically phone numbers. What do they call that weird hexagon on Jupiter?

Is it a hexagon? Oh, the hexagon. That's right. I think they call that, you know, the hexagon on Saturn, they don't even, they're really, the hexagonal storm, it's fantastic.

You could fit about two Earths across that.

And it's a hexagon jet stream, basically.

You've got super fast moving winds around the pole of Saturn. 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 jet stream here, there's kind of this joke. Oh, there's a picture.

Hey, that's fantastic. 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 not on the bottom there, it's in the bottom in the middle. Yeah, that picture. Little more of that one. Yeah, that's a picture from the Cassini Space Mission, that's a real image.

And that's the eye of that storm. 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 went there, we flew over that storm. That's crazy.

And yeah, I mean, as amazing as the storm is, it's, at least fairly well understood

it as a very low temperature jet stream. You know, you know, you may be familiar here, people kind of joke about like, you know,

They're patterns that get set up in the jet stream of the earth. And you take away all the heat and all the friction and it forms this beautiful storm. But why, what does the theory is why it forms a hexagon?

It's something called a standing wave, the jet stream basically sets up a wave inside this

circulation.

“And I will admit, I'm not an atmosphere specialist, but that's what I know.”

And that wave kind of makes this hexagonal shape and then you cool everything down without friction. And that's how the whole thing works. They have done computer simulations of very fast moving jet streams under the conditions of Saturn and you can get this sort of shape to set up.

Wow. It's so fascinating. And it's so fascinating that we think of that as being so far away. That's just right now. Neighborhood.

It's right there. Yeah. It's super hard to get to, takes a long time, but it's just right there. Well we're hoping to launch a, what to say, we, NASA's hoping to launch a new mission to one of the moons of Saturn, hopefully in like 28, 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 it's that's very cold.

You know, it's 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 Octocopter. It's a big drone. There you go. Perfect.

And so, so, so, so Dragonfly is going to be this big Octocopter 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 chemical 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 know, with actually fly around. And I go to different places. There's rain, there are oceans, there are rivers, there's the only place we know. There are open, you know, great lakesized lakes on Titan. Wow.

But it's so cold that it's not liquid water. It's actually liquid natural gas, liquid methane and ethane. Yeah. And again, you know, the, we've, 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, that, that we humans have been there.

“I mean, that, that, that, that's, 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, but some of them readings that it took were intriguing about the possibility of life on Titan.

Do the Russians land something on Venus? Yeah. Well, more than once. Yeah. They're, they're, they're the Soviet Union.

Our, it's the only nation, you know, former Soviet Union now that ever landed on Venus. And V, landing on Venus is way hard. They got crazy pictures, too. The surface temperature is about 1,000 degrees, and the air pressure is similar to being about a mile, but blow the ocean.

That's a photo. Yeah. That's a photo. Yeah. That's real.

Yeah. It's a photo taking and a 1,000 degree temperature. Yes. Didn't last long. But everything is crushed flat.

I mean, the landscape is just crushed flat by that, you know, huge pressure.

You know, this incredible dense atmosphere.

The clouds are sulfuric acid. That's why it looks yellow. That's real. You know, sulfuric acid clouds. I mean, it is like, you know, classic vision of hell.

It's, it's, it's heavy and deep and, and dense and sulfuric acid. Yeah. It's so interesting, too. Understanding a 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 they can be some planets out there that are set up completely different the planets in our solar system? Oh, absolutely.

One of my favorite websites, just for fun. I mean, so the changes every day, how many planets around other stars we know about, we

“call them exoplanets, exterior planets, I think we're up to about 5,000 that we know of.”

And when did we start noticing them? So this was at least detecting. Yeah. Yeah. This is something I was involved with.

Ever since I was in college. When, when I was in college, my, my research advisor was a man named David Latham. And he was trying to, to find the first evidence. I mean, we figured other stars have planets. I mean, they can't be just us.

But they're hard to see. If they're tiny, they're dark, I mean, you may compare it to a star, right? I mean, planets don't glow themselves, right? So they just reflect starlight. I mean, we literally said it was like trying to see a fire fly around a search light from

200 miles away, right? How would you do it? And 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 think, thousands of new planets every single year.

And, um, and some of actual images. So for the most part, we don't have images. So that doesn't mean we don't have really cool observations, including the chemistry of their atmospheres.

This is really amazing to me.

So there's so tiny, it's hard to actually get a pixel, they're smaller than a pixel.

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 star light 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. We think we're starting to see the evidence of organic molecules. It's, it's, it's not, you know, a very strong signal yet. And this, this was, 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, the data's 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, it could

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 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 mean, this is what most scientists do 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 let the light from the star pass through a grading that then actually draws into a rainbow. It 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 can tell how hot the star is, how fast it's rotating.

“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's your amazing person by the way, that's incredible.

Thank you so much. 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 water vapor, carbon dioxide, organic molecules. Everybody has their fingerprint in the rainbow. And so when the star light shines through the atmosphere, there you go.

That's how we tell what these things are made of. This is a dying star. This is actually in the Korean and Nebula, and the most luminous stars there is. And we pass the light through a rainbow, and then looking really, really carefully at how much light comes in every color, you can pick apart exactly what it's made of.

“Yeah, did you know that you know helium, you know the element helium, right?”

Maybe familiar that 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 the turn of the last century, 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 is on the sun, but not here. We never knew the helium was here. That was found later. It was later we found it, you know, in like, you know, natural gas, 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 pattern of colors in the sun's light, we were like, "Well, what the hell is that?" And 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, I'm sure I can find it. Well, I mean, I've been thinking about helium balloons, and people who, you know, suck helium, and that's always going to be right, that we didn't even know about helium until 1868. There we go. So, they figured out that there was helium in the sun in 1868.

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 Johnson, a French astronomer, we figured it out.

When you think about, you know, I know that one thing you love is the idea of, you know, Einstein and time being different, and all that, you know, they figured all of this out around like 1908, it was more than 100 years ago, and, you know, we don't really even have a better thing yet, you know, I mean, they figured out that time isn't the way that we experience it, just by really simple brilliant thought processes, observations, 100 and some

years ago, 100 and 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, something like that? So actually, if we want to break this down a little bit, there are a couple of different

effects about time, and one of the things that NASA does is, you calibrate the GPS satellites

“and the signal coming, and you wouldn't, I mean, I think I heard that, I mean, within a day,”

if we didn't take into account the time difference, these things are in, that we would be about six miles off, I mean, it is in a single day, oh yeah, it's a big deal. That's so crazy, yeah, that's so crazy, and that's just above us. That time really is something, I mean, this is not a theory, time 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, there's two things going on, and it's, it's, it's, it's kind of fun because it's actually the reverse for the astronauts. So let's, if I 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 know, if we had a clock on this desk and then if you 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 your feet, we spend most of our lives standing up are actually going through time at slightly different rates. The farther away you are from a gravitational source, I mean, you, you probably like movies

“like interstellar, right, with with your Matthew McConaughey, 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 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, I mean, it's measurable, you, you, you need extremely accurate clocks. And in the case of the GPS satellites, the GPS satellites are what we call them, 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 miles an hour around the earth. The astronauts in the space station by the way are going much faster. They're, they're going more, let's see, approximately 20,000 miles an hour. So the GPS satellites are going a little slower, and yeah, 8,000 miles an hour is a, 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, they're also slowed down by the fast velocity, the faster you go, the

“slower your time goes, but people don't realize it'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. And for the astronauts, it's, it's the, it's the motion, it's at the time dilation from the motion that's a bigger effect.

If you are on the space station for a year, you come back about one, 100th of a second

younger than you should be, and obviously it'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, 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 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 velocity is compared to everything else, right? And I mean, it's a great question a kid can ask, how fast am I going through space?

miles an hour, and then we go around the sun at about 67,000 miles an hour in our orbit.

The sun's going around the 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 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 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 in 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 I doubt the physics will get any less weird than that. But, yeah, I mean, that's sort of the way modern physics thinks the universe may be is a big whole thing that started from beginning to end, and it is all now, fish. But if that's the case, so subjectively we can measure things, we can measure time, but what

are we measuring? If it's, I mean, are we making artificial time constraints, are we, are we doing it ourselves? And when we, when we create a clock, we click, 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 is, that is a deep, excellent question.

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 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 on 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 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 light is making just a straight up and down line from mirror to mirror. But 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 get it.

I mean, we... I don't know if I have an answer for you. I don't think anybody does, but here's the deal. So the clock in Einstein's experiment, so the clock has two mirrors and this light bouncing between it, and then that's the distance that it travels in one tick.

Right. But now you put that clock on a spaceship, and the spaceship's going really fast. And as it goes by, you see that that clock, as it streams by, you're really fast. You see the light make this motion, and this line is actually longer than that line. This line, if you measure it, that's actually a longer line than I drew than the original

line 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 change, whatever 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 it 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 don't think we have an answer to what time is. What are we measuring? I think, I think you're 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 are measuring time currently, like when I 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 you.

“I mean, that's what you see here sitting still with your watch, looking at it.”

If someone's flying by it, close the speed of light, they won't see you measure time the same way. Well, you said something else to the freak me out that if you traveled at the speed of

Anything with mass, yeah, yeah, that's the thing. So if a person was in a spaceship and a 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 equations blow up. So what does infinite mass mean?

“Do you have more mass than the whole universe, what that tells 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're going 99.9% the speed of light, okay, I want to go a little faster.

It takes more and more energy, each little tiny step you make, basically you never get to

the speed of light. It takes an infinite amount of energy. So when it comes to things like interstellar travel, I don't think we're ever going to take a spaceship and accelerate it to the speed of light. I mean, we might get very close.

There are particles in space that do have mass, like neutrinos, tiny limits of mass. They travel very close to the speed of light, but they don't travel at the speed of light. But to me, I think that the idea of traveling interstellar distances are even intergalactic distances. I think that starts to really get me as the question of this, what is space and what

is time at all? Quantum entanglement. Right. Glad you brought that up.

“Oh yeah, I'm going to say, I hope our listeners, I don't want to get, I want people”

to come along with us. Oh, they're coming along. Yeah, 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. It's okay. Okay. The idea of quantum entanglement, we should explain that to people. 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 with resistance.

Like, yeah, literally the beginning of the universe distance, like 13.8 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 is crazy stuff that scientists will, we'll say this stuff, and people hear it for the first time, and they say, well, that sounds like idiotic.

That sounds stupid. Why, where did they get that from? And 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

with something that even Albert Einstein 100 years ago, he understood that quantum mechanics was pointing that way, but he really didn't like it. He called it Spooky Action at a distance, he hated it. He realized that quantum mechanics had this implication 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 no time difference. And he didn't think that would ever actually happen, and then back in the mid-1990s, we started to do experiments with atoms, and we found out that it was real, that it can start off pretty simply. You have two atoms that are in an orbit around, so an atom has the 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 atom. Two electrons can be in the same orbit only if they are spinning in different directions.

“They have an angular momentum 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 upper direction, one is say spinning in a downward direction, Hatheprokenfinger. So 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 in that orbit together. So now you separate them, you can separate them by any distance you want, you can separate

them by centimeters on a laboratory, the Chinese have done this up to the space station that they run in back, 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

one part to another, have you, did you watch the, the three-body problem show ones?

Yeah. So you have these things called sofons, right, and sofons are entangled to this alien civilization, and they can respond instantaneously because they're entangled, yes, I mean, that's fantastic science, and as far as I can tell, that could be theoretically possible. Yeah.

“Well, that's what 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. Is it 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? 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 think you're a person in Austin, my feet around the ground.

Yeah. Here I am, touching this desk.

“I'm going to get 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 are 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. This seems super crude. Yeah. That seems like the idea of making a horse fly. Yeah.

Yeah. You know, we talked about that movie interstellar because there were a lot of good teaching moments in that movie for our physicist, you know, the idea that time really does slow down close to a black hole. And again, we observe this.

When we observe things orbiting close to a black hole, you can tell it that happens. The idea that this advanced civilization that we never actually see in the movie somehow communicates through basically space and time itself through gravity.

“You know, that's how Matthew McConaughey is able to even go back in time and space to help”

his daughter solve gravity and all that. You know, I was like, I wonder if that's really more would be like, you know, advanced civilizations. I mean, you got to think, right? I mean, you look around the earth and there are things like grasshoppers and hamsters

that are fantastic, incredibly complex beings. But you know, you try to teach him quantum mechanics or ask him to, you know, crochet a blanket or whatever. They don't have the capacity. And 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's the 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? Yeah.

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 keep going. And as long as civilization gets rid of war and figures out a way to not dive disease in 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, what we could potentially be observing in a physical way every planet on every star, one day. But we can't even think of that as being a possibility now. But what we're doing right now is insane to people living in the 1400s. Yeah.

You showed someone from the 1400s, a nuclear power plant that would be like, what the fuck are you guys doing? Like, what is this? If you showed them a nuclear detonate, if you showed them face time on a phone, they'd be like, this is insanity.

I just got it in a little middle tube and came here from Milwaukee, and I'll fly back tonight. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.

And we're just accustomed to it. It becomes normal and it would become normal as technology increased further and 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 follow-on to humanity someday will be some form

I think so. I mean, yeah.

And I do wonder if the human brain is just kind of limited.

I mean, if you could say there are multiple dimensions and time is something that changes. I mean, I just said that 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. I mean, will we have a creature someday that we've created in AI that then all of a sudden

can comprehend these things?

“Is that really the real evolutionary path of humanity?”

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 just a different kind of life that we're-

It's an earthling. I mean, I mean, seriously, it's our children. We created this. Yeah. I was described ourselves as like we're an electronic caterpillar, we're making a cone.

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, 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 bee hive and they're 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 a 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 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, that will be us. It'll just be us in a completely different realm.

Yeah. I mean, I do like this idea that what we call AI's now isn't something separate. I mean, they are children, it isn't Earthling, it is something we've created. 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 is also learned about love or about the

arts or about creativity. I mean, whether you want to go with like the new battle star galactica or whether you want to go with a pretty profound experience I had with a friend of mine who's an author who has cochlear implants. And, you know, he realizes that he doesn't hear like a human.

You know, he, he, he, he, I mean, the cochlear 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 a Michael Chorus, a wonderful man that did some essays about this. And, and he's, he talked about how much emotional response he has to music now, something he could never experience, how being a cyborg, quote unquote, you know, an experiencing something in a non-human way has added joy and depth and passion. You know, are we, 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 at this? Well, all of our differences fall apart.

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 stuff goes away. Yeah.

If we realize we're all one thing. And we part of the problem with human beings. 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 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 that humans were playing. If we get to a point of universal telepathy, like universal telepathy with a universal

language, we're all human beings or 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 own. 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. It's like we read each other's minds in a sense, but it's much more complex than that. And much more in depth, like you feel with that person feels, you are that person.

That could be possible through technology.

And this is where I have hope where a lot of people are very fatalist with AI and they look at it in this dystopian sense of these oligarchs, these technical oligarchs, technology, oligarchs are 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 going to 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 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'd probably

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.”

Likewise, we're just this archaic biological entity living in this new world of this ultra-sperial life form. But if we integrate with that thing through wearables, implants, engineering, if we figure out away, 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 rewards systems

that are built into us that are really problematic for progress. And there is why we did 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 shit that we've been doing for thousands and thousands of years.

Well, how do we get past that? We get past that by stopping people. I think you may be right. I mean, again, that future is writing in some ways, but I'm more interested in the imagination.

“I mean, instead of just the dystopia, what could this mean?”

Right. I mean, how much more, like we said, when we were little tribal groups, the little wars we had the skirmishes didn't really hurt the planet as a whole. I mean, now we're getting so many people and we're still having these little tribal skirmishes and now we're in danger of massive destruction.

I mean, we can't just keep going this way. I mean, it's not survival. It's not. So I mean, could AI help us tap into some kind of group consciousness? I mean, we're talking about Einstein's idea that the universe may all be this one big thing.

And then this is pure metaphysics, pure conjecture. But even for when I was a little kid and I heard that, I wondered, well, if all time in space happens at once, is there need for more than one consciousness, even?

“Are we all just looking at one consciousness looking out of everybody's eyes simultaneously?”

Not just humans, but everything in the universe. It's a spectacular idea that if there is a moment, if the universe is just one big thing, we are part now, even now, of beings we have no names for, the super advanced beings that have figured all of this out and can span the universe with their consciousness. That's part of the eyes too, that that's another part of this consciousness that we're

part of right now, if there's one instant, it reminds me of some of the tendons of Buddhism. There might be these perfectly enlightened beings, bodhisattvas, and we are past lives of them. We're all existing at once. It's a fantastically beautiful idea. It is a beautiful idea, and our survival instincts are attuned to maintaining what we are.

There's this thing, well, I don't want to lose being a person, but I guarantee if you went to an Australia Pithicus, and you could somehow communicate to them, listen, you're going to change, and you're going to be this thing that gets six, seven times a year, and maybe you're obese, and maybe you have a problem with cigarettes, and maybe you drink too much, and you like to gamble, and you're going to fuck 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 brake dust every day, and your doctor's going to give you a bunch of stuff you don't really need, because he's trying to make money. The Australia Pithicus is probably like, fuck that. I know what I'm doing here, 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 want to stay, you want to maintain, you know, a country boy can survive, keep me in the woods.

You know what I mean? People have this like natural inclination to keep things simple because they understand them, but I think that's not possible anymore, and I think we're going to have to let it go, just let that idea go, and relax, and accept whatever this new thing is.

it. As regardless of the outcome, this is a very unique time.

“They're 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 roughly the same age, and I think that, I mean, for me having this what they now kind of, you know, call the Fural Childhood, right, where I was unplugged. And there were, you know, there were vast stretches of time, even as a small child, where I was on my own, you know, in the neighborhood stuff, and I loved it.

I remember going to, you know, a YMCA camp when I was 11 years old, and, you know, everybody had a show up at breakfast, and then there was an activity time, and everybody had to show a bit 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 riflery, 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, you imagine. I had this similar experience in the voice counts. Yeah, yeah, and, you know, the thing was, you know, so, so you and I had this experience

of living unplugged, and sort of the idea of a quiet mind, an imagination, and, but we also saw this tremendous change in this connectivity, which I love, and I also love having the internet, and this is my cell phones and all of that, but, but this is a real change in human civilization that we went through personally. And I agree with you, I feel a tremendous sense of gratitude for both ends of my life.

Right, we could have been born in the 1500s, where the 1500s is 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 it interfaced with the world, pretty much the same way, the road stuff down with feathers.

Yeah, you know, and gratitude, and like you said, I mean, maybe instead of all of 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 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 was it going to be?

And there's all these college kids that are really freaking out, because they're, they're wanted to debt, they're getting these 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, 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's going to be valuable in the future. Like, what does it even mean, or are we going to abandon all money? Like, what is, what does 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. This is what people are talking about, like, this is a potential, you know, 100 years from now on the future. But very seriously, so, yes, absolutely. Which is terrifying, the people that are thinking, hey, you know, I want to do with 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 to 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 T's, you're going to be okay, Bob. But maybe you're not going to be okay.

Maybe we don't know shit 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, or 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 they might not be any jobs.

On the flip side of that, are you in fact describing the Star Trek universe? But at a time where people do not work for the being, everybody has anything they need as far as apparently survivability, food, whatever. Now you have a chance to say, am I going to be a writer, or an artist, or a captain, or a musician?

Yes. Does it 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, you have to do this in order to find meaning in life. It's 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.

doing it just sort 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 the 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. They're just completely set in their ways, and now they're 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?

Maybe that comes with whatever this technological interface is, maybe that comes with when we become, which essentially a cyborg, that you get 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, in the way that now when you open up your phone and you use perplexity, you have access to 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 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 is, because that's the problem, the problem is meaning, and the feeling like

you matter, feeling like you're important. And I think part of that is because we're also 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 that's like tuned again to consciousness.

And 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, maybe you'll be better at it than the other person because you have a better antenna. But we might understand that.

We are really truly all one thing. So all our fears about finding your place in the world that might be nonsense. I really like that idea. I like that idea of search for meaning, and I agree with you. I think that, like you said, as D.O.A. Strelipithecus, as people that you still exist

in these little tribal groups and families, the modern isolated life, it's something that I struggle with a lot.

I'm always wondering where is my family, where are my friends?

I've had to do a lot of interior work about, I'm just going to bring along my own family and sides. Somehow, I have to have to provide this all for myself. The idea of being less alone, being less isolated, that's one thing that I wanted from the internet.

It started out on Facebook, I could keep up with my friends, I saw what they were doing. They were posting pictures of their life. Because 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 the ads and everything like that, but for me, I mean, you talk

about meaning and you talk about solving isolation. To tell me more about that, I mean, how is your sense of meaning in your life evolved? How has it changed over your life? 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 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's success is what you can accumulate as far as objects and desired material possessions.

It's like true success is happiness, and the amount of joy that you get out of life in 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 liter, they're going to write. You're going to, there's going to be a thing that you enjoy putting yourself into, that you feel satisfaction and you feel meaning with, 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 shit together, so 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 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 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 and enjoying time with my friends, having joy and fun and laughter and then also difficult pursuits. I like things that are complex, that things that are hard to solve, I like things that are hard to do where 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 I am a relatively happy person, but 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 the way, if all that's gone, would”

you still have happiness, like what is happiness, right? What is meaning and is it entirely connected to your job that seems kind of crazy, because a job is just to construct the thing that 500 years ago didn't even exist. So what do we have to have, are we these complex problems solving biological organisms that have this thirst for innovation and to constantly make things better?

Are we tricking ourselves with jobs to be happy? Are we feeling the need of whatever, like when a cat chases a ball? What is it doing? Well, things that's killing something, that's designed, this is its biological need. You throw a ball past a cat goes after it, because it's got this biological need to chase

things that are running away from it, so it could kill a need. 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 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 keep it happy.

I agree with you. I think that's a wonderful answer. I mean, there's something about the happy poor person isolated rich person thing that I agree with at the same time seeing what grinding poverty does to people's minds and breaking them down with exhaustion and demoralization.

There's obviously some kind of a sweet spot for there. I've had to work quite hard in different parts of my life, and I was just very aware of the soul grinding, not having enough and wondering where your next meal is coming from, and I haven't nowhere near as bad as some, but the thing that was absolutely, for me, unbelievable about working for NASA, was the idea of solving complex problems with people you trust

it and people that you thought really had your back, and no organization is perfect. You know, the idea that it's not a zero-sum game, right? 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 or less money on that, at the end of the day, you want

whatever's 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 solving problems, we're saying, you know, can you take a picture of the black part of a black hole?

Can you actually see the light area, the event horizon getting sucked in, you know, 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 were doing something right 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, you travel at the speed of light, the wavelength of light is tiny. Let's say for a minute, you know, they were dealing with microwave, so let's say like a

So something that's a meter divided by a million is traveling past you at the speed of

“light, and the Earth is round, and the Earth is moving, and they had these eight observatories”

all around the planet, and they had to catch that same wave front, the same one, if it was one wave front later, 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 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, somewhere in the United States, somewhere in Chile, they were

all over the planet, and if you caught the same fricking wave of light, there you go. 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, that's something called the shadow of the event horizon.

And it's basically the event horizon, where time and space stop, we don't even know if there

really isn't interior to a black hole, all the equations blow up, time and space don't exist in there, and light, nothing can escape that darkness, 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 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, 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 they said they were going

“to go take a picture of it, and I was like, you have to catch the same wave front 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 fucking did it, and they didn't do it just once, right, 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 lesser extent, one of the mass emissions that I thought was just spectacular, was a small inexpensive mission called nicer, you

like who's the nicer person, nicer NICR, it's the neutron star, interior composition explore, and a neutron star, you probably know about these, but you know, when a star dies and the nuclear reactions inside a star cease, all of that gravity, 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

of NASA, they're all over the place, they're real, there's something you can take up an

“image of, you can take a picture of, and these neutron stars have physics that we don't”

understand, 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 physics that matches that type of density, and 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, but I mean, it's actually

able to create maps of what the surface of these objects are like, the 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 rotate very fast in their hotspots, we see coming in and off 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'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 huge project like the event horizon telescope, where I would have bet that they would not have been able to make that measurement, and they did, you know, there were so many hard drives of data, one of the, one of the telescopes was at the South Pole, and you want to, you want to, you want to, you want to, you want to tell 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 there wasn't, I mean, there's this pretty good email links down to the South Pole, but the email link wasn't fast enough for all of this data, they sent back literally, there was 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 them, okay, some of them, I should say, maybe pretty much

back to this, I mean, one of my good, I have three friends now of one of the Nobel Prize,

which is always like, get what the hell am I doing? That's awesome, but the one group of

yeah, would you have a good group chat? Well, let's see, the final thing is 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 actually in this, I tried 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 mental capacity and the strength of that person is something that, you know, don't look at us, 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 so on together, the privilege of being able to work at NASA 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 pendant and say that meant something, you know, that that gave me some meaning, that that gave me joy. And as you said, it's not so much being a hunter-datherer, it's, you know, can we ask a question that we think is impossible and can we just go and do it? Yeah, the ultimate expression of human curiosity, when you say that we don't have the

“physics, 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, 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 the reason they're called neutron stars is that the gravity is so intense on these things. I mean, I hate, I hate sort of a

simple few of atoms as little balls going around each other because they're not. They're their waves of energy. But the gravity actually crushes the electrons into the nucleus. They combine with protons to become neutrons. So they're there mainly little balls of neutrons, but we do, there you go. You see the big question mark there at the core. So here's the problem. You run our basic laws of physics are understanding of how particles work. And you get to the density of a

neutron core and the equations don't work. They're not making the bright predictions. We can tell that there is, there's actually a really great NASA video. I would, I would suggest you watch it.

It's called the, the interior of a neutron star. I can help you find it, but it basically says that

that the models we have about how matter works at that sort of density, none of them give the right predictions for the size of the neutron star. Why is that? We don't have the right physics for yet. 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 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, for one thing,

you know, we, 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. Yeah, they're, oh, you got it. You got it. You're amazing. I, I, I, I, I have seen, I'm seriously impressed by this person's ability. Yeah. So, I mean, this is a video that it, it was done by, by NASA testing matters limits. It's a four minute video. And,

“and while I don't think it's an, an absolutely perfect video, I, I think it's fantastic. And so,”

you see the, this is supposed to represent the, the electrons being pulled into the of 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, we can't tell you how it behaves. We,

we've never created it in a lab. We, we, we, we, 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 made when, when one of these giant stars explode, you know, the, 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 can not 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? We, we got to get two big ones right in front of your neutron stars and black holes, right?”

So, so, I mean, these, the, the, 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, there, there's 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

they, they figure 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 this experiment was an inexpensive”

small observatory that that's up on the International Space Station. And, I mean, it's a, 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, uh, 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 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 he get that big? Yeah. 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 four 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, some kind of around there. But then the, the bigger ones, we know what 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 is, so a star collapse is a star dies. And this, you know, this tremendous crush of gravity is 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 detect a burn through to actually get that to happen? And there was nothing that we could figure out. 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, 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. There, there are 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, 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, we saw these, these sort of bright objects at first, we thought they were galaxies. And that was like, whoa, how did 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 appeared 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 the stuff called dark matter that had gravity pulling everything together.

So maybe, at that time, the universe had just, there were cores of huge amounts of gas that collapse 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 stuffed form what they call a pseudo star. There's all this, this, this atmosphere of hot gas being heated up by the black hole in the middle, as, as the, 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, that's what, that's what, 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. 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

So we may have found the answer to where you get these big black holes. 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 course 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 on black holes once, where they were talking about that in the center of every galaxy, there's a supermassive black hole that's one 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 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 black holes. And if you can go through them, all of them, it broke my brain. Because I'm just thinking, 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, I mean, we don't know yet how many, I mean, there's giant black holes in the”

middle of galaxies. And then there are smaller black holes, cause when massive stars dies. And the reality, reality probably has millions of those. But the ones in the center of the galaxies are fascinating, the one in our galaxy. So we're about about 25,000 light years away from this guy. So we're safe. But 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 then the mass needed to make all these stars

orbit was about 4 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 and then go back out again. And an S2 at closest approach would it whips around the black hole. This is star. It 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 about

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 so we see these stars whipping around the black hole, the middle of our galaxy. They will probably eventually go down that black hole. And maybe everything in our galaxy will eventually kind of spiral down to that black hole. But you know, 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 goes faster. It's a 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 entire mass of the universe and the radius, 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? Our 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 an entire universe exists inside of a black hole? Yes, exactly. That's bananas. Yeah. There we have the very large array. That was at the that was in Chile. That's a wonderful observatory. There we have a great depiction. You found, okay, yes.

Yeah, that's right. That's right. That's the star's moving around a black hole. Yeah, the star's moving around a black hole. Yeah, coming, what would this ejection be? So that, okay, what what that means is that that's a consequence of the black holes, that 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 all of that very, very hot gas generates a very strong magnetic

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”

the 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 big 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 this guy. 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 see some of these jets going, you know, in some cases more than 100,000 light years. I mean, they're their huge jets that come out. 100,000 light years. And one light year is how many trillion miles about. Yeah. Yeah. So, oh my god. And then in the, oh my god. Yeah. So, I mean, around a, around a

steppicked video is so nuts. I've never seen that. Yeah. When I was looking for this, there's

somewhat 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, yeah. I don't know. It's, it's an idea. I mean,

“that idea, honestly, it had a lot more following, you know, more in like the 60s and 70s,”

it's kind of falling out of favor because at first, we thought that these hugely bright objects were white holes. At the end of a black hole, maybe the radiation went through a tunnel through space, then came out somewhere. But now we know that these super bright objects are actually hot gas discs around black holes. And they are bright. They're like, I said, they're the brightest things we know of in this guy. And, 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 to broke my brain. 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, once again, you know,

no astronomer thinks the big bang came from nothing. The problem is, once it can, 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's centered on us.

That's an effect of we look at every direction of 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 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 this 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 wave, the wavelength of light gets stretched out by the expansion of space. This is what we call the

microwave background radiation. So 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 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, the universe actually does become opaque to light at that point. Because it's too long ago. It's basically the universe is so bright itself. Yeah. I mean, so you look at any direction on the sky. You look back to a time. The wonderful thing about the universe changing is we know this is true. The farther out we look with the telescope, the farther light has had to travel. 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

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 light to actually get to us. Is there a”

potential for being able to observe 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 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 I mean, going all the way back to the mid-90s, I was a post-doc at Caltech. And I wasn't working with this department, but people were starting

to measure something called gravitational waves. And gravitational waves, again, I never thought they'd

be able to actually detect these. The universe is constantly, 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. As I move, I create gravity. Gravity actually 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 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 for the laser interferometric gravitational wave observatory and it started out with two facilities, one in Oregon and one in Louisiana. And LIGO has two extremely long lasers at a corner, at a right angle. The lasers I believe are four kilometers on a side. They're huge, right? A four kilometer laser. They want them to be as perfectly the same length as they can. And then there's a laser beam that bounces back and forth.

And as the laser beam bounces back and forth, if it's exactly the same length that 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 lasers are no longer exactly the same length. Space itself has changed as a wave comes by. It's 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 four 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 noise for this, right? I mean, every time, yes, this is us detecting and exploding star this way. I'm happy to talk about that too. But I mean, just the fact they did this, these lasers are under vacuums,

they're in vacuum chambers. I mean, they try to be every time the UPS truck goes by, they must go "Hey, why are 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 happened, and I could, you can look up the year, but it was something on the order about 10 years ago. A long ways away, millions of light years away, 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 that detectors detecting all kinds of spurious signals, but then all of a sudden in Louisiana, there was this, the whole detector went, "Womp, boom, boom, boom, and then at the speed of light, the detector in Louisiana did exactly the same thing.

"Womp, boom, boom, boom, 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 now 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, could we detect the gravitational waves of the big bang?”

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 exactly, 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,

Again, they fucking did it. I just, I cannot, I felt my heart just dropped that day.

“I mean, out of joy, it just, it's like, oh, they did it. That may give us the potential to understand”

the big bang better as we get better with that. 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 produce a 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 time line

of 13.8 billion years or whatever it is? Well, you know, I mean, these things are never sure,

you know, absolutely. But there, there are some very good reasons to think 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 Lynne, let's, let's roughly say that, you know, things we 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 know, what, what happened is that 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. You know, when I, when I, when I, 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 peach piece of elastic. And I was able to hammer two nails in and either side of the board. And then I would say,

okay, these, 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 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 a 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 are particle accelerators. You know, I've had the wonderful chance to go to us, to go to sir in a couple

of times and go to the large-chay drawn collider. And, you know, you know, using, you know, an 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, 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 with things were like, you know, a millionth of a second after the big bang, 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's nothing about our current”

physics. It would be like taking somebody from the 1400s and saying, you know, described to me what the interior of the sun is like. They, they, they would have, 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 way we're asking. It's like the environment. And that's the preceded the big bang. What are we talking about? Where this subatomic thing that contains everything that's

to it. I mean, you're asking the question that I hope someday humanity will have a chance to

“explore and will know more about. Then I think what will happen is that once we can describe what”

happened before the big bang, there'll be a whole series of other questions. So if the big bang is the wrong way to think about it, of 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 criticism, right? It was, it was Fred Hoyle. 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 that universe is expanding in every direction. You know, it was actually Fred Hoyle that, you know, said at a conference, as a way of making fun of this, you know, people were saying, well, well, maybe everything would back to sort of a common denser, you know, structure.

“It was actually a, it was a Belgian Jesuit father, a Belgian priest named Georys Limaitre, who came”

up with the idea that if the universe was expanding now, if we run time backwards, maybe all becomes one big, he called the, the, the, the, the premierial atom that was Georys Limaitre.

And, you know, he said, Bob, what was this? Um, Georys Limaitre. So we would have been talking

around about probably sometime in the 1920s. I bet we could probably have some help. So 100 years ago. Yeah, 100 years ago. So Georys Limaitre says, if we run time backwards, we, we get this big lump of something. The premierial atom. And then Fred Hoyle said, what, you mean the whole universe started with a big bang? You know, really there was this big, there was this atom that what 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 that is everybody kind of nodded and said, well, yeah, you know, and I mean, more people should know about Georys Limaitre, you know, the, the, the Jesuit Belgian scientist that that came up with that idea. I think he was a fascinating man. Interestingly enough, even as a Jesuit, 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, what, what's the best thing we can say about to describe these”

different times and states of the universe? You know, a lot of my friends are, the, the, the Catholic Church, the Jesuits have had, you know, an active astronomy program for four thousand years. And so, 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, it's wonderful that there are these things right over the horizon for, from us. We,

we know the universe is expanding. What was it like before? What, 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 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 lightest 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. I mean, we basically see it as sphere around us how far we're able to see given the time.

A galaxy that we can observe with the 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, we know the universe isn't just our observable universe. So, like I said, 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. It has its own view. And then there's another one over here.

It has its own view. It can be put something up here. Yeah. So, yeah, I'm not even sure that, I mean, that's a great NASA 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 they call the afterglow. That's 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. For the sake of argument,

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 radiation, that microwave background. The microwave background has been a wonderful story. It was discovered back in the 1970s by two scientists from Bell Labs called Pensius and Wilson. And they were trying to categorize, 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 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 Pensius. So there you go, Pensius, look at that. So so Pensius and Wilson built this, they were working with this big microwave telescope. And little did I know that Pensius actually gives off microwaves. It does. They trapped all the Pensius in the microwave telescope. You could actually see a Pensius in the Smithsonian where they did this. They scraped

all the Pensius. And low and behold, the signal was still there. In every direction you looked, it was exactly the same. Exactly. 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 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 have you like, you know, 300 degrees on one side. And you know, minus 50 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 that 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 could see by your expression. I should do a better job of X-Men. Oh, you're doing a great job. Just absolutely fascinating. Your expression is just perplexed. Yeah, well, no, 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, the first NASA satellite that observed it was called Kobe. And then they're the cosmic microwave explorer. And then there was a new one in the 1990s called W Mac. The Wilkinson microwave and isotropy probe. Oh, yes, good. And they measured this, you know, down to, to hundreds of thousands of a degree. I mean, they measured it to tiny little amounts.

And the incredible thing was that it was, it was almost exactly the same temperature.

But there were these beautiful large, you know, 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 highly recommend you read about this. 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 hundred thousand years after, that's four hundred thousand 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, as almost being an instantaneous event. Well, yeah, I mean, again,

you as an experimental scientist. There are all these wonderful theories about about what

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's a great book called The First Three Minutes,

which has been around since the, oh, geez, probably since the 1970s, maybe even longer. And it's 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 can helium that we have. And in the first three minutes, it pretty much everything was done. The whole sort of process of the Big Bang was done in those first three minutes. The actual Big Bang itself goes back to

something called the Plank Epuk, which you see there. 10 to the minus 33 seconds, 10 to the minus 43 seconds. So take a decimal point, draw 42 zeros, and then then a 43. Singularity, infinite density, and capture quantum gravity, dots, forces unified. Absolutely. Again, again, big, big chunk of salt there. Yeah, I mean, so this is not bullshit. This is the best model given our understanding of modern physics.

Do I think this is, is right? Literally no. I think we've got a lot to understand about how gravity works in high density situations. When, when gravity and quantum mechanics come together with those two theories, they don't work well together. And in order to understand how things

“would like right before the Big Bang, or even right after, I think you need to understand that a lot”

better. 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 don't have the physics to describe high density, high gravity conditions.

Insane, hard density. Oh yeah, yeah. I mean, to the point where you can't even take the known universe and put 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, the idea of, um, the Alan Gooth. That's the idea of, um, Alan Gooth's idea. Well, that's, it's not the expanding universe. I'll come up with it later. But the, back in the 1970s, a man at MIT Alan Gooth had, 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 inflation, inflation, I'm sorry. That was a complete mental fart. I, I, I, I know the inflationary universe.

But, um, again, I think all of this is a necessary first grasp using the occurred understanding of physics. I don't think we understand how the Big Bang went off yet. And I think we need to waste 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, 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 have to say,”

we, we made this measurement and it's real. You know, we, we, we fucking managed to see the instance of 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 ability

yet to know. And it's hard for humans to stop there. And it, I mean, of course, we make better experiments to 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 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 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, you may not have the same answer as to what comes next about the 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

believe you. It's tough. You do know. There has to be some things that you can't know. It has to be

measurable. Yeah. And this is especially in the current state of what we were able to measure right now.

“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, you know, alien visitations or whatever. 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've had to talk to so many people

called into NASA saying they had profound experiences with time travel.

Or who had to talk to Tom Travers? Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Or people would call in. Is there a time traveler hotline like Art Bell? They would often forward the calls to me. Why you? Well, I, I mean, I was, I was doing communications in NASA. And I think they just didn't know what to do with these people. And I, I think they, they, they knew, well, and I, I, I pride myself on this. I, I tried to be kind. I tried to lead with compassion.

And I would listen to people's stories about, you know, I, I was, I, I traveled in time 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 know, you have experienced something that, I mean, I hope you, you, you, you as a gift. I would say there, 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, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, you, 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, what, why are these people a NASA allowed to have

“telescopes and do all this stuff? 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. It means that science is limited to what is 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, maybe, when we understand the brain better, you know, maybe when

if AIs are sharing minds, you know, when we're talking, you know, incredible fun

conjecture here. At the moment, we're limited with the tools of what is reproducible. You know, I mean, if you, if you, 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 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's reproducible. That there's something else out there.

I think it's a wonderful question. And I think this, this may give you a little bit of a snapshot of the culture of science and a mind of a scientist because it's an odd little tight rope to walk. I'm very proud of it actually. I think it's kind of beautiful. 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 could it just be us? How could it? We're all science fiction

chilling. I have for decades now in the hopes that someday we'll have a clear evidence of life outside the earth. You know, we'll have a signal. What are you willing to pop the champagne or is it molecules? Yeah, yeah, I'm bacteria. I like definitely bacteria. I definitely ponds come, some little micro bond Mars, you got it. The champagne is coming out. And at the same time, there are the fantastic scientists of Ceti, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence,

who are scanning this guy's looking for mathematical signals from civilizations. The question 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 fighter jets and all of that, I think an interesting”

thing is that scientists at NASA, you know, and the universities, I mean, we're not getting together over a beer and looking at these videos and really getting excited. It's not enough yet. You know, we're seeing these things we can't explain, but we're trained as skeptical scientists to sort of stop there. Okay, we can't explain this. That next step that this is an alien, we're not willing to go yet. We need more evidence than that. But as I said,

that's a deliberate training of a scientist. That's skeptical stop. The people who have had experiences, and no, I'm not willing to dismiss them as being mentally ill necessarily. I honestly don't know what it is. The experience is not within, it is certainly within my realm

“of possibility that what they're describing actually happened. I cannot say that that's impossible.”

As a skeptical scientist, I'm stopped by, I would need more evidence than an individual experience. You know, this happens in many aspects of life. It's not just the visitation of extraterrestrials.

You know, I have people that 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 that is not part of my experience. But these people are completely 100% trustworthy. I have to live in this universe where I don't get to say what's real and what's not. These trustworthy people have experience something profound and it may be real. It may be that they've seen people after

they died or they've seen visitors from other plants. That gives me joy. I sure hope we live in a larger reality than 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 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. I live in this sort of skeptical

tight rope with hope that someday things will become more clear. That's a great place to be.

“I love that. I actually like it. To me, I think humility and compassion,”

you know, I think we could, the whole of the world could use a lot more of that. Just for sure. Yeah, just to be reserved, judgment, think about how different a human experiences. We don't understand what consciousness is. We don't understand that human brain works. Is it possible somebody had a different experience of time? Maybe it is. You know, in science, what can we measure

is powerful? We do things we should not be able to do. Like catch waves of space in time. See,

light and space curve around a neutron star. And that's real. That's a measurement. Stick up 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, it's, it's space and time. A construct of 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

island 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 Herschel back in the late 1700s. He discovered infrared radiation. Is it even deeper than that?

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, I will admit, I'm a chicken. I've never, I've never actually done any hallucinogenic

drugs. I have been tempted because I do sometimes wonder if under that sort of influence the filters of our brain or different. I mean, could you actually have an experience of something that could be real? Because your filters, how we perceive space and time of the universe are changed by the drug. I, I, because I 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, maybe. What about it makes you 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. I actually had a night last night. I, I, I was, the, the dreams were a lot to recover from. And, um, I have a little worried. I, I, I, I, I, I, I, some of the, sometimes my dreams are wonderful and sometimes they're horrible. I remember them forever. There are things I really would like to erase that I've, I've jumped about. I'm, I'm not real confident in letting my mind be unfettered. Hmm. Yeah. Why do you think it, it's unfettered? What, why do you, what about a, a cycle,

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 good and bad trips, right? People have, you know,

“people sometimes have wonderful experiences, 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 in 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 dimethyl trip to mean the brain produces. It's produced in the liver and the lungs. It's very, very, very weird. The most potent psychedelic known demand is actually made by the human body.

That's true. 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 endogenous. 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 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 and to conjecture, 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 know space and time can bend and change. And so the idea that our brain filters this somehow entirely possible and that people may have slightly different filters. I mean, I think I was wondering about schizophrenia. Yeah. Like, what are they experiencing? Are they in a constant

dream state? Yeah. But really profoundly schizophrenic people that are just, they're having voices and communication. Like, what, 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 five seconds. Can we 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 piecing things that none of us say?

He's experiencing things that none of us experience, but he's doing it all day long constantly. He lives in a crazy fantasy world. Well, I may be interested. I mean, I've also, you know, I mean, not just the experience of physics, you know, and people 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's something that,

out, you know, how, how you sort of, you get beyond that. And I've, I've heard as well that,

that psychedelic drugs can be a treatment for that. Yeah, it's a lot of it is also for people that have ended up live anxiety. People have died from cancer, particularly psilocybin, for some reason, has a profound effect on people, like experience again, letting it go. I remember,

“do you remember that show Dallas? Yeah. Remember, is Larry Hagman? Yeah. Yeah. So, 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. That's fantastic. Yeah, I know. But like they're saying, like, I don't think they expected J.R. Ewing to say this, you know, the guy from Dallas, it was like this bad guy. Here it is.

So, I don't have a Joy Bay Harron online news. It's very, I mean, no.

Oh, it's headline. Is that CNN? It's seven, it's some very similar. Okay, we're on the same way. I would, I would like that. I would like to lose my fear of death. Listen, what he says. Across me, stills a Nash. Charging you want to LSD. What was that lie? Tell me a little about that. Oh, I'm a time we got. Yeah, about a minute. But you can do a lot in a minute. A minute. Yeah. Okay, it took the fear of death away. Really? That's a big answer. That's a big, that's a great answer.

“But did it hold? Yeah. Do you have to keep taking into office care? No, did it hold?”

Did the lack of fear of the losing fear? Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, sure. Absolutely. Once you've lost the fear of death, it doesn't matter. How did it, what happened to you? How did that manifest? Oh, my dear. Have you heard of the white light? Have you heard of that? Only when I'm going into Jersey. Well, I would, I went into this, this, this place that was the white light that where everything's okay. Well, that is, I think that's what I think. Yeah.

And I think I think it ought to be mandatory that all our politicians should do it, at least one. That now, that's a good suggestion. You know, I mean, I think George do it too. Quit the view. Can you imagine being an interview with somebody who's like, you have 30 seconds. Tell me about the most profound experience you've ever had. Yeah, that's the most ridiculous aspect

of those shows. Wow. Is that they're constricted by time? I like that idea, though. And I like that like the idea that it could help us through things like that. I really do. I mean, I know, uh, psilocybin was legal in, uh, Washington DC. When I was living in Washington DC, when my husband died. And, you know, 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 never, I didn't.

But I thought it should be a therapy, an optional therapy, you know, that that could be something, that that you give people to help them through that. Well, you know, we are very restricted by the propaganda that made all that stuff illegal in the first place, unfortunately. And, 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.

Because the only reason why they're illegal was because the Nixon administration, the controlled substance is active of 1970. And what they did was they were targeting the civil rights movement, 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. It's not true. It's not true. I mean, you can't eat enough mushrooms to die. It's not even possible. It'd be, 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.

“Confuse the shit 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 like that idea. You also could take a micro dose. If you found someone who gets 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 like a sub-psychedelic threshold dose where you just feel better. You just feel wonderful. He's like feel nicer. You feel like you have a better spatial awareness, which is weird, better edge detection. It's very

strangely measurable. Like they did these studies. I think it was in the 1960s where they gave people suicide and then they had a control group. And the people that were on suicide and were able to detect when parallel lines varied quicker than the people that were not on suicide.

to be able to detect it. Sure. Which is weird. Well, again, I mean, to me that makes sense. I mean, you know, I can imagine that, you know, if the brain is stimulated in certain ways, it would act more efficiently. You know, if you're sure, that works with me. Well, the weirdest thing about it is that when they do brain scans of people on suicide, but it doesn't show a stimulated brain. It shows a quiet brain. We understand so little

about the brain. I had a friend who was a neuroscientist at Caltech. And, you know, one of the things

he really, I loved this quotation. He said that we always compare the brain historically to sort of

with the height of our technology. You know, the Romans thought of it as sort of a series of fluid aqueducts. And, you know, and then in the 18th century, he had the idea of gears, cogs, cognition, right, where we get that word from. 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 do not understand yet how this works. We have no idea what the mechanism of memory,

“you know, you know, or I mean, or how wide do we perceive space in time the way we do?”

If the universe really does exist in a huge infinite now, how can we think one event causes another? How can 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 sure when we understand quantum computing better, we'll probably say it's a quantum computer,

you know, we know, 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 we're still like burden with the same questions. Just, you know, was that quote, I think was Dennis McKenna's quote, of the bonfire, once the bonfire of information is lit, it exposes more surface area ignorance that the brighter the fire gets, the more you realize, oh, there's so much I don't know. Maybe

we would think that interfacing with this technology and having all the information that every fucking human being that's ever lived has, it's still, you just go, this is not enough. There's no way. Yeah, well, that's the idea. People sort of think about this, you know, there's an ultimate question like people say what happened before the big bang, and I think someday we will figure that out, and then they'll be just a whole other bunch of questions. I mean, I don't think there's any end.

You know, I don't see why they really should be. I don't think we'll ever figure it all out as 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. You get to a certain point where like, your guess is good as

“anybody. It's like nobody knows. Yeah. That's what's nuts. That's what's nuts is that it's 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 two hundred years ago. It's not going to be right now, so I'm insane. 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 shit that's just no way. Yeah. The way that you detect black holes, and then he pulled up a picture

of this telescope in Chile, the very large telescope, Vielty. Again, never let astronomers name anything,

Vielty, the very large telescope, and then off to the sidestep. The curly building, the ELT, which is the extremely large telescope. No kidding. But this technique called interferometry, where you basically catch the same wave front of light in several detectors. And then you bring that light all together, and you have an interfere with itself. It's one of these things that I always think should people should be a little bit more in a good way, kind of scared about, because 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, wavelength of light, traveling at the speed of light. When you're measuring down to the accuracy of the quantum world, or quantum mechanics becomes the prevalent description of reality, the universe just doesn't care

that these are different space points that the photon was in. It's, let me put it this way. It is really kind of true that when you do this experiment, the same particle of light is measured

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 there were eight different versions of reality where the photon was in each of these telescopes. You're sort of delvetailing them together to make an observation. Interferometry, depending on how you interpret it, there are many interferometris that don't interpret it that way. They interpret it more as saying, "Well, yeah." In quantum mechanics, you can have something that's in many locations at once.

But 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 results is that they're interpreting its ability to solve equations so fast. The way mark entries and describe it, that if you took every molecule of the universe and converted into a

supercomputer, it would, the universe would dive heat death before it would 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, here that you're like, "Okay, maybe, but 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. Is there any”

other potential explanation to why it's able to compute so quickly? Yes, but none of them are particularly anymore comforting. I mean, they're all that weird. I mean, the idea, you're talking sort of about a superposition of states. So 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 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, if it's not that, then it's something like reality has many different versions all connected at once, and that's just what we call reality. I mean, it's not going to get any less weird. Right, equally weird. Yeah, so the idea that 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 in probability. So yeah, I mean, we're in for a ride because the, 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 this really have to confront what reality is, how different reality is from how our senses tell us of it. I don't see any way around that. I don't think we're going back to things being easily understood. I guess it's just brings

“us back to our limited senses. Yeah, I think we're going to keep pushing that envelope of,”

you know, how much can the human brain comprehend that all of a sudden our brain just doesn't go there. Our brain doesn't understand multiple realities, multiple probabilities, space and time that exists all at once. It's not something we do. We, we started that journey so long ago. I mean, you started the interview with looking up at the Milky Way. And one of the things I remember was how Galileo went through this kind of profound spiritual crisis when he, he, he, he,

he used one of the first people to take a telescope and look at the Milky Way. That's 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, 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 the human brain makes it. We know that. But we're not going back. You know, we have to go forward

that the universe is not as we perceive it. Our minds don't do it. And, and why should we be so surprised? Like I said, you know, take a wonderful, complex, simple organism, like an ant. You know, 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 compare it to the”

capacity of the human brain. You know, it does 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? Oh, 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 we're evolving and if conscious life and intelligent life

is continuing to expand its capacities, it just makes sense that we're going to realize how one day people will look back at people that lived in 2020, six and go, what a bunch of silly beings. It's foolish people that thought they knew. Oh, they do it in love, yeah. Yeah. I mean, and that's one of the things about AI again, that I, I don't like the idea of something become super intelligent. It'll just want to kill us. I mean, I, you probably saw that

“movie, a her with Yakim Phoenix, which came out years ago. Have you seen that movie? Yeah.”

I actually really liked it. 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, that, that was a very interestingly profound movie because the AI's actually fallen love with us. You know, 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 AI's 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 aunt is. You know, I hope what's coming next. You know, has some compassion for us and some love. You know, about where we are on the journey. I mean, you know, I mean, I think that compassion goes

both ways. You know, 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. That's why we're toasting. 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, you know, with with with with with with higher intelligence or other beings is, is, is why would they want to hurt us? What would good? Well, if they did, 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 involved and, and, and, sayingly advance civilization. And they have the ability to come here. They probably have the ability to do whatever they want. We probably wouldn't even know.

Well, we probably just all fall over dead, you know. If they wanted to just evaporate the planet, they probably could cause 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 can do

better than that if you can get here. I don't think we killed the microbes. I mean, there's always that,

you know, I start all over again. Yeah, yeah, it is, it is amazing how tenacious they are. I mean, that's a big deal about going and exploring the solar system is, is how, how can you, I mean, we, we know we can't completely sterilize things. Well, we're finding fungi and Chernobyl. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Well, or, I mean, also, also, things that can live on the outside of the space station, over back bacterial and microbes and stuff. I mean, to me, I mean, weird. I don't, what are the

most profound discoveries of the last, say, 10 years at NASA? I mean, this was even more recent than that. Was a, there was a mission called Osiris Rex. And I'm, 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, origin, spectral interpretation, resource identification, security, regulatory explore. There we go. And it brought back a sample of an asteroid. And asteroids, as you know, are these rocks,

you know, in space that there were never built into larger planets. And so there's Osiris Rex,

thank you. And 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 Bennu's about half a kilometer across. It is an asteroid that comes in 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 anyway, we sent a probe out there to bring back a real pristine sample of an asteroid, because-- Which is just nuts? They could land on an asteroid

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,”

get low enough to get into orbit, match its spin rate, and then when they got out there, I love this. You know, we designed NASA design 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. It's like it's not going to work. There's nowhere where there are small fine grain things we can just suck up easily. So, they survey the whole thing. They find there these tiny little craters that

have some dust in them. And then they have to reprogram the spacecraft, because 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 joy stick it. It's got to take itself down manually and 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 could drop so in a parachute into the Utah test range. They open up the sample. And all of the nucleobases of our DNA, not just little molecules. The letters of our DNA in 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 was full of water. At one time, the minerals were soaked in water. They were wet.

So that the asteroids were delivering water and a little bomb of proto life, not life yet. But the genetic code, the letters of our genetic code were in that asteroid. And not just our genetic code, but there were nucleobases we don't even use. Maybe life on other planet would use different

“nucleobases, but we can already sample them from the asteroids. You know, the idea that our biology”

was brought here from these colder, more distant parts of the solar system, and it's literally raining down on us. You know, I expected to find organic molecules. I expected to find amino acids. You know, those sort of things that make up our proteins. I was amazed. We found all of our nucleobases, all the letters of our genetic code, both for DNA and RNA. There are either in the asteroid.

Which is nuts. The idea of Pantspermia, 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 every word. Well, that's a little bit less mysterious than you'd think. The, the universe is great at making large-scale organic molecules. Carbon is a sticky atom. And you make 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 carbon wants to grab on to other atoms. 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 get's collected by gravity into these clouds. And then the carbon starts glummon on to 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, you know, and then they occasionally come in and then 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, 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

work. 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, you know, a minor manager at NASA, you know, and a minor scientist, I mean, just, just, what, what, what a team can accomplish. I mean, not just a single person, you know, one of the, the big things that I really respected at NASA was once you had your team of people. And 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 it, and, and input from everyone. And they're not going to give it to the same way. They're the people that are really assertive in meetings. And they've got an idea immediately. They speak up

process. They, they, they're going to need a little more time. They don't want to be put on the spot.

“You know, trying to make sure you get an input from everybody on your team. And sometimes the”

solutions come for the people that you might not have even asked. You know, the, that's 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, 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 thank you for everything that you put online. It's so valuable. It's so educational, it's so interesting. It's awesome. I'll try to do a little more and have some fun with it because you're, like I said, I'm retired now. And I have a chance to be a little more creative with it. So, uh, let me see what I can do.

You definitely should do something. A YouTube channel, something along the lines. Yeah.

“Definitely a podcast, something. Good. I will try. Please do. If you want to find you on social”

media, do you have that? Well, yeah. I mean, so I, um, somebody had taken Michelle Foller. So I go by Dr. Michelle Foller. There's a Facebook page and Instagram. And I do have a, uh, a small YouTube channel set up. I'll do more of that. I just started doing TikTok. Um, and, uh, so, so I'm, I'm just getting started, but I'll try to put some stuff out. All right. Awesome. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. Bye, buddy.