The Joe Rogan Experience - January 16, 2021


Joe Rogan Experience #1596 - Avi Loeb


Episode Stats

Length

2 hours and 26 minutes

Words per Minute

157.92915

Word Count

23,184

Sentence Count

1,723

Misogynist Sentences

1


Summary

In this episode of the Joe Rogan Experience, the comedian and podcaster talks with astrophysicist Avi Finan about the mysterious object known as Amuamua, and why he thinks it may have been discovered by some other civilization. Also, Avi talks about his new book, The Dark Side of the Sun: A Guide to the Most Beautiful Object in the Solar System, which is out now, and is out for pre-order! This episode was produced and edited by Alex Blumberg. Additional editing was made by Annie-Rose Strasser. The show was mixed and produced by Matthew Boll. Our theme song was written and performed by Micah Vellian and our ad music was provided by Mark Phillips. Additional music was performed by Mark's band, The Weakerthans, which you can find on SoundCloud here. Thanks to our sponsor, VaynerSpeakers, for sponsoring this episode. You can expect weekly episodes every available as Video, Podcast, and blogposts. If you like what you hear, please consider becoming a patron patron and/or become a patron. Subscribe to the podcast by clicking the patron patron! Subscribe on iTunes, Rate/subscribe in Apple Podcasts, and leave us a rating and review on iTunes if you like the podcast! Thank you for supporting the show! , and share it on Apple Podcast, too! or wherever else you get your listening pleasure! Thanks for listening and sharing it! - The Joe Rogans Experience Podcast by Night All Day, All Day All Day by Night, by Day, by Night - All Day. - by Night by Night! - by Norma - By Norma's Podcasts by Night all Day, By Night by Day by Day - By Night, By Day, All Day By Night - By Day All day All Day? by Night By Night -- by Night's Podcast by Day Allday All Day all Day by Grace, by Grace and Night by Grace's Podcast, by Gratitude by Grace & Grace, by Grace Thanks, Grace and Grace, Thank You, By Grace, Thanks, Thank you, Grace & Gratavie, Thank You for listening to Meghan Mclean? - Thank You For Listening to Meals and Gynn? -- By Grace & Gellie? , By Grace and Glynis?


Transcript

00:00:03.000 The Joe Rogan Experience.
00:00:06.000 Train by day.
00:00:07.000 Joe Rogan Podcast by night.
00:00:08.000 All day.
00:00:14.000 Hello, Avi.
00:00:15.000 Thanks for having me.
00:00:17.000 My pleasure.
00:00:19.000 I'm very good friends with your friend, Lex Friedman, and he highly recommends you as well.
00:00:24.000 Oh, thank you.
00:00:24.000 You know, he asked me about social media and I told him I have no footprint on social media.
00:00:30.000 He said, why?
00:00:32.000 And I said, I promised my wife when I married her not to have any account.
00:00:36.000 And he said, I should get married.
00:00:40.000 Yeah, he reads accounts.
00:00:42.000 He says he doesn't, but then he does.
00:00:44.000 He reads comments and stuff, and then he gets mad at things people say.
00:00:47.000 It's kind of funny.
00:00:48.000 Yeah, you see, I save the time.
00:00:49.000 I don't even read what other people say.
00:00:51.000 Good for you.
00:00:52.000 And I don't care how many likes I have.
00:00:54.000 That's the other thing.
00:00:54.000 That's wonderful.
00:00:55.000 That's a freedom.
00:00:56.000 Yeah, exactly.
00:00:57.000 That's an underrated freedom.
00:00:58.000 Yeah.
00:00:58.000 You came on my radar when you were discussing Amuamua, which is an object that we detected in space that you believe could possibly have been extraterrestrial in origin,
00:01:15.000 meaning from some sort of a civilization.
00:01:17.000 Right.
00:01:20.000 Please explain to people what Oumuamua is, why it's so extraordinary, and why you think it's possible that it came from some other intelligent civilization.
00:01:29.000 Right.
00:01:30.000 So I'm a scientist, and I basically follow the evidence, just like Sherlock Holmes, trying to find solutions.
00:01:38.000 It's a detective story.
00:01:39.000 You have some anomalies, some things that don't quite match what you expected, and you're trying to find an explanation.
00:01:48.000 The thing about Oumuamua is that it was discovered on October 19th, 2017. A little more than three years ago.
00:01:57.000 And it was the very first object that visited our vicinity in the solar system from outside the solar system.
00:02:05.000 It moved too fast to be bound to the Sun.
00:02:08.000 Very first object that we have found coming to us from interstellar space, from other places.
00:02:13.000 And at first, astronomers said, oh yeah, it's probably just like the objects we had in our solar system, all the rocks that we have seen before.
00:02:22.000 We've seen comets and asteroids.
00:02:25.000 So a comet is a rock that is covered with ice, water ice.
00:02:29.000 So when it gets close to the sun, the surface gets warmed up and the ice turns into vapor.
00:02:38.000 And you see this beautiful cometary tail behind it.
00:02:42.000 That's what a comet is.
00:02:44.000 An asteroid is just rock without much ice on it.
00:02:47.000 Actually, the first person to explain what comets are was at Harvard, the university that I am affiliated with.
00:02:55.000 And the story goes that, I mean, it was Fred Whipple that he went to Harvard Square and saw all the slush during the winter day, you know, and came up with the idea that it's just...
00:03:07.000 Icy rock or icy rocks or, you know, rocky ice.
00:03:13.000 And that's what a comet is.
00:03:15.000 And the comets come to us from the periphery of the solar system.
00:03:20.000 And, you know, astronomers said, okay, other stars may have them as well.
00:03:24.000 And, you know, since they are loosely bound, if they are in the periphery, they can be easily ripped apart from their host star.
00:03:32.000 And some of them will fly in our direction.
00:03:34.000 We will see them.
00:03:35.000 So they said, Oumuamua is probably a comet.
00:03:40.000 The only problem is there wasn't any cometary tail.
00:03:44.000 So you look for a duck, but it doesn't look like a duck, you know.
00:03:48.000 So then the question is, what is it?
00:03:50.000 And so people say, okay, it's...
00:03:52.000 Just a rock without any ice on it.
00:03:56.000 Then the problem was that it exhibited an extra push away from the sun.
00:04:01.000 And usually you get it from the rocket effect.
00:04:04.000 When you make the cometary tail, it pushes the object in the opposite direction, just like a jet plane.
00:04:12.000 A jet plane works by throwing gas out, and that's pushing you forward.
00:04:18.000 So a comet has an extra push when it But there was no cometary tail, so why did it show an extra push?
00:04:28.000 That was the key question in my mind, at which point I started thinking, maybe it's not a comet and not an asteroid, something else, you know?
00:04:36.000 And the other strange thing about it, it changes its brightness by a factor of 10 or more, and the brightness of the object, the light that we see, is simply reflected sunlight, right?
00:04:49.000 So just think about it, think about a piece of paper, razor-thin piece of paper, tumbling in the wind, and changing the area that we can see, the projected area of that piece of paper, by a factor of 10 as we look at it.
00:05:05.000 That's exactly what we inferred from this object, spinning around every eight hours, but changing its brightness by a factor of 10, meaning that the area projected on the sky That we see that reflect sunlight changed by a factor of 10. So that means it has an extreme geometry,
00:05:23.000 most likely flat, if you try to interpret the light that it reflected over as it was tumbling around.
00:05:31.000 And so a flat object about the size of a football field That has an extra push.
00:05:38.000 If it were a comet, it needed to lose about a tenth of its weight.
00:05:43.000 So a lot of evaporation.
00:05:45.000 You can't just say, oh, it's a little bit of evaporation and therefore that's why we don't see it.
00:05:50.000 It should have lost a tenth of its weight.
00:05:53.000 You know, if we go on a diet and lose a tenth of our weight, that's a big chunk of me.
00:05:58.000 So this object didn't lose that because we didn't see it.
00:06:02.000 And the Spitzer Space Telescope looked very deeply behind it to see if there are any traces of dust or gas.
00:06:08.000 Didn't see anything.
00:06:09.000 So then...
00:06:11.000 You know, just like Sherlock Holmes, I was trying to think together with a postdoc of mine, Shmuel Bialy, what could explain it?
00:06:20.000 And the only thing that came to mind is reflecting sunlight.
00:06:25.000 So the object itself is being pushed by the sunlight reflecting off its surface.
00:06:30.000 And, you know, that would agree with everything we know about the object.
00:06:35.000 But in order for it to work, I think?
00:06:55.000 And we're actually using this technology now, developing it for space exploration.
00:07:00.000 The big advantage is you don't need to carry the fuel with the spacecraft.
00:07:04.000 You just reflect light off it and it's being pushed.
00:07:07.000 There's a science fiction movie that did something like that.
00:07:10.000 I think it was called Sunlight.
00:07:11.000 Quite possibly.
00:07:12.000 I should mention an anecdote.
00:07:14.000 In September, just a few months ago, in September 2020, there was another object that showed an extra push.
00:07:20.000 No cometary tail.
00:07:22.000 And then astronomers gave it a name 2020-SO, okay?
00:07:27.000 September 2020. And then they extrapolated back in time and found that it came from Earth, actually.
00:07:35.000 And then they looked at the history books and saw that, indeed, there was a rocket booster.
00:07:42.000 From a lunar lander that was kicked into space, and this is the object.
00:07:46.000 Now, why did it show this push?
00:07:49.000 Because it's a hollow, it's a very thin structure.
00:07:52.000 So here is an example where we can tell it's artificial, and we know that we made it.
00:08:00.000 But Oumuamua could not have been made by us because it was passing near us just for a few months, very quickly, faster than any rocket that we can launch.
00:08:08.000 That's why we couldn't really chase it when it was receding away from us.
00:08:12.000 And it came from outside the solar system.
00:08:14.000 So, you know, I just do one plus one equal two.
00:08:17.000 I say, okay, it looks very peculiar.
00:08:19.000 Maybe it belongs to another civilization.
00:08:22.000 I just put it in a scientific paper.
00:08:25.000 We didn't have any press release.
00:08:27.000 Then it went viral.
00:08:29.000 The public got extremely interested.
00:08:30.000 And the thing that really surprised me is that my colleagues were...
00:08:35.000 Pushing back.
00:08:36.000 They were very upset that this possibility was even mentioned.
00:08:39.000 You know, we had a seminar, a lecture about this object at Harvard, and a colleague of mine, after the lecture, said, this object is really weird.
00:08:51.000 I wish it never existed.
00:08:53.000 Yeah.
00:08:53.000 Now, to me, I was really appalled by this.
00:08:57.000 How can you say something like that?
00:08:58.000 You should be happy about whatever nature gives you.
00:09:02.000 You learn something new.
00:09:03.000 If something doesn't look right, it actually teaches us...
00:09:08.000 It's a learning experience.
00:09:10.000 We learn that we have to revise the way we think about reality.
00:09:13.000 That's a good thing.
00:09:15.000 That's not a bad...
00:09:15.000 You shouldn't always be in your comfort zone and think that the future will be the same as the past.
00:09:21.000 So...
00:09:22.000 I actually see it as a blessing, you know?
00:09:25.000 I can't imagine why anybody would be upset that it exists.
00:09:29.000 Like, I wish it didn't exist.
00:09:30.000 That's kind of hilarious.
00:09:31.000 Because it takes you away from your comfort zone, you know?
00:09:34.000 I know, but if you're studying the heavens, you're studying the cosmos, what is the ultimate thing that you could find?
00:09:42.000 Another civilization or a piece of something from another civilization?
00:09:45.000 That's exactly my point, but if you go back in time, let me give you two examples.
00:09:51.000 And Galileo Galilei said, I think the earth moves around the sun.
00:09:57.000 But at the time, philosophers knew for sure that the sun moves around the earth.
00:10:02.000 You see it moving in the sky.
00:10:03.000 It was consistent with their religious beliefs, everything.
00:10:06.000 So they said, we don't want to look through your telescope to change our view.
00:10:12.000 We will put you in house arrest.
00:10:14.000 Now, what did they achieve by that?
00:10:16.000 And by the way, I'm in house arrest, but it's because of the pandemic, not because.
00:10:19.000 So what did they achieve by that?
00:10:21.000 They maintained their ignorance, and the earth continued to move around the sun.
00:10:26.000 You know, reality is the one thing that never goes away, irrespective of whether you ignore it.
00:10:30.000 You can ignore it.
00:10:32.000 Now, there is another example.
00:10:33.000 There is a student at Harvard that, as a result of my book on this subject that is about to come out in a week or so, She was inspired to do her PhD on the theme of my book.
00:10:49.000 So she invited me to a thesis exam just a couple of months ago, and one of the examiners, a professor, asked her, do you know why Giordano Bruno, an Italian guy, was burnt at the stake?
00:11:05.000 And she said, well, he was an obnoxious guy.
00:11:07.000 He irritated a lot of people, which is true.
00:11:10.000 You know, he was an obnoxious guy.
00:11:11.000 But the professor corrected her and said, no.
00:11:15.000 It was because he said that other stars are just like the sun.
00:11:20.000 You know, there are stars like the sun.
00:11:22.000 And they have planets like the earth around them.
00:11:26.000 And there may be life on those planets.
00:11:28.000 And that was offensive to the church.
00:11:31.000 Because if there is life there, and it had sinned, you know, then Christ...
00:11:40.000 We should have visited those planets to save them, to save the life forms.
00:11:44.000 You need multiple copies of Christ to visit those planets, and that was unacceptable, so they burned the guy.
00:11:52.000 Burned him alive.
00:11:57.000 People are not really open-minded about the heavens, as you said.
00:12:02.000 Well, they're not open-minded when it comes to saying something that could make you an outcast or that could align you with an outcast or open you to ridicule.
00:12:13.000 People don't like being ridiculed.
00:12:15.000 And I would imagine that's one of the things you've experienced.
00:12:18.000 Well, wonderful for you.
00:12:19.000 Look, what I care about is...
00:12:23.000 I operate by the same theme that basketball coaches tell their team, the team players.
00:12:32.000 They say, keep your eyes on the ball, not on the audience.
00:12:35.000 I really don't care what other people think.
00:12:38.000 I just follow the evidence.
00:12:40.000 Now, it may well be that I'm wrong, that this is really an unusual object that is of natural origin.
00:12:46.000 And by the way, some of the mainstream astronomers try to explain it, but they always came up with an explanation that is the first object of its type that we have ever seen.
00:12:57.000 So all I'm saying is, if it's nothing that we have seen before, Why not contemplate also the possibility that it's artificially made?
00:13:07.000 Why is that so offensive to people?
00:13:10.000 And besides, science is about evidence.
00:13:14.000 So let's look for other objects and not always assume that we know the answer in advance.
00:13:20.000 If you took a caveman and showed the caveman a cell phone, a modern cell phone, the caveman would think that it's a rock, just a shiny rock.
00:13:29.000 And I can understand the response of my colleagues, but on the other hand, I would expect them to be more open-minded.
00:13:36.000 That's the whole purpose of science.
00:13:38.000 It's a learning experience.
00:13:39.000 We should be humble.
00:13:40.000 We should be modest.
00:13:41.000 We shouldn't assume that we always know the answer in advance, and we shouldn't worry about our image.
00:13:46.000 It's not about us.
00:13:46.000 It's about finding what...
00:13:49.000 The heavens are.
00:13:50.000 Now, the pushback that you've received, is there pushback on your interpretation of the evidence?
00:13:56.000 Is there pushback on the evidence itself?
00:13:59.000 Like, what is the pushback?
00:14:00.000 Is it just the possibility that it's extraterrestrial in origin?
00:14:03.000 Just the possibility bothers people.
00:14:05.000 And they say, you know, we shouldn't even discuss it.
00:14:09.000 There is a taboo on it.
00:14:12.000 Some of these people that are very vocal about it, some of them I think of as just like this congressman that for many years was making anti-gay statements.
00:14:23.000 And then in March 2020, he confessed that he's gay.
00:14:28.000 So I believe that some of them, deep inside, are really intrigued by this possibility.
00:14:33.000 And they speak out in a way that is against it.
00:14:36.000 But...
00:14:39.000 They will jump ship as soon as the evidence becomes undisputable.
00:14:44.000 To me, it's just a possibility that we should entertain because it affects the way we behave in the future.
00:14:50.000 If we search for other objects of the same, we might find even more conclusive evidence.
00:14:56.000 If we don't look for unexpected things, we will never discover them.
00:15:02.000 You know, if we put blinders on our eyes.
00:15:04.000 So all I'm saying is, it's a reasonable possibility for this, a reasonable interpretation for the evidence we have for this object, which is unusual, because all the natural interpretations also assume something that we have never seen before.
00:15:17.000 So I say...
00:15:18.000 Okay, so let's consider the possibility of a message in a bottle.
00:15:22.000 You know, when you walk on the beach and you see most of the time seashells or rocks that were naturally produced, every now and then you encounter a plastic bottle that was artificially made.
00:15:33.000 And perhaps Oumuamua was the first plastic bottle, you know, that carries some message for us.
00:15:39.000 And that would change our perception about our place in the universe.
00:15:43.000 You know, we are not alone.
00:15:45.000 Also, I don't think that we are the smartest kid on the block, if you ask me.
00:15:49.000 I think that we are probably quite typical because half of the stars, like the sun, have a planet the size of the Earth, roughly at the same distance, that could have liquid water on the surface and the chemistry of life as we know it.
00:16:05.000 Now, you open a recipe book for cakes.
00:16:09.000 You can see that you can make very different cakes out of the same ingredients, depending on how you mix them.
00:16:14.000 You can take flour, sugar.
00:16:17.000 So you get very different outcomes.
00:16:20.000 What's the chance that if you took the soup of chemicals that existed on Earth and put them together in some random fashion to get the life as we know it...
00:16:30.000 That you got the best cake possible.
00:16:32.000 The chance is minuscule.
00:16:34.000 I think we are sort of typical, like ants on a sidewalk.
00:16:39.000 You know, we are not really special.
00:16:40.000 That's why nobody is interested in us.
00:16:43.000 It's very arrogant to say, we are unique.
00:16:46.000 We are special.
00:16:48.000 The aliens are coming to haunt us.
00:16:50.000 They don't care about us.
00:16:51.000 We are just like ants on a sidewalk.
00:16:54.000 And at the same time, we might learn from them.
00:16:57.000 So if we approach this from a modest perspective, that we are not really the sharpest cookie in the jar...
00:17:06.000 Then, by looking at the sky, we may learn something about more advanced technologies that we can bring here, for example.
00:17:14.000 Suppose we see a technology that we didn't even dream about.
00:17:18.000 It would be a better investment of our time to learn about it than to go to Wall Street or to Silicon Valley.
00:17:23.000 Instead of us developing it over hundreds of years, suddenly you see something that we can use here.
00:17:29.000 Well, let me push back on a couple of these things.
00:17:31.000 First of all, I don't think if people do believe that there is alien life, I don't think they necessarily think that we are the best of life in the cosmos.
00:17:42.000 I think most people agree there's room for improvement when it comes to the human race.
00:17:46.000 But we are clearly the most advanced animal that we're aware of, that we can prove it.
00:17:54.000 But we're not smart.
00:17:54.000 Look at the newspaper.
00:17:56.000 We're not perfect, but we're far more...
00:18:02.000 The word intelligent is a rough word, right?
00:18:04.000 We're definitely more intelligent than a lot of other animals that we can observe.
00:18:08.000 But what we can do that is interesting is we can radically change and manipulate our environment.
00:18:14.000 And I think it's preposterous to think that that wouldn't be interesting to another species.
00:18:19.000 Now, if you're thinking of something that's infinitely more advanced than us, millions and millions of years more advanced than us, it probably won't be impressed with us.
00:18:26.000 But we have...
00:18:29.000 Biologists go to the jungle to study bugs.
00:18:32.000 I mean, we have people that spend a large portion of their life looking for strange little mammals that live in the forest.
00:18:39.000 But think about it.
00:18:40.000 Our technology is evolving on a three-year timescale.
00:18:43.000 So, you know, it's a century old, the technologies we have.
00:18:47.000 So think what it would be a hundred years from now, a thousand years from now, a million years from now, a billion years.
00:18:53.000 I believe that an advanced technological civilization probably builds a cocoon around itself.
00:18:59.000 It's not really interested in establishing contact with lesser civilizations like ours.
00:19:04.000 But why wouldn't it be?
00:19:05.000 Because we're, you know, not...
00:19:08.000 First of all, the only thing that can happen as a result of interaction with us is that they will downgrade their lifestyle, the quality of life.
00:19:15.000 So the only way for us to learn about them is from the trash they throw out.
00:19:19.000 Just like investigative journalists looking through the trash of celebrities in Hollywood to find out what are they doing.
00:19:29.000 But I don't think they will care much about us.
00:19:32.000 I do.
00:19:33.000 Let me offer you up another possibility.
00:19:35.000 What if they have recognized that all life, regardless of the ingredients in the cake and how they're put together, that all life seeks innovation and seeks to advance, and that this is a constant throughout the universe.
00:19:48.000 That things go from single-celled organisms to multi-celled organisms to interstellar travelers.
00:19:54.000 And that they continue along this path as long as they don't fall into a few possible scenarios that could lead to ultimate destruction, like nuclear war, like climate change, like all the things that we're involved in right now.
00:20:08.000 But that's the point.
00:20:08.000 I think advanced civilizations are probably short-lived because of stupidity.
00:20:15.000 Now, look, for example, at the concept of racism.
00:20:18.000 You know, that's not new anymore.
00:20:20.000 You know, there was the Nazi regime, okay, in the Second World War, and racism is still around us.
00:20:26.000 What is it based on that somehow the color of the skin of a person, you know, makes a difference as to...
00:20:34.000 Well, it's essentially tribalism, right?
00:20:36.000 Because if it's not the color of the skin, then it's the origin of the religion.
00:20:39.000 But it's stupidity.
00:20:40.000 It's stupidity.
00:20:41.000 Yeah, it makes no sense.
00:20:42.000 If you look at the genetic making of humans...
00:20:44.000 The color of the skin is completely superfluous.
00:20:47.000 Right.
00:21:01.000 Is in fighting each other.
00:21:03.000 That is not a sign of intelligence.
00:21:05.000 A sign of intelligence is working together, dedicating all the resources that we have towards a better future such that we can benefit from it.
00:21:13.000 So how can we waste all these risks?
00:21:16.000 You know, just to give you an example, in my book I talk about Winston Churchill.
00:21:20.000 Winston Churchill in 1939 wrote an essay about the fact that There could be life on other planets, around other stars, and we should search for it.
00:21:32.000 Now, he didn't have a chance to publish it because he became prime minister and then had to fight the Second World War against the Nazi regime.
00:21:39.000 So much money was wasted in that war.
00:21:42.000 If that money was allocated to the search for extraterrestrial life the way that Churchill envisioned it before the war, We might have known the answer by now.
00:21:53.000 And what I'm saying is this is just an example for how non-intelligent we are.
00:21:58.000 We are not working together towards a better future.
00:22:01.000 We're fighting each other.
00:22:03.000 And that's the answer to your question, that we might not live very long.
00:22:06.000 But you're saying this as you work at Harvard and as you're writing books on extraterrestrial objects.
00:22:14.000 I don't necessarily agree with you.
00:22:16.000 I think there are massive problems with people, but I think we are far better than the human beings that lived 2,000 years ago in that regard.
00:22:23.000 And I think that we will probably be looking back on this day and age and mocking how stupid we are when we are more advanced 2,000 years from today.
00:22:32.000 I really hope so, and that's I think we're moving in that direction.
00:22:35.000 Well, that's what I'm trying to promote, but I'm not necessarily as optimistic as you are.
00:22:40.000 I think our cake is still in the oven.
00:22:42.000 Let's hope so.
00:22:42.000 I really want that future.
00:22:45.000 I'm doing my best, but you can see from the pushback...
00:22:48.000 Yes.
00:22:49.000 To which I don't have access because I don't have an account on the social media.
00:22:54.000 Congratulations again for that.
00:22:56.000 I think there's conflict, but I think for whatever reason, the way human beings operate, we oftentimes need conflict in order to make improvements.
00:23:09.000 We need a yin and a yang.
00:23:10.000 We need to give in a poll.
00:23:11.000 If we don't have that, we get complacent.
00:23:14.000 Why can't we understand the best path forward without...
00:23:18.000 You know, it's just like using a GPS system and it says recalculating.
00:23:22.000 Every time we have a crisis, recalculating.
00:23:24.000 So we recalculate our next move based on all the mistakes we've made.
00:23:30.000 Why can't we be smart in the first I think we have biological limitations that are based on our ancestry.
00:23:35.000 And our ancestry is filled with tribalism and chaos.
00:23:38.000 And we're primates.
00:23:39.000 I mean, that's part of the problem.
00:23:41.000 And I think that our issue with racism is the same issue that we have when we have religious discrimination or cultural discrimination.
00:23:48.000 It's tribalism.
00:23:49.000 I agree.
00:23:50.000 And we are, you know, it's wired into our DNA. Now, my problem is, why couldn't science, given that...
00:23:58.000 You know, there are billions of Earth-Sun systems within just the Milky Way galaxy.
00:24:04.000 And then a trillion galaxies like the Milky Way in the observable volume of the universe.
00:24:09.000 You know, why can't the mainstream of astronomy simply say, conservatively, you know, just assuming the most conservative, not speculative assumption.
00:24:22.000 Conservatively, we are the middle of the road, you know, kind of life.
00:24:27.000 It's very likely that we're not unique and special.
00:24:30.000 And let's just look for evidence, you know, search for it.
00:24:33.000 Why should there be a taboo on discussing this subject?
00:24:37.000 That makes no sense.
00:24:38.000 For example, astronomers are now thinking, contemplating new telescopes of the future that will cost billions of dollars to taxpayers, okay, that would search for oxygen.
00:24:51.000 In the atmospheres of other planets around other stars, because oxygen could be indicative of life, microbial life.
00:24:58.000 I say it will never be conclusive, such as such, even if it costs billions of dollars, because the Earth, for two billion years, the first two billion years of the Earth's history, didn't have much oxygen in its atmosphere.
00:25:13.000 There were microbes, but the oxygen level was quite low.
00:25:17.000 And then it suddenly rose after two billion years, half of its life.
00:25:20.000 So not finding oxygen doesn't mean there is no life.
00:25:23.000 And then if you find oxygen, it can be produced by many natural processes like breaking water molecules or other things.
00:25:31.000 So it will never be conclusive.
00:25:33.000 How can you make a conclusive statement if you find industrial pollution in the same atmosphere?
00:25:38.000 You just search...
00:25:40.000 For CFCs, these are the molecules produced by refrigerating systems, by industries.
00:25:46.000 If you find evidence for that, there is no way that nature can make these very complex molecules naturally.
00:25:52.000 So I say to the mainstream of astronomy, use the same instruments and motivate them by this question of, can we detect industrial pollution?
00:26:03.000 And I wrote a paper about it.
00:26:04.000 And the thing is, the public is extremely interested in this question.
00:26:10.000 And the public funds science.
00:26:12.000 So how can the scientific community shy away from a question that it can address with existing technology, you know?
00:26:22.000 When the public is very interested in that, how can there be a taboo on this question?
00:26:27.000 That's the thing that really puzzles me.
00:26:29.000 Now, you know, I wasn't working in this area until the last five years or so.
00:26:34.000 I was working in studying black holes, studying the universe, and I came across a number of ideas that led me into this rabbit hole, into this subject.
00:26:47.000 Now I'm about to publish this book at a popular level, but also a textbook, Six months later, that describes all the science that we have related to the search for life outside Earth, far from Earth.
00:27:00.000 And I'm just amazed that it's not part of the mainstream.
00:27:05.000 You know, it's really surprising to me.
00:27:07.000 And I think it's inappropriate because you look at physics, theoretical physics.
00:27:12.000 There are lots of speculative ideas in it, like people talk about extra dimensions, the multiverse, supersymmetry, superstring theory.
00:27:21.000 All of these have no evidence to their credit.
00:27:25.000 There is no experimental test, not even...
00:27:30.000 We're good to go.
00:27:45.000 To me, that's an unhealthy situation in physics.
00:27:48.000 You know, you can do it in mathematics where it's completely detached from any application to reality.
00:27:54.000 But in physics, we are supposed to describe reality.
00:27:58.000 And yet you have this intellect.
00:27:59.000 So it's as if the physics community, some parts of it, decided that the most important task is to demonstrate that you're smart.
00:28:08.000 And that is really strange to me because, you know, we're supposed to understand nature, not show that we are smart.
00:28:14.000 You know, Einstein made three big mistakes at the end of his career in the 1930s.
00:28:19.000 He argued that black holes don't exist, gravitational waves don't exist, and quantum mechanics doesn't have spooky action at a distance.
00:28:28.000 You know, he argued all these three things at the end of his career when he was the most experienced, you know.
00:28:33.000 And he was wrong.
00:28:35.000 We have experimental data that shows that he was wrong on all three.
00:28:38.000 What is the lesson from that?
00:28:56.000 It's better not to take risks.
00:28:58.000 And how do you not take risks?
00:29:00.000 If you work on ideas that will never be tested against data, against evidence.
00:29:06.000 So if you work on superstring theory or on extra dimensions or on the multiverse, you can do intellectual gymnastics and impress your colleagues that you're smart.
00:29:15.000 And you will get jobs, you will get recognition, you will get awards.
00:29:20.000 If that's your goal, that's a completely legitimate framework.
00:29:25.000 But I see it as a violation of our commitment as physicists to understand nature.
00:29:31.000 You know, it's not really about us.
00:29:33.000 Physics is a dialogue with nature.
00:29:35.000 You listen to nature.
00:29:36.000 You see what the experiments are telling you.
00:29:38.000 And you learn.
00:29:39.000 And perhaps you were wrong.
00:29:41.000 You take risks.
00:29:42.000 It's not about your image.
00:29:43.000 It's not getting more likes on Twitter.
00:29:45.000 So that's why I don't really care what my colleagues say.
00:29:49.000 If this object looked...
00:29:51.000 Unusual.
00:29:51.000 I just talk about it the way I would talk about any other anomaly.
00:29:55.000 And people were asking, you know, why isn't he backing down?
00:29:59.000 Well, I will back down as soon as there is evidence.
00:30:02.000 You know, if I saw a photograph showing that it's a rock, or if I saw some other objects like it, that we definitely have clear evidence that they are naturally produced, then I will give up on it.
00:30:12.000 And I'm not afraid of being wrong.
00:30:14.000 You know, that's part of any work on the frontiers.
00:30:17.000 This is my thoughts on the quantum physics aspect of this.
00:30:22.000 I think there's not enough people that understand what they're doing to criticize them, so there's no social pressure.
00:30:28.000 The difference between that and the concept of exploring extraterrestrial life is extraterrestrial life is inexorably connected to nonsense.
00:30:37.000 It's connected to crazy people that think that they're talking to aliens.
00:30:43.000 They're channeling people from the other planet.
00:30:45.000 I have an answer to that.
00:30:47.000 Suppose there was a whole literature on COVID-19 that is completely fictitious.
00:30:53.000 People were saying crazy things about COVID-19 that make no sense whatsoever.
00:30:58.000 You can find them.
00:31:00.000 Suppose there were books about it.
00:31:02.000 There were films about it.
00:31:05.000 Now, would that mean that scientists, reputable scientists, should not work on a vaccine for COVID? No, no, no.
00:31:12.000 So who cares if there are people that say nonsense?
00:31:14.000 You don't care.
00:31:14.000 You ignore them.
00:31:16.000 COVID-19 is a real thing.
00:31:17.000 You can prove it in a lab quickly, instantly.
00:31:19.000 I mean, it's universally acknowledged as being a real thing.
00:31:22.000 The problem with extraterrestrial life is there's no evidence that it's real.
00:31:24.000 Well, but if you step on the grass...
00:31:27.000 And you say, look, it doesn't grow, then obviously because you're stepping on it.
00:31:31.000 So if you bully anyone that works on the subject, then young people don't enter into this research field.
00:31:37.000 If you don't fund it at all, you dry it up, then there will not be discoveries.
00:31:41.000 And then you say, look, there are no discoveries.
00:31:42.000 I step on the grass, it doesn't grow.
00:31:45.000 Therefore, there is no point in continuing to wait for it, you know, to grow.
00:31:49.000 I agree with you.
00:31:49.000 No, I think it's a side effect of our social interactions.
00:31:56.000 And I think a lot of professors, a lot of people in academia, they come from maybe a more socially awkward...
00:32:05.000 They come from a lot of people that get into teaching.
00:32:09.000 A lot of people that get into being professors.
00:32:11.000 They weren't like the class king.
00:32:13.000 They weren't like the most popular person.
00:32:15.000 And social interactions with them, you know, maybe they were bullied.
00:32:19.000 Maybe they're like Dr. Carl Hart, who's an academic who was on a couple days ago, was actually talking about this very subject.
00:32:25.000 And that a lot of academics, they try to undermine other people's work.
00:32:31.000 And they do so in kind of a bullying fashion.
00:32:34.000 Yeah, because it's all about the ego, you see.
00:32:36.000 I was asked by the Harvard Gazette, the Harvard University Gazette, which is the Pravda of Harvard, you know, this official newspaper of Harvard.
00:32:46.000 They asked me, what is the one thing you would like to change about the world?
00:32:51.000 You know, a very big question.
00:32:53.000 So I wrote an essay.
00:32:54.000 I said, I want my colleagues to behave more like kids.
00:32:59.000 Because as a kid, I remember that.
00:33:01.000 You know, I was mostly curious about the world.
00:33:03.000 I would not be afraid of making mistakes.
00:33:06.000 I wasn't worried about my ego or my something...
00:33:10.000 Really strange happens to those kids that take risks and are not worried about themselves so much.
00:33:17.000 Something bad happens to them when they become tenured professors in academia.
00:33:22.000 Tenure is supposed to give you the freedom to explore directions that may turn out to be wrong.
00:33:29.000 That's what Einstein demonstrated at the end of his career.
00:33:33.000 So You would expect people to take advantage of that but instead once professors become tenured for life meaning that there is no risk to their job They are starting to pursue honors and awards,
00:33:48.000 status, recognition.
00:33:50.000 They are afraid of making mistakes.
00:33:52.000 They build these echo chambers where they have students and postdocs repeating their mantras so that their voice will sound louder, so that they will get even more recognition.
00:34:04.000 Now, I say the scientific inquiry is not about us.
00:34:11.000 It's about the dialogue with nature, trying to figure out what nature is.
00:34:16.000 It's not about elevating our status, our image.
00:34:18.000 You know, we will all die in several decades.
00:34:20.000 So, you know, it's really not that.
00:34:22.000 Now, you know, actually, Lex Friedman was asking me, Avi, you know so much, what do you think is the meaning of life?
00:34:33.000 And I told him, look...
00:34:37.000 I think we just exist.
00:34:38.000 Any meaning that we assign now will go away in a billion years because the sun will boil off the oceans on Earth.
00:34:47.000 There will be no life on Earth.
00:34:48.000 All of these things that we call meaning, they are really temporary in the big scale.
00:34:54.000 We should just enjoy the process, just like eating good food.
00:34:58.000 I will not mention another example.
00:35:02.000 You know, doing this, like eating good food, you enjoy the process.
00:35:06.000 So learning about the world, figuring out what the world is, is very enjoyable.
00:35:12.000 You know, if I realize something nobody else did...
00:35:17.000 And understand something that nobody else did, it gives me pleasure.
00:35:21.000 So just the process of doing that, that gives me meaning because I enjoy it.
00:35:27.000 So you should live your life in a way that you enjoy it.
00:35:30.000 If you like good food, that's good enough.
00:35:32.000 You can live your life just eating.
00:35:34.000 That's what animals do.
00:35:36.000 You can have sex.
00:35:38.000 You can do all kinds.
00:35:40.000 But...
00:35:41.000 If you want a deeper sort of satisfaction, I think understanding the world is what humans are capable of doing.
00:35:48.000 And that's really a deeper level of enjoying life, so to speak.
00:35:52.000 Well, there's a lot of examples of professors going out on a limb, being incorrect, and then being punished, being ridiculed, losing their status in the community, or even being correct, but not having the support of your peers who turn on you and turn against you,
00:36:10.000 and then it turns out ultimately they were correct, but there's very little...
00:36:13.000 We're good to go.
00:36:32.000 To get ridiculed for believing in it.
00:36:34.000 It's like Bigfoot and then extraterrestrial life.
00:36:37.000 No, I want to change that.
00:36:38.000 I say this is a subject the scientific community can address with scientific tools, okay, with telescopes.
00:36:44.000 Let's discuss it.
00:36:45.000 The public is interested.
00:36:47.000 You know, let's forget about the past and look for a better future, right?
00:36:50.000 And my point is...
00:36:53.000 There are many examples for unborn babies in science where people were ridiculed and ideas were never pursued or delayed.
00:37:02.000 For example, looking for planets around other stars.
00:37:06.000 That was something that was suggested in 1952 by an astronomer called Otto Struve, who said if you take Jupiter, the planet Jupiter, put it close to the Sun, then it will move the Sun back and forth A lot.
00:37:22.000 And you could tell if there is a close-in Jupiter near other stars by looking at their motion.
00:37:28.000 Or looking as it occults the star, comes in front of it, transits in front.
00:37:32.000 He suggested that 1952, for four decades, astronomers ignored that.
00:37:38.000 Why?
00:37:39.000 Because they said, we know that Jupiter in our solar system is far away, and we understand why it's far away, and therefore we shouldn't waste our time even looking for something like that.
00:37:52.000 Then, in 1995, a couple of astronomers found a hot Jupiter, a Jupiter close to a star, and they got the Nobel Prize a couple of years ago for that.
00:38:02.000 So my point is, this is an example of a baby that was eventually born.
00:38:07.000 So people would say, oh yeah, science works, you see, eventually it was found.
00:38:12.000 My point is it took four decades.
00:38:14.000 In those four decades, you know, we could have done a lot to advance science.
00:38:18.000 And the other thing is, I say, okay, this baby was born, but there might have been other babies that were not born.
00:38:25.000 You know, ideas that were put forward and were scrutinized for no good reason just because people are close-minded.
00:38:33.000 You know, the strange thing for me is that I see a lot of innovation in the commercial sector.
00:38:37.000 You see, you know, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, you know, Apple, Google.
00:38:44.000 They have...
00:38:46.000 I think?
00:39:05.000 Now, the commercial sector is after making a profit.
00:39:08.000 You would expect academia to be even more open-minded, but it's not.
00:39:13.000 And to me, that must change.
00:39:16.000 Is this something that you had as an idea before publishing these thoughts about extraterrestrial life?
00:39:23.000 And did that accentuate it for you?
00:39:26.000 I didn't expect the response that I received.
00:39:29.000 It doesn't bother me.
00:39:31.000 I have more than 800 papers that I published and eight books.
00:39:38.000 In all of these, I talk about anomalies.
00:39:42.000 Over the years, I talked about anomalies in other contexts, like in the early universe and And when I mentioned speculative ideas in other contexts, there was no pushback.
00:39:56.000 It wasn't threatening to anyone.
00:40:00.000 But something about the subject of extraterrestrial life bothers people.
00:40:04.000 And frankly, I'm just like a kid.
00:40:07.000 I try to be as close as possible to the way I was at a young age.
00:40:11.000 I'm just doing it innocently.
00:40:15.000 Working on this subject the same way I work on other subjects, and I get this response that...
00:40:21.000 Now, the only reason the two of us are speaking, you know, and I get a lot of media attention is because my colleagues are not behaving the same way.
00:40:28.000 If everyone would accept...
00:40:29.000 You know, I think it's common sense.
00:40:31.000 What is common sense to me, if everyone would accept it, I would be no different than the person next to me.
00:40:36.000 You wouldn't be speaking to me.
00:40:39.000 Sure I would.
00:40:40.000 No, I still would be.
00:40:41.000 I would love to talk to you.
00:40:42.000 You know, I grew up on a farm, by the way.
00:40:44.000 I'm not a typical astronomer.
00:40:46.000 Yeah, you were explaining that.
00:40:48.000 Did you grow up in Israel?
00:40:49.000 Yeah, I grew up in Israel on a farm.
00:40:51.000 I used to collect eggs every afternoon and drive a tractor to the hills and read primarily philosophy books.
00:40:58.000 I was interested in the big questions.
00:41:00.000 But then, you know, I had to serve in the military.
00:41:03.000 And I had two options, either to run in the fields with a machine gun, you know, Which I did partly.
00:41:11.000 Or to do intellectual work.
00:41:14.000 And I could do that if I were to work in physics.
00:41:17.000 So I said, okay, I'll do the physics.
00:41:22.000 And I was recruited to a special program that allowed me to finish my PhD at age 24. And then I worked on, not on astronomy, but then I visited, I actually led the first project that was funded by the Star Wars initiative of Ronald Reagan back in the 80s.
00:41:42.000 The first international project.
00:41:44.000 So General Abramson came to visit Israel and we presented the project to him.
00:41:49.000 I was the theorist leading that project and he liked it a lot.
00:41:53.000 So it was the first project to be funded outside the U.S. related to SDI, the Star Wars initiative.
00:42:00.000 So that brought me to visit Washington quite often because we were funded by the U.S. And in one of the visits, I went to Princeton because I heard that Albert Einstein was at the Institute for Advanced Study and wanted to see the place.
00:42:15.000 Someone introduced me to John Bacall, who was an astrophysicist there, working mostly on the sun for his career.
00:42:25.000 I didn't know how the sun shines when I met him.
00:42:29.000 Eventually, he invited me for a month-long visit and then offered me a five-year fellowship.
00:42:34.000 And at that point, I said, okay, I have this offer.
00:42:38.000 I cannot decline it.
00:42:40.000 I'll go into astrophysics.
00:42:41.000 So I switched into astrophysics.
00:42:44.000 I had to learn the vocabulary.
00:42:46.000 And then a position came at Harvard, junior faculty, and nobody wanted it.
00:42:50.000 There was someone else that was offered it.
00:42:52.000 He turned it down because the chance of getting tenured at Harvard were very small at the time.
00:42:58.000 And I took it because I could always go back to the farm.
00:43:01.000 You know, that was a plan B for me and maybe even better plan because...
00:43:05.000 You know, I enjoy nature.
00:43:07.000 But then they promoted me to tenure in three years, and I became the chair of the department a decade and a half later.
00:43:14.000 So I was the longest serving chair between 2011 and 2020, so that's three terms.
00:43:21.000 So, you know, I'm in a way part of, should be regarded as part of the establishment, because I was the chair of the Harvard astronomy department for nine years, three terms.
00:43:31.000 And I also chair the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies.
00:43:35.000 And I was a member of President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology in Washington.
00:43:42.000 And I'm also chair of the Starshot Initiative of the Breakthrough Foundation.
00:43:48.000 I have a lot of leadership, and I'm the director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at Harvard and the founding director of the Black Hole Initiative, which is a center just focusing on black holes.
00:44:00.000 So I have all these leadership positions, but fundamentally, I'm just like a kid.
00:44:05.000 I don't care about these labels.
00:44:08.000 I try to keep my eyes on the ball.
00:44:16.000 Now, to go back to Oumuamua, you were saying that it was moving at a speed that was inconsistent with something that's being thrown from the sun and that it moved faster than any rocket that we can shoot out.
00:44:31.000 How fast was it moving?
00:44:34.000 It was moving when it went close to us, over 50 kilometers per second, which is, you know, think about it, well, of order, 30 miles per second, second, not hour.
00:44:47.000 So, very fast.
00:44:49.000 Now, by the time we spotted it, It was already moving away from us.
00:44:55.000 So it's just like seeing a guest for dinner and then noticing that the guest is weird once it left through the front door into the dark street.
00:45:07.000 So you can't...
00:45:07.000 By now, you know, as it moved out, by now it's extremely faint.
00:45:12.000 It's a million times fainter than it was when it was close to us.
00:45:16.000 What is the normal speed of a comet?
00:45:20.000 It's at least twice as slow.
00:45:23.000 So all the comets and asteroids we have seen before are bound to the Sun.
00:45:27.000 And so they come from the outer part of the solar system.
00:45:30.000 They are sinking on an orbit that almost goes towards the Sun, but not quite.
00:45:37.000 And so they pass near us, some of them.
00:45:40.000 Most of them are moving far away from us, so we don't see any cometary tail.
00:45:46.000 Because they are bound to the sun, they are not moving as fast as an object that came from outside that is falling near.
00:45:52.000 And we could tell that it is an interstellar object.
00:45:55.000 That was the first thing noticed.
00:45:57.000 We didn't expect it because I wrote a paper about 12 years earlier saying...
00:46:06.000 That this telescope in Hawaii that discovered Oumuamua, and that's why it has this name, by the way, because it means a scout in the Hawaiian language, a messenger from far away.
00:46:17.000 Oumuamua.
00:46:19.000 It was discovered by a telescope called PANSTARS on Mount Haleakala in Maui, in Hawaii.
00:46:25.000 We actually visited that observatory in July 2017 with my family.
00:46:30.000 We were on vacation in Maui.
00:46:32.000 But back then...
00:46:34.000 They didn't spot Oumuamua when it was approaching us at that time.
00:46:39.000 They spotted it only in October that year when it was receding away.
00:46:44.000 If we would have known about it when it was approaching us, we could have in principle sent a CubeSat, a satellite, with a camera that would meet it.
00:46:54.000 Halfway and take a photograph.
00:46:57.000 Not only that we didn't spot it approaching us, but we also didn't suspect that it's something special.
00:47:02.000 Now, there was a second object that came later called Borisov.
00:47:08.000 It's called after a Russian amateur astronomer, Gennady Borisov.
00:47:13.000 They discovered it by chance, and it looked just like a comet, a typical comet with a cometary tail, also came from interstellar space, just what we expected.
00:47:23.000 So then people came to me and said, okay, you see, this one is a comet, it's interstellar as well.
00:47:29.000 Doesn't it convince you that Oumuamua was also natural in origin?
00:47:34.000 And I said, you know, when I went to the first date with my wife, I thought that she's special and unique.
00:47:43.000 The fact that I met a lot of women since then didn't change that opinion.
00:47:47.000 I still think that she's special.
00:47:49.000 So the fact that we saw Borisov, like a typical, regular, usual comet, after we saw Muamua that didn't look like a comet, doesn't change my opinion.
00:47:59.000 So you think they were just hastily looking to dismiss your observations?
00:48:03.000 Well, it was not my observation, but they were trying to make the case that it's also natural.
00:48:08.000 So, you know, the community as a whole, there was a group of astronomers that came together and said, it is natural.
00:48:14.000 It is unusual, but it's probably natural.
00:48:17.000 They just said that.
00:48:18.000 And it reminded me of a story about in the early 1930s, there was a group like of 30 physicists that decided to write a book showing that Einstein's theory of relativity is wrong.
00:48:33.000 So when Einstein was asked about it, he said, you know, why do you need 30 physicists to write such a book?
00:48:41.000 You know, one of them would be enough.
00:48:42.000 You know, if he makes a good argument, that would show that my theory is wrong.
00:48:47.000 So, a kid can make a good argument and show that something is wrong.
00:48:50.000 You don't need a group.
00:48:51.000 The only reason you need a group of people is if there is sort of a herd, you know, just like in Africa, if you have a group of lions coming together, then they feel much more strong, you know, and so it's just a sign of authority.
00:49:05.000 They want to establish authority.
00:49:06.000 My point about Oumuamua is you don't need a group of astronomers to come together and say that it's natural.
00:49:13.000 I just want them to look at the evidence and explain it.
00:49:19.000 I appreciate that.
00:49:20.000 Now, the speed in which it was traveling, you said that it's twice as fast, at least, as the average comment.
00:49:28.000 Have there been other things that have been observed that are as fast as it?
00:49:32.000 No, this was the first object that we saw coming from outside the solar system.
00:49:37.000 So it was the fastest...
00:49:39.000 At the place where we saw it.
00:49:41.000 The fastest ever.
00:49:43.000 Because all the other objects were bound to the sun.
00:49:46.000 And by the way, there is this principle that is called the Copernican principle that says we are never at a privileged time or space.
00:49:57.000 You know, Copernicus Was arguing that we are not at the center of the universe.
00:50:02.000 We're not at the center of the world.
00:50:04.000 And you can generalize it and say also that we are never at a special time, okay?
00:50:08.000 So if we saw this object over a period of a few years that the survey of PanStars was going on, In the region of the Earth's orbit around the Sun, that means that there are many more out there.
00:50:24.000 You know, you can't just be lucky that over a few years you see the only object that passes in our vicinity over billions of years.
00:50:31.000 You know, that makes no sense.
00:50:33.000 So there will be many more that we will find in the future if we just look.
00:50:37.000 And in three years, there would be another telescope much more sensitive than Pan-STARRS called the Vera Rubin Observatory.
00:50:46.000 That could see one such object every month, you know?
00:50:50.000 The only thing that complicates the picture is that Elon Musk wants to launch all these SpaceX, all these communication satellites.
00:51:00.000 And, you know, they reflect sunlight.
00:51:03.000 So when they go in the dark sky, they appear on the telescope images.
00:51:09.000 So we have to know where they are and subtract them off.
00:51:12.000 But that's all.
00:51:13.000 Now, this object you also deemed, when you were talking about its reflective surface, that there's something about it that is much more reflective.
00:51:25.000 I believe you said 10 times more reflective than the average...
00:51:29.000 Than the typical.
00:51:30.000 Yeah, it's...
00:51:30.000 Okay, so how did we get that?
00:51:34.000 The Spitzer Space Telescope was trying to detect heat coming off the object because we know how close it came to the sun.
00:51:41.000 And we know what temperature it was heated to, okay?
00:51:45.000 So the amount of heat that we can detect from it just depends on its size.
00:51:50.000 If it's very big and it's hot, we would easily detect the heat.
00:51:54.000 And this is about the size of a football field?
00:51:56.000 So then, yeah, so it's less than a football field.
00:51:58.000 So from the fact that the Spitzel spacecraft didn't see any heat coming off it, you can put an upper limit.
00:52:04.000 You can say the size is smaller than something, okay?
00:52:07.000 Roughly the size of a football field.
00:52:09.000 And then you can infer how much reflectance it should have so that you see as much light, as much sunlight coming off it as we saw.
00:52:18.000 And it's at the shiny end of the objects that we have seen before.
00:52:23.000 I mean, it's not completely unprecedented.
00:52:25.000 There are objects that are as shiny as this one, but it's not, you know, one of the dark objects, you know, like middle-of-the-road kind of objects.
00:52:33.000 It's at the shiny end.
00:52:36.000 And so that, in your mind, what is similar in terms of what you would expect from something that's this reflective, that's that shiny?
00:52:50.000 So what we've seen before are asteroids and comets, a small fraction of which are as shiny.
00:52:58.000 None of them is 10 times longer than it is wide.
00:53:03.000 So it's cigar-shaped, roughly.
00:53:06.000 And the comets that show as much push as this object exhibited, they have very clear cometary tails.
00:53:15.000 So I say, you know, okay, suppose it represents 10% of the objects that show one anomalous property, and then 10% of the objects that show another anomalous property, and then 10% of the objects that show another anomalous property.
00:53:29.000 You multiply all these probabilities, you get a very small likelihood.
00:53:33.000 Of getting such an object.
00:53:35.000 And this is the first that we have seen.
00:53:37.000 So it should be typical.
00:53:38.000 So how come the very first interstellar object, or maybe one out of two if you include Borisov, how come it's so unusual relative to the objects we have seen in the solar system?
00:53:49.000 So my point is, let's Let's be open-minded.
00:53:56.000 Why assume that we know the answer in advance?
00:53:59.000 What is so problematic in discussing?
00:54:02.000 I don't think it's a speculation that there are other civilizations out there.
00:54:06.000 Maybe they're dead because they killed themselves.
00:54:08.000 You know, they produced the means for their own destruction.
00:54:11.000 They didn't take care of the climate.
00:54:13.000 They didn't...
00:54:14.000 We're good to go.
00:54:37.000 From dead civilizations.
00:54:38.000 And one type of relics are those space junk, you know, the things that they threw out that we can find visiting our solar system.
00:54:47.000 So why not check for it?
00:54:48.000 Now, everything you've said is very rational.
00:54:51.000 It makes perfect sense.
00:54:53.000 What are the arguments against this?
00:54:55.000 Like when your colleagues disagree with you, what fuel do they possibly have?
00:55:00.000 For example, they say it's never aliens.
00:55:03.000 It's never aliens.
00:55:04.000 Never, until the aliens come.
00:55:06.000 What do they think about things like Commander David Fravor's interpretations of the experience that he had off of the coast of San Diego, where something moved from 60,000 plus feet above sea level to one in a second?
00:55:20.000 On that, I would say, on unidentified flying objects, I think the scientific community should invest some effort at examining these reports.
00:55:33.000 Basically, you can deploy a whole set of instruments.
00:55:37.000 In the ocean where the Nimitz carrier was and search for objects similar to the reports and do a scientific study of this rather than dismissing it and moving on to work on extra dimensions.
00:55:58.000 Given that the public is so curious about these issues, I just find it inappropriate not to listen to the...
00:56:04.000 By the way, I don't think of science as an occupation of the elite.
00:56:08.000 It's not something that is supposed to elevate you to a higher status.
00:56:12.000 You know, when a plumber comes to my home to fix a problem with the toilet or with the pipe, you know, I help the plumber and we figure out what the problem is based on all the clues that...
00:56:23.000 This is my way of life.
00:56:24.000 I think about a problem in the sink or in the toilet, just like I think about a problem in physics.
00:56:31.000 Trying to apply common sense, look at all the evidence, the clues, and figure out what's going on.
00:56:36.000 And I think anyone, even without professional education, should be able to follow what the scientists are doing.
00:56:44.000 But my colleagues argue we should...
00:56:49.000 Be quiet as long as we are not sure about the interpretation.
00:56:54.000 You know, once we decide that we have the right answer, we come out to the public and tell the public what it is.
00:57:01.000 Because otherwise nobody would believe us that there is global warming, for example.
00:57:07.000 My point is exactly the opposite.
00:57:09.000 I say...
00:57:11.000 Nobody would believe you if you don't show, expose the process by which you arrive at the conclusion.
00:57:17.000 So, most of science is not...
00:57:23.000 We're finalized.
00:57:24.000 Most of the scientific process does not have enough evidence.
00:57:28.000 We don't know exactly what's going on.
00:57:29.000 So we're trying to collect clues, evidence.
00:57:32.000 And that's part of the process.
00:57:33.000 It's a learning experience.
00:57:35.000 Sometimes we make mistakes.
00:57:36.000 It's completely human to make mistakes.
00:57:38.000 We should show the public that it's okay.
00:57:41.000 The public will understand that because it's part of our experience.
00:57:46.000 And then when scientists have enough evidence to conclude something, The public will believe it now because they see how the process goes, that as you collect enough evidence, eventually it's clear.
00:57:58.000 Instead of forcing scientists to be quiet until the last moment, and then they look like teachers in a class coming out with a press announcement of some result, and every now and then those press conferences end up being wronged.
00:58:15.000 So their quarrel with you is that they think that your assumption that it's alien in nature is incorrect or hasty?
00:58:24.000 No, we shouldn't discuss it because the alien interpretation could be contemplated in many other occasions.
00:58:37.000 But this is not a typical situation.
00:58:41.000 We have the first object from interstellar space.
00:58:44.000 It looks strange.
00:58:46.000 Go for it.
00:58:47.000 Let's collect more evidence.
00:58:49.000 The public is interested, so what's the problem?
00:58:51.000 I don't see any problem with discussing this possibility, putting it on the table, and looking for more evidence.
00:58:57.000 Why would there be a taboo on this subject?
00:59:00.000 What is their interpretation of the evidence?
00:59:03.000 When you lay out all the things you said about the shape of this object, the speed of it, where it's coming from, all these variables that are very unusual.
00:59:12.000 So they say each of them is indeed unusual.
00:59:17.000 But probably there is a natural explanation.
00:59:20.000 And then they say, it's within my comfort zone to just ignore it.
00:59:24.000 Let's forget about it.
00:59:25.000 It's natural.
00:59:25.000 The first ever interstellar object moving twice as fast as any comet we've ever observed with no tail, with a shiny reflective surface that has an extremely unusual shape that's ten times longer than it is wide, and they just want to ignore it.
00:59:41.000 Yeah.
00:59:41.000 That seems silly.
00:59:42.000 And it's flat, most likely flat, according to this.
00:59:45.000 Yeah, I mean, look, I'm telling you that, frankly, I don't benefit from this exchange with my colleagues.
00:59:55.000 On the contrary, I'm sure that behind my back they are saying bad things.
01:00:00.000 But the way I see it is when I served in the military, and I did some training in the paratroopers and so forth, There was this saying that sometimes a soldier has to put his body on the barbed wire so that others can pass across.
01:00:19.000 And the way I see it is that I'm trying to create an atmosphere, an intellectual atmosphere that would be...
01:00:27.000 More open-minded that would allow younger people to have a better future and discuss these subjects.
01:00:35.000 To me, I also think that it's just inappropriate, unhealthy for science to speculate about extra dimensions, about all these things, while avoiding even the discussion on technological signatures.
01:00:50.000 They're not the same people, though, right?
01:00:51.000 Not the same.
01:00:51.000 You're saying science in this gigantic blanket.
01:00:54.000 Yeah, but there is this culture.
01:00:55.000 But quantum physicists and astronomers...
01:00:57.000 They're not the same, but think about it.
01:01:00.000 The mainstream...
01:01:01.000 I mean, astronomers are completely fine with the discussion on extra dimension and the multiverse.
01:01:07.000 They don't complain about it.
01:01:10.000 But it's not their field of discipline, right?
01:01:13.000 Yeah, it doesn't threaten them in any way.
01:01:16.000 I think there is something about extraterrestrial life that is so important for us.
01:01:22.000 That they prefer, just like my colleague said, I wish it never existed.
01:01:26.000 But it's kind of crazy for someone who is an astronomer to not want there to be evidence of extraterrestrial life.
01:01:35.000 Or at least extraterrestrial civilization.
01:01:37.000 Some discarded piece of civilization that's hurling through our galaxy.
01:01:43.000 And that's what you believe, right?
01:01:44.000 You don't think it's actually a ship.
01:01:45.000 You think it's some sort of an object that's like...
01:01:49.000 Artificial.
01:01:50.000 I don't know what it is.
01:01:51.000 It could be just a surface layer.
01:01:54.000 But there's something about the way it was moving.
01:01:56.000 Yeah, it was pushed by sunlight, in my view, just like this.
01:02:00.000 Was it tumbling, though?
01:02:00.000 It was tumbling, so it probably was not functional.
01:02:03.000 It could be a piece of a surface layer of a spaceship that was ripped apart.
01:02:10.000 It's something that...
01:02:12.000 Now, let me mention a few examples that my colleagues suggested.
01:02:15.000 So, those mainstream astronomers that try to explain...
01:02:19.000 The observed properties of Oumuamua.
01:02:21.000 An example for an explanation that is natural was that it's a dust bunny.
01:02:27.000 You know, the kind of thing you find in a household.
01:02:30.000 The collection of dust particles.
01:02:31.000 A dust bunny, you know, you find in the corner.
01:02:34.000 But a size of a football field and a hundred times less dense than air that is pushed by sunlight.
01:02:42.000 What?
01:02:43.000 Very porous.
01:02:44.000 That was an explanation.
01:02:47.000 Of a natural origin.
01:02:49.000 Why would it be so reflective?
01:02:51.000 They didn't discuss that.
01:02:54.000 Then there was another suggestion that it's frozen hydrogen, like a hydrogen iceberg, that evaporates, but hydrogen is transparent, so you can't see the cometary tail.
01:03:07.000 The problem with that is we showed in a scientific paper that it would not survive the journey because hydrogen can easily get evaporated by starlight impacting on its surface.
01:03:19.000 So, you know, these are the kinds of ideas that were...
01:03:21.000 And then there was another idea that maybe it's a piece of an object that was...
01:03:30.000 We're good to go.
01:03:49.000 Now, this object, the way it's detected, you can't see a clear image of it, correct?
01:03:56.000 No, you can't, because it's too small.
01:03:58.000 From the distance it had from Earth, you know, our telescopes are not big enough to...
01:04:05.000 So how do we detect it?
01:04:06.000 What are we detecting?
01:04:07.000 We detect the reflected light from it.
01:04:10.000 The sunlight that bounces off its surface, we can see it.
01:04:14.000 So, you know, it's just reflecting some light and we see it as a point source.
01:04:19.000 But if we were to discover it when it was approaching us, we could have sent a camera that would come close to it and take a photograph.
01:04:26.000 So there's no images of it that anyone can look at?
01:04:30.000 No.
01:04:30.000 So when the machine, when the observatory is detecting it, they are detecting it as data?
01:04:37.000 As a point source of light.
01:04:40.000 A source of light that cannot be resolved.
01:04:44.000 There it is.
01:04:45.000 That's what they're seeing?
01:04:47.000 Yes.
01:04:47.000 So the thing that is circled is Oumuamua, and all these other dots that you see are trails of stars.
01:04:56.000 Now, Oumuamua was moving in the sky very fast, but if we focus on it, then the stars are moving relative to it.
01:05:03.000 And that's why you see from a sequence of snapshots, you see these trailing trails of stars.
01:05:10.000 Now, is there anyone who agrees with you?
01:05:14.000 Well, the people that I worked with.
01:05:16.000 Yes, but I mean, are there other astronomers that have stepped out with you and said, I think he's got some really good points here?
01:05:22.000 Not stepped out, but, you know, behind the scenes.
01:05:25.000 One of the reasons I wrote it up is because, you know, people that I respect told me that they think this is really unusual.
01:05:33.000 The behind the scenes people.
01:05:34.000 Yes.
01:05:35.000 They don't want to step out in public.
01:05:36.000 That's right.
01:05:37.000 Isn't that unusual?
01:05:39.000 Yeah, but I don't...
01:05:39.000 Or not even unusual.
01:05:41.000 It's just sad.
01:05:42.000 It is sad.
01:05:43.000 The entire situation is sad.
01:05:45.000 Well, it's not that sad because, you know, a lot of people are discussing it because of the fact that you have the courage to talk about it openly.
01:05:52.000 Right.
01:05:52.000 Yeah, I mean, it's not sad.
01:05:54.000 It's just, it sort of just explains the state of modern academia and that it's filled with human beings and human beings are flawed.
01:06:01.000 And there's some really typical psychological traits that people that, you know, might be a little socially awkward display.
01:06:09.000 But, by the way, the public is different.
01:06:11.000 Yes.
01:06:12.000 Very different.
01:06:13.000 I get a very different response.
01:06:14.000 Wow.
01:06:14.000 We're dumb, and we depend on people like you, and stories like this are fun.
01:06:18.000 I would turn it around.
01:06:19.000 I would say that you are open-minded, and you are much more forward-looking.
01:06:25.000 Yes, I think the public is more forward-looking when it comes to extraterrestrial life, but also less informed.
01:06:31.000 You know, they believe things they maybe shouldn't believe.
01:06:35.000 And it's a complex, very bizarre issue.
01:06:40.000 But my point is, unless you look, you will never discover those things that you have convictions about.
01:06:45.000 So if the scientific community shies away from this subject, obviously there will be no news, and the public is starved.
01:06:52.000 The reason I get this attention is the public is starved, really wants to know more about it.
01:06:58.000 The scientific community has the ability to explore it, but they shy away from it.
01:07:03.000 So I'm sitting in between, you know, in this very awkward, strange situation.
01:07:07.000 I told my wife, you know, when this story broke out, I said, look, this is, I just cannot believe this, that it's so obvious that the scientific community needs to explore it because the public funds science and its common sense.
01:07:20.000 You know, I just apply common sense to it.
01:07:22.000 And yet my colleagues do not agree with me.
01:07:25.000 You know, I cannot believe this.
01:07:28.000 Well, I believe it also.
01:07:29.000 I think it's also part of the thing that they didn't come to the same conclusion.
01:07:33.000 Even if your data and your interpretation of the data makes sense to them, if they didn't come to that conclusion on their own and you are also in the same field as them, they might want to just diminish their findings.
01:07:45.000 Yes.
01:07:45.000 There is this tendency as well that stems from jealousy to the attention and so forth.
01:07:51.000 But the way I see it, and frankly, it's not about me and it's not about the...
01:07:57.000 Public media attention and so forth.
01:07:59.000 It's about, are we alone?
01:08:01.000 And are we the smartest kid on the block or not?
01:08:06.000 And the only way to find out is by collecting evidence.
01:08:09.000 So let's look for more objects of the same.
01:08:12.000 And that's all I'm trying to advocate.
01:08:15.000 Let's be modest, not say that we know the answer in advance because that would resemble those philosophers that put Galileo in house arrest.
01:08:22.000 Let's be open-minded.
01:08:24.000 And the good news is that science can address this question now.
01:08:28.000 You know, so it's an opportunity that I just cannot believe that my colleagues are not taking advantage of because public is excited.
01:08:35.000 Public funds science.
01:08:37.000 One plus one equals two.
01:08:39.000 Let's get the public engaged behind this to fund future astronomical research at a much higher level than is currently funded.
01:08:49.000 No, instead, the scientists say, no, no, no, thank you.
01:08:52.000 We don't need this gift.
01:08:54.000 We don't want to deal with it.
01:08:56.000 Now this much more powerful observatory that you're saying comes online in three years, where is that going to be located?
01:09:01.000 In Chile.
01:09:02.000 Is that the VLT? No.
01:09:04.000 Well, there is a VLT there in Chile as well.
01:09:07.000 But that's already up?
01:09:07.000 Yeah, that's already up.
01:09:09.000 This is called the Vera Rubin Observatory.
01:09:11.000 And it's even more potent than the VLT. It's a telescope that will survey the sky.
01:09:17.000 The VLT is focusing on a small region of the sky.
01:09:21.000 This is a survey telescope that would look through the sky.
01:09:24.000 Now the purpose of PANSTARS or this telescope was originally defined by Congress that said astronomers should find all the objects that are endangering life on Earth.
01:09:35.000 All the killer asteroids that could wipe us out because the dinosaurs were killed by a giant Stone, you know, a rock, the size of a big city like Manhattan, you know, tens of kilometers in size.
01:09:50.000 And it must have been an amazing sight to be a dinosaur back then because you see this rock coming at you and then boom, and you're gone.
01:09:59.000 They didn't have astronomy, right?
01:10:01.000 The dinosaurs didn't have science, so they couldn't really forecast this day.
01:10:08.000 We have science so we can at least alert ourselves to that danger and perhaps deflect, nudge those killer asteroids that are heading our way.
01:10:18.000 And, you know, there are various ways to nudge them off.
01:10:21.000 You can evaporate part of their surface, just give them a little kick so that they miss the Earth.
01:10:27.000 But first you need to find them.
01:10:28.000 So that's why Pan-STARRS was funded.
01:10:32.000 And it's one of the goals of the Vera Rubin Observatory to identify all these objects that are endangering.
01:10:39.000 But in the process of doing that, you know, Oumuamua was discovered.
01:10:44.000 So when this new one goes online in Chile, will they be looking specifically for the same kinds of things that...
01:10:54.000 No, so science, you know, you just survey the sky.
01:10:57.000 You don't need to know what you're expecting to find.
01:11:00.000 So it's just a blanket view of the sky.
01:11:02.000 Yeah, it's just surveying the sky.
01:11:04.000 And then when they see an object that's moving...
01:11:06.000 Fast, and then if you see that it looks weird, just like Umumu, you can follow up on it.
01:11:11.000 And how much more potent will this one be?
01:11:13.000 Oh, it will be much more sensitive, and it will detect an Umumu-like object roughly once per month.
01:11:19.000 Here it is right here.
01:11:20.000 Yeah.
01:11:20.000 The telescope will produce the deepest, widest image of the universe, 27-foot mirror, the width of a single tennis court, 3,200 megapixel camera.
01:11:33.000 That'll be on the new Samsung Galaxy phone.
01:11:36.000 Each image the size of 40 full moons.
01:11:39.000 What?
01:11:40.000 Yeah.
01:11:41.000 It's a survey of the sky.
01:11:43.000 37 billion stars in galaxies.
01:11:44.000 You know, the biggest challenge with this observatory will be the huge amount of data that it will produce.
01:11:50.000 We cannot store so much data.
01:11:51.000 Look, it says there are 20 terabytes of data every night.
01:11:55.000 Yeah.
01:11:55.000 Wow.
01:11:55.000 Wow.
01:11:56.000 It's amazing.
01:11:57.000 That's insane.
01:11:58.000 Up to 10 million alerts, a thousand pairs of exposures.
01:12:02.000 So the only risk I should say to this survey comes from the communication satellites, these constellations that, you know, at the tens of thousands that SpaceX is planning to put in space.
01:12:14.000 And At first they were not really aware of their risk.
01:12:21.000 But then the astronomers told them, look, you are contaminating our images.
01:12:25.000 And so now they're thinking about coating those communication satellites so that they are dark enough, they don't reflect as much sunlight.
01:12:33.000 We're trying to work together with them, but obviously they have a commercial incentive to put these things out.
01:12:39.000 They do, but what if it puts us in danger?
01:12:41.000 What if we don't see asteroids because they want to get, you know...
01:12:45.000 Well, let's party until the end.
01:12:47.000 You want to get internet access in Antarctica.
01:12:50.000 It just seems a little silly.
01:12:52.000 I mean, it's great, but I don't know if it's the only way to get internet access.
01:12:56.000 I just think the more things we have in the sky, the more things we can't get out of the sky.
01:13:01.000 The problem with the space junk is there's no real tenable plan to take that stuff out.
01:13:08.000 True.
01:13:09.000 That's why I think we will eventually have to leave Earth.
01:13:14.000 Of junk?
01:13:15.000 Yeah, because of all the self-inflicted wounds.
01:13:19.000 But the way I see it is also like the printing press of Gutenberg.
01:13:26.000 Once it was established, it produced many copies of the Bible.
01:13:30.000 Before that, there were very few copies, and each of them was extremely precious.
01:13:35.000 But after the printing press by Gutenberg, there were many copies, so if one of them got damaged, you wouldn't worry too much.
01:13:42.000 So I think that we should produce what we have here on Earth.
01:13:46.000 Currently, all our eggs are in one basket on Earth.
01:13:49.000 But if we spread them in space, in other places, like going to Mars, going to the stars, then if something bad happens on Earth, It wouldn't be that bad, you know.
01:14:01.000 It will be one copy out of many.
01:14:03.000 And you might ask, how can we do that?
01:14:06.000 How can we avoid?
01:14:07.000 So, you know, there is this story in the Bible, in the Old Testament, about Noah.
01:14:12.000 It's called Noah's ark.
01:14:14.000 He was worried about the great flood that will come and wanted to preserve animals.
01:14:22.000 So he built an ark.
01:14:24.000 And by the way, the dimensions of the ark are mentioned explicitly in the Bible, and they are very similar to the dimensions of Oumuamua, but by coincidence.
01:14:33.000 Anyway, so he put the animals on it and saved them.
01:14:38.000 Now, what is the moral of this?
01:14:40.000 How can we preserve life that we have on earth?
01:14:44.000 By sending out a spaceship.
01:14:45.000 So you might think, oh, if we build a big enough spaceship, we can put whales, we can put elephants, we can put birds on it.
01:14:53.000 That's not the smart thing to do.
01:14:56.000 You can just take a small spacecraft, a CubeSat, put a very advanced computer system on it with artificial intelligence and a 3D printer.
01:15:07.000 And you We're good to go.
01:15:33.000 Wouldn't you think that if some civilization got that advanced, that they wouldn't be satisfied with the design that we currently experience?
01:15:40.000 Like the design of the animals, the design of the people.
01:15:43.000 Wouldn't they want to make that better?
01:15:45.000 Yes.
01:15:45.000 Make people that can breathe underwater.
01:15:48.000 Yes.
01:15:48.000 Make people that don't get cancer.
01:15:50.000 Right.
01:15:50.000 And I think maybe the ultimate, you know, we are evolving.
01:15:54.000 You know, we started just like animals and we are getting better.
01:15:59.000 But eventually it may be silicon-based things that will be the future.
01:16:04.000 Well, that's a speculation that people have when they look at the archetypal alien, right?
01:16:08.000 With a large head and no genitals.
01:16:10.000 What that is is some sort of an advanced version.
01:16:14.000 Of intelligent life, like that life, as life becomes sort of immersed in the world of technology, it becomes, they have these symbiotic relationships where their parts get replaced by artificial parts, which we see now with people.
01:16:31.000 We see artificial limbs and artificial...
01:16:34.000 And I think, you know, any form of life, even biological life that we find on another planet, we will be shocked when we see it.
01:16:42.000 For example, the nearest star to us is called Proxima Centauri.
01:16:47.000 Now, it's not like the sun.
01:16:48.000 It's much smaller, 12% of the mass of the sun.
01:16:52.000 And it's much fainter.
01:16:54.000 But it has a planet close enough so that life can be on the planet.
01:16:57.000 The planet has a permanent day side.
01:17:00.000 It's facing the star because it's so close to the star, 20 times closer than the Earth is from the Sun.
01:17:05.000 That planet, Proxima b, is facing the star with the same side.
01:17:11.000 So there is a permanent day side.
01:17:12.000 Like the Moon.
01:17:13.000 Yes, exactly.
01:17:14.000 Like the Moon.
01:17:15.000 And a permanent night side.
01:17:17.000 And the permanent day side is warmer than the permanent night side.
01:17:20.000 That's what we think.
01:17:22.000 Now, my daughters said that, you know, the real estate value would be highest in between the day side and the night side because you would have a permanent sunset strip there.
01:17:32.000 And, you know, if you want a home, that would be a perfect...
01:17:35.000 Vacation place, you know, kind of.
01:17:37.000 But if you think about the animals that may exist on the day side and on the night side, they would be very different.
01:17:45.000 And also the ones on the day side, since the star is much colder than the sun by a factor of two or so, it's cooler, like 3,000 degrees instead of almost 6,000 degrees for the sun.
01:17:58.000 Then most of the light emitted by the star is infrared.
01:18:03.000 So these animals would have infrared eyes.
01:18:06.000 Our eyes detect sunlight.
01:18:08.000 That's what we have.
01:18:10.000 But on that planet, Proxima B, the closest...
01:18:17.000 You need infrared eyes to survive.
01:18:21.000 So these animals will be something very different.
01:18:24.000 They will have infrared eyes.
01:18:25.000 I don't know how they would look.
01:18:27.000 I think even if we find evidence for biological life, it would be shocking to us not to speak about...
01:18:36.000 You know, technological instrumentation, you know, if they are much more advanced than we are, it would look like magic to us, you know, an approximation to God.
01:18:45.000 It will do things that are really crazy for us.
01:18:47.000 So, when you think about taking a 3D printer and genetic material and recreating life on other planets, I mean, it sounds crazy to say today, but no crazier than a cell phone would be if you put it in the hands of someone who lived in the first century AD. It's not completely crazy because there is a colleague of mine,
01:19:11.000 a Nobel laureate at Harvard, Jack Shostak, has a laboratory in which he's very optimistic that he will produce synthetic life, meaning starting from building blocks, chemical building, and making...
01:19:25.000 A living cell.
01:19:26.000 That sounds like a horror movie, doesn't it?
01:19:29.000 No, why?
01:19:30.000 Because he gets out of hand.
01:19:31.000 Like some guy decides, I'm going to make something.
01:19:34.000 I'm going to make a giant Wolverine.
01:19:37.000 Well, you have to trust that guy.
01:19:39.000 I don't trust anybody like that.
01:19:42.000 I don't trust anybody with new life.
01:19:45.000 Yeah, but you can't prevent it.
01:19:46.000 It's just like, you know, the exploration of the atom that led to eventually nuclear weapons.
01:19:53.000 You know, you can't stop science.
01:19:55.000 No, you can't.
01:19:55.000 So I think it will happen in the next few decades that we will be able to create synthetic life.
01:20:00.000 Did you have an interest in extraterrestrial life before this?
01:20:06.000 Has it changed at all?
01:20:08.000 No, so I can tell you, maybe a decade ago, I was working on detecting radio waves from hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe, from early cosmic times.
01:20:23.000 And astronomers built observatories To test the calculations that I've worked on.
01:20:29.000 And then one of the problems was that radio stations, TV stations, would introduce interference to these observatories because they operate at the same frequencies.
01:20:39.000 So I said, oh wait, if we are producing interference, can't we use these telescopes to also look for, to eavesdrop on other civilizations?
01:20:51.000 You know, I Love Lucy, radio transmissions, you know, with the same instrument.
01:20:55.000 So that was my first paper on the subject.
01:20:58.000 Then I was in Abu Dhabi.
01:21:01.000 I was invited to give a talk in Abu Dhabi.
01:21:05.000 Even though I'm Israeli, you know, I'm also American.
01:21:07.000 So it was fine.
01:21:09.000 I went there.
01:21:10.000 And then the tour guide showed us around.
01:21:14.000 We also went to Dubai.
01:21:16.000 And then he was bragging.
01:21:18.000 He said, you know, these lights at night, he was showing us around, they can be seen from the moon.
01:21:26.000 So then that inspired me to consider the possibility of us seeing artificial lights from a distance.
01:21:35.000 So with a colleague of mine, Ed Turner, we asked, how far away can the Hubble Space Telescope see the city of Tokyo?
01:21:46.000 And we found that on Pluto, if there was a city like Tokyo on Pluto, we would be able to detect it with the Hubble Space Telescope.
01:21:53.000 That was my second paper on this subject.
01:21:57.000 But there is no city like Tokyo on Pluto.
01:22:03.000 What's interesting is the type of light that you were talking about being infrared light on this small planet.
01:22:09.000 It would be really interesting if a civilization figured out a way to avoid light pollution.
01:22:15.000 Because I think light pollution is one of the biggest impediments to us understanding our position in the universe.
01:22:20.000 Because we don't see the universe anymore.
01:22:22.000 We just see a dark sky.
01:22:23.000 Unless you send a space telescope.
01:22:25.000 Unless you go somewhere.
01:22:26.000 You can go to the middle of the wilderness and look up on a dark night.
01:22:32.000 And you can see everything.
01:22:33.000 And it's stunning.
01:22:35.000 It is stunning.
01:22:36.000 I went to the Keck Observatory in Hawaii once during a dark moon or when there's no moon out in the sky and it was amazing.
01:22:43.000 You could see everything.
01:22:44.000 You see the full Milky Way.
01:22:46.000 By the way, I'm a theorist.
01:22:48.000 I work mostly with ideas.
01:22:50.000 So we visited Australia.
01:22:51.000 I was invited for a month.
01:22:53.000 We went to Tasmania and there are no city lights in Tasmania and there was no internet connectivity.
01:23:00.000 So I was forced.
01:23:02.000 I couldn't check my email.
01:23:03.000 I was forced to go out At night and look at the sky.
01:23:08.000 And suddenly I see the Milky Way in its full glory, you know, and the Andromeda Galaxy.
01:23:15.000 Things that I've talked about through my scientific papers out there.
01:23:19.000 It's amazing.
01:23:20.000 You know, in particle physics, you talk about the Higgs boson, you talk about particles.
01:23:24.000 You never see them.
01:23:26.000 I mean, here in astronomy, we're talking about real things out there.
01:23:30.000 And light pollution prevents us from seeing them every day.
01:23:34.000 Yeah, if you go to the Big Island, right, they have those diffused lights in their streetlights.
01:23:40.000 It's a different kind of lighting that doesn't interfere with the light that you can see from the sky so that it doesn't screw up the observatory.
01:23:47.000 But when you do manage to see the heavens for the way they are, it's one of the most spectacular things you could see.
01:23:53.000 And the fact that it's...
01:23:55.000 That we're blind to it in most of the Western world because of the civilization that we've created that's all light-based.
01:24:03.000 There's lights everywhere.
01:24:05.000 I think it's responsible for our detachment.
01:24:10.000 There's a lack of wonderment that comes with the universe because it's just dark.
01:24:15.000 That's what Henry Thoreau, you know, he...
01:24:18.000 Yeah, he wrote about the fact that the modern technological life prevents us from seeing nature.
01:24:25.000 And he went to the Walden Pond and wrote about it.
01:24:29.000 And he was right, just following what you said.
01:24:33.000 And you know what?
01:24:34.000 The thing that astronomy is sending us is a very clear message that most of us miss.
01:24:42.000 The message to me is very simple.
01:24:44.000 Be modest.
01:24:45.000 You have to be modest when you see how big the universe is.
01:24:50.000 If you are an emperor or a king and you conquer a small piece of land on earth, a lot of alpha males, white alpha males, were extremely proud.
01:24:59.000 I conquered this piece of land on earth.
01:25:02.000 Even if they conquered the entire earth, They were not more significant than a single ant hugging a grain of sand, a single grain of sand, in the landscape of a huge beach.
01:25:15.000 It's not very impressive.
01:25:16.000 How can you ever be proud of yourself, given this big landscape?
01:25:21.000 And moreover, you know that the Caesars in Rome used to have a person next to them.
01:25:29.000 Whenever they would win a battle, that person, his duty was to whisper in their ears, You are mortal.
01:25:37.000 Remember that you live a short amount of time.
01:25:41.000 And that's very sobering.
01:25:42.000 We are a small component of the universe.
01:25:46.000 We're also living for such a short time.
01:25:48.000 And I realized it when both my parents passed away over the past few years.
01:25:52.000 And I said to myself, the hell with it.
01:25:57.000 Forget about all this nonsense.
01:25:58.000 Let's just...
01:26:02.000 Just like in Gun with the Wind, I said to myself, I don't give a damn about what other people say.
01:26:15.000 Let's just focus on substance, okay?
01:26:19.000 And not pay attention so much to ourselves.
01:26:21.000 We're not that significant.
01:26:23.000 Not assume that we are unique and alone in the universe.
01:26:27.000 Let's just, you know, find out the answer.
01:26:30.000 I think the public and I think even you could tell me whether the scientific community agrees with this, but I think people are more apt to believe in the possibility of extraterrestrial life today than ever.
01:26:44.000 And I think part of that has to do with some of the stories that have been published like in the New York Times in 2017 and then accounts from people of experiences with unidentified flying objects like Commander David Fravers and some other people that are very reputable people that also are fighter pilots and people that understand what they're looking at and then are using Not just their eyesight,
01:27:09.000 but they're also explaining that this thing jammed their radar.
01:27:12.000 It moved at an impossible speed.
01:27:15.000 It was tracked with equipment.
01:27:17.000 These revelations, I think, have led people to relax some of their skepticism.
01:27:24.000 Me, personally, I could say from my own personal experience, I never denied the idea that alien life is possible.
01:27:32.000 I just had extreme skepticism at the people that proclaimed that they had experiences because I know people love to be special.
01:27:43.000 And they love to be special without putting in a whole lot of work.
01:27:45.000 And one of the best ways you can be special without putting in a whole lot of work is to have a special experience that only you get to have.
01:27:53.000 Whether the aliens chose you or the angels chose you or, you know, whatever it is.
01:27:58.000 Those people are, you should always be very skeptical of people who claim to be special without having put in any work because it's just a part of human psychology.
01:28:09.000 People want to stand out.
01:28:11.000 And one of the best ways to stand out is to claim special abilities like psychic talents or I'm a channeler.
01:28:16.000 These people are all full of shit, right?
01:28:17.000 We all know it.
01:28:18.000 But with extraterrestrial life, there's this other component.
01:28:23.000 And that component is the vastness of the universe.
01:28:26.000 The Fermi paradox.
01:28:28.000 The fact that there's...
01:28:29.000 You know, hundreds of billions of galaxies, hundreds of billions of stars in each galaxy.
01:28:35.000 And we just have no idea.
01:28:37.000 We literally have no idea and we do know there are planets out there.
01:28:40.000 But actually, yeah, exactly.
01:28:41.000 That last bit that you mentioned is the thing that is important.
01:28:45.000 Yeah.
01:29:06.000 But what you find around you is extremely common.
01:29:10.000 Half of the sun-like stars have an earth-like planet.
01:29:13.000 So how dare you?
01:29:15.000 It says to you in the face, how dare you think that you're special?
01:29:19.000 And yet, yet, a major portion of the scientific community says, oh...
01:29:25.000 You know, technological life?
01:29:27.000 That sounds like a speculation.
01:29:29.000 But it exists right here.
01:29:31.000 Well, that's what the Fermi paradox was, right?
01:29:34.000 If there's all this possibility of life, where is it?
01:29:38.000 Well, so, first of all, It may be all around in the sense that the signal is faint.
01:29:45.000 You need to reach a threshold.
01:29:47.000 So maybe there are lots of signals humming in the background, but we haven't yet developed the sensitivity to detect them.
01:29:56.000 An example for that is gravitational waves.
01:29:59.000 These are ripples in space and time, just like ripples on the surface of a pond.
01:30:04.000 According to Einstein's theory of gravity, space and time are not rigid.
01:30:09.000 You can actually perturb them.
01:30:10.000 You can create ripples.
01:30:12.000 And for example, when two black holes collide, they generate ripples.
01:30:15.000 And these are called gravitational waves.
01:30:18.000 And the LIGO experiment...
01:30:22.000 It was designed to detect those waves.
01:30:24.000 And at first, the astronomy community was very much opposed.
01:30:27.000 When I was at the beginning of my career, I heard a lot of senior people saying, let's not even try to detect gravitational waves.
01:30:37.000 There is no hope for that.
01:30:38.000 Forget about it.
01:30:39.000 And we don't even know if they exist.
01:30:42.000 And there were a few administrators at the National Science Foundation that decided that this is a worthy cause And there was a leader of the experimental effort, Ray Weiss, that was pushing for it.
01:30:56.000 And he got the Nobel Prize together with two other people.
01:31:00.000 And eventually it was funded.
01:31:02.000 And in 2015, the instrument was sensitive enough to detect the first signal.
01:31:08.000 And it was a booming signal.
01:31:11.000 And then after that, we have tens of events over the subsequent years that were detected.
01:31:17.000 So it opened up Flood of signals showing in the detector, and it only was a matter of reaching the threshold sensitivity.
01:31:30.000 So I say the same thing.
01:31:32.000 The signals may be very subtle.
01:31:34.000 It's very difficult to detect a spacecraft, for example, because it sends very little power in your direction.
01:31:39.000 So I don't know what the signal is of a technological civilization, but once we reach a sensitivity, we might find The universe humming, you know, the galaxy humming with living, you know.
01:31:52.000 Or there is another possibility that most of them are dead by now.
01:31:55.000 But we can still do archaeology and find evidence for them because that would help us avoid the mistakes they made and try not to share their fate, you know, not destroy ourselves.
01:32:08.000 Have you spent much time thinking about the various kinds of technology that these different civilizations in the universe could possibly have created?
01:32:21.000 Meaning they might have a completely different atmosphere, a completely different Understanding of gravity, a completely different combination of elements on their planet, and that our perception or our contemplation of what could be possible is really just based on what we've already observed and experienced,
01:32:41.000 which is such a small portion of the universe.
01:32:44.000 That's right.
01:32:44.000 Now, what we can imagine is based on our experience.
01:32:48.000 And when you go on a date, You look at the mirror and you imagine the other person being genetically similar to you.
01:32:59.000 And that's not a bad assumption because we all share the same heritage as humans.
01:33:05.000 But when you meet another life from a completely different planet that had nothing to do with Earth, For the first time, there is a chance that it would look nothing like we are familiar with.
01:33:18.000 As you say, the conditions are different.
01:33:22.000 The cake that was baked out of the same chemical soup ended up looking very different.
01:33:29.000 It's a chocolate cake, not a cheesecake.
01:33:30.000 It's something very different.
01:33:32.000 And when a chocolate cake meets a cheesecake, It wouldn't really figure out what's going on there.
01:33:39.000 It's also possible, right, that they could have a different kind of environment that doesn't lend itself to the sort of territorial behavior that we have.
01:33:49.000 It's quite possible.
01:33:50.000 Like other intelligent life, like orcas, for instance.
01:33:54.000 They don't go to war with other orcas.
01:33:55.000 That's right.
01:33:56.000 They're obviously very intelligent.
01:33:58.000 Speaking about that, I was asked to participate in a debate about Whether the space race between the US and China Is bad or good for humanity?
01:34:11.000 It was organized by IBM and Bloomberg News.
01:34:15.000 And all three debaters, the other debaters, were talking about the military risks that space poses.
01:34:24.000 If you put satellites or things that hover above the Earth, it's a military threat.
01:34:30.000 And therefore, we should reach international agreements so that we don't explore space too much.
01:34:36.000 And I was just puzzled by this because, you know, we live on a two-dimensional surface of the Earth.
01:34:42.000 And of course, there are risks from things hovering above the surface.
01:34:45.000 But space is all about going in the third dimension, far away from Earth.
01:34:49.000 So if you go to Mars or you go to the stars, as, you know, we are contemplating in the Starshot Project...
01:34:57.000 There is no military threat to Earth from doing that.
01:35:01.000 It's very narrow-minded to think that space is all about military threats.
01:35:05.000 You know, there is also interest from the commercial sector, you know, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, to go to Mars.
01:35:13.000 And, you know...
01:35:17.000 We're good to go.
01:35:29.000 Rather than always think territorially, as we are used from the primate phase, as you mentioned, we should come together.
01:35:39.000 And science is the best vehicle to bring people together.
01:35:42.000 Because, again, it's not about ourselves.
01:35:45.000 It's about trying to figure out nature.
01:35:47.000 And nature is shared by all of us.
01:35:49.000 Space can be shared by all of us.
01:35:52.000 So it's not about one nation capturing a piece of land or getting ahead of other nations.
01:35:58.000 It's about all of us working together.
01:36:00.000 I agree with you, but you also know that the way most nations think about military superiority, they think about technological superiority.
01:36:10.000 They think about having the ability to do something that these other nations can't do, and that would put you at some sort of a tactical, strategical advantage, like having some sort of a satellite with nuclear weapons that's hovering above a city.
01:36:22.000 Like that they could do things like this that we can't do yet, or that having the ability to go to Mars and return before any other nation would show that they have extreme technological superiority.
01:36:35.000 They can actually go to other planets.
01:36:37.000 I agree with you, but why can't we work as one team?
01:36:40.000 So if we find, for example, evidence for another civilization, don't you think that would give us a sense that we are part of the same team?
01:36:49.000 Because now there is another team out there.
01:36:51.000 That was the old Ronald Reagan speech.
01:36:52.000 Exactly.
01:36:53.000 And I agree with Ronald Reagan.
01:36:54.000 Yeah, I do too.
01:36:55.000 I think that would open up our eyes and it would be very humbling, in fact.
01:37:01.000 Yeah, so here is another advantage to working on this subject.
01:37:05.000 How do you think people would handle undeniable extraterrestrial visitation?
01:37:12.000 Like if there was a mothership that hovered over the White House and just sent some sort of a message that we had to interpret and made some sort of a very clear demonstration of its presence?
01:37:28.000 Well, if it says, take us to your leader, we have to say, wait until January 20th.
01:37:35.000 Even then.
01:37:36.000 But really, I think the smart thing to do is listen.
01:37:44.000 If you get into a room full of strangers, you don't want to speak out very loudly because one of them may smash you.
01:37:51.000 Of course.
01:37:52.000 Yeah.
01:37:53.000 So...
01:37:55.000 If they show up, we should listen.
01:37:57.000 Yes.
01:37:58.000 Let's listen and figure out what to do.
01:37:59.000 It's also the problem.
01:38:01.000 We all have these countries.
01:38:03.000 They're run by different people in different styles.
01:38:05.000 We have different philosophies and we have very different political climates in different parts of the world where some people can't speak up.
01:38:12.000 Some people are completely under the thumb of their own government and their military.
01:38:17.000 And it would be really weird to see if it's possible For human beings to have a sort of a universal reaction to superior intelligence.
01:38:27.000 Oh no, I think it's very naive to expect humans to behave the same way.
01:38:32.000 Different people, different nations.
01:38:34.000 And I don't think there is a protocol because The United Nations never thought about designing a protocol for dealing with a situation like that.
01:38:44.000 And many people say, ah, let's not think about it because we have problems that are much more serious here on Earth.
01:38:50.000 And to them I say what Oscar Wilde used to say.
01:38:54.000 He said, we are all in the gutters, but some of us are looking at the stars.
01:39:00.000 Don't you think that's a fitting statement?
01:39:02.000 Yeah, it's very fitting.
01:39:03.000 The idea that we have bigger problems is kind of hilarious, too.
01:39:07.000 Because if they came down here and they decided to do whatever they wanted, that would be our biggest problem.
01:39:13.000 I mean, if you have something that's capable of interstellar travel with a giant ship that has, you know, millions of little aliens on it that just decided to take over, that's our biggest problem.
01:39:23.000 I agree.
01:39:23.000 Anything that can travel here easily from another planet, that's our biggest problem.
01:39:27.000 Or it's...
01:39:29.000 Maybe problem is the wrong word.
01:39:31.000 That's something that demands our attention.
01:39:33.000 But you know, we were careless for a century because we transmitted radio waves.
01:39:38.000 By the way, the brightest transmissions that we produced were anti-ballistic missiles, radars.
01:39:46.000 You know, we produce very bright emission in the radio wave, and it's now progressed to a distance of about 100 light years.
01:39:54.000 So there is this bubble of radio waves that we produced, and if they have, if there is any civilization with radio telescopes similar to what we have, they can detect us.
01:40:05.000 And, of course, it will take a while for them to respond, but we already shouted into this room of strangers without being careful.
01:40:14.000 Yes.
01:40:15.000 And that is a sign of not being intelligent, by the way.
01:40:18.000 Well, I don't know if it's a sign of not being intelligent.
01:40:20.000 It's a sign of not understanding the ramifications of what you've created or the actions.
01:40:25.000 Yeah, but we may suffer the consequences decades from now.
01:40:29.000 Or we may get a visit from the anthropologists of the space.
01:40:33.000 I mean, that's what I would hope, that something would come down here that understands what we're going through, that has probably gone through a very similar path.
01:40:45.000 I know that there's different cakes and there's different ingredients for cakes, but at the end of the day, they're all cakes.
01:40:51.000 And we can go, oh, that's a cheesecake.
01:40:53.000 There's a carrot cake.
01:40:54.000 I get it.
01:40:55.000 I would imagine that something that's so intelligent, it can come here from another planet, probably understands the variables, the possibilities of life.
01:41:05.000 But look at the Americas.
01:41:06.000 When the Europeans came over, you would have expected the Europeans to behave better.
01:41:10.000 Well, they didn't know anything about diseases, first of all.
01:41:13.000 That's what killed 90% of the people.
01:41:15.000 I know, but still, it's not obvious that a visit is to your benefit.
01:41:19.000 That's true.
01:41:20.000 That's true.
01:41:20.000 Well, in that case, it's actually been proven by history that every single time a civilization has been visited by a far more advanced civilization, it's been disastrous for the original civilization that gets visited.
01:41:36.000 Whether it's the Americas or, I mean, you can go throughout time.
01:41:41.000 This has always been the case in history.
01:41:44.000 With the Aztecs, it happened with everybody.
01:41:48.000 But my message is simple.
01:41:49.000 If you close your eyes and you refuse to admit the possibility that they are out there, You might be surprised one day, right?
01:41:58.000 You might be really surprised.
01:42:00.000 Do you pay much attention to science fiction?
01:42:03.000 No.
01:42:04.000 There's some pretty good visitation movies.
01:42:10.000 I don't enjoy most of the literature on science fiction, most of the films, because they violate the laws of physics.
01:42:17.000 So when I see something that doesn't make sense according to what I know about physics, I cannot enjoy it because, you know, I stop there and I say, well, forget about the storyline.
01:42:27.000 It doesn't make any sense.
01:42:28.000 I understand.
01:42:29.000 Yeah.
01:42:30.000 What movies have violated the laws of physics to you?
01:42:33.000 Most of them.
01:42:35.000 But the ones I really liked are Gravity, The Martian.
01:42:40.000 They violated, but not in a very blunt way.
01:42:43.000 Right.
01:42:44.000 They didn't beat you over the head with stupidity.
01:42:46.000 No, there were some aspects of the storyline that didn't make any sense, like hopping from one satellite to another.
01:42:53.000 You know, that's very difficult to do.
01:42:54.000 Right.
01:42:55.000 Yeah, there's a bunch of it.
01:42:56.000 Neil deGrasse Tyson went into detail about all the problems with gravity that he found.
01:43:01.000 There was a movie that was made by the guy who made Ex Machina.
01:43:05.000 It was his follow-up movie that was about extraterrestrial life that was pretty interesting.
01:43:10.000 It was really bizarre.
01:43:12.000 And the way it was done...
01:43:14.000 There was a couple little hokey moments in it, but I thought it was really interesting.
01:43:18.000 Yeah, I think I saw it and I liked it.
01:43:20.000 When I saw it, I was like, that might be what we're looking at.
01:43:24.000 We might be looking at life that we can't recognize.
01:43:30.000 There might be something that when it visits us, we don't even know what to look at.
01:43:34.000 Right.
01:43:35.000 Maybe, yes.
01:43:36.000 The good thing about science fiction is that it explores possibilities that we haven't imagined before.
01:43:44.000 And in that sense, you know, it broadens our view.
01:43:47.000 So I think it's a good exercise for us to imagine things we've never thought about.
01:43:52.000 But when they violate the laws of physics, I have a problem with that.
01:43:54.000 Oh, I can completely understand.
01:43:56.000 Have you paid much attention to various UFO encounters that have been reported by people?
01:44:02.000 Have you ever looked into those?
01:44:04.000 Well, I read some of the stories and I'll tell you what my concern was that, you know, 50 years ago we had some cameras and some recording devices that were not very sophisticated.
01:44:18.000 Now they're much better.
01:44:19.000 So if 50 years ago we saw fuzzy images of saucers and things like that, by now, with modern cameras, you should get very crisp images of the same things.
01:44:29.000 We don't have them.
01:44:30.000 So I'm worried that these were artifacts of the instruments that were used back then.
01:44:38.000 What I would like to do instead is have a scientific study of the reports that are recent.
01:44:46.000 Go to those sites, the ocean, where the Nimitz was, and try to examine this.
01:44:55.000 Now, the reason it's important is because there is also a national security element here, which means that perhaps other nations have technologies that we don't know about.
01:45:08.000 So we better find out.
01:45:10.000 So if there are things that we don't understand, we better find out what they are.
01:45:14.000 Well, that's absolutely true.
01:45:17.000 Like, if there is something that can do what Commander David Fravor experienced, but it's not extraterrestrial, it's actually from China or from Russia, that puts them at a significant advantage, a crazy advantage.
01:45:29.000 We can't even imagine something that's that sophisticated.
01:45:33.000 But they don't believe that's the case.
01:45:36.000 They think our understanding of physics is pretty universal, right, in terms of, like, the highest intellects in various continents, right?
01:45:44.000 Yeah, these looked like very peculiar maneuvers that they reported about.
01:45:49.000 And all I say is that we should use scientific instruments to record it again with much better data and examine this.
01:45:59.000 Yeah, but who would fund something like this?
01:46:00.000 You know, if you have a monster in front of you, I want to look at it straight in the eyes and figure out what it's about.
01:46:09.000 Other people say, ah, there is no monster, forget about it.
01:46:14.000 Well, I mean, who would fund something like this?
01:46:17.000 This is the real problem.
01:46:18.000 If the government funds it, then they could deem what gets released, what the public can handle, what they can't handle, and whether or not there's a military application.
01:46:27.000 Well, the same funding agencies that fund scientific research, open scientific research, can allocate a small fraction of their funds.
01:46:36.000 This should not be very expensive.
01:46:38.000 You don't think it would be very expensive?
01:46:39.000 No, because we study the environment in many different ways, you know.
01:46:42.000 And you just deploy a set of instruments with sensors in the geographical locations of where the reports were.
01:46:51.000 And you put the best sensors you have and systematically study the region and figure out what's going on.
01:46:58.000 The thing is, you would have to get the approval of the military.
01:47:01.000 Like if you wanted to go to where the Nimitz is, you wanted to go to any of these offshore areas that are in international waters, you would have to get some sort of approval.
01:47:09.000 Sure, but why wouldn't they give it?
01:47:11.000 I mean, in principle, if they want to figure out what the reports are about.
01:47:15.000 I don't know if they do want to figure it out.
01:47:16.000 The way Commander Fravor explained the experiences they were having off the coast of San Diego, he said they were basically just at a loss for words, didn't understand what these things were, but had been experiencing them on multiple occasions, and had just shrugged their shoulders and said,
01:47:33.000 let's just not talk about this.
01:47:35.000 No, but imagine you have a medical condition that you cannot understand.
01:47:41.000 Wouldn't you want the medical community to address it and figure out what it is?
01:47:47.000 You have some disease or something.
01:47:48.000 So the same thing here.
01:47:50.000 Something that you cannot explain is happening, and you want to figure it out.
01:47:54.000 So I say, look at it straight in the eyes.
01:47:58.000 Figure out what it is.
01:47:59.000 Just collect more data the way science does.
01:48:03.000 And it's not a major investment of funds.
01:48:05.000 So what disciplines would you draw from?
01:48:09.000 Let's pretend that President Biden says, Avi, I like what you're saying.
01:48:16.000 Let's make this happen.
01:48:18.000 Who do you bring in?
01:48:19.000 What do you do?
01:48:20.000 Would you bring in biologists?
01:48:21.000 Do you bring in physicists?
01:48:23.000 Just physicists?
01:48:24.000 Yeah, because physics is a unifying theme.
01:48:29.000 Anything obeys the laws of physics, right?
01:48:31.000 So physicists work with measurement devices, instruments that can record the data.
01:48:38.000 Now, if the data shows something that is biological, then you need the biologist to interpret it.
01:48:43.000 But most likely it will be physical objects doing something or artifacts or natural phenomena, you know, something.
01:48:50.000 You just figure out.
01:48:51.000 You collect more data.
01:48:52.000 You figure it out.
01:48:53.000 What's the problem?
01:48:54.000 You know, the good thing about science is...
01:48:56.000 It allows you, without prejudice, to try and figure out.
01:49:00.000 Just as I was mentioning, with a plumber, you know, I have a problem with my faucet, with my pipe.
01:49:04.000 You know, I bring in a plumber, we start to put diagnostics, figure out where it's coming from.
01:49:10.000 So, science is a way of life.
01:49:13.000 It's not an occupation of the elite, and there is no taboo on checking something.
01:49:18.000 It makes no sense.
01:49:20.000 Everyone should be engaged in an open mind, figuring out what it is.
01:49:24.000 Just like we do in the dark ages, some people had a problem dissecting bodies, human bodies.
01:49:31.000 They said that the body has a soul attached to it.
01:49:35.000 There are some magical properties that we should not interpret.
01:49:38.000 Imagine modern medicine not allowing to dissect bodies.
01:49:46.000 How would we ever arrive at the health, all the advantages in medicine and health care and so forth that we have right now?
01:49:55.000 So the way that science makes progress is relying on evidence, collecting evidence without fear.
01:50:01.000 Why should we be fearful?
01:50:02.000 You know, let's just figure out what it is.
01:50:05.000 If we care about it, obviously the public cares about it.
01:50:08.000 Obviously the public pays taxes.
01:50:11.000 So, we should pay attention to what the public wants.
01:50:13.000 I think the public would definitely want it.
01:50:15.000 But my question is also, how would you implement it?
01:50:17.000 Like, if you're dealing with these things that are very unique experiences.
01:50:22.000 Like, say, if we only have one or two legitimate unique experiences like this.
01:50:26.000 First, we isolate those cases.
01:50:28.000 But you also have to deal with the fact that this thing is flying at this insane rate of speed.
01:50:32.000 You'd have to try to find it.
01:50:33.000 But, again, the Copernican principle would say that the fact that they were noticed at one time, in one place, Why do you say that though?
01:50:54.000 But it could be a privileged circumstance if there's an exploratory mission.
01:50:58.000 Like if someone goes to a place in the world and visits an uncontacted tribe, that uncontacted tribe is uncontacted, meaning no one has visited them.
01:51:08.000 So that time that they go there is a very unique time.
01:51:11.000 Now, we're talking about on one planet.
01:51:14.000 But if something comes from another planet and visits us with the same spirit of trying to find things and visit things, but it's only done it once, It could be a unique experience.
01:51:25.000 It could be, but the chances for that would be small because what is the chance that the pilots would be at the right place at the right time and that they would be the target?
01:51:33.000 You know, I think...
01:51:34.000 I don't necessarily think they were the target.
01:51:35.000 So, then it should come again.
01:51:37.000 Yeah, in that particular case, in the Nimitz case, I think, yeah, you're right.
01:51:41.000 Okay, so you're speaking about a situation similar to what, you know...
01:51:45.000 Again, I go back to religion, but in the Old Testament, Abraham...
01:51:50.000 Heard a voice that told him, the voice of God, that told him to sacrifice his son, the only son he had.
01:51:59.000 He was about to sacrifice his son, Abraham.
01:52:02.000 But imagine that he had a cell phone with a voice memo app.
01:52:09.000 He would press that app and record the voice of God.
01:52:13.000 That would convince everyone, all humanity, that God exists.
01:52:18.000 He didn't have that app.
01:52:20.000 Right.
01:52:21.000 So, obviously, you can make up stories.
01:52:23.000 You know, anyone can say anything.
01:52:25.000 But if we have the instrumentation to record the data in a precise manner, you know, that's the best we can do.
01:52:31.000 So, I agree with you.
01:52:33.000 It's possible that Abraham indeed witnessed God, and since then, God never spoke.
01:52:40.000 Only once.
01:52:42.000 Then we have no choice, either to believe the story of Abraham or not.
01:52:46.000 But if God speaks again, now we have these apps.
01:52:49.000 We can record it.
01:52:54.000 That's a funny way of looking at it.
01:52:56.000 I think that makes a lot of sense, but it's a very funny way of looking at it.
01:52:59.000 Look, all I'm saying is common sense.
01:53:03.000 The only thing I'm surprised by is that other people didn't say it already.
01:53:08.000 When you get into the real spectacular hypothesis or theories about extraterrestrial life, one of the more spectacular ones is interdimensional travel.
01:53:21.000 And that these are interdimensional beings that visit us using some completely different understanding of how the universe works.
01:53:30.000 Have you ever thought about these or looked into these?
01:53:33.000 Okay, so I can speak only from the point of view of a scientist.
01:53:36.000 And space and time in physics are currently described by Einstein's theory of gravity.
01:53:47.000 As of now, we don't know how to move faster than light between two points in space.
01:53:53.000 But there are ideas about a wormhole, for example, connecting.
01:53:58.000 We don't know if there are other dimensions.
01:54:01.000 People talk about them, but we have no clue.
01:54:04.000 So I would say, if I had to summarize the scientific literature, which is quite extensive on these issues, I would say that as of now, we have no clear idea whether this is possible.
01:54:19.000 We are limited in our knowledge.
01:54:21.000 It may be possible, what you're saying, but...
01:54:24.000 I wouldn't, you know, at this point in time as a scientist, I wouldn't consider it as a possibility that is likely.
01:54:32.000 Because we have no clue.
01:54:34.000 And this is based on...
01:54:35.000 So your interpretations of quantum physics when they're discussing dimensions and that this is basically just theoretical.
01:54:44.000 This is completely theoretical.
01:54:46.000 At the moment...
01:54:48.000 You know, I can explain that.
01:54:50.000 At the moment, they're working, actually, in a space-time that is called anti-deceiter space, which is not shared by us.
01:54:57.000 This is not the space-time that we work in, you know, that we inhabit.
01:55:02.000 But the reason they work there is because they can solve the mathematics in that space.
01:55:07.000 It's sort of like looking for your keys under the lamppost.
01:55:10.000 You can find them under the lamp, but they may not be there.
01:55:13.000 So there is a whole community of People that do mathematical gymnastics in a space-time that is not represented in reality.
01:55:22.000 And they talk about extra dimensions and give each other awards and feel very smart about themselves.
01:55:28.000 But I say, look, let's be realistic here, you know, until you demonstrate that what you're doing is connected to reality, until you find experimental evidence.
01:55:41.000 This is not physics.
01:55:42.000 What is it then?
01:55:45.000 It's mathematics.
01:55:46.000 It's mathematical gymnastics.
01:55:48.000 Now, there are philosophers, I should say, some philosophers that support them.
01:55:53.000 They say, if a bunch of physicists agree on an idea for a decade...
01:55:59.000 It must be right, because they agreed that it's a good idea.
01:56:02.000 I say it's not up to them to agree on.
01:56:05.000 I mean, a lot of people agreed that the sun moves around the earth, but it was not necessarily reality.
01:56:11.000 So, you know, when you have a big enough group of people, they can agree on something and feel comfortable.
01:56:19.000 That's how cults work.
01:56:20.000 Yeah.
01:56:21.000 Yeah.
01:56:21.000 But you don't expect that in science.
01:56:23.000 Right.
01:56:24.000 But it is kind of cultish.
01:56:26.000 And that's one of the criticisms that I've heard about people in quantum mechanics and quantum physics that when people talk about it, they say, God, it sounds kind of cultish.
01:56:34.000 Well, there is quantum physics which is rooted in experiments, you know, solid state physics.
01:56:40.000 Right.
01:56:40.000 What we are talking about is quantum gravity.
01:56:43.000 The unification of quantum mechanics and gravity that is called string theory or extra dimensions.
01:56:48.000 Yes.
01:56:48.000 Yes, so quantum physics has aspects that connect directly to experiments and they are very well documented and part of the standard practice of physics.
01:56:57.000 The way I see it is just like this oath that medical doctors take.
01:57:04.000 They take an oath that represents their profession.
01:57:07.000 I think that physicists should take an oath I think?
01:57:32.000 That physicists brag about because they say, irrespective of what the experiment will show, the theory will be valid.
01:57:38.000 It's like not putting any skin in the game, you know?
01:57:42.000 And I find that inappropriate.
01:57:45.000 So there is a student at Harvard, a graduate student, in the English department, And she was inspired by my book, which didn't appear yet, but she knows about it, to do a PhD on that theme that I explore.
01:58:03.000 And she invited me to the PhD exam, the first exam.
01:58:09.000 And there was an examiner in the room who asked her, do you know why Giordano Bruno was burnt on the stake?
01:58:22.000 And she said that he was obnoxious and irritated a lot of people and he corrected her.
01:58:29.000 No, it was because he imagined that life exists on other planets.
01:58:33.000 And the moral of this...
01:58:42.000 We can have testable predictions of theologies that can be tested experimentally.
01:58:51.000 Another example is there are Christians and Jews.
01:58:56.000 The Christians believe that the Messiah arrived already.
01:58:59.000 And it will come back again.
01:59:01.000 The Jews argue that the Messiah hasn't arrived, but will arrive in the future.
01:59:06.000 So both sides agree that the Messiah will arrive in the future.
01:59:10.000 Let's just wait and see when the Messiah arrives.
01:59:14.000 Ask the Messiah, did you visit us before?
01:59:17.000 And then we can figure it out.
01:59:18.000 So that's another test of theology.
01:59:20.000 But the quantum physics that you are critical of...
01:59:24.000 Is it possible that some of that could become significant in the future?
01:59:30.000 That a lot of this crazy mathematics and what you call mental gymnastics that one day will be applicable to some new science?
01:59:37.000 That would be wonderful, but the problem is that the culture that works on this subject is not...
01:59:45.000 I'm not feeling even the obligation to come up with testable predictions.
01:59:49.000 It's not willing to put skin in the game.
01:59:52.000 It's not willing to say, okay, if you do the experiment and you find this, then this theory would be proven wrong.
01:59:59.000 I mean, I can give you an example.
02:00:01.000 There was a seminar at the Black Hole Initiative That mentioned an implication of string theory to cosmology, to the study of the universe.
02:00:10.000 And I said, oh, this is great.
02:00:13.000 So if we do the experiment and we find the cosmic microwave background to show something, would that rule out string theory?
02:00:21.000 And the speaker said, no, it will just rule out my conjecture about this relation.
02:00:30.000 String theory will always be right.
02:00:32.000 So to me, that's not putting skin in the game.
02:00:35.000 And string theory is almost entirely theoretical.
02:00:39.000 It's entirely theoretical.
02:00:41.000 Not almost.
02:00:41.000 It's entirely theoretical, trying to unify gravity with quantum mechanics, but it didn't make a testable prediction as of yet.
02:00:52.000 And that's the issue.
02:00:54.000 Are you intrigued at all about ancient depictions of what some people interpret as extraterrestrial vehicles or flying saucers, whether it's Ezekiel's story in the Old Testament or some of the other, the Vinmanas and the Hindu scriptures?
02:01:09.000 Well, we're back to the story of Abraham.
02:01:11.000 If there was a recording device that could give us The picture, I would examine it and say something more conclusive about it.
02:01:21.000 But the lack of evidence doesn't allow us to say anything.
02:01:24.000 So stories appear everywhere.
02:01:26.000 There was also a recent story about an Israeli claiming, Eshed, claiming that there is a federation of aliens out there.
02:01:37.000 What was that about?
02:01:38.000 Yeah, I say, you know, Anyone can say anything they want.
02:01:43.000 You know, it's a free country, but the duty of a reporter, a journalist, is to ask for evidence, right?
02:01:49.000 So if this guy would produce a document, would show a document that I think?
02:02:12.000 You know, there is a place for such people, right?
02:02:15.000 So my point is, the duty of a reporter is to check the evidence.
02:02:20.000 And that's also the duty of a scientist.
02:02:22.000 That's a real problem with journalism today, right?
02:02:24.000 Is this clickbait is very attractive because that's how they make money.
02:02:29.000 They make money off of people clicking on fantastic stories.
02:02:32.000 That's a very fantastic story.
02:02:34.000 And it actually is not...
02:02:37.000 It's not profitable for them to research it if they really want to try to verify those claims.
02:02:45.000 It's unfortunate because it adds noise to the system.
02:02:49.000 There are lots of possibilities.
02:02:50.000 Reality is just one.
02:02:52.000 And if you hear all these possibilities all the time, then you don't know what's real and what's not.
02:02:56.000 And that's true of politics as well, right?
02:02:58.000 What was this guy's claim?
02:03:00.000 He claimed that they're waiting for us to get our shit together, right?
02:03:03.000 Yes.
02:03:03.000 Isn't that the idea behind it?
02:03:05.000 Yeah, and that President Trump knows about him.
02:03:07.000 That's funny.
02:03:08.000 I think if Trump knew about it, he'd tell everybody.
02:03:10.000 I don't think he can keep his mouth shut.
02:03:12.000 Maybe we have to wait until January 20th until he gets out of office.
02:03:15.000 But do you think this guy have a motivation for saying this?
02:03:20.000 I mean, what is his position in the military?
02:03:23.000 He used to occupy an important leadership position, but I'm not sure what happened to him, and I don't know him personally, and I would just dismiss it and move on.
02:03:35.000 If he had a reason for saying what he said, he should have produced the evidence.
02:03:39.000 And I think at the late stage of his life, something may have gone wrong.
02:03:45.000 Yeah.
02:03:46.000 Well, that is the real problem, right?
02:03:49.000 When people get older and they start believing things that might not necessarily be true.
02:03:54.000 But the story is so compelling, right?
02:03:56.000 That's the other problem.
02:03:57.000 Is it someone telling you that the aliens are waiting for us to get it together?
02:04:01.000 Like, oh, good.
02:04:03.000 I'm glad.
02:04:04.000 I knew.
02:04:05.000 I had a feeling they were out there.
02:04:07.000 Yeah, but it's just like dating someone and expecting someone to return love to you when they're not really interested in you.
02:04:15.000 So it doesn't matter how much you wish it if it's not real.
02:04:19.000 Right.
02:04:20.000 But there's so much, again, the appeal of those stories.
02:04:25.000 It's so profitable.
02:04:27.000 Because so many people are interested in something really...
02:04:29.000 Especially now, while they realize, like, oh my god, our government is ridiculous.
02:04:33.000 The people that are in charge...
02:04:35.000 I mean, one of them is literally a reality show contestant or host who's possibly...
02:04:42.000 A sociopath who was running the planet, or running at least this country, they would hope that there's going to be some sort of intervention by some hugely intelligent species from another planet.
02:04:54.000 That they're going to come down here and they're going to go, listen, listen, listen.
02:04:56.000 Enough.
02:04:57.000 Enough already.
02:04:58.000 But this is crap.
02:04:59.000 And the point is, you know, it's just like junk food.
02:05:01.000 It tastes good, but it's bad for you.
02:05:06.000 Right.
02:05:06.000 And that is crap because it's bad for you.
02:05:08.000 Yeah.
02:05:09.000 Do you think that all of the, like when you see the, have you ever seen the Go Fast video, the FLIR video of where these fighter pilots are tracking this thing?
02:05:21.000 I've seen it.
02:05:21.000 Moving at incredible rates of speed, it doesn't exhibit any heat signature, no obvious method of propulsion.
02:05:28.000 When you see things like that, do you look at that as saying, well, this is something that seems to be legitimate evidence?
02:05:36.000 Well, it's partial evidence.
02:05:38.000 We want more.
02:05:39.000 So, you know, it looks very interesting.
02:05:42.000 The question is, what is it?
02:05:44.000 You know, and I'm just advocating that we collect more data on things like that.
02:05:49.000 Not ignore it, not dismiss it.
02:05:52.000 Because it's reported by credible people using credible instruments.
02:05:56.000 Something is going on.
02:05:58.000 Is it the fault of the instruments?
02:06:01.000 Is it the fault of the person?
02:06:02.000 Is it some natural phenomenon?
02:06:03.000 Let's figure it out.
02:06:04.000 So the point of the matter is we can figure it out.
02:06:07.000 It's not magical.
02:06:09.000 It's not something that is beyond our control.
02:06:12.000 You know, we can invest enough in this question and solve it.
02:06:17.000 Let's do it!
02:06:17.000 What's the problem?
02:06:18.000 Sometimes these compelling conversations and sometimes books like yours and the statements that you've made about that object, like it could inspire people to take action.
02:06:31.000 And if someone did I would collect reputable scientists with state-of-the-art instrumentation.
02:06:51.000 And put it together, deploy it where necessary, based on the most credible reports.
02:06:56.000 And collect data.
02:06:57.000 And then write scientific papers about it.
02:06:59.000 Just the same way that we do with any other anomaly that we find in the cosmos.
02:07:06.000 And there is no difference.
02:07:09.000 We should be guided by evidence and not by our prejudice.
02:07:12.000 That's the message that comes through from all...
02:07:16.000 The history of science, that on many occasions we were putting blinders, saying something doesn't exist, we ended up being wrong.
02:07:23.000 The only way to educate ourselves, to be modest enough to admit that we don't know everything, is by collecting evidence, a dialogue with nature.
02:07:32.000 Let's listen to nature, see what it tells us, and then say what this thing is.
02:07:38.000 Rather than...
02:07:40.000 You know, sitting in an ivory tower and saying, no, no, no, this is taboo, we shouldn't even consider it.
02:07:45.000 So you would have physicists, and how many physicists do you think that you would actually try to put together?
02:07:50.000 It depends on the scale of the experiment that we want to do, but I would need more than a dozen.
02:08:01.000 A dozen?
02:08:02.000 Yeah, and the appropriate instrumentation.
02:08:05.000 It may not be very expensive, actually.
02:08:07.000 Do you think that it would be possible to do something like this?
02:08:10.000 Yes.
02:08:11.000 And do you think that there's a dozen physicists that you would have in mind that would be qualified for this?
02:08:16.000 Definitely.
02:08:17.000 Just like there are dozens of physicists working on the search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
02:08:22.000 Now, if you have this bullying going on so that young talent, you know, there are young people that are extremely interested in these questions, but if they're afraid about their job opportunities, afraid of speaking out, afraid of being engaged in this,
02:08:38.000 then obviously And there is no funding for this, then obviously there will be no results.
02:08:44.000 And the situation will continue to be the same way.
02:08:48.000 Now, it's just the way that science was suppressed in the Middle Ages.
02:08:52.000 You know, people just didn't look for a revision in the way they look at the world around them.
02:08:58.000 And they put Galileo in house arrest.
02:09:01.000 So, of course, it maintained the views at the time.
02:09:05.000 And people were in their comfort zone.
02:09:07.000 But I thought that we came out of that hole.
02:09:10.000 And by now we are open-minded.
02:09:13.000 Do you think that having these kind of conversations and you coming out and being public about your struggles with other academics about this can lighten people up?
02:09:24.000 I hope so.
02:09:24.000 Do you think it helps the environment?
02:09:25.000 That's my hope.
02:09:26.000 As I said, I'm doing what I'm doing, not expecting anything, but I will be pleasantly surprised if the common sense that I'm trying to advocate, and by the way, I was a farm boy, I speak just the way I would speak as a kid.
02:09:45.000 I don't do any calculations.
02:09:47.000 When I was department chair, one reason that my term was extended twice is because I don't manipulate people.
02:09:57.000 I never hide things from people and tell them one thing when the reality is different.
02:10:03.000 I tell them what I think.
02:10:04.000 Now, I can be wrong.
02:10:05.000 I can make mistakes.
02:10:07.000 But what you see is what you get when you deal with me.
02:10:11.000 And, you know, on the one hand, it's a weakness because in politics, you need to manipulate people very often.
02:10:17.000 But it's also a major source of strength because people believe you and follow you.
02:10:23.000 And as a department chair, I realized that the strength is bigger than the weakness, and it worked out.
02:10:28.000 It wasn't clear from the beginning.
02:10:30.000 It really depends on the people that you surround yourself with.
02:10:33.000 But my hope is that in science, it will be the same way.
02:10:37.000 And, you know, I'm not afraid of suffering the consequences, as I said.
02:10:41.000 I'm willing to put my body on the barbed wire.
02:10:44.000 Now, if you did do something like this, and I'm trying to set this up.
02:10:47.000 This is what I'm trying to do right now.
02:10:48.000 I'm hoping that people are listening and I'm hoping that this actually becomes real.
02:10:52.000 Where would you want to be located?
02:10:55.000 So I would first examine all these reports and isolate the most credible ones or one, you know, the thing that is most striking among them.
02:11:06.000 And go there.
02:11:08.000 So the most striking one to me is the Commander Fravor instance.
02:11:12.000 So let's imagine.
02:11:14.000 Or the Nimitz.
02:11:15.000 Yeah.
02:11:16.000 So let's imagine that there's still some activity in that area.
02:11:21.000 So we can look for that.
02:11:23.000 The same type of activity that he reported.
02:11:26.000 We'll be looked for with much superior instruments than the ones that he was using.
02:11:31.000 So what kind of instruments would you use to try?
02:11:34.000 I have to look at the details of the evidence that he reported, but I will choose the instruments that are most sensitive right now with our best technologies right now.
02:11:42.000 Because he had some instruments that were for other purposes, not for this.
02:11:47.000 For combat.
02:11:49.000 Yeah.
02:11:49.000 So instead, I will use the very best instruments that exist right now To look for the kind of signals that he saw, so that we are much more sensitive than he was, and for us it will be a piece of cake.
02:12:03.000 The signal will boom in our instrument, if it's there.
02:12:07.000 And then collect the data.
02:12:08.000 And we can do it over a period of time so that we allow for these signals not to be there all the time.
02:12:16.000 And then conclude with our findings.
02:12:21.000 And it should be open to the public, to the science community, to everyone.
02:12:25.000 And I don't think it will cost a lot.
02:12:28.000 Instead of us talking about it forever.
02:12:30.000 Right.
02:12:30.000 Now, when you're talking about what happened off the coast of San Diego, I think it was several hundred miles at sea.
02:12:37.000 How would you set up out there?
02:12:38.000 I would send some instruments at the same distance into sea.
02:12:42.000 Now, it's important for national security as well because perhaps these are espionage-related systems.
02:12:50.000 Are operating out there and we want to know about it.
02:12:52.000 So I wouldn't be surprised if the, you know, if people behind the fence of national security would be curious about the findings as well.
02:13:02.000 Would there be a problem with that though?
02:13:04.000 Because if they were behind the fence of national security, then they wouldn't want these findings to be relayed to the public.
02:13:11.000 Well, it depends who funds the work.
02:13:14.000 But if the military funds it?
02:13:16.000 If the military funds it, they own the data, right?
02:13:20.000 But if the private sector funds it, or if it's a federal agency that is not guided by the same rules of secrecy?
02:13:31.000 Okay.
02:13:32.000 Aren't all of them, though, when it comes to something that would be deemed top secret like UFOs?
02:13:38.000 It wouldn't be deemed top secret if everyone can see it.
02:13:41.000 So my point is, when you look at the sun, that cannot be top secret, right?
02:13:45.000 Because everyone can look at the sun.
02:13:46.000 Right, but you're talking about something that's hundreds of miles off the coast, very difficult.
02:13:50.000 You need very powerful instrumentation in order to document it.
02:13:55.000 But we can look everywhere.
02:13:56.000 Right, but what I'm saying is, if it's funded by the military, would you have concern that they would not want to release the findings?
02:14:04.000 Yeah, so let's fund it by a more open channel, you know?
02:14:09.000 A channel of interested citizens.
02:14:14.000 Channel of interested citizens.
02:14:15.000 Yeah.
02:14:16.000 I mean, if the funding is not at a very high level, if it's at the level of millions or tens of millions of dollars, that can be funded.
02:14:25.000 That's pocket money for the wealthy.
02:14:28.000 Why don't you talk to Elon?
02:14:30.000 He might be interested in that.
02:14:31.000 Yeah, I'd be glad to.
02:14:33.000 I mean, it's really nothing.
02:14:34.000 You look at his wealth right now.
02:14:37.000 Right, and also when you're thinking about the private sector is getting involved in space travel now, you know, with Jeff Bezos' company and Elon's company, and I'm sure more to come.
02:14:47.000 Maybe that would be something that, look, just imagine the PR power and potential of approving extraterrestrial life.
02:14:58.000 So actually, in my book, I call it Oumuamua's Wager, which goes back to Blaise Pascal.
02:15:05.000 He was a philosopher arguing about God.
02:15:09.000 He said, well, as a mathematician, there are two possibilities, either God exists or not.
02:15:14.000 Now, let's examine the consequences.
02:15:17.000 If God exists and you don't do the right thing, consequences are much greater.
02:15:21.000 So he put a wager that there is a much, you know, bigger implications to one of the possibilities than the other one.
02:15:30.000 And that convinced him that you need to take it seriously.
02:15:33.000 Now, I say Oumuamua or the possibility of extraterrestrial life more generally is It poses exactly the same type of wager because the consequences of finding evidence would be huge.
02:15:47.000 And if it's not a very expensive task to examine it, if it's something we can do with existing technology...
02:15:55.000 It's a missed opportunity not to even consider doing that, and to have a taboo, and to silence everyone that wants to speak about it.
02:16:02.000 That's a mistake.
02:16:04.000 How can we do that?
02:16:06.000 I agree with you, and I also think that the positive benefits for the person who does stick their neck out would be spectacular.
02:16:14.000 If you could absolutely prove that there is some evidence of extraterrestrial civilization.
02:16:21.000 Yes.
02:16:23.000 You know, the article that appeared in Haaretz's newspaper about my work and in the New York Post, they were, each of them separately, completely differently,
02:16:39.000 separation of a couple of years, were the most read online stories in the history of these newspapers.
02:16:49.000 Really?
02:16:49.000 The New York Post article?
02:16:51.000 That was the most read online story in the history of the Post?
02:16:55.000 That's what I was told by my literary agent.
02:16:58.000 But I should say that over the past few days, I had seven filmmakers and producers from Hollywood contact me.
02:17:07.000 And I told my literary agent about the book.
02:17:10.000 I told my literary agent that if a film ever comes out of it, I want Brad Pitt to play my role.
02:17:21.000 Does he have to have the accent?
02:17:24.000 Yeah, he knows how to do it.
02:17:29.000 Did you see the movie Contact?
02:17:31.000 Yes.
02:17:31.000 What did you think of that film?
02:17:33.000 I thought it was pretty good.
02:17:34.000 That was pretty good.
02:17:34.000 I loved it.
02:17:36.000 By the way, Carl Sagan was a junior faculty at our department at Harvard.
02:17:46.000 He was not tenured there, so he moved to Cornell where he got tenured.
02:17:50.000 But he also lived in the same town that I live in.
02:17:54.000 And when I bring my clothes to the dry cleaner, The dry cleaner says that there is someone, his son probably, or someone related to his family that brings the clothes to the same dry cleaner.
02:18:07.000 Sagan.
02:18:10.000 Royalty.
02:18:11.000 But, you know, he also was not...
02:18:13.000 His ideas predated our current interest.
02:18:18.000 But he was more of a popularizer.
02:18:21.000 He had his program and...
02:18:24.000 Right now, I'm focusing mostly on the science.
02:18:27.000 That's my main interest.
02:18:30.000 But I think this subject is big enough for a lot of people to come together and make the future better than the past.
02:18:39.000 Well, I think it would be just beyond spectacular if your coverage of Oumuamua and this controversy that's erupted from that...
02:18:50.000 That this is just one step in the multiple step process of us understanding that we are not alone.
02:18:58.000 I mean, if you like ring the first bell, if you, you know, coming from Harvard, very respected guy, say, hey, this, this is not normal.
02:19:08.000 Look at this.
02:19:09.000 And then people want to deny it.
02:19:11.000 But then another thing comes up and another thing comes up.
02:19:14.000 And then who knows?
02:19:16.000 Yeah.
02:19:17.000 I mean, it would be pretty amazing.
02:19:18.000 That's what everybody wants, right?
02:19:20.000 What people really want is they want to know.
02:19:23.000 They want to know.
02:19:24.000 Like, if we are alone, boy, what a mess.
02:19:27.000 You know, the story about my paper broke out just around the time of the State of the Union address by Donald Trump, 2018. And it was more popular than what he said on the Washington Post or whoever reported it.
02:19:43.000 And I was asked, why do I think that's the case?
02:19:47.000 And I said that people look for uplifting news from the sky because our situation on Earth is not very promising.
02:19:56.000 Well, it's certainly problematic.
02:19:59.000 We've got a lot of shit that's going on that's not so fun.
02:20:02.000 But I think we're all hoping that our civilization is going to get better and evidence that it's possible to get past this weird period of conflict without destroying ourselves.
02:20:19.000 It would be great if we saw a civilization that has achieved that.
02:20:22.000 And that's what I think we hope for when we think of some intergalactic civilization that comes to visit us.
02:20:27.000 But I think also it changes the way we see ourselves.
02:20:31.000 If we are Part of the human species, rather than fight on borders, feel superior relative to each other based on superficial things.
02:20:41.000 Let's come together, build a better future for all of us.
02:20:45.000 That's a sign of intelligence.
02:20:48.000 Why not do that?
02:20:50.000 Why does that sound weird or strange?
02:20:53.000 It should be The thing that everyone wants to do.
02:20:57.000 I think it's the thing that most people want to do.
02:21:00.000 I just think that what you've experienced is this weird thing that's going on in academia.
02:21:06.000 I think you're experiencing this resistance from people that either they don't want to look foolish or they're upset that you're the one who's come up with this and then they can't argue against it rationally.
02:21:19.000 There's no real logical The reason why what you're saying is incorrect, where they could prove it, like here, this is why.
02:21:27.000 They don't have that.
02:21:28.000 I think it's very frustrating.
02:21:30.000 Right.
02:21:30.000 Well, sorry, but then, you know, sometimes you have to revise your views of nature.
02:21:36.000 And, you know, quantum mechanics is a very good example.
02:21:39.000 You mentioned it before.
02:21:40.000 It was forced upon us by experiments.
02:21:43.000 And it didn't look natural to many physicists.
02:21:49.000 And in fact, Einstein thought that it makes no sense.
02:21:51.000 And he was saying it has this spooky action at a distance that cannot be real.
02:21:56.000 And then experiments showed that he was wrong.
02:21:59.000 And that we still do not fully understand the meaning of quantum mechanics.
02:22:04.000 Can you explain, just because you've said that a couple times, explain to people that don't know, what does that mean by spooky action at a distance?
02:22:10.000 Yeah.
02:22:10.000 So in quantum mechanics...
02:22:14.000 Entities, objects, are described by a wave function.
02:22:18.000 So you have a probability of detecting an electron.
02:22:21.000 At this point, at that point, you cannot imagine the electron as being a point-like particle, like a billiard ball, which is located in a particular place.
02:22:30.000 There is some uncertainty.
02:22:33.000 So it's sort of like a wave.
02:22:34.000 It's spread over space, okay?
02:22:37.000 Now what that means is that if you do a measurement of the electron, let's say here, it affects what you will find very far away because there is a probability distribution of finding it far away and a probability finding it here.
02:22:51.000 And if I measure it here, it means that it's not there.
02:22:54.000 And this effect is action at a distance, and it can be faster than light.
02:22:59.000 So in other words, you can imagine two experiments done almost simultaneously, without any information coming from one experiment to the other, trying to measure the electron.
02:23:11.000 And if one of them finds, the other one is not able to find it.
02:23:16.000 But how did they know about each other when they were separated by a distance?
02:23:21.000 So large that they couldn't transmit a signal.
02:23:23.000 This is called spooky action at a distance, that information about what is done here is already known there without enough time for the signal to cross that distance, that separation.
02:23:35.000 What does that tell us about the nature of reality?
02:23:37.000 That it's not the way we're used to.
02:23:39.000 We're used to having a cup of coffee at one place.
02:23:42.000 You can't have the cup of coffee at another place.
02:23:46.000 But in quantum mechanics, that's not true.
02:23:49.000 Your cup of coffee has some probability of actually being there as well.
02:23:52.000 So that's something being in superposition, right?
02:23:55.000 Well, yeah, it's being in a multitude of states, many places with different properties, potentially.
02:24:04.000 And you just assign a probability to finding it here.
02:24:08.000 And moreover, quantum mechanics says that you can never pin down both the position of an object and its speed, its velocity.
02:24:18.000 If you want to localize the object extremely well, You don't know its speed.
02:24:23.000 And if you want to measure its speed, you don't know where it's located.
02:24:28.000 And this is called the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
02:24:30.000 There is always uncertainty about reality.
02:24:33.000 We're not used to it because big objects have very little quantum uncertainty.
02:24:37.000 So that allows us to come to the conclusion that, you know, you can imagine things being in one place.
02:24:45.000 But quantum mechanics says no, that's not the case.
02:24:48.000 And it's counterintuitive, and Einstein had a problem with that, but he was wrong.
02:24:53.000 And all the experiments are fully consistent with this strange feeling.
02:24:57.000 So what I'm saying, the reason I brought this up is you have an uneasy feeling when you think about quantum mechanics.
02:25:03.000 And a lot of people had an uneasy feeling.
02:25:06.000 You know, I'm sure that the friend of mine, the colleague that spoke about Oumuamua would have said about quantum mechanics, I wish it was not there, you know?
02:25:15.000 So, okay, he can wish, but reality is whatever it is, irrespective of whether we ignore it or not.
02:25:23.000 And we have to get used to it, right?
02:25:28.000 We're good to go.
02:25:32.000 We're good to go.
02:25:43.000 But when you go to cash that money, you don't have it in your back.
02:25:47.000 So what I'm saying is reality is whatever it is, irrespective of your imagination.
02:25:52.000 And we better get tested by experiments before we, you know, assume that everything we believe in is true.
02:26:01.000 Beautiful.
02:26:02.000 Well, thank you very much.
02:26:03.000 Thank you.
02:26:04.000 Thank you for being here.
02:26:05.000 Your book comes out when?
02:26:07.000 26th of January.
02:26:08.000 Okay, so not too far away.
02:26:10.000 What is today?
02:26:10.000 The 15th?
02:26:13.000 Yeah, so in about 11 days.
02:26:15.000 I will post it on Instagram.
02:26:16.000 I will let everybody know.
02:26:18.000 And I appreciate you.
02:26:19.000 I appreciate what you're doing.
02:26:20.000 And I hope somebody reaches out and actually decides to do this.
02:26:22.000 It's a pleasure.
02:26:23.000 And takes you up on your work and really puts together some sort of a group of people that can...
02:26:29.000 Do these kind of experiments that you're talking about.
02:26:32.000 There it is right there.
02:26:34.000 Extraterrestrial, the first signs of intelligent life beyond Earth.
02:26:40.000 Thank you, Joe, and I'll be glad to be back once we find definitive proof.
02:26:44.000 100%.
02:26:45.000 Definitely.
02:26:46.000 We'll do it.
02:26:46.000 Thank you.
02:26:46.000 Appreciate you.
02:26:47.000 Bye, everybody.