#252 — Are We Alone in the Universe?
Episode Stats
Words per minute
154.15878
Harmful content
Toxicity
10
sentences flagged
Hate speech
9
sentences flagged
Summary
Neil DeGrasse Tyson is an astrophysicist who hosts his own podcast, StarTalk Radio, as well as the Emmy Award-winning National Geographic shows StarTalk and Cosmos. He is the author of more than a dozen books, including Astrophysics for People in a Hurry, and most recently, with his co-author, James Treffel, Cosmic Queries: StarTalk s Guide to Who We Are, How We Got Here, and Where We're Going.
Transcript
00:00:10.900
Just a note to say that if you're hearing this,
00:00:15.180
and will only be hearing the first part of this conversation.
00:00:18.460
In order to access full episodes of the Making Sense Podcast,
00:00:57.640
He is an astrophysicist who hosts his own podcast,
00:01:04.860
as well as the Emmy Award-winning National Geographic shows,
00:01:16.300
and most recently, with his co-author, James Treffel,
00:01:26.800
He's also the director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York.
00:01:30.820
And today we talk about our place in the universe.
00:01:58.720
We also cover the public understanding of science a bit,
00:02:19.200
And you can judge the results of that for yourselves.
00:02:25.060
and I hope you enjoy the conversation as much as I did.
00:03:05.440
all of the most controversial things going on in society,
00:03:19.800
but I will lead you to the edge of your courage,
00:04:32.000
because what I learned from my very first book,
00:04:45.220
And so my first book was a question-and-answer book
00:04:59.000
And Merlin would recall a conversation with Einstein.
00:05:03.720
and all the questions were asked by full-up adults.
00:05:23.580
they expect some of it to sit above their head.
00:05:30.800
that's guaranteed to be above everybody's head,
00:05:37.320
is a celebration of the deepest sources of curiosity
00:06:43.320
so that we have a consistent product each time.
00:06:49.720
where our fan base just simply asks us questions.
00:07:19.280
because you know it was there when you were younger.
00:07:22.620
I think that's why you were feeling that way about it
00:07:28.520
And thanks for noticing the National Geographic DNA
00:07:34.740
And we didn't stop at just science illustrations.
00:08:12.960
and not necessarily making discernible progress.
00:34:59.940
that large brain, like relative to other branches
00:35:09.480
I'm going to use that tree to dam this river and
00:35:37.840
So yes, it takes thresholds of intelligence to exploit your environment even more.
00:35:44.500
But the simple act of exploiting an environment is not unique to being human.
00:35:51.640
Second, the Romans were no less smart than anyone who followed them.
00:35:57.780
Smart in terms of the, what their brain could figure out, but they didn't have alien communication
00:36:08.080
So imagine the Roman empire and aliens are waiting for a return signal back through space
00:36:19.100
They're still trying to do arithmetic with their Roman numerals.
00:36:28.600
But people forget that Roman numerals do not have a zero.
00:36:31.040
You cannot represent a zero with Roman numerals, and that's why the calendar, the Christian
1.00
00:36:38.460
calendar, Gregorian calendar, and the Julian calendar, there's no year zero.
00:36:42.680
It went from 1 BC to AD 1 because no one could wrap their head around it.
00:36:48.320
So yeah, arithmetic is hard with Roman numerals.
00:36:55.220
Yeah, no, I mean, I take your point, and we should be humbled by how much change can
00:37:06.460
I mean, you look at the rest of what's on Earth with us now, and it's hard to imagine
00:37:12.960
anything evolving into the kind of species that could do more than we're managing to do.
00:37:21.200
But we're just looking at asynchronous lines of evolution, right?
00:37:25.080
And given millions of years, basically everything is potentially available.
00:37:30.980
And millions is short compared with billions, right?
00:37:33.180
A billion is 1,000 times longer than a million.
00:37:36.500
And here we were, some kind of fist-sized or smaller shrew or some kind of rodent running
00:37:43.940
underfoot, trying to avoid becoming hors d'oeuvres for T-Rex, and that's how it would have stayed
00:37:50.500
if the dinosaurs didn't just get unlucky and an asteroid takes them out, pries open the
00:37:57.140
niche, an ecological niche that allows mammals to evolve into something more ambitious than
00:38:05.720
So, I want to impress upon people, if they didn't otherwise sort of wrap their head around
00:38:11.920
it, that we went from rodents to humans in 65 million years, and that's a vanishingly
00:38:19.700
small fraction of a billion years, and Earth has been around for 4 billion years.
00:38:26.840
If you line up, this is a little thought experiment, if you just lay Earth's timeline out on the
00:38:32.700
wall, left to right, beginning to end, and then you blindfold yourself, like, you know,
00:38:38.300
pin the tail on the donkey, and just, and then you walk up to it, you don't know where
00:38:43.760
Most of the places on that timeline you pin it, Earth only had single-celled life.
00:38:50.060
Complex life was relatively late, last half a billion years.
00:38:53.620
And then what we call intelligent life in big brain mammals, even smaller than that.
00:38:57.840
But the point is, if it ever, if Earth is any indication, if it ever gets to that, then
00:39:10.180
Or the other side, flip coin, flip side of that is, imagine the asteroid never came.
00:39:18.420
Because dinosaurs were around as a community for 300 million years before the dinosaur,
00:39:31.460
So, what this tells us is what we think of as intelligence clearly is not important for
00:39:38.680
Otherwise, roaches would have really big brains, right?
00:39:41.860
So, maybe the big mistake here is thinking that intelligence is an inevitable consequence
00:39:48.580
When all it would have taken was one broken branch, then that could have taken out all
00:39:54.360
the mammals from the vertebrate chain, and then we would not have anything like we think
00:40:02.520
Yeah, but if you run this experiment billions upon billions of times, it's just-
00:40:08.140
As long as we have, on the assumption that we're in no way unique, and we being a species
00:40:17.060
of Earth, and if multicellular life is ubiquitous in the galaxy or in the universe, and you just
00:40:26.800
have those hundreds of billions, ultimately trillions of similar experiments to run, then it's very
00:40:35.500
difficult to imagine that you don't have, at minimum, tens of millions of cases of advanced
00:40:44.760
That's how you get to win the argument in the end.
00:40:46.700
You say, oh, what are the chances of that happening?
00:40:50.800
One in a million, and there's 100 billion star systems out there.
00:41:03.460
If you polled people at a conference of physicists and astrophysicists and astronomers, you think
00:41:11.220
a large majority would say that advanced life is ubiquitous in the universe?
00:41:17.720
I think the only sensible way to do it is to just- we have a sample of one, so let's
00:41:24.140
just start with that and ask, what fraction of the total timeline of Earth has Earth had
00:41:30.160
what we would call intelligent life, or big-brained life?
00:41:34.640
And what fraction of that period has it had intelligent- the Drake equation?
00:41:39.060
And what fraction of that period has intelligent life with technology?
00:41:42.080
So, if you do that, then that gives you a set of fractions that you can layer onto the entire
00:41:53.260
And even using highly conservative estimates, you do not come up with us being the only life
00:42:00.080
And like I said, if you look at the actual map of the galaxy, where we have found these
00:42:05.480
4,000 exoplanets, it's this tiny little circle.
00:42:10.500
The star has to be close enough to get good data to know whether it has another planet around
00:42:14.840
And you say to yourself, gosh, this is what leads to that analogy that comes from the
00:42:19.340
SETI Institute with Jill Tartar and Seth Shostak, where they say, if you're going to
00:42:27.300
And that's like taking a cup, an empty glass, and scooping it into the ocean and pulling
00:42:38.300
From this tiny sample of the vast ocean that you know you have yet to search.
00:42:45.040
But what do you think the limit is on getting a truly optical look at an exoplanet?
00:42:53.280
I mean, any of these large telescopes that you describe in your book coming online, how
00:42:59.520
close are we to seeing anything of interest in another solar system?
00:43:10.600
If you're on the moon, how well can you see sort of cities on Earth?
00:43:18.320
Those images you see on the screensavers where you have the space station orbiting, you know,
00:43:23.700
they've pumped up the brightness of those cities so they can stand out as beautifully
00:43:28.320
But if you're going to go a quarter million miles away from them and stand on the moon,
00:43:39.780
And I'm always sad because there's always color-coded.
00:43:44.480
And so you think of Earth as a place divided by countries, not unified by land and water
00:43:50.860
That's just me getting sentimentally cosmic on it.
00:43:54.420
But you can ask, well, at what altitude above that globe would you find the International
00:43:59.900
Half the people I've asked that come away about a foot from it.
00:44:03.720
It's three-eighths of an inch above the surface.
00:44:08.180
Well, we're so jaded by how often we see the Earth and moon drawn in a textbook.
00:44:12.400
People tend to put the moon maybe a foot or two away.
00:44:24.840
So to directly image a planet, yes, that could be on our horizon.
00:44:31.060
But to image it in a way where we're going to see roads and cities, I think that's unrealistic.
00:44:36.660
But I have a- I say that, but smiling because I know what we're already up to.
00:44:46.100
What I want to see is any evidence in the atmosphere that anybody's alive on that planet's
00:44:55.240
And these are- we call them collectively biomarkers.
00:45:02.380
One of these, my own- that I gleaned as I got older and wiser and learned.
00:45:06.400
And so you grow up and you see these science fiction stories.
00:45:19.160
They're walking around on all kinds of planets.
00:45:22.000
I also wonder about the suits they were wearing, but that's not a matter.
00:45:39.060
And they say, Captain, it's an oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere.
00:45:42.700
As though if you searched enough, you would just simply find oxygen-nitrogen atmospheres.
00:45:49.260
What I didn't know at the time, and I don't think they knew either, is that we only have
00:46:00.160
And not only because we have life, but life is constantly making oxygen.
00:46:06.560
So if you start out with a planet that's born with oxygen, it'll go away.
00:46:10.940
It is going to react with all manner of things, and it'll go to zero in very little time.
00:46:16.520
So the fact that we have an active fraction, 20%, 21% air of oxygen tells you something is
00:46:22.800
constantly making it, and that's the photosynthesis in plant life.
00:46:26.980
So if you find a planet that has a stable supply of oxygen, oh my gosh, bump that to the top of
00:46:35.160
And there are other unstable molecules, like methane, although there are other ways you can
00:46:42.200
But the people who are in the business of studying the chemistry of atmospheres, they've
00:46:46.420
got a laundry list of chemical, of molecules that will be the product of all kinds of life
00:47:00.140
They found phosphine in the atmosphere of Venus, where it's not so hot, scalding hot on the surface.
00:47:08.180
Phosphine, no one can figure out how you make phosphine other than by the natural chemistry
00:47:19.260
It's been questioned for other reasons since then.
00:47:21.660
But so we have this cottage industry of people studying the atmospheres of exoplanets, now that
00:47:28.400
we have the catalogs of exoplanets ready for our perusal.
00:47:31.460
And I think that's where the answers are going to come.
00:47:35.400
And one last point about that is, I joke, that if you find a planet that has hydrocarbons
00:47:43.500
in their atmosphere, but also smog and soot and other things, that would be the sure sign
00:47:56.880
And one last thing I'll tell you about the atmosphere is the thickness of our atmosphere
00:48:00.940
is to Earth as the skin of an apple is to an apple.
00:48:06.140
So we think of this as this huge ocean above us when it's not, and it's actually quite
00:48:12.440
So this connects rather nicely to recent news stories about the aliens in our midst.
00:48:22.040
And I got to imagine you were hit with all manner of communication of human origin about
00:48:29.440
this behind the scenes, because even I was, and this is not my wheelhouse.
00:48:35.760
So what we've had, you know, we're recording this in just edging into the second week of
00:48:44.460
And so we've had recent disclosures in the press that the Pentagon and the Office of Naval
00:48:52.800
Intelligence primarily have thrown up their hands and have admitted that we are in the
00:49:00.140
presence of technology that they can't explain.
00:49:02.700
And they've put forward some classified evidence apparently that is supposedly better than the
00:49:10.560
And the media has seized upon this really prominent stories that were not at all skeptical and not
00:49:18.480
marshalling any of the legacy of, you know, skeptical debunkings of this kind of material in their
00:49:25.800
And so we have 60 Minutes and the Washington Post and the New Yorker, the New York Times,
00:49:33.900
I mean, really more or less everyone in sight has given a very fair and one might even say
00:49:46.160
To my eyes, it's just not really clear what's going on.
00:49:49.060
And I said this on someone else's podcast, on Lex Friedman's podcast, that I had received a sort of an
00:49:55.220
advanced communication, advanced with respect to the calendar, not with the details, that this was
00:50:02.700
And, you know, I was urged to sort of prepare my brain to receive these startling disclosures so
00:50:09.000
that I could help shape a public conversation about this new consensus, which purported to be, again, it seems
00:50:18.960
to me that the shoe really never quite dropped.
00:50:23.640
But what I was asked to anticipate was that the people who are best placed to assess the evidence, the people
00:50:32.180
who have the radar evidence, the Navy pilots who have had the dash cam video, the analysts who have poured over
00:50:40.440
these data for now several decades, they have formed a consensus that there's no way what they're seeing is a mere
00:50:53.760
It does not admit of any truly skeptical interpretation.
00:50:57.920
No, we are in the presence of technology that is so advanced that it could not be of human origin, and we don't
00:51:09.160
I guess my first question before we get your full download, Neil, did anyone contact you and ask you to sort of
00:51:18.900
Yeah, I've been interviewed at least a dozen times in the last 10 days.
00:51:23.000
Most recently, a few hours ago, for the daytime ABC show, The View, so that you are correct
00:51:35.160
If you'd like to continue listening to this conversation, you'll need to subscribe at samharris.org.
00:51:40.700
Once you do, you'll get access to all full-length episodes of the Making Sense podcast, along with
00:51:45.160
other subscriber-only content, including bonus episodes and AMAs, and the conversations I've been
00:51:50.840
having on the Waking Up app. The Making Sense podcast is ad-free and relies entirely on listener
00:51:56.300
support, and you can subscribe now at samharris.org.