#252 — Are We Alone in the Universe?
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
154.15878
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
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.