Into the Impossible With Brian Keating - Jorge Cham & Daniel Whiteson: Frequently Asked Questions About The Universe (#192)

Starting point is 00:00:00 Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. And we are here today, my friends, Jorge Chamm, Daniel Weitzen, for their second book. Their second book is a phenomenal book. It is called Frequently Asked Questions About the Universe. And it's lovingly and tenderly illustrated by Daniel, I believe, right? Daniel, you're the illustrator for all these. Yeah, but I farmed it all out to Jorge. That's right.

Starting point is 00:00:35 Jorge has, as a course. I'm an outsource. Yeah, you're doing the job that Daniel doesn't want to do. You know, a big shot professor, right? You know, what are you going to do? So, guys, I followed your meteoric rise for many years. Your story and legend are well known. Actually, you were some, I think you were my first two kind of legitimate book guest for a book

Starting point is 00:00:58 release. We did a podcast for Into the Impossible way back in 2018, and you guys were on for your first book. We have no idea. And then you came to San Diego, and we did a live event with you, Cliff Johnson of USC. I think Physics Girl was there as well as yours truly. And that was a wonderful event. And I want to thank you for returning coming back on the show. And I've been on your show and I do just have the utmost delight whenever a new episode of your podcast drops, explain the universe. But today we're going to talk about frequently asked questions, facts about the universe. First question, guys, your first book, we have no idea.

Starting point is 00:01:44 Why should we trust you now? Yeah, we should have said ourselves up for not having a sequel. Although everyone joking with our sequel, we have some ideas now. It's a great question, though, but you should trust us because we're the ones who will admit when we don't know. We're not just here to sell you on science. We're here to admit what we know and what we don't know, because for us, you know, the majesty of the unknown is what drives us our curiosity and drives all of scientific discovery.

Starting point is 00:02:15 So that's what it's all about. And you notice that it's frequently asked questions about the universe. Not all of them contain definitive answers. That's right. And I think actually the questions are almost more interesting. People think of scientists, like the three of us, as people who have all the answers. But actually, I think it's more important, guys, maybe you guys agree or not, to have questions. What do you guys say to that?

Starting point is 00:02:38 Is it more important? Are questions underrated? Because everyone can have a question. Like, those of us who have kids, no, the ultimate explanation is because I said so. Are questions really so important, or is that kind of a platitude we tell our readers and listeners? No, I think questions are what science is. you know, science is just people asking questions. I think a lot of people out there think of science as like monolithic institution that just sort of like churns out knowledge every year.

Starting point is 00:03:06 But they forget that it's a bunch of people and science only makes progress when some person is decided, I'm going to devote my life to this topic. I want to understand how butterflies migrate. It's important to me or I want to know how the universe began or I want to measure the anisotropy of the CMB, you know, for example. because everybody has to make a choice. And so science moves forward because individual people ask questions, questions that are important to them to know the answer to. And Jorge, you're, of course, scientist, engineer by training. But you also approach things in a very visual way with your, you know,

Starting point is 00:03:43 very whimsical PhD comics series that I've been a fan of for decades it feels like now. I want to ask you, do you answer or ever pose questions visually? Is that even a concept that makes sense? Yeah, I ask questions all the time. I have a notebook. It's digital now, but it's all where I sort of outsource my brain and where I put all the questions I have

Starting point is 00:04:09 and then I have fun answering them. But yeah, no, I do think sort of visually, which is why sometimes a podcast is challenging to think about these things. But no, yeah, it's it's pretty interesting to sort of think about some of these abstract or grand ideas about

Starting point is 00:04:30 the universe and try to translate them into cartoon form. That's kind of the fun challenge for me in these projects. I see the evolution, both of you guys individually, but also collectively as this Burbaki-like set that you guys comprise. You guys have really evolved and branched out. We were joking before I hit record. You guys have this multimedia. empire. You've got audio podcast dominating, always top 10 science podcast, explain the universe.

Starting point is 00:05:00 You've got Eleanor wonders why just a marvelous resource for parents and for anybody who's interested in kind of exploring big picture things, but also, yeah, this character, Eleanor. So actually, we didn't talk about that last time because I don't think she existed. Talk about the evolution, the origin of Eleanor. And then we'll get into this delightful new book. whoever wants to start. Yeah, yeah, I can chime in. Eleanor wonders why it's a kids show that airs on PBS Kids. It's for preschool to sort of like first, second grade, and it's all about inspiring curiosity

Starting point is 00:05:35 in kids. You know, we talked about how science is all about asking questions, and, you know, it's about inspiring the little scientists that every kid is born with, you know, every kid has all this curiosity about the world. They want to know how the world works, and so they have questions, and, and, um, Unfortunately, society sometimes beats that down eventually. And so we were trying to champion the other part of it, which is to encourage kids to be curious, to encourage them to ask questions,

Starting point is 00:06:04 and also kind of give them some tools they can use to answer their own questions. And so the original show was actually kind of independent of our book and our podcast. You know, we were sort of in the middle of doing those projects, But then I got an email from someone at PBS saying they were looking for new ideas. And so I wrote Daniel in and we pitched the series. And we based it on our kids. So Eleanor is the name of my daughter. And we also base some characters on Daniel's kids.

Starting point is 00:06:38 And so, yeah, it's a big passion project. It's an amazing project just because it reaches so many kids and not just in the U.S., but all over the world. and hopefully brings a little more curiosity into all of those households. And Daniel, I've gotten in trouble lately because I've been kind of preening and saying things like scientists who get paid by the public like you and me, we have a moral obligation to explain what we do to the public who pay our salaries. But I shouldn't speak for all scientists. What is your take on the obligations of a professor?

Starting point is 00:07:13 As I expect when I wrote different books and did different projects, my department chair was like, oh, we won't punish you. We probably won't punish you. Of course, I had tenure by then, as you do. But do you feel an obligation to explain things, or is it just something that you're naturally talented at? And therefore, you take to it. But if you didn't have that talent, maybe you wouldn't be doing it. Do you feel it's an obligation? And if so, how do you approach that balance in your career between teaching and a university, top university?

Starting point is 00:07:43 in the world and doing the outreach that you do so spectacularly well. Make every get-together chill. This Memorial Day, get up to an extra $1,000 off select top brand appliances like LG. Plus, get free delivery at the Home Depot. Tackle pool towels and camp laundry with a large capacity washer. And host in style with the fridge serving craft ice, mini craft ice, cube ice, and crushed ice. Shop appliance savings now through June 3rd at the Home Depot. Offer valid May 14th through June 3rd, US only.

Starting point is 00:08:12 Free delivery on appliance. purchases of $998 or more. See Store Online for details. Thanks, yeah. It's a lot of fun for me to do the outreach. My view is that academia and science, it's a big field, and we have room for lots of different kinds of folks. And there's places for people to contribute in lots of ways.

Starting point is 00:08:34 There are folks who are good at outreach and there are folks who are great at teaching, and there are folks who are great at research, and there are folks who are great at building tools, and we need all of them. I don't think everybody has to do every part of it. And that's one of the strengths is that we can really attract people to do their bits. For me, specialization is like a sign of progress. I mean, I don't raise my own, you know, I don't farm my own food. I'm not my own doctor.

Starting point is 00:09:00 I outsource those bits. So I think it's fine if some folks like to do it and other folks don't. I certainly wouldn't say that everybody needs to do outreach. Not everybody, you know, enjoys it. For me, it is a pleasure. and I do feel this sense that we should make some parts of us accessible. You know, the people do pay for science and the science is, you know, of the people, by the people and for the people. So we do have as an institution, not as individuals, an obligation, I think, to come and talk to people and explain to them

Starting point is 00:09:28 why we're doing what we're doing and why we're doing it, why it's amazing and fun, and how they can feel a part of it. I think it's important to sort of break down this barrier where people feel like scientists are inaccessible. One of the things that I do is I hold a public office hours or hang out on Zoom for an hour and anybody can come and ask physics questions and sort of grows out of, you know, office hours at the university where the students can come and they feel like they have access to you. They could ask you about your career or they can ask you physics questions or whatever. And there's this sense that like, you know, they can hang out with you a little bit. And so I like doing public office hours because it makes people feel like, hey, there's a resource available. I can go and ask this question or I can talk to a physicist about. X, Y, Z, and people show up and sometimes they ask for career advice and sometimes ask physics

Starting point is 00:10:16 questions. And I think that's a lot of fun. The other question you ask is really interesting also is how do you balance this sort of career-wise? Because, you know, as you say, it's not something that's always prized within academia. And I have students now who come to UCI partially because they're into outreach and they know that folks here do it. And I tell them that unfortunately it's not something that's going to get you a job. If you want to be a physics professor, having a podcast is not what's going to get you that position.

Starting point is 00:10:48 There's opportunity, yeah, there's opportunities to branch out after you have tenure, but, you know, the institution is still a little weird. I like the way Sean Carroll says it. He says, you're allowed to have hobbies as a professor as long as they're not science hobbies. Like, nobody would criticize you

Starting point is 00:11:04 if you liked riding horses on the weekends, but if your hobby on the weekends is doing science outreach, then they have this sense that it somehow diminishes your focus on science itself. You and I know that's silly. I actually think that working on the podcast and all these other projects fuels my love for science. It reminds me why it's fun and exciting. It taps into that basic curiosity and interest in the deep questions about the universe.

Starting point is 00:11:29 It helps me broaden my knowledge as I do reading to prepare to talk about some topic on the podcast. So for me, it's been a really wonderful experience. and also, you know, getting to work with artistic and creative people like Jorge, who ropes me into amazing projects I never, ever would have been involved in otherwise. Yeah, speaking of Jorge. Basically, the answer, Brian, is that every professor should hire a cartoonist. I think that would help both professions a lot, I think. Yeah, although it sounds like, if I recall, correct, you kind of hired him.

Starting point is 00:12:02 You were writing some stuff about the Higgs and you approached him. But yeah, just to add to that, I always joke, there's no one skill called scientist. There's no one skill called cartoonist, right? There's no one skill called a podcaster. It's all these microskills, and we never developed them, even in our scientists, when we are paid so dearly in the state of California to do so. So let's turn to the book. The book is frequently asked questions, and I thought that Daniel was a Bayesian.

Starting point is 00:12:34 That's an inside joke. But what is the most frequent of all frequent? Is it asteroid dinosaur related? Is it black hole related? Is it extra dimensions and alien related? What's the most frequent of the facts of the universe? Yeah. Well, you know, I think the title is sort of not just data and statistically driven.

Starting point is 00:13:00 It's also sort of spiritually driven. You know, we try to tap into questions that not only we get a lot of, on the podcast through the podcast or through our talks and things like that, but also just questions that, you know, we thought humanity has been asking for a long time, you know, big questions like, where does the universe come from or, or, you know, why can we go to other star and visit other stars or can we somehow, is there another Earth out there? Or why haven't aliens visited us? These are the questions we cover in the book.

Starting point is 00:13:29 And, yeah, we just try to focus on really sort of like existential questions. that makes you sort of think about the nature of the universe, about your role in it, or whether you're very existence in it. And also, we balance that with questions, with real questions we get from listeners. Yeah. That's right. And as we say near the end of the book, maybe the most frequently asked question is the one that comes second. Like, people ask us a question about some physics, and then they ask us, what does it mean?

Starting point is 00:14:02 You know, like, all right, so we have this theory about how the universe started, what does that mean about the universe or about my life or what does that tell me? And I think that's really fun because it connects to the bridge between physics and philosophy, you know, that physics, the things we learn about the universe from physics can tell us things about how to live our lives and what it means. And so for me, maybe the most frequently asked question is that implicit one. It's like, what does it mean the universe is this way and not the other way? What does it mean, man?

Starting point is 00:14:37 That's, yeah, we do. There is one question we covered in a book that we do. It seems to get a lot, and that it's one about black holes. There's a chapter in the book about, sort of like a beat by beat of what happens if you fall into a black hole. What are you in experience? Are you actually going to die? Can you survive going into the black hole? And so for some reason, people seem to be really curious about black holes.

Starting point is 00:15:01 Probably because we don't know what's in them. Yeah, exactly. Right. We always get the questions about the things that are mysterious to everybody. I always like questions that start off with, you know, this is a simple question, but, you know, what happens if you shrink the plank scale by a factor of it? So let's talk about black holes. I love this chapter. You know, what happens if I get sucked into a black hole?

Starting point is 00:15:24 And, you know, partially because it's familiar, but it's also kind of, you know, dastardly remote. I mean, nobody knows what happens. ultimately, and I think a lot of the questions are answered by that, and that's what's so exciting about science. Like, you know, I always say, you never win science. Science is not a finite game like chess. There are finite games within it, like getting into grad school, getting a 10-year-track position, winning the Nobel Prize.

Starting point is 00:15:51 Those are all, you know, zero-sum games or finite, so-called finite games. But science isn't, and so, of course, there's going to be things that we don't know. And the Archib, John Archer-Boehieler once said, you know, science is like, expanding this island, the size of an island, and as you do so, the ocean of ignorance gets smaller, but the boundary between them also grows. So this question I get a lot, and actually I've asked that not necessarily the Sir Roger Penrose or Reinhard-Gensel when they were on my show, but I want to ask you guys, the fact that we don't know exactly what happens has been troubling me and many people. So let me ask maybe an expert question. because we often hear that we need a quantum theory of gravity to understand a black hole singularity, can we ever know without such a thing?

Starting point is 00:16:38 In other words, is it really a two-part question that what is the ultimate quantization of gravity, or is that even possible? And then we can ask what happens if you go inside a black hole. So either one of you guys. I think that's a question for you, Jorge. Yeah, that's Jorge. Please take it off. Of course, yeah.

Starting point is 00:16:55 But I'll defer to Daniel on this one. I think I can't answer it just from having recorded 300 episodes in our podcast together. Well, it's a really fun question because it sort of goes to the balance between experimental and theoretical physics, right? Like, can you figure this stuff out before you see it? Or do you need to see it in order to understand? And the thing that's fascinating for me about the black holes is that we sort of do know what's in them. What's in them are the secrets to quantum gravity? Like, if you could go inside a black hole and observe what's going on in there, is there a singular?

Starting point is 00:17:27 is there some quantum fuzziness? That would tell you a lot of what you needed to know, presumably, to build a quantum theory of gravity. And so that's sort of like what we need. And the thing that's wonderful about the universe and the reason that I'm an experimentalist and not a theorist is that some of these things just have to be discovered. You can't just sit in a cave somewhere and think your way through the puzzle of the universe. You have to go out and explore because the universe is constantly confronting us with things we never imagined, which take us 100 years to come to terms with, you know, like, is it really that way? What? Are you sure? And then finally, you know, 100 years later, undergrads are like, oh, of course. You know, it takes a while. And so I think you have to go out and to explore sometimes to discover these things. Now, of course, it's possible that somebody out there has a theory of quantum gravity or will develop one, which later we prove to be correct. But I think it's much more likely that some weird discovery we make some,

Starting point is 00:18:26 something which violates general relativity, maybe on the microscale, you know, these experiments with like quantumly entangled gravitationally interacting particles maybe will give us a sense for the direction of quantum gravity. But I think it's the experiments that need to lead the way because I suspect the universe is weirder than even theorists can imagine. And Jorge, I actually do find it kind of curious to know if you were inspired in any way by a great cartoonist by the name of Sir Roger Penrose, who did a tremendous work. Some say he won his Nobel Prize for a single diagram in a 1964 paper on the spacetime properties of Black Holt. He, of course, draws all sorts of whimsical shapes and so forth.

Starting point is 00:19:11 And maybe that's connected to this concept of discovery that we mentioned earlier. But are there places in physics that lend themselves more naturally to artistic, depiction. Yeah. Well, it's kind of tricky because, you know, if we sort of know what it looks like, then it's easy to draw, but then you don't get to use your imagination as much. Whereas if we don't know what it looks like, then, you know, I'm sort of free to imagine what or interpret that or come up with interesting ways to depict it.

Starting point is 00:19:46 But then, you know, it's like, who knows? Who knows if I'm right or not? I would say sort of the hardest thing I always find hard to draw is just the idea of quantum physics and things like the fuzziness of particles or the orbitals around the nucleus of an atom. You know, those are things that maybe a two-dimensional black and white drawing are kind of difficult to really capture. But yeah, no, I agree. Everyone who draws cartoons is a genius for sure. And so for both of you guys, in the zeitgeist, in the spirit of the times, this will be out after Halloween, unfortunately, but the ghost of the times, the spirit of the times have been aliens, not just aliens, UFOs, that is covered in facts about the universe. What does that kind of reveal more?

Starting point is 00:20:43 Is it more of a scientific question? Is it a sociological question? Is it an escapist question that David Kaiser, when he was on the show discussing his book, Quantum Legacies, talked about this confluence of the nuclear age and the information age, and that led to sightings and thoughts about extraterrestrials, et cetera, et cetera. What do you make of this lately? Either one of you or both of you. And this notion that we are being visited potentially by an extraterrestrial intelligence of some kind,

Starting point is 00:21:13 and there are events that we can't explain. And I guess the question is, where does the boundary of, like, saying, well, we have no idea, you know, we leave off and say, well, there are some ideas that actually we have some idea, but not a great idea. So maybe Daniel first. What do you make of this, first of all, this popularity of the notion of UFOs in the public? And then maybe, Jorge, what do you do with this? Like, how do you address it in a way that's respectful but also takes it seriously?

Starting point is 00:21:43 Yeah, it's a lot of fun. And I'm always saying on the podcast, I'm looking forward to the alien invasion because in that brief moment before they eat us or zap us, maybe they'll share with us their theory of quantum gravity. And, you know, that'll make it all worth it. And so I read these reports with enthusiasm. I'm like, ooh, yay, maybe the aliens have come. I mean, I think people on the podcast hear me being skeptical, but I'm skeptical, but I'm also

Starting point is 00:22:08 optimistic. You know, I'm open-minded. I definitely want this to happen. I want to believe. But it's hard to look at, frankly, any of these events, these Navy pilot reports or the videos, and take much away from them that's sort of concrete. If you put your skeptics hat on, we actually had Mick West on our podcast and we went through a lot of these videos, sort of frame by frame and broke them down. And a lot of them, frankly, have prosaic explanations. You know, you can understand why this looks this way because of lens flare or this one is sort of a forced perspective.

Starting point is 00:22:41 or, and, you know, none of this is conclusive, but if there are simple explanations for these things, then it's hard to come away with inclusion that there's something going on we don't understand. Unfortunately, you know, and a bunch of people wrote in after that episode, it was like, how could you have somebody like Mick West on your program? He's anti-alien, you know, and I don't think he's anti-alien. I think he's just, he's looking for an explanation that's reasonable and that's simple. And that's what we have to do before we conclude that something is extraterrestrial or alien, then we have to dismiss all other possibilities. We have to assess them at least.

Starting point is 00:23:21 And I think that this question about aliens really breaks into two. One is like people seeing weird stuff out their windows or things you can't explain, these sort of UFO phenomena. But I think there's a much more serious and exciting understanding in the last 20 or 30 years that the universe is filled with habitable planets, and that makes the prospect that there really are extraterrestrials out there, maybe not here on Earth, but out there in the universe, much more scientifically responsible to imagine. And so I think that maybe drives that, you know, maybe there's a coupling between, like, the legitimate scientific exploration of the question of extraterrestrial intelligence out there and people's excitement for things they see, you know, the weird videos and the things they see out their windows. Yeah, and using it as an opportunity to explain legitimate, as you say, scientific questions. And I agree I had on Mick as well.

Starting point is 00:24:15 And I actually had on people from the Jasons, the super secret society. They're all like, yeah, hell, this would be great. I'd love to, you know, learn, you know, to win the next 80 Nobel Prizes in a row or something. But, yeah, in the same token, we have to be careful and think about, well, is this really data? who does it belong to, you know, our eyewitness accounts, you know, how are they reliable? If we all had a courtroom sketch artists like Jorge around at all times, of course, everything would be documented perfectly. Another thing that, you know, maybe ties into that is this notion of another earth.

Starting point is 00:24:50 And this had some really lovely ideas and depictions. And Jorge, was there a chapter that was the most fun for you to kind of illustrate and contribute to, or are they all like your children, children, singly? that they're all your favorite. Yeah, I don't have as many kits as you have, Brian, but I do love all of my drawings. They're all special in their own a special way. No, they're all fun to draw.

Starting point is 00:25:19 I mean, that one about Another Earth was particularly fun just because we had a lot of fun kind of thinking about this question, like, is there another planet we could live in somewhere else? And what would they mean? What would they look like? And so there's a lot of fun cartoons about like a rocky planet, and sort of dressed like a rock star or, you know, sort of thinking of another planet as like a home remodeling project

Starting point is 00:25:43 and what that would take and whether or like sort of like going home shopping and what sort of would you want to look for when shopping for a new home for your species or your entire civilization? So, yeah, that one was fun to drop. And maybe I could just step in and sing Jorge's praises. for a moment here because, you know, one of the reasons that this book contains cartoons is that some things are difficult to describe with words. You really need something visual.

Starting point is 00:26:13 And often when I was writing first draft to this, I would think, hmm, but this is tricky. I'm sure Jorge can sort this out with a nice cartoon. And then it comes back to me with this amazing depiction that really, like, crystallizes the ideas and shows you how things connect or, you know, pokes fun at something at the heart of it. So I really love all the drawings that he put in there because it really, it's not just there for comic relief and to break up the pages. They really contribute to the essential science communication and making it understandable. And dovetailing from there briefly into Eleanor Wonders Wally for a second, how do you come up with topics or are they handed to you by the network bigwigs? You know, you have to cover the simulation hypothesis, which we'll get to me.

Starting point is 00:26:59 But, you know, whatever. How do you come up with ideas for the series? For the TV show? Yeah. Our network overlords are PBS, so they don't wear big wigs. They're very humble people and very nice. They wear medium-sized wigs. Well, for that show, we really started from what we thought questions kids might ask.

Starting point is 00:27:22 Because there's lots of things adults like to talk about science. They get excited about X, Y, Z. But we really wanted to make sure that every episode, So it was answering a kid's question. And, you know, Jorge has kids, and the show is named after his daughter who asked lots of questions. And you have kids, and I have kids, and we spend time around kids. So we know the kids come at these things with a different set of preconceptions, and they ask questions, which are amazing or interesting. And so we sort of put on our three-year-old goggles and just walked around the neighborhood or the world and looked at it and said, like, what questions would kids ask?

Starting point is 00:27:55 and so every episode starts with a real question we think a kid can ask. And sometimes questions our kids asked us or a neighbor kid asked me one day. And I was like, ooh, that's a good one. You know, why do spiderwebs have holes in them, for example? You know, stuff like this. Yeah, very good. Yeah. And, you know, sort of what we can do, Daniel and I sort of lasted us for about 40 episodes,

Starting point is 00:28:20 but we still had needed 40 more. And so we were thankful to have just a great team of rights. You know, these shows have like a writing staff, a writing team. And, you know, we try to tap people who were not normal writers and people who were, you know, lifetime children's writers. And everyone came in with just really great and fun ideas about just again, like, what does the world look like to little kids? And how can we kind of inspire them to explore? Mm. Another topic that's kind of, again, in the public mind, or is the so-called simulation?

Starting point is 00:28:55 hypothesis. I love that chapter in the book. Are we living in a simulation? Some of these are just not falsifiable. So how do you approach a subject like that? Maybe Daniel first, what is the simulation hypothesis for those that might not be familiar? And then, you know, Jorge, how could you even depict such a thing in the way that you did or what inspired you to provide this kind of really fleshing out, as we would say, the complete vector space of all these different possibilities, something that's admittedly both extremely complex to even describe, but also to be verified or to approach using the finite tools of the scientific method. So Daniel, what is a simulation hypothesis? And then Jorge, how did you choose to approach it?

Starting point is 00:29:44 Simulation hypothesis is something people are probably familiar with by now. It's this idea that perhaps our lives are not real. The universe is not physical, that we live inside a simulation in a computer in some other sort of like super meta universe. And, you know, it's not unusual or weird to think about writing a simulation in a computer. We do it all the time in science. We say, what would happen if these two galaxies collided? And we write a little computer program that simulates it to give us the answer.

Starting point is 00:30:12 And so you might imagine that if you had a simulation that was complex enough that it could have like, you know, life emerge inside of it, an intelligent life that those beings that lived inside that simulation in your computer might not be aware of the fact that they're inside a simulation. How would they know? And so that, you know, you flip that around and you say, well, maybe our universe is a simulation from some very incredible high performance computer in some other universe. And you're right that it's not necessarily something we can verify, though. In the book, we talk about, you know, ways you might be able to figure out your the simulation, looking for bugs or computational limitations, et cetera. But, you know, science isn't

Starting point is 00:30:52 limited to things we can necessarily falsify. There's lots of theories of science and how it can proceed. A lot of folks focus on things that are experimentally falsifiable. But, you know, it's also possible to make arguments like if you could come up with a theory of the universe that is the only one that's consistent with our data and it has implications for things that you cannot measure, then you could conclude that those things. things are probably real. So I don't think that you necessarily need to be able to experimentally interact with things in order to have a strong argument that they're real. Although, of course, as an experimentalist, I always want to have the hard truth, the data. I want to go see it or touch

Starting point is 00:31:32 it or send a probe out there. So it would be pretty cool to get to interact with the masters of the universe if we do live in a simulation. Of course, I think today Mark Zuckerberg announced the Metaverse or something like that. Jorge, how do you approach depicting things that may or may not, it may or may not be legitimate to demand that they're falsifiable or not? But yet, that's a common refrain, you know, all the more so when it could be you who's being simulated drawing the simulation. And so we could get really meta on this and ask, you know, who's simulating the simulators? Is that the Coast Guard's job? Who does that?

Starting point is 00:32:08 But anyway, Jorge, how do you depict something for which we have zero evidence, at least at present? Yeah, yeah, maybe we're all NPCs, you know, non-physics characters. Really. Yeah, this is my favorite kind of question to tackle in the book, just because it is so wild and so potentially un-falsifiable and so kind of out there to draw. And, you know, I think our general approach was to tackle these kinds of questions in a way that not just kind of gets finesse,

Starting point is 00:32:41 but also kind of demonstrate a little bit how physics, and scientists and engineers would sort of tackle these big questions. You know, he has the question also in the book, is an afterlife possible? And usually that's, you know, sort of a ticking time bomb in science and religion and things like that. But, you know, we try to show kind of like, well, how would a scientist approach is? Like, let's break it down.

Starting point is 00:33:02 Like, well, what exactly do you mean by simulation? And how would that even, what would that mean? And how would that, what are some of the different ways that could happen? And what would be some of the implications for that? And, and, like, you know, what are some of the ways in which you could maybe potentially demonstrate whether or not that's true or not? And so, yeah, I had a lot of fun drawing little brains and vats. I think that's the go-to. A little brain hooked up to PlayStation 4 is sort of the go-to depiction of the simulated world.

Starting point is 00:33:39 And then they're, you know, in contra-distinction to those, or contrast to those, their book, there are a chapter. in this delightful book, frequently asked questions about the universe. Of course, it could have been the multivory. You talk about other universes, so I think you show a pro-universe bias that I find. Not only I, but Andre Linday has made a claim that you should not

Starting point is 00:34:00 be prejudiced to think of it as a universe. First, you should think of it as a multiverse. So, anyway, next book, I did. Actually, that was a dinner time question. My daughter, Eleanor asked me one day out of the blue. I mean, I think she was like six or seven, And she's like, how can there be multiple universes? Wouldn't they all just be the universe? Yeah.

Starting point is 00:34:19 And I was like, you got, you got all physics. That's right. When we were kids, that's all they were. That's all they were. That's the problem. But actually brings out something interesting that, you know, when I was reading this book, like the caliber of the question, some of them are for kid, you know, kid level. You know, there's one, you know, when will the sun burn out?

Starting point is 00:34:37 Okay. That has a very, you know, specific, scientific rationale that we can approach and answer definitively, unlike, you know, well, we have no idea. You know, see our first book. Buy our first book. No, you guys don't do that, as I would shamelessly do. But, you know, some of the questions that are asked, at least by, you know, Eleanor and another work that you guys do, it is a lot higher than what we would have asked, right?

Starting point is 00:35:01 And, you know, as kids, just like 30 years ago, 40 years ago, we're all approximately to a physicist the same age. I'm probably the oldest one. But anyway, looking back at, you know, like, when I was a kid, I wouldn't ask, you know, what about the multiverse or the simulation I bought? And now our kids are asking such questions, you know, and the appropriate responses, you know, go to bed or do your homework. But do you think that like science is inevitably going to lead to smarter and smarter children, you know, if the matrix doesn't, you know, isn't caused by a future advanced civilization, it could be a civilization that's currently living among us. namely our kids. So the caliber of questions of our kids are really getting much more sophisticated, wouldn't you say? Absolutely. But I think that's progress. I think things that were cutting edge

Starting point is 00:35:51 controversial ideas 100 years ago, now we can teach them to five-year-olds. And I think that's wonderful. I know that, for example, if I was able to get into a time machine and go to the year 3,000, I wouldn't go to a physics conference because there's no way I'd figure it out. I'd go to the children's section of the library, and I'd start reading astronomy books and cosmology books four or five-year-olds, because that'd be the only thing I'd ever have a chance to even understand. And so I think that just shows the sort of slow-rolling nature of scientific progress, the basic ideas, our basic view of the universe has changed. And so now what we teach to children, and therefore the questions they ask are also changing.

Starting point is 00:36:32 I think that's pretty awesome. And so the last topic, before we turn, I want to spend some time talking about your podcast and getting some ideas that I can poach to grow my podcast from you guys. But is this notion of why. I was always taught that why is not a scientific question. Why is there this? It's some teleological method, you know, motivation of intent, which you can't ascribe to the blind, pitiless indifference of the universe's inexorable evolution. What do you guys say? The last chapter talks about why, you know, is a why question.

Starting point is 00:37:08 I don't like to give away the book and, you know, I want people to buy every single version of this book possible. So are why questions, are they not taboo guys? And why do you end with a why if I can ask a double, double why? Yeah. Well, we're all, our kids just call Eleanor Wonders Why. And so if that's not allowed, then we're in trouble. But yeah, you know, I know that there's something that sort of

Starting point is 00:37:35 traditional line between philosophy and physics. But, you know, I never saw a why question as being particularly taboo. You know, you can ask like, why is the sky blue? And that definitely has an answer. You know, you can definitely give a physical answer to that, right? Sure, yeah. And sometimes we confuse, you know, why with how or what. I do remember a saying of Einstein where he attributed his curiosity later on in life to the fact that he He never asked certain questions as a kid. In fact, he credited the sophistication with which he approached questions as a 25-year-old patent clerk to the fact that he never asked these questions.

Starting point is 00:38:17 Like, he made explicit mention that. I never asked my dad what happened if I traveled alongside a light beam and looked at myself in the mirror, you know, or try to send a TikTok, you know. But, you know, he said, because if I did, you know, my dad would have given me the best answer of the time, which was wrong because he. it had a wait until he himself came about. So, you know, I think that, you know, as much as we do want to, you know, kind of inculcate this notion of curiosity amongst kids, et cetera, we also have to, you know, recognize that sometimes the sophistication of the answer can't be really appreciated until one is much, much more developed.

Starting point is 00:38:57 And it's not a knock. It's just, that's just, you know, it's like you can't paint a masterpiece, you know, straight out of kindergarten. So finding that balance, I think, is sort of crucial. And maybe this dovetails a little bit into the podcast, because you kind of blend a melange of styles. And sometimes you have guests, sometimes, too, you guys riffing. And how do you approach it? How do you approach different topics? Is it just, you know, what people, you know, send in, or is it stuff that you're really curious about?

Starting point is 00:39:25 Or guests like McWest, you've talked about? Or, you know, your most, you know, impressive guests to date, yours truly. tell me, what is your strategy there? Is it one of like, I'm interested in this, let's find it out, or is it like, how do you balance appealing to what the audience wants versus what you guys want? Yeah, great question. First, let me chime in on the previous one about physics and philosophy. I think that you're right that often physics tries to stay separate from philosophy, that a lot of physicists is due, you know, talking about philosophy. I think that's silly.

Starting point is 00:40:00 I think that there's not a crisp and clear line between the two. I think that a lot of the questions we ask in physics have philosophical motivations. And the answers we get from physics have philosophical consequences. And even the people who say, like, you know, philosophy is a waste of time, they don't realize that's a philosophical position. They're in effect doing philosophy without even, you know, really thinking about it carefully. So I would say that why questions are vital, that why questions fuel the how questions. and how answers inform the why questions. So I think it's all a wonderful mixture.

Starting point is 00:40:33 Here at UCI, we have a lot of folks who do really interesting philosophy of science, and I'm often over at their seminar as asking naive physicist questions. But to your point about the podcast, I think that we do all of that. We sometimes do questions where I think this is something will blow people's minds and is not widely appreciated, or I haven't seen talked about in an accessible way before that I think people will find really, really cool. You know, for example, we recently had an episode on the Wimp Miracle. And a lot of people are interested in Dark Matter,

Starting point is 00:41:07 but there's not a lot of, like, accessible discussion out there for why science coalesced around this idea of dark matter as a particle. And in large part, it was because of this Wimp Miracle, this, you know, suggestion that maybe Dark Matter was this weekly interacting massive particle. And so we talk about that, and a lot of questions, a lot of topics come from listeners. They write to us and they ask us, hey, can you explain this?

Starting point is 00:41:31 Or they say, I need a Daniel and Jorge treatment of this. They send me an article. They're like, I didn't get it. What's going on? Can you break this down? And so we have a big mixture of stuff, whatever people find fun. And we explore different topics.

Starting point is 00:41:44 Sometimes we interview science fiction authors about the universes they build in their books and the physics of it, which I think is a lot of fun also. And Daniel, you also take questions from listeners, right? People send in questions, and sometimes we not just devote episodes to answering questions, but also they inspire topics to cover, right? Yeah. Absolutely, yeah. People can write to us with any question to questions at Danielahorpe.com. We actually answer

Starting point is 00:42:13 every single email, usually within a day or so. And some of the really good questions, yeah, we talk about them on the podcast, a whole episode can be devoted to that, or sometimes people send in an audio of themselves asking questions and we have a whole episode just answering. listener questions, which is really fun. And I'm, you know, try really hard to engage with the audience and make them feel like they're a part of this process. It's like a conversation, not just a one-directional podcast from us to them. And maybe Daniel, to wrap up, I want to get your impression of there's been a lot of recent particle physics results. And you are, of course, one of the preeminent experimental particle physicists in the world and doing yeoman's work from everything from

Starting point is 00:42:56 working on LHC work to your crayfish I.O., which I'd love to hear about again in person next time you come and give a colloquium here. Been a lot of results, G-1-2. There's been the LHCB results, actually a couple of them. Just yesterday we're recording this on the 28th of October, and just yesterday there were results from Microboun claiming, on one hand, consistency with the standard model. On the other hand, a whole new chapter of physics has been opened up and, you know, what's going on here? Are there really, you know, fifth forces and physics beyond the standard model?

Starting point is 00:43:39 Or is that just what, you know, big particle physics has to do in order to get red-buttered? Be honest. Are we seeing a fight here? Am I seen the beginning of a fight here between a... Yeah, because cosmologists never hype our results. Yeah, come on. Cosmology versus particle physics. Let me get to popcorn.

Starting point is 00:43:55 Hold on. Yeah. No, you're about to see a fight, but it's between two personalities I have inside my own head. There's the optimist and there's the pessimist, you know, or the cynic. The optimist says we know there's physics beyond the standard model. There's dark matter. There's neutrinos. There's all sorts of stuff that we just cannot describe with the standard model.

Starting point is 00:44:14 We know it's not everything. On the other hand, the cynic says, I don't really think that anything we've seen is very exciting or persuasive. I really am kind of a cynic when it comes to these discoveries because they tend to to come and go and people get really excited about them and then they fade away often. And so, you know, let's talk about the individual ones. You talked about the LHCB measurement. And this is a measurement of, you know, whether particles talk to electrons and muons at the same level. Mewons are like the heavy cousins of electrons. And we think it's important in our theory that these particles interact with electrons and muons. It also tau's at the same level. And LHCB sees this evidence that maybe they don't.

Starting point is 00:44:55 But if you add up all the numbers, they see some hints, but it's not really very conclusive. It's like it's a tantalizing hint because we want to find something and we look in lots and lots of places. So if you do that, then eventually you're going to find something weird. It's like if you set a thousand monkeys to flip a coin a hundred times, some of them are going to give you weird results, you know, pretty far from the distribution of 50-50. And so that's sort of the situation. We're desperate to find something new and we're hunting for tantalizing.

Starting point is 00:45:25 new effects. The muon g minus two is also interesting because what they saw there doesn't agree with a theoretical prediction, but the theoretical prediction also doesn't agree with other theoretical predictions. And so it's hard to really be terribly excited about that. And the microboon one is sort of the most head scratching. But my version of the story is maybe the least exciting. you know, that came out of an experiment called LSD decades ago that had a result that nobody understood. And frankly, a lot of people were skeptical of love. They thought maybe they didn't understand something. And then they did a follow-up experiment to try to understand it called Mini Boone. And Minnie Boone saw something else weird that they didn't understand that wasn't

Starting point is 00:46:11 consistent with LS&D. And I remember thinking at the time, well, it's the same folks. Maybe, you know, maybe they don't understand the backgrounds they expect in that experiment. And now micro-Boon has come out and basically said no to the favorite theory that could describe LSD and Miniboon. And to me, that just says, well, the most likely explanation is that those experimentalists, you know, got it wrong. They didn't understand their backgrounds as well as they thought they did, not that there's some new chapter of physics. So I'm really kind of a cynic when it comes to, you know, declaring that one of these discoveries is really heralding. some new physics. I really got to see a lot more data before I get excited about it. It's peak pollination season and my business is scaling fast. To keep the nectar flowing,

Starting point is 00:46:59 I need a phone plan with top priority data speeds. That's why I chose GoogleFi wireless. My connections stay strong even when the hive is buzzing. Plus, unlimited plans started $35 a month. Now that's a deal that doesn't stay. Explore Google FiWireless plans today. Plus taxes and government fees. GoogleFi Wireless is not subject to data traffic deprioritization during times of high network usage. I think that harkens back maybe even to your first book. We have no idea. Sometimes you get, you know, spend millions of dollars in decades of your life and you get what's called a null result. And you get something that's just not, you know, inconsistent with what came before. And those are important. They don't usually happen to make the front page of the OC Register, the Pasadena

Starting point is 00:47:46 Star News. These are all, you know, like a rock concert. Now, oh, he said my city's name. Or the San Diego Union Tribune. I can't, I can't neglect the paper of record. But, you know, this is, this is, it's always interesting to have this rubric, and I think you guys do it oh so well, what we can understand, what we can't, what we can potentially not understand, and everything in between, and giving people permission to ask these questions and to have legitimate serious answers. And I think that is very commendable. And I want to give, give maybe just the last word to Jorge, what is going with PhD comics? Sometimes I see it's, it's like regular, it's coming out. Sometimes, oh, there's a new comic. I just saw,

Starting point is 00:48:29 I retweeted one. I was like, this is like ripped from today's headlines. And it's from 2010. What's going on with PhD comics? Yeah, a great question. I don't know. It's the question. You know, I did it for like 20, 20, 15 years. And then all these amazing other fun projects came in, you know, making movies based on the comics, starting a YouTube animation collaborative. And then the book with Daniel and the podcast and the TV show. And so, you know, thank you to all my fans for being patient.

Starting point is 00:49:06 But, you know, these days I sort of just kind of when I find the time, is sort of, or when I feel inspired and is when I'll post a new one. Or, you know, even, like, posting old comics is sort of a lot of work. And so, you know, sometimes I get inspired and really want to connect with people. And so I'll start posting again. But, yeah, yeah, there's just too much fun work to do. That's right. Too short the life as your encomium, Blair Breiter, Carlo Rovelli always says,

Starting point is 00:49:37 the life is just too short. But you guys are making a huge dent in the multiverse with this latest contribution to the scientific uvra, frequently asked questions about the universe. Ray-Cham, Daniel Weitson. So my original two guests, actually last time you were together and I had to like virtually pull you apart, you guys were just that. No, but it's, you guys have such a great chemistry. It's always a delight when a book comes out, but it's a delight when every one of your podcast episodes

Starting point is 00:50:07 and Eleanor asks why, wonders why. You guys keep doing what you're doing. It's so vital. It's so commendable. And I just want to congratulate you guys. You guys are the real deal. You set the standard for other podcasters and science communicators to aspire to. So I want to thank you guys so much.

Starting point is 00:50:25 And wish you the greatest of success with this wonderful book. And promise me you'll come back on the podcast again. And again, if only to just discuss the latest weather, because it's always a fascinating time to be with you guys. Yeah, why is it hot? Or is that not a question we're supposed to ask? Southern California, it's not atypical. Thank you guys.

Starting point is 00:50:48 And best of luck with this wonderful new book. Yeah, thank you, Brian. All those things, same to you. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Please support the show by rating, commenting, sharing, and leaving reviews. We appreciate hearing from you, and it really helps keep our universe expanding. Watch our YouTube channel at Dr. Brian Keating. That's DR. Brian Keating

Starting point is 00:51:23 and join our premieres Tuesdays at 8 a.m. Pacific Time. Follow Brian on Twitter and Medium and support us on Patreon at Dr. Brian Keating. For exclusive content, visit Brian Keating's website and sign up for his informative newsletter at briankeating.com. Into the Impossible is produced with the Arthur C. Clark Center for Human Imagination in the Division of Physical Sciences at the University of California, San Diego.

Starting point is 00:51:46 Produced by Stuart Volko and Brian Keating. Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is California's number one entertainment destination for today's superstars. Catch the Jonas Brothers return to the Yamava Theater stage on April 30th, the powerful vocals of Demi Levato on May 17th, and the signature Southern Country Rock of Eric Church on July 19th. Tickets on sale now at Yamavat Theater.com, only at Yamava Resort and Casino, celebrating its 40th anniversary. You in? Must be 21 to enter.

Into the Impossible With Brian Keating - Jorge Cham & Daniel Whiteson: Frequently Asked Questions About The Universe ​(#192)

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.

Into the Impossible With Brian Keating - Jorge Cham & Daniel Whiteson: Frequently Asked Questions About The Universe (#192)