Julian Dorey Podcast - 🤯 [VIDEO] - Michio Kaku EXPOSES Multiverse, Aliens & Quantum IMMORTALITY | #145

Episode Date: May 6, 2023

BUY Michio Kaku's New Book: https://amzn.to/3p10D1q  Support Our Show on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/JulianDorey  Subscribe To Our Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChs-BsSX71a_leuqUk7vtDg  (***TIMESTAMPS in description below) ~ Michio Kaku is a world-renowned theoretical physicist, NYT bestselling author, futurist, String Theory Co-Founder and popularizer of science. ***TIMESTAMPS*** 0:00 - Albert Einstein & Michio’s earliest day w/ Science 5:21 - Why String Theory is music of Universe / Multiverse 10:57 - Michio responds to Eric Weinstein’s criticism on Joe Rogan 15:08 - The 11 Dimensions of the Universe 18:41 - Ancient Greece’s Pythagoras & String Theory 21:40 - The story of an Ancient Roman Computer; The 3 Kinds of Computers; Alan Turing 27:01 - The Quantum Race, Moore’s Law, & Our Quantum Universe 30:46 - How do Quantum Computers work?; Quantum Nature 36:24 - What if China gets Quantum Computers first?; Laser Beams 39:42 - AI & Quantum; ChatGPT & AI Chatbots 43:32 - Quantum and robots; Robots compared to animals 48:47 - The next 200 years of robots; Avatars 52:40 - Half Biological alien existence; Digitizing Einstein & Churchill 55:09 -  Quantum Immortality; Reprogramming DNA & ending aging 1:00:35 - Silicon Valley & Quantum Supremacy 1:02:42 - The 3 Types of Civilizations in the Universe; The Planck Energy & Alice in Wonderland 1:09:11 - Time Traveling; Parallel Universes & The Multiverse 1:17:06 - Multiverses & Simulation Theory 1:19:36 - God, The Big Bang Theory, & Baby Universes 1:24:10 - Meaning of Life; The 2 Meanings of Everything, Why our universe is stable 1:33:20 - How do we prove String Theory (M Theory); Dark Matter 1:35:57 - Aliens & UFOs; Alien Drones, & Von Neumann Probes 1:43:37 - Why haven’t aliens tried to destroy us? 1:45:25 - Invisibility; Aliens walking among us; David Fravor & Parallax Effect 1:49:57 - DARPA Secret Technology; James Fox & Aliens simulating sightings 1:54:05 - 3 Reasons Why Humans are Dominant Species; Famous people aliens? 1:58:09 - How confident is Michio Aliens / UFOs have been here?; The Pentagon Tapes 2:01:25 - Aliens & CIA; Avatars among us 2:04:18 - Carl Sagan & Alien Gods; The Aztecs & Cortes; Alien attitudes 2:07:20 - The Universe is enormous; Aquatic Life in the Galaxy; Hydrogen / Solar Power 2:11:43 - Lithium Batteries & Quantum Computing 2:14:17 - Quantum can simulate ancient history & Big Bang?; Quantum & Climate Change 2:18:09 - Regulating Quantum Computers; Type Zero Civilization Problems 2:24:21 - Multiplanetary Capabilities & Quantum; Fusion Rockets 2:31:05 - Quantum simulating what happens after death; Multiverse post-death existence 2:34:58 - Quantum & diseases like Cancer, Alzheimers & ALS; Merging w/ Quantum Computers 2:40:36 - Scenario where Quantum *doesn’t* work?; The World in 2050 2:45:43 - How Michio views his legacy 2:48:01 - NUK3S, War & How Quantum could go bad 2:52:16 - Why Technology has a directional morality 2:58:42 - Is Michio Kaku happy? ~ Get $150 Off The Eight Sleep Pod Pro Mattress / Mattress Cover (USING CODE: “JULIANDOREY”): https://eight-sleep.ioym.net/trendifier Julian's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/julianddorey ~ Music via Artlist.io Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What's up, guys? If you're on Spotify right now, please follow the show so that you don't miss any future episodes and leave a five-star review. Thank you. Do you believe in God? Well, I believe in the God of Einstein. He believed in God, but not the God that intervenes in human affairs. It was the God of order, the God of simplicity and elegance. Einstein was asked the question, did the universe have a choice? Is it unique? So universes, you can create universes in an afternoon, but most of them are unstable. Most of them fall apart. Most of them don't work. Our universe is stable. It works. Everything fits together. And then the question is, what set off the bang? That's what we do for

a living. We have the Big Bang Theory up to the point where the universe is going to explode. Why did it explode? We think it was a quantum event and we are here because we are in the universe which decided to explode. So Einstein said, was it all an accident? And he thought, no, it could not have been an accident. Dr. Kaku, it is great to see you, sir. Thank you for coming down here from New York. My pleasure. What is the, at the beginning of your career when you got into this, this had been something that as a child you were fascinated by physics and I always want

to know like what's the initial spark that gets you into that like what's the day one where you're like I want to learn about the theory of the universe well it all started when I was eight years old all the newspapers talked about the fact that a great scientist had just died and there's a famous picture a picture flashed famous picture, a picture flashed around the world, a picture of his desk. And on his desk was a book. And the book was unfinished. The caption of the picture said that the greatest scientist of our time could not finish this book. Well, I was fascinated. What could be so hard that a great scientist could not finish this

book? I mean, why didn't he ask his mother? I mean, why did he simply go to the library to look up the answer? Well, I had to know. I had to know what was in that book that could fascinate the greatest scientists of our time. I went to the library and I looked it up. His name was Albert Einstein. And that book was the Unified Field Theory, the theory of everything. He spent the last 30 years of his life chasing after an equation that would allow him to, quote, read the mind of God. Well, these were his words, and I was fascinated by this story. I had to know everything possible about this man and this search for the theory of everything. So I decided when I was in high school that I wanted to do experiments on these things,

the nuclear force, for example. So I went to my mom one day, and I said, Mom, can I have permission to build a particle accelerator, an atom smasher in the garage? And she kind of stared at me and said, Sure, why not? And don't forget to take out the garbage. So I went to Westinghouse. I got 300 pounds of transformer steel. I went to Verandah Associates. I got seven miles of transformer steel. 200 pounds? I went to Veritas Socios.

I got seven miles of copper wire. And I built a capacitor bank that could handle four kilowatts of energy. And I built a 2.3 million electron volt betatron particle accelerator in the garage. Well, every time I turned it on, there was this huge crackling sound as four kilowatts of power went surging through my capacitor bank, creating a tremendous magnetic field, about 10,000 times greater than the Earth's magnetic field. And then I heard this pop, pop, pop sound

as I blew out all the circuit breakers in the house, and the whole house was plunged in darkness. So my poor mom, she'd come home from a hard day's work and see the house lights flutter, and then she would say, okay, where's the fuse box? And then she must have thought to herself, why couldn't I have a son who plays basketball? Why couldn't he play football? And for God's sake, why can't he find a nice Japanese girlfriend? Well, I was fascinated by this. I said to myself, this is my future.

The nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, the gravitational force. Think of it, an equation no more than one inch long that would allow us to read the mind of God. It's such a heavy thing at that age, too. I mean, that's a hilarious story and I'm glad your mom was very supportive of that after you blown out all the electricity in the house. But you know, I, when I was like 15, 16, I mean, I'm just watching like the latest NBA game and whatever. There's no thought of like the meaning of life, but it seems like you had,

you were looking past the science and actually at how the science made sense of everything here. That's right. And the more we learn about the universe, the more we realize how simple it is. The Hot Honey McCrispy is so back at McDonald's. With juicy 100% Canadian raised seasoned chicken, shredded lettuce, crispy jalapenos, and that completely craveable hot honey sauce, it's a sweet heat repeat you don't want to miss. Get your hot honey McCrispy today. Available for a limited time only at McDonald's. It's truck month at GMC. Tackle the open road

with added confidence in a 2025 Sierra 1500 Pro Graphite at 0% financing for up to 72 months. With an available 5.3 liter V8 engine, 20 inch high gloss black painted aluminum wheels, off-road suspension with available two inch factory installed lift kit, plus a towing capacity of up to 13,200 pounds, you'll be ready for anything this truck month. Truck month is on now.

Ask your GMC dealer for details. It is that a handful of equations, for example your GMC dealer for details. worked out, his equation is about an inch and a half long. And so I said to myself, I want to work on a theory that would give an equation that's no more than an inch long that allow us to summarize the electromagnetic force, light, the nuclear force, and the gravitational force. And the leading candidate for it, though we're not positive that it's correct yet, the leading candidate is something called string theory. And as a culmination of my work, I wrote down an equation one inch long that summarizes all of string theory.

It's called string field theory. That's actually my equation. And of course, we can't prove it yet. It would require an atom smasher millions of times more powerful than what I had in my garage. But we think that one day we'll be able to prove that perhaps string theory is the theory of the universe. If the theory is correct, it means that music, music is the paradigm that eluded Einstein. That all the particles we see

are nothing but musical notes on a tiny vibrating string. Each vibration corresponds to a particle. That's why we have so many particles. And so what is physics? Physics is the harmonies, the harmonies of vibrating strings. What is chemistry? Chemistry is the melodies that you can play when these strings interact with each other? What is the universe? The universe is a symphony of strings. And then what is the mind of God? The mind of God is cosmic music resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace. That we think, that we cannot yet prove, is the mind of God. The string theory part, there's a lot to bite off there, but let's go back to the very beginning of that. This is something where sometimes when

you say it out loud, people are like, okay, my mind is melting a little bit. But you're talking essentially, if I understand it correctly, about the particle that is beneath the electrons, and that particle is the one that is playing, you said it way better and I'm going to say it, but it's playing the musical notes of the universe, so to speak. Well, we think that all the particles that we've discovered so far, hundreds, thousands of subatomic particles, are nothing but different vibrations on a tiny, tiny string. So if you pluck the string, the string vibrates in different ways.

It becomes a different particle. So this, for example, would be an electron vibrating this way. If it vibrates this way, it becomes a quark. This way becomes a graviton. So all the different particles are nothing but different ways that a string can vibrate. And you came up with this theory in 1974? Well, I came up with an equation. Several people were responsible for

creating the theory itself. My goal was to create an equation, one inch long, that would allow us to summarize all of string theory. And that's called string field theory. And we know that this is probably not the final theory. Now there are membranes as well. There's what? There are membranes as well as vibrating strings, like a beach ball. A beach ball is a membrane, and it can vibrate, and it vibrates, and it creates musical notes. And so all the music, the music of a string and a beach ball, can create all the particles that we know in Mother Nature. So in other words, the universe is a symphony, a symphony that uses music as the paradigm of the universe. The concept about music, I mean, I love hearing that because we all love music. It's something that brings humans together.

But the thing that confuses me a little bit, and maybe it shouldn't, is that when they've studied music and rhythm and beats and timing, human beings seem to be one of the few species, I think there's a few others as well, who can understand this. Like if you play music for a dog, the dog doesn't understand the rhythm and why the notes are happening and that it's something different than like language, so to speak. But we do, and maybe, as I i said a few other species so if string theory were like as a layman my first thought is if string theory really were the music of the universe and

that were at the core of everything we do why wouldn't all species be able to recognize music itself well i think music is a common denominator for many organisms on the planet Earth. The mating call at night when you hear the crickets chirp, it's a mating call. And for birds, it's not just a mating call, but it's a way to express your vigor and your health. It turns out that when you analyze the chirping of birds, it correlates with the vigor of the animal. The animal that has the strongest vocal cords has the most vibrations that create the most complex melodies. So even the melodies of love, which permeates throughout the animal kingdom, is based on the complexity of resonances of strings. So strings are, in some sense,

what propels evolution. Well, you and I were looking at a video right before we went on camera. I wanted to show you in case you didn't have the context, but we were watching a video of Eric Weinstein on Joe Rogan recently, where he was, I guess, like having a moment with string theory and going off about it david gross and ed witton should be in front of the community explaining why did you take all the smartest people all the resources all the attention michio kaku get michio kaku in here with me michio kaku is out of control sean Sean Carroll is covering up for this as well. In what way?

They are too kind. Brian Greene. Like, I had this interchange with Brian Greene where I said, you know, we're not being honest about the failure of strength. Brian was like, oh, well, maybe we were a little bit exuberant. I blurt out, Institute for Arts and Ideas, I blurt out. That's like saying Milai was irrational exuberance.

No, you put a lot of people's careers in the shredder. And it was kind of funny to watch, but I'm a little removed from it because I'm not a physicist and neither is he is a mathematician but he was talking about how it frustrates him that there hasn't i think the way he put it was they haven't like shipped a product in 70 years or something like that and he was saying that there seems to be this like setup within physics and theoretical physics that

says if you don't subscribe to string theory like fuck off and to me it's kind of like don't we still have to develop like isn't the whole point of through i can't even say that right now theoretical physics to think about how things could possibly be so that we can find out ways to develop things to look at those things and test it in the first place? Therefore, we're kind of in the time period right now where we are trying to figure out how to test that with maybe something like quantum computing? Well, first of all, where do correct ideas come from? In part, correct ideas come from interactions with incorrect ideas and also experiment.

So the fact that there's controversy around these things is a good sign. We should welcome it. We should encourage more people to jump into the game and criticize, and so we can raise the level of conversation. But the key thing is to criticize in order to create a higher theory. That's the key. We're not talking about criticism for criticism's sake. That's easy. You could rattle off a million criticisms in an afternoon. We're talking about reaching a higher understanding.

You know, when I was a kid, we had an expression, put up or shut up. So my personal attitude is as follows. You can criticize all you want. That's healthy. I welcome it. But propose your own theory. You don't like the theory that exists?

Great. That's fine. We live in a democracy. Propose your own theory. Because where do correct ideas come from? Correct ideas come from interactions with incorrect ideas. But a criticism is not a proposal. And that's why I challenge people to make your own proposal.

When I give a speech to an audience, I say to myself, I say to the audience, go home, propose your own unified field theory. And if you find it, come back to me and we'll publish together and we'll share the Nobel Prize, you and me together. Okay? Yeah and we'll share the nobel prize you and me together okay yeah i i think from the outside so like i was saying sometimes it's like we look at it as non-scientists

and there seems to be drama so to speak with it but i agree with you i think you know especially when you look at society today not even science even a guy like me i'll sit here and i'll complain about certain things and i don't know how the hell to solve it you know and so it's almost it seems like you're shouting into the abyss a little bit so bringing up new ideas if you're going to criticize is smart and and something we should do i agree with you but there also has been in, let's say, more recent years, the problem of shutting down criticism like at the start itself. And within science, within a lot of things, but within science where you see there comes to be this type of consensus on whatever it is. I'm not talking about string theory. I'm talking about anything where then anyone who comes in and says, well, hey,

let's talk about this, they're told no. I mean, have you seen a change in that since you were coming up as far as like the openness to challenging ideas? Or what would your thoughts there be? Well, I've seen a lot of theories come and go. And when I started working on string theory back in 1968, when string theory was first born, it was the bad boy of physics. People said, what? A theory of strings? That violates everything we know about particles. What?

Strings vibrating in ten dimensional hyperspace? Beam me up, Scotty. We're talking about science fiction. Hyperspace? We're talking about Scotty. We're talking about science fiction. Hyperspace? We're talking about wormholes? We're talking about other dimensions? That's stuff right out of science fiction. But yeah, string theory talks about that. In fact, we're up to 11 dimensions now with string theory. What does that mean when you say we're up to 11 dimensions? Well, most people think that the universe is three-dimensional, you know, length, width, height.

Three numbers define where you are. Einstein comes along and says, no, there's a fourth. The fourth number is time. So given length, width, height, given the time of the measurement, you now have an event in a four-dimensional space-time continuum. That's Einstein's idea. Now we realize that Einstein didn't go far enough. There are other dimensions. In fact, we think up to 11 dimensions, that that's really the universe

of the Big Bang. The Big Bang was a disturbance in 11-dimensional hyperspace, and we are nothing but four-dimensional vibrations that peeled off from the original explosion. And so when this idea was proposed, going all the way back to 1968, people said, this is nuts. I mean, this is crazy. We live in four dimensions. We live in a world of particles. You're talking about strings. You're talking about music. You're talking about hyperspace. You're talking about wormholes. You're talking about extraterrestrial intelligence even. At that point, string theory was shut out. We couldn't get a job. Many of my friends left physics, in fact, promising physicists because they could not get a job. And then I realized, hey, that's the way science is. At the cutting edge, it's rough and tumble.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And to be in the heat means, yeah, to be criticized. We were criticized heavily because people said, this is nonsense. Strings, hyperspace, other dimensions, wormholes. Come on, give me a break. Well, now we are in a position where we dominate a lot of physics departments. And so when I hear the criticism of string theory, that perhaps string theory is too powerful, I say to myself, well, hey, look, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

That's just the way cutting-edge physics is done. At the cutting edge of physics, all theories are subject to blistering criticisms, and if you can't stand it, get out of the kitchen. But you were also able to break through fairly quickly as far as getting that to be some sort of mainstream discussion, because you said you wrote the equation around 1974, but you started working on it in 1968. What was the initial thought that made you come up with the idea of like,

oh, it's all a string? Well, the idea of a string came pretty much out of accident when we were analyzing subatomic particles. We realized that there's a whole array of subatomic particles, and how do you make sense of it? Is Mother Nature so cruel as to create a universe, not a simple universe, but a universe of so many particles that vibrate in all directions? I mean, it's nonsense.

And then you realize that if it's a vibrating string, everything falls into place. Because then you realize it's music. For example, 2,000 years ago, there was a debate between Greek philosophers. Pythagoras, the guy who invented, discovered Pythagorean theorem. Pythagoras said, no, no, no, the universe is not made out of atoms, which is what Democritus said. No, it's strings, said Pythagoras. And how did he get the idea? He went to a blacksmith's store one day, and he saw the blacksmith pounding pieces of metal. The longer the metal being pounded, the lower the note. And then he saw a lyre string,

and it was the same thing. The longer the lyre string, the lower the note. So how many notes are there on a lyre string? How many notes can you make on a sword? And then you realize infinite number. There's an infinite number of vibrations that you can make on a string, on a lyre string. And that's why we have music. And so then Pythagoras started a school, a school where he said that strings is the music of the universe. This is the paradigm that unites everything. But unfortunately, the Roman Empire fell apart, and for the next 2,000 years, science was plunged in darkness. So the idea never went anywhere. But the kernel of the idea was actually 2,000 years old.

Hey guys, please don't forget to share this episode around on social media or with your friends, whether it's on Reddit, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook. It's all a huge, huge help to allowing us to continue to grow and get great guests like this. So thank you to all of you who have already done so and thank you to all of you who are going to do

so now. Also, I want to give a huge shout out to everyone who has joined our Patreon in the first couple months of it being live. I'm amazed by the support over there. And it's been a huge help. And I hope to continue to see it grow. We've been doing a bunch of bonus episodes and getting a bunch of bonus content over there as well. We'll continue to grow that over time. But if you haven't checked it out yet, the link is in the description as well as on the homepage on both YouTube and Spotify. I'd love to see you over there and help this show grow. Yeah, actually, to take a little sidestep on that because I had read that. I think that was in your book.

I was reading it there in the new one, Quantum Supremacy, which we're going to talk about that today. But why is it that science didn't have any progress? Because some of these things you were talking about were like right at the end of the B.C. times. And then as you said, we really got to say the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s where for the first time in a long time we took a step forward. What – even through guys like Leonardo da Vinci and different people from history that we know existed within that time, or Galileo, Isaac Newton, why do you say it didn't necessarily move forward? Well, sad to say, but the Roman Empire fell apart. And the greatest works of these great scientists were in a library, the library at Alexandria, and the library was burned to the ground. And just think about it, the sum total of human knowledge basically disappeared

with the fall of the Roman Empire. And it took another, what, 1,500 years to gradually inch our way back up to that point. Now, let me give you an example. Around 1900 or so, there was a shipwreck off the coast of Greece, and divers found an instrument encrusted in coral. It looked like a piece of junk, but when they cleaned it, they realized, no, it's a machine, a machine that is 2,000 years old. And then they took x-rays of it, and they realized it's a computer. My God, a computer. A computer. A computer that was supposed to be a gift to Julius Caesar.

But the ship sunk, and it was there at the bottom of the Mediterranean for 2,000 years until divers found it. How did they know it was going to be a gift to Julius Caesar? This is so interesting. This is a speculation because they know more or less when the shipwreck took place and what was happening there that could create a gift of some sort, a fantastically complicated gift. And when they moved the coral away away they found out that it was a

computer it was an analog computer that modeled the universe the universe known at that time Mercury Venus Earth Mars like a planetarium a little planetarium that you could put on a desktop that modeled the known universe 2,000 years ago it predicted the eclipses of the moon. It predicted the motion of the sun and the motion of the planets. How did they do that, right? Well, that shows you the power of what we had,

but it was all, again, for naught when the Roman Empire fell apart. But that was the world's first computer. The world's first computer was created 2 000 years ago an analog computer you turn gears you turn a wheel gears and pulleys would then move mimicking the motion of the planets so how but how do you define at its base case because we say computer now and it means what it means but like at its base case my thought always was a computer is something that has some form of code that that can then operate on that code but what it sounds like there if i understood

that correctly is that this was operating based on a human moving pulleys and then it moved around to be able to tell where certain planets are and things like that well there are three kinds of computers uh the first kind of computer is called an analog computer, like the abacus. Beads on a pole can be shifted around to do calculations. And so almost any device that you can create on a tabletop can be used to count. And it's the counting that is the computer. And so analog computers use gears, levers, pulleys, and also, like in this situation, a planetarium,

analog computers were the first computers to be created. Then World War II comes along, and then we have a genius called Alan Turing, who then uses electricity to drive vacuum tubes to create a digital computer, not based on wheels and levers and pulleys, but based on zeros and ones, zeros and ones, zeros and ones, binary. And that helped to win World War II. Unfortunately, his work was classified by the British government. And years later, the government found out that he was gay. And it was illegal to be gay at that time. And they put him on trial, and they forced him to take hormones to turn him into, basically feminize him, and messed up his brain.

And so here's this man, the greatest genius that came out of this mathematics project, one of the founders of artificial intelligence theory committed suicide. He ate a poisoned apple. And some people think that the symbol of apple computers is a half-eaten apple is a tribute to Alan Turing, the creator of the first major digital computer that computes on electricity rather than on gears, levers, pulleys, and strings. Okay? That's the second stage. We're in the second stage now.

But now we're entering the third stage, the third stage of computation. You realize that Silicon Valley prides itself as doubling computer power every 18 months. That's why at Christmastime, all your toys are twice as powerful as they were the last Christmas. That drives the world economy. The world economy is driven by Moore's Law. But Moore's Law is now ending.

It turns out the computer power is no longer twice as powerful every 18 months. It's slowing down. It will eventually flatten out. And Silicon Valley could become a rust belt, a rust belt of obsolete technology, just like the abacus is obsolete today. Silicon Valley could have mass unemployment. That's why we want to go to the third stage, the third stage, which is quantum computers, computing on atoms. That is the ultimate computer, a computer that computes on atoms. Now, if you want to see a quantum computer, just go outside and look at a forest. Look at a leaf. A leaf takes light from the sun, photons, combines it with carbon dioxide, creates oxygen,

and also eventually creates cellulose and chlorophyll. Think about it for a moment. That's a computation. That's a quantum computer. So if you want to see the simplest quantum computers, go outside. Mother Nature is the greatest quantum mechanic of all time. All of life, the magic of life itself is quantum mechanical. It's at the level of DNA, the level of genes, the level of molecules, and it's all governed by the quantum theory. And so if you want to see a

quantum computer, just look at a flower. Just look at a leaf. Mother Nature does it. Why can't we do it as well? Now the nations of the world are onto it. And so the two leading powers are, first the Chinese, and second, in the United States. We have some of the biggest computer firms now researching quantum computers. It's the biggest thing in Silicon Valley right now. Startups can get billions of dollars in investment money thrown in their way

if they can propose a better quantum computer. And that's what's at the heart of your book right here. And so it's like this idea to me of quantum is something that was introduced to me back in 2018 by an old friend of mine marcelo cabrera we were in new york not far from where you live we were in central park taking a walk and he was explaining to me why all the blockchain fad at the time i guess you could say like very early 2018 january was a little bit premature and why it could end up being a problem and what he was hypothesizing was that quantum computing which as he said at the time one country around the world or a couple countries could have and we might not know it essentially could be so powerful as to break the code of even the blockchain which isn't supposed to be breakable

within 100 years it could break it in seconds and this blew my mind because I'm like, well, we're looking at this crazy technology that everyone's bragging about right now. And you're telling me there might be something right behind it that can basically crush it like a book. And so when I read your book, which Quantum Supremacy talks all about this and what the hypotheticals here are with quantum computing, which we're right on the dawn of, I was blown away by the fact that this can also integrate with all other types of technology. And I guess that really shouldn't blow you away because that's kind of the idea of computing. It's at the heart of it. The code is at the heart of it. But I think what I was trying to understand the most that is a little difficult for me to comprehend, similarly to string theory,

is how, like what the meaning of quantum itself is. I understand that computers can only do computational type things in the sense that it's zero or ones and millions of permutations on top of each other, and that quantum can do millions of these at one time. But how does that work precisely? Well, very simple. Think of a top, a spinning top. Let's take an atom, for example, and have it spin. And it can spin this way, let's say, hypothetically, or spin this way. It could be one or zero. So you can simulate a digital computer with zeros and one just by spinning top. But real tops, of course, spin at all sorts of angles. They can spin this way, they can wobble, they can go upside down. So how many modes are there in a spinning top that can rotate like this?

Infinite number. Not just zeros and one, but an infinite number of possible vibrations just on a spinning top. That is the power of quantum computers. Quantum computers compute not on zeros and ones, but they compute on all possible orientations of an atom. And how many orientations are there? Infinite number. Now, what can you do with this? Let's say I put a mouse in a maze, okay? And at each joint, each juncture, the mouse has to go left or right, left or right, because it's in a maze. So how long does it take for the mouse to go through the maze on a computer? It takes a fair amount of time, because each time it hits a joint juncture, it can go to the left or the right, left or the right. It's tedious to calculate all possible orientations. A quantum computer does everything all at once. Every single possibility laid out for you all at once. So how much more powerful is the quantum

computer compared to ordinary computer? It is infinitely more powerful than an ordinary computer. It can solve problems that a digital computer would take an infinite amount of time to solve. And it can do it in a matter of seconds to minutes, depends on the computer, of course. And why? Because how many calculation modes are there in a quantum computer? Zeros and ones? No. Infinite number. How many numbers are there between zeros and one? How many numbers are there between zero and one? Zero. Numbers, not just integers, but rational, irrational numbers like 1.5, 6.7.

A lot. So you're talking about a qualitative leap in our ability to compute. Now, what's the drawback? Why do we have them now? Why doesn't the CIA try to outlaw these things now? Because these codes can be broken. Codes can be broken with the quantum computer almost instantly. And so realize that the crown jewels of national governments, the codes

used to protect all the secrets can be broken with a quantum computer. Well, the reason is you have to cool these things down to near absolute zero because the slightest cough, the slightest vibration will cause these atoms to spin out of control, and the whole calculation is ruined, okay? Now, Mother Nature could do it at room temperature. Mother Nature is ahead of us. That's why we have flowers. That's why we have forests. That's why we have leaves.

The laws of chemistry are incredible, but where do these laws come from? They come from the quantum theory. And it basically shows you that chemical processes, which are beyond our ability to understand, like photosynthesis, are quantum mechanical. That's why it's so hard to figure them out. Photosynthesis takes photons, that is particles of light,

mix them with carbon dioxide, and it creates oxygen. We breathe the oxygen, so we depend on this process. But that process is quantum mechanical. Now, normally, if you have billiard balls, billiard balls that mimic light and carbon dioxide and oxygen, how long would it take for these billiard balls to perform the magic of photosynthesis? It would take millions of years.

Millions of years by random collisions of billiard balls. But mother nature does it using quantum mechanics, using quantum theory. And so that's the power of the quantum theory that allows you to take shortcuts, shortcuts that make chemical processes possible. For example, when you eat an ice cream cone, what does your body do to the ice cream cone? It hits it with enzymes. What do these enzymes do? They speed up the breakdown of the ice cream cone. They speed it up by a factor of millions of times.

So in other words, that's quantum mechanics. Normally, ice cream would simply not be digested for thousands of years. You would eat an ice cream cone, and it would take a few thousand years for you to digest it. But you can digest it in an afternoon because of enzymes. And what are these enzymes? They are quantum mechanical. They allow you to take shortcuts and that's why you can digest food. In other words, life itself is a byproduct of quantum mechanics. Without quantum mechanics, there's no such thing as life.

DNA could not exist. Molecules could not exist. It would take millions of years to simply digest an ice cream cone. If I'm understanding this correctly, though, my mind naturally goes towards the tribalism within

the human race and the fact that we have all different countries and countries have different ideas. And, you know, this is what leads to wars and everything. And now I'm putting quantum potentially in the middle of that. And I'm starting to think, well, what if one country gets it first, whether it's us or China or Russia or anybody, is there a way for them to then prevent everyone else from even getting to it? No, but it would allow you to be many steps ahead of the competition. You'd be able to break into their secrets. You'd be able to read all their codes because all the codes that we use today are breakable if we have a quantum computer. And so the government, the U.S. government, has issued a directive saying, watch out,

it's coming. Start to take measures now to prepare for the time in the future when quantum computers become possible. Right now, they're still in the research phase. So right now, we're not talking about breaking the code. We're talking about preparing for the time when this will happen. Who knows? Maybe in 10 years, who knows when it's going to happen, but it will happen. Right now, the Chinese, for example, are one of the leaders in this technology. Instead of using circuits of electricity, they use laser beams.

Laser beams to do the calculation, because a photon of light can also spin in different orientations. It's called polarization. How does that work though when they're using laser beams? Well, when you go to the store and buy a sunglass, chances are it's polarized, meaning that the vibrations can only be in one direction, like this way. That's why you buy them for sun, to protect you against sunlight. All the other vibrations are eliminated. So what does that mean? That means light is not just one frequency or one phase. Light can vibrate in all sorts of orientations. Therefore, you can make a

computer, a computer out of them. Anything that's quantum mechanical can, in principle, be made into a computer. Like I said, a flower, a leaf, is a quantum computer, okay? There's quantum computations, a leaf, and that's why photosynthesis is possible. That's why life is possible. Life itself is made possible by the quantum principle. If the world were Newtonian, if atoms were billiard balls, billiard balls that bounce against each other, just like Newton would envision a billiard balls, billiard balls that bounce against each other just like Newton would envision a billiard game, if life were a billiard game, it would take millions of years for a simple chemical reaction to take place. But using quantum mechanics, you can take shortcuts, and that makes life possible. So all chemical processes that involve life, photosynthesis, stuff like that, is made possible by the quantum theory. Do you think that this is quantum would be the largest technical step forward in human history by an exponential rate? Yeah, almost by definition.

You'd have computers that are infinitely more powerful than any known existing computer, capable of doing calculations that would take an infinite amount of time on a regular computer that computes on zeros and ones, zeros and ones. Well, the thing I keep thinking about while you're saying all this is where AI plays a role in this as well. Because obviously, everyone's talking about that right now ai is something i looked really closely at in like 2017 2018 2019 and i was almost wondering like where is this like because it seemed like they already had a lot of the technology and now in 2023 it's almost like they're unleashing it through things like chat gpt mid journey and having it all around us but the way i understand ai is that it's all machine

learning. So it's basically once you code the machines, the AI learns what to do and then can build on top of itself. So if you put quantum with AI, just thinking about this as a layman right away, that to me would almost seem like it could severely accelerate the rate at which AI learns. That's right. AI is basically a software problem. You want more code, and you can do more things with robots. They can learn things like that with coding. And so it's a software problem. You write the code.

Quantum computers are a hardware problem. We're talking about the ability to do more with software. So there's a limitation with these chatbots because these chatbots can lie. They can cheat. You know, I'm a professor, and when we assign a term paper project, what do some students do? They go to the web, cobble together existing essays, splice them together, and hand it in as their masterpiece. Okay? That is a chatbot. A chatbot takes existing phrases and essays written by a human, splices them together, and passes it off as your article.

And so, in other words, are these articles written by Chad Boss original? Are they human-like and can surpass human abilities? No. They're like college students cobbling together known essays, passing it off as their own. Now, these essays sound human-like. Freaks people out when they read them. Sounds like a human wrote them. That's because a human did write them. A human wrote everything that there is on these chatbots. All the chatbots, they would splice them together, sew them together to make it look presentable. And they're not original.

We're not talking about something that's created out of nothing. But anyway, the relationship between chatbots and quantum computers is chatbots is a question of software, limited by the power of your hardware. Quantum computers is hardware. It increases your muscle. It increases your power. And for example, what we need for all this is fact-checking. Chatbots will lie. In fact, what they do is they take essays on the web and splice them together. If a teenager wrote nonsense on the web, some chatbot will grab that teenager's essay

and incorporate that into an answer. That's why there's so much garbage coming out with chatbots. So you need a fact-checker. But a fact-check checking is very difficult. It requires lots of computational muscle. And that's where quantum computers could come in. Quantum computers has the computational muscle because it computes on atoms, not on transistors, and use that as a fact checker to make sure that these chatbots don't go off the deep end and say all sorts of nonsense,

which of course they do, because there's a lot of nonsense on the web. And all these chatbots do is they take existing essays on the web and splices them together, sounding like a human wrote them, because a human did write them. These are human-generated essays spliced together by a machine. Feels like we're entering a brave new world, Doc. It's scary to me, though, because I think about something like chatbots may not be good

right now, but if we got to this quantum stuff in, say, like, 2029, I think that was one year you may have thrown out in your book suddenly the the issue doesn't move from oh now the chatbot can understand a few things a little better it goes from oh now the chatbot's like a person so we kind of flip that switch and i fear that we could get stuck in this time period where we're like oh yeah ai is around it's kind of cute we we know it's ai though and then we don't have any time to prepare because we think that's what it is. And then quantum comes out and suddenly AI is not sentient, but all knowing. And you basically go from one day where you don't have it in the next day. Oh, shit.

Okay. Well, let's talk about that. Let's talk about animals and compare these machines to animals. If you compare our most advanced military robot to an animal, what would that animal be? It would be a cockroach. You put a cockroach in a forest. A cockroach finds mates, food, shelter.

It immediately scurries around the forest and makes a house, a place for itself. You take our most advanced military robot and put it in the forest what does it do it falls spring is here and you can now get almost anything you need delivered with uber eats what do we mean by almost you can't get a well-groomed lawn delivered but you can get chicken parmesan delivered sunshine no some wine yes get almost almost anything delivered with uber eats order Order now. Alcohol in select markets. See app for details.

Why do fintechs like Float choose Visa? As a more trusted, more secure payments network, Visa provides scale, expertise, and innovative payment solutions. Learn more at visa.ca slash fintech. Over, gets lost, can't even crawl up again. It's simply there trying to right itself. But eventually, robots will be as smart as a mouse. I have no doubt that one day they'll be as smart as a rat,

then as smart as a rabbit, then as smart as a dog or a cat, and finally, they'll be as smart as a monkey. At that point, they are potentially dangerous because monkeys are self-aware. They know they're not humans. They're self-aware. They're sentient. They make their own plans.

You don't have to program a monkey. Now, dogs, dogs are confused. Dogs think that we are a dog. That's why they obey us. We're the top dog. How do we know that? Well, we're the top dog. We're the underdog.

Let's do a simple experiment with a dog. Go to your dog tonight and teach your dog the meaning of tomorrow. Doesn't know. You can't do it. Right. It's impossible. You can't teach your dog the meaning of tomorrow. And why can't do it right it's impossible you can't teach your dog the meaning of tomorrow and why can we do it because there's a huge part of our brain the front part of our brain the

cerebral cortex which is dedicated to looking at the future what does the human brain do that animal brains cannot do we see the. We take the present and do simulations into the future. Now, do animals do simulations into the future? A little bit, but no, nothing compared to what a human can do. We spend all our life daydreaming. We spend all our waking moments asking the question, what if I did this? What if I did that? Animals don't do that. They operate by instinct. You chase an animal for game,

that's because you're hungry. You feel hungry. You want to get food. But a human will say, do I want to have lunch this afternoon or do I want to do this? No, you have alternate realities. The front part of the brain, which is what we have,

what animals don't have, is the ability to use it as a time machine. Our brain, the reason why we are sentient is because our brain is a time machine. It sees the future, okay? Now, of course, the future doesn't exist. So how does the brain see the future? When you do a brain scan and you ask the brain on an MRI machine to see the future, what does the MRIs do? Well, of course, you cannot see the future. That's impossible. So what does the brain scan do when you ask a brain to simulate the future and daydream? What it does is it accesses memories of the past and then distorts them a little bit. That's the key to how we think. We think on the basis of things that happened in the past

and then we tweak it. We tweak it and have alternate realities. So that's what separates us from the animals. Our brain is a time machine. It alters the past to create alternate visions of the future, which is what animals do not do, okay? Animals hibernate not because they say, oh, I'm getting tired, I want to hibernate. No, there's a gene in their brain that says time to hibernate. So you see, animals are done by instinct, while we do our motions on the basis of logic and thinking and simulating the future. How far is a monkey off of that, though? Monkeys can do a little bit of that. They have a cerebral cortex that, of course, is not as developed as our cerebral cortex. But yeah, they also think about the future. They plan a little bit. But

dogs, you cannot talk about the future to dogs. So I think that maybe in 100 years, I could be off, but maybe in 100 years, we'll have animals and robots that do simulate the future by themselves. They don't need a human to prompt them to simulate the future. At that point, they are potentially dangerous. How did you arrive, and you said you may be off because it is a prediction, obviously, but how do you arrive at like 100 years when you say that? Because you look at the progress of the past, and then you realize that we're going to be hitting a lot of roadblocks. For example, the fact that Moore's Law is going to collapse in the next coming decade.

And you realize that quantum computers are still not really off the ground yet. They're not competitive on the open market yet. And so it'll take time. And even with quantum computers, you have to train it so that it begins to understand its role and its identity. You see, robots do not know they are robots. They have no self-awareness. You cannot go up to a chess-playing machine and say,

congratulations, you just beat the world's greatest chess player. No. It just stands there and acts dumb. That's what machines do. They do one task and then they shut off. Okay. We are sentient beings. We self-program. Okay. We have the ability to plan the future and to understand our role in that simulation of the future. Animals aren't anywhere close to that. They don't simulate the future with their role in the future.

We constantly obsess about this. This is what we call a college education. What is a college education worth? It allows you to simulate different futures with you in it so that you can choose a destiny for yourself. We create our own destiny. Robots do not. Robots simply do what they're supposed to do.

Now, as I said, I think it's only a matter of time before robots have some of this ability, self-awareness, the ability to simulate the future, and then watch out. I think maybe in 100 years, we should put a chip in their brain to shut them off if they have murderous thoughts, if they decide that perhaps they should be in charge, not humans. But eventually, maybe in 200 years, and of course this is just wild speculation, maybe in 200 years robots will remove that chip. Robots will figure out how to remove the chip that constrains them

so they cannot take over the world. At that point, what should we do? I think at that point, we should merge with them. We should become supermen and superwomen and explore the universe as a cyborg. What does that look like? When you say merge with them, is this like the Matrix? What does it look like?

No, not the Matrix, but be able to, for example, the simplest thing to do is to have avatars. We control the avatars. We are in communication with the avatars. And the avatars go to the moon. They go to Mars. They explore the universe. And we sit comfortably in our beach house in Miami

while our avatar goes out and explores the universe with our intelligence. Are we consciously experiencing that, though? Yeah, we are consciously experiencing the exploration of the universe. So my attitude is that in the future, we should merge with these creations of ours. When we encounter a being in a flying saucer,

we should not be surprised if we find out that they're not totally biological. They can be part computerized, part mechanical, as well as part biological. So I think when we encounter aliens from outer space, we should not be surprised if we find out that they're not totally

biological. How do you... Alright, that's like melting my brain a little bit. So, are you saying that there'd be a way for you to appear in physical form that you can touch and not put your hand through that wouldn't be biological? Yeah, I think that the future will explore the universe as part biological and part computer. For example, let's take a look at the simplest example of this, which is digital immortality. As you probably heard, William Shatner from Star Trek sat in a chair for four days and

was pestered with all these questions about his life, his history, his dreams, his hopes, his family, and so on and so forth. A computer then homogenized it, so put it in logical order, and you can talk to it now. In other words, he will live forever as a computer program that you can talk to. But he doesn't really live forever, though. This is where I divert. Why do you say he lives forever if it's just a computer that took the code of some of the bases of his brain and doesn't actually live in there and feel and touch and have the human experience that he did? Well, it depends on how you define the word you. Unfortunately, in the English language, there's no variations on the concept of you.

You is just who you are organically. But in the future, we'll have the option. We'll have the option of being in several different modes. And for example, I would love to talk to Einstein. One day, somebody will digitize him, digitize all his writings and filming that he did and everything about the guy, and you'll be able to talk to him.

So the library of the future, you'll be able to talk to Winston Churchill because all his, every reference to Winston Churchill will be digitized and you'll be able to talk to him. So in that sense, you can be digitized and talk to your great, great, great, great grandchildren long after you're gone biologically but you you this some total of emotions memories that that you you carry with you will be digitized and will be digitally immortal i'm trying to picture that world and i still see some holes in it. But the fact that it doesn't, I mean, we're testing it right now. It means that the earliest iterations of that can't be that far off, which actually that even makes me think, because we keep talking about this Moore's law thing, right? Where every 18 months, there's a doubling of computational power. And you keep

saying that it's slowing down and we know it's coming to an end and i've heard that a bunch like we know more is always going to end at some point but it would seem that it wouldn't be the end when we're getting to like the quantum era and the era of doing all this stuff because quantum itself is exponential in being able to simulate things so why would suddenly when we get the greatest exponential finding in the history of technology at this point, why would that coincide with the time when Moore's Law is ending? That's what I don't get. Well, Moore's Law is ending, so we have to look at alternatives. And so that's what we are consciously now, not accidentally, but consciously looking at the quantum alternative, which will affect medicine, our way of life, the economy, energy.

For example, we talked about immortality, right? Let's now talk about biological immortality. There's no law of physics which says that you cannot live forever. And so the question is, why can't we live forever? Well, the second law of thermodynamics says that in a closed system, you eventually die. You age, you fall apart, errors build up, and you eventually die. That's the second law of thermodynamics for a closed system,

the law of physics. But there's a loophole, a loophole in the laws of thermodynamics notice i said the word closed in a closed system like a box you will eventually die air is built up things rust things fall apart things decay that's a law of physics okay but notice i said closed if it was opened if you opened the box and energy can come in from the outside, then in principle you could live forever. Because what is aging? Aging is the buildup of air. That's all aging is, the buildup of air. Air in our DNA, air is in protein synthesis,

air is at the atomic and molecular level, and that's where quantum computers comes into picture. Because quantum computers live in the quantum world. Immortality is therefore possible. Of course, I'm not saying that we can do it now. I'm just saying that in principle, it may be possible. So for example, if you take a look at a car and you ask, where does the car age? You would say the car ages in the engine. That's where you have buildup. You have oxidation. You have wear and tear. So where is the engine of a cell? The engine of a cell is the mitochondria. That's where you have oxidation. That's where you have, quote, moving parts in the buildup of air. So if we could then fix the air buildup in the mitochondria, you would then be able to reverse aging.

So with quantum computers, we'll be able to isolate the process which makes aging possible. Some animals live forever. Look at the hydra. The hydra is a microscopic animal found in a pond. You try to destroy it and it regenerates itself. It lives forever. Okay, it's immortal. And so the question is, why can't we do it? And believe it or not, some of the biggest names in Silicon Valley are now beginning to put their money on the table looking at ways to regenerate cells, looking for ways to reverse the aging process.

And one day we may be able to create a certain form of immortality. Not digital immortality that we just talked about, but I mean biological immortality. So they're doing this by repro reprogramming DNA essentially, right? That's one component of it, right. And how does that work? So with trying to bring quantum into the picture, how does that work?

Like the quantum simulates a bunch of things and then is able to instruct humans how to therefore fix this? Yeah, more or less. In other words, aging is a quantum mechanical process. It's the buildup of error, okay? That's a quantum mechanical process. If the atom were a billiard ball, you couldn't talk about this. This is only possible because atoms are not billiard balls. They're quantum mechanical. They can form bonds. They interact with each other. They create enzymes to speed up processes, so on and so forth. And so one day we will find the key ingredients that

make aging possible. Why is it possible to, why do we age? We age because of the buildup of mistakes. Every time a cell divides, every time you're hit with a cosmic ray every time you take a piece of material that's slightly poisonous you speed up the aging process the build up of mistakes and that's where quantum computers can come in because it may allow us to repair those mistakes

cells have repair mechanisms otherwise we would all age immediately we would be able immediately, right? We would be able to isolate them, find them, and use them. And that's a process that we are working on right now, and that's why Silicon Valley now is putting billions of dollars to find the fountain of youth. And you've talked about how, like you mentioned it already in this episode,

about how Silicon Valley could one day be the Rust Belt and be totally irrelevant. That's right. If they stay digital, a digital Silicon Valley will become a Rust Belt. There'll be mass unemployment, mass layoffs, and people will talk about the good old days when Silicon Valley ruled the world, but those days are gone. That's why Silicon Valley, they're no fools there. They're investing in quantum computers. Some of the biggest startups now,

some of the biggest startups in Silicon Valley are all based on quantum computers because they realize this is the future. So they're based on quantum computers, hypothetically, if we don't know, or if this is actually the case, without current quantum computers. They're just trying to develop them. Yeah, we're still in the experimental stage. We've passed what is called quantum supremacy. Quantum supremacy is the point at which a quantum

computer can exceed the power of a digital computer for a certain task. That has already been breached. The Chinese and the scientists in America now have quantum computers that exceed by factors of millions, millions of times more powerful than a digital computer for a certain task. Now, notice I said for a certain task. We want a computer that works for all tasks,

and we're not there yet, okay? The main problem is that we have to cool these things down to near absolute zero so that there's no air buildup. What do you mean by that? If somebody sneezes or somebody jumps up and down, small little vibrations will move the molecules so that the chemical reaction falls apart. So you want it to be totally stationary. You want it to be totally stationary. You want it to be away from any vibration. And you want to cool it down to near absolute zero. Now, Mother Nature does this at room temperature.

Yes. Mother Nature is ahead of us. We can't yet do it at room temperature. But that's the goal. The goal is at very cold temperatures, we want to be able to simulate quantum processes. Is quantum itself the final step from getting from a type 0 civilization to a type 1 civilization? And maybe if you wouldn't mind defining the three types of civilization just for people out there to follow.

Yeah, there are three types of civilizations we think for the future based on energy. Energy is quantifiable. Therefore, we can actually look at the future thousands of years from now. A type one civilization is planetary. They harness all planetary energy. They can, for example, control the weather. They can control earthquakes, volcanoes, anything planetary they can control. That's type one. Sort of like Buck Rogers. Then there's type two. Type two is stellar.

They control the energy output of an entire star. Stars to them are playthings. That's like Star Trek, the Federation of Planets, would be a typical type two civilization that has colonized a tiny fraction of the Milky Way galaxy. Then there's Type III. Type III is galactic. They roam the galactic space lanes. They play with black holes.

Their energy output is measured in now billions of stars, not just one star system. That's called Type III, like Star Trek. I mean, Star Wars. Star Wars would be a typical type three civilization. Then the next question is, what are we? Are we type one that can play with volcanoes and the weather? Are we type two that can play with the sun? Are we type three that can play with the Milky Way galaxy? No, we are type 0. We get our energy from dead plants, oil and coal. But we can dream of the day when we become type 1.

And this is a mathematical formula now. We can now calculate when we will attain type 1 status. Really? Yeah. The answer is we'll be Type 1 in about 100 years. Around the year 2100 or so, a little bit after 2100, we'll be a planetary civilization. And you see the beginnings of it now.

For example, what is the Type 1 language that we'll be speaking? Well, on the Internet, the two most popular languages are English and Mandarin Chinese. Also, we're seeing the beginning of planetary sports, the Olympics and soccer. We're seeing the beginning of planetary fashion with Gucci and Chanel. We're seeing the beginning of planetary music with rap music and different kinds of musical variations. We're seeing the beginning of a type one culture evolving right before our eyes. And the greatest transition of all will be in about 100 years when we become a planetary civilization. What makes you say like

Gucci is type one fashion and the Olympics are type one sports? I'm just saying that in general, we're seeing the beginning of a type one culture. So the beginning of a type one energy system and communication system secondarily spins off a cultural image. Okay. So the cultural reflection of what's really happening at the physics level, that is the creation of energy systems, creation of communication systems. The reflection of that is cultural, which in turn is

Chanel, Gucci, the Olympics, and things like that. So we're seeing the reflection of the beginning of a planetary civilization on the planet Earth. And how do we arrive at a calculation that can tell us it's 100 years away? Very simple. We assume that the world economy will grow, let's say, at about a 3% a year. It goes up and down, of course. But assume for the moment that the world economy grows at the rate of 3% a year. And science, of course, drives much of the world economy grows at the rate of 3% a year. And science, of course, drives much of the world economy. And that allows you to then calculate the level of energy consumption into the future.

This is something that is not that hard to do on a simple computer. They calculate exponentially where we will be in 100 years, growing at the rate of about 3% per year. Then the next question is, at what point will we become masters of the galaxy? At what point will we have interstellar drive? At what point will we go to the stars? Well, in 100 years, we'll probably begin the process of colonizing the solar system

and perhaps maybe even sending probes to the nearby stars. But the galaxy is huge. The galaxy is about 100,000 light years across. And at what point will an advanced civilization be able to reach us from out of space? To do that, you will probably have to have the energy, what is called the Planck energy. The Planck energy is the ultimate energy of all. It is the energy of the Big Bang. It's the energy of a black hole. It's the energy that you would need to rip the fabric of space and time.

Now, you may say to yourself, well, didn't Einstein give us the laws of space and time? Well, Einstein's laws will eventually collapse. They will eventually collapse. They will eventually collapse once you hit the Planck energy. The Planck energy is the energy which space and time become unstable. At that point, wormholes begin to develop. And with wormholes gives you the possibility of interstellar drive. There's wormholes, I might be off here, but there's wormholes where it's like two black holes connecting.

That's one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is Alice in Wonderland. When Alice went through the looking glass, she went through two universes. One universe was she was in Oxford in the countryside. The other universe was when she was in Wonderland. Alice in Wonderland was written by a mathematician, Charles Dodgson, writing under a pseudonym, Lewis Carroll. And he knew that in mathematics, you can combine spaces together. You put them together. They're called multiply connected spaces. We physicists call them wormholes. It's a gateway. It's a shortcut. So think of a funnel, a funnel where everything goes into a small little

hole. Take two funnels and put them back to back. When I take two funnels and put them back to back, I get a wormhole. And this is where my mind and I think the average person mind starts to go towards like time travel and what we could possibly do there because you know if i were a guy like you i don't know how i'd sleep at night because the the no pun intended the gravity of what happens here on earth is so beneath what you deal with you're looking at the meaning of everything and yet you know we got people fighting on the front page of the fucking New York Times talking about who they're going to vote for. it seems like everything that we look at in the galaxy and that you've spent your career looking at is based on the fact that there are multiple outcomes. And as you do those multiple outcomes, things get exponential really quickly. And so when we talk

about wormholes, and we start talking about the relationship between time and space, and what time even means, which is something obviously we've spent a lot of your career on. It's like, well, now we can think of different ways that things could be simulated. And so when I'm thinking about time travel, the way I've heard you explain it before is that it's not as simple as, oh, you go back and you change what happened to Abraham Lincoln, and then that changes the future. What you seem to point out is that if you were to use time travel as a mechanism, if we figured that out, you could go back and change Abraham Lincoln getting shot, but it's not going to change the future, the past that you know. It's only going to change that for another set of probabilities, which means that there's this whole other galaxy out there with unlimited potential permutations of it that exists on a parallel plane, if you will, from what we experience right now in this room. Well, by George, I think you got it.

I think you understand the whole problem of time travel. Okay, time is a river. And the river of time can speed up or slow down. That's called special relativity. That gives us the atomic bomb, for example. However, the river of time can fork, fork into two rivers. And that's called the multiverse, which is the foundation of quantum mechanics, which we'll talk about in a second.

That's called the forking of space and time. And that gives us wormholes. But the question is whirlpools. Can the river of time have not just splits, but whirlpools by which you can go backwards in time to alter the past? Okay. That is the question. Now, it turns out that in Einstein's theory, wormholes are rather common.

It's very easy to generate wormhole solutions in Einstein's equations. But the catch is you have to be type three. You have to be a very advanced civilization to begin to tinker with the fabric of space and time itself. Now, how does that work? If you go backwards in time and alter the past, the river of time forks into two rivers. And you've saved not just Abraham Lincoln at the Ford Theater. and alter the past, the river of time forks into two rivers. And you've saved not just Abraham Lincoln at the Ford Theater, you've saved a copy of Abraham Lincoln at the Ford Theater. Because the river of time has forked into two rivers.

And that, of course, is the multiverse idea. And where does the multiverse idea come from? It comes from quantum mechanics. So the question is, where do parallel universes come from? And the answer is, it comes from the quantum theory. The quantum theory is powerful because it computes in parallel universes. All of quantum mechanics, which in turn is all of physical reality and all of life. Everything you know and love is based on quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics in turn is based on the multiverse. And we're not talking about Marvel comics. We're not talking about Spider-Man

and Marvel comics in multiverse. We're talking about the laws of physics are defined in a multiverse. Now, how do you explain the multiverse to an average person? I once asked Steve Weinberg, Nobel laureate, to explain the multiverse in a simple way. And he said, well, look, take a look at radio. If you walk into your living room, how many radio stations are there in your living room? Hundreds of radio stations, right? But your radio is only tuned to one frequency. It resonates at one frequency, and that's why you hear only one station. But how many stations are there in principle in your living room?

Hundreds of vibrations. Now replace the radio with electrons. The electron is is a wave a wave governed by quantum mechanics okay and how many waves are there of these electrons an infinite number of waves just like infinite number radio waves but you are tuned to one frequency that's why you exist with parallel universes. In your living room, there are dinosaurs. In your living room, there are pirates.

In your living room, there are aliens. You don't have to go into outer space to see the aliens. The aliens are there right there in your living room. The thing is,

you are no longer vibrating in unison with them. You've bifurcated. So you cannot jump into these other universes unless, of course, you are an electron. Electrons do this all the time, okay? And what is that called? It's called electronics. All of electronics are based on that idea that electrons can be in multiple states at the same time. That's why you have laser beams. That's why you have the internet. That's why you have all the wonders That's why you have the internet. That's why you have all

the wonders in your living room. It's because electrons can be in multiple states at the same time. Okay? Now, why can't you enter these other realities? Well, for the PhD exam, we sometimes give a simple question to our PhD students. Calculate the probability that you'll wind up on Mars tomorrow. Now, the average person would say, that's a stupid question. You gotta be an idiot. What? Calculate the chances you're going to wake up on Mars tomorrow? That's a physics question. Electrons do it all the time. The question is, can you wake up on Mars tomorrow? Okay. So you do the calculation, Heisenberg uncertainty principle, delta P, delta X, H bar. You do the calculation and you have to wait longer than the lifetime

of the universe for that to happen. Chances are you're going to wind up in your bed tomorrow, but there's a small probability that you'll wind up on Mars tomorrow. That's the quantum theory. The quantum theory computes on multiple realities. So the question is, why are quantum computers so powerful? They compute on parallel universes. That's why they're so powerful. Now, we usually don't like to teach our students this because it freaks them out. So we simply say that the electron, oh, it's like a football. You know, you took chemistry, right, in high school? Of course. In high school chemistry, what was the electron? How did you

visualize the electron? It was a football, right? A football that was surrounding the nucleus of the atom. That was the picture given to you by your chemistry teacher. They didn't tell you the truth because it would freak you out. I knew she lied to me. That's right. Ms. Pomeroy was on something. That's right. The electron is not a football. The electron is not a wave that looks like a football.

The electron is not a wave at all. The electron is a particle that exists in multiple states at the same time. In other words, this is straight out of Marvel Comics. In fact, where did Marvel Comics get the idea of a multiverse? It came from physics. Right. I just don't know how, I mean, what is the meaning of it all then? Like, sitting right here right now, if this is the case, and there's all these multiverses, which are these infinite probabilities and possibilities, what is to say that that we're not completely simulated in one separate multiverse right now and in another multiverse you're an axe murderer

or not a scientist at the very least there's something totally different right like what is to say that this right now is happening and you and i are both present and understanding a similar experience of the world as we know it today well Well, like I said, we usually don't teach this to our students because it freaks them out. Yes. But hey, get used to it. Yeah, I'm very freaked out. This is the way the reality is. Reality is not there to make you feel comfortable.

Reality is the way it is. Get used to it. Well, when I walk across the room, I have this picture that it's just not me walking across the room. There are hundreds of parallel me's walking across the room with me, each one thinking that they are the unique version of me. When I look in a mirror, I ask myself this quite constantly. When I look in a mirror, is that really me? No. First of all, it's me one billionth of a second ago.

Because it takes a billionth of a second for light to go from my face to the mirror to my eyeball. It takes about a billionth of a second. So I'm looking at me a billionth of a second ago. I never really see myself as I really am. And then with quantum mechanics, I'm surrounded by other versions of me. Surrounded. And some of them decide to go outside, get breakfast. Some decide to go to the bathroom. Some of them decide to go to the library.

And it's all me. Okay? And you begin to freak out thinking about this. I'm very freaked out right now. But my attitude is, get used to it. This is the way reality is. And this is the reason why quantum computers are so powerful. And that's why flowers

can capture sunlight. Flowers can capture sunlight for exactly this reason. It is a quantum mechanical effect that sometimes the flower catches the photon, sometimes it doesn't catch the photon. But for the most part, it does because it takes shortcuts. Shortcuts given to us by quantum mechanics.

In other words, it all fits together. Quantum mechanics is the basis of reality itself. But the basis of reality is based on probabilities. Get used to it. Do you believe in God? Well, I believe in the God of Einstein, okay? Einstein once, he believed in God, but not the God that intervenes in human affairs. It was the God of order, the God of simplicity and elegance. And he once said that he's like a child entering this huge library.

And this child is awestruck at the power and the enormity of this library called the universe. And all he could do was take the first volume, first chapter, first line, and read a few lines. So he was awestruck by this. And he said, was it all an accident? And he thought, no, it could not have been an accident. Do you think about like how it, I mean, we talk about the Big Bang and everything and like, oh, that's how something began, but there's potentially unlimited galaxies out there. There are, I mean, within our own galaxy, we're talking about unlimited multiverses. It is a number that is quite literally infinite. Do you ever think about, like, where all of that came from?

Well, yeah, that's what I do for a living because, of course, what we do is we run the videotape backwards. We can run the videotape forwards, but what's more interesting is when you run the videotape backwards, you begin to realize that the universe becomes simpler. In other words, the universe today is quite complicated. We have neutrons, protons, chemical elements, so on and so forth, because it's old. That's why it's so complex. It's old. But when you go backward, turn the radio dial backward,

things become simpler and simpler. Atoms combine with each other to form subatomic particles. They in turn combine to form a super particle at the beginning of time itself. And then the question is, what set off the bang? That's what we do for a living. We have the Big Bang Theory up to the point where the universe is going to explode and then the next question is why did it explode we think it was a quantum event okay that there's a certain probability that it didn't explode but there's a certain probability that it would explode and we are here because we are in the universe which decided to explode. That's why we're here today.

But could that just be scratching the surface in the sense that, like, yes, you're thinking about where everything came from. But above that, couldn't there have been infinitesimal Big Bangs and universes to already exist? And therefore, we don't even know. We can't even possibly fathom or concept where the steps began. Well, yeah, we can't. This is all theory we're talking about, right? I like to look at it this way. Let's take a glass of water and heat it up. And it turns into steam.

It starts to boil. And let's take steam now and put it in an oven and heat that up. And eventually the steam begins to split apart into oxygen and hydrogen. Let's keep on cranking up the heat. And then the atoms then begin to disintegrate into electrons and protons. Let's crank that up and just keep on cranking it up. At a certain point, what happens is bubbles form. These bubbles are baby universes.

And these bubbles then can expand to create a universe of their own. These bubbles are wormholes. They're gateways, gateways to other alternative universes. So just by boiling a glass of water, heating it up to the Planck energy, which is 10 to the 19 billion electron volts, heating up to the Planck energy, that is the energy which space becomes unstable. Even space itself becomes unstable. Bubbles form. And what are these bubbles? Baby universes.

These are baby universes. And it means that at some point, maybe we can create our own baby universe. Believe it or not, I have friends of mine, physicists at reputable universities, who've done the calculation. What would it take to become God? To create your own baby universe? And of course, the number is quite fantastic. So don't think that you're going to become God anytime soon. But it's something that we physicists think about.

We think about these things. So heavy. It's just really like, to me, I think a lot of my life, you know, I was just focused on the next thing and trying to do my best at whatever i was putting my mind to and and there's something about when you're a few years out of college and i've heard this from a lot of other people that's why i say because i did personally experience this you do start to think about well well like what is there you know what is maybe you think about your mortality a little bit. You think about the planet and where we are on this whole speck of stuff. But a thought that had probably come into my head as a kid that I would run away from

that now I run headfirst into is, you know, what is the concept of nothing? And when I'm thinking about meaning, I constantly think of like, what is, what would it mean for there to be no space whatsoever? And the odd thing is that you can't picture that because just by picturing something, that's something. You can't picture a blank room that's white. You can't picture a blank room that's black with you sitting in it. That's something, right? And so when I extrapolate that towards all the different parts of the Big Bang and all the different parts of trying to figure out all these 11 dimensions and how they coexist with each other, I start to wonder like,

what even is the next action in front of me? Why do I exist? Why do I need to do, why do I need to choose good over bad? Like it gets to this point where you keep talking about it freaks out your students. I get it. It's like what is the purpose of us even being students if I'm looking at it from their perspective? What is the purpose of you looking after all the potential here to teach other people in some limited one multiverse about it. You know, like, do you understand what I'm saying? This is a very hard way to put it.

But, you know, learning about this is the gift of intelligence that we have as humans, but learning about it is also the torture of not knowing what we don't know. Well, you know, ignorance is bliss. And when we are young, we live in a very blissful world. It's just mommy and daddy. You get a career, get married, have kids, whatever. And you think that's the universe. But then when you started to study these things, you realize what did it take to create that universe? Well, it took evolution because of course we are beings made out of atoms. How long did it take to create atoms that would create people?

That takes millions of years. Millions of years for random atoms to form people. And then you begin to realize, oh my God, this is incredible. That all these random processes could create me. So finally, as a physicist, we come down to two basic philosophies of the meaning of everything. The first is the cosmological principle. Cosmological principle comes from Copernicus, okay? The Copernican principle says that we are nothing. We're a piece of cosmic dust floating in an ocean of other dust particles. That's the Copernican viewpoint.

And that's a viewpoint that many physicists share. But then there's the anthropic principle, which says the exact opposite, which is also compatible with all the known laws of the universe. And the anthropic principle says, no, we are special. We have life. If there are other universes, most universes have no life in them. It's extremely rare, extremely rare to have life.

And yet here we are in a universe fine-tuned, fine-tuned to exactly allow life. For example, take a look at the nuclear force. If the nuclear force were a little bit stronger, atoms would burn out, everything would explode, we wouldn't be here. If the nuclear force were a little bit tuned weaker, atoms would never form at all. We'd be a bunch of gas molecules. So the nuclear force is tuned just right to allow for life. Look at gravity. If gravity were a little bit stronger, we would have had a big crunch and we would all be crushed to death

if gravity were stronger. If gravity were weaker, we would have just been blown apart. We'd be drifting pieces of atoms in empty space. Gravity is tuned just right. These are accidents, right? Or are they? Some people have said,

look at all the accidents necessary to create people. A huge number of accidents, the nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, everything has to be tuned just right to allow for life. That's called the anthropic principle, which is also compatible with all the known laws of physics. So take your pick. Either it's the Copernican principle where we're just dust, floating particles of dust in a

meaningless universe or the other principle the anthropic principle which says we are special we have life it is extremely mathematically difficult to create life off the ground think about that all the molecules have to be just right to get dna off the ground. And yet, here we are talking about it. And so that's the miracle of existence. So there are two philosophies, which are diametrically opposed. And hey, they both work. But it's also it has to do with what we think of as large or small numbers to like, as you're going through that example, in my mind, I'm thinking, okay, there's this very fine tuning that means it's a low probability that life exists in the first place. But we know that because we understand numbers themselves. If numbers themselves that we think are big, like, I'll say

a number that sounds enormous to me, right? Like 10 trillion or something like that. If in the context of all these different multiverses and potential universe i is it universe i or universe is i guess universe is okay universe is out there who's to say that's not a microscopic number so therefore we start getting to the idea of like well how much life is there because now we can at least like additively like put it out there if we start to be able to have a way to figure that out across different galaxies and when you start thinking about that you're like okay well then why doesn't life interact as much which we'll talk about the whole phenomenon and aliens and stuff which is something you've you've gone on record about over the past few years we'll get there but you know if if

numbers are a human creation as to how we understand the universe, why do we have to think that that fine-tuning doesn't mean that there aren't billions or trillions or numbers we can't think of, permutations of life that actually do exist out there within whatever a way bigger number is of potential universes or universes that have no life that just exist because they don't have that fine-tuning? The answer is yes. Next question. What's the next question now? I mean, that was a lot right there. I had to really do a lot of thinking. What do you mean, yes? Well, Einstein once asked the question,

did the universe have a choice? Is it unique? In other words, the laws of physics are pretty stringent. You just can't create nonsense and have it mathematically consistent. A Newtonian universe is rather ingeniously mathematically consistent up to a point, okay? So universes, you can create universes in an afternoon, but most of them are unstable. Most of them fall apart. Most of them don't work. Our universe is stable.

It works. Everything fits together. The universe is over 13 billion years old. And in 13 billion years, we've seen no contradiction. The laws are the laws. It's a universe that seems to work. So Einstein said, did God have a choice? Could he have created the universe in a different way?

Okay. Well, we don't know the answer to this, but string theory says the following, that there is one master equation, which we now call M-theory. One master equation, which gives you everything in the universe. But his M-theory says the original

universe was unstable. Bubbles began to form. And these bubbles are baby universes. And one of these baby universes exploded to create our universe. But how many possible universes are there that satisfy this one equation? Perhaps an infinite number. There's a multiverse of universes. So this is the picture. One equation, one theory, with how many solutions? A multiverse of solutions. And that's why we have all these different possible universes that are consequences of string theory. Now some people say that's a weakness. That's the weakness of string theory, that it doesn't say that our universe of string theory. Now, some people say that's a weakness. That's a weakness of string theory, that it doesn't say that our universe is this one.

It's just this one, not that one. It's just this universe. Well, what can I say? That's the theory. The theory says there are many, many possibilities as solutions, but there's one master equation, M-theory, which gives you the whole shooting match. And you think M-theory is basically the theory of everything. So how do you prove that, though?

Well, the bottom line is you have to experimentally show hard data which shows that this is the correct theory. And there are several ways that that may be possible. One way is to look at dark matter. What is the universe made of the universe is not mainly made out of ordinary matter is invisible matter called dark matter and dark matter is necessary because it holds the milky way galaxy together without m theory we'd all be flying out into outer space but the one of the leading theories of dark matter is what is called the fotino. And the fotino is a higher vibration of the string. So in other words, what is this mysterious invisible matter called dark matter that everyone freaks out when they first hear about it? We think it's nothing but the next octave, the next octave of a vibrating string.

And how many octaves are there? An infinite number of octaves. How many octaves are there on a violin string? An infinite number. Get used to it. If I put my finger in like water though, for example, and I move it around, right? Like it appears to be consistent

in the sense that I'd put it in here. I'll do it right now because I don't drink out of this right here. I move it in there and then suddenly when I move it here, it looks like I'm just moving along the edge of the water. But as I do that, I technically do displace particles that are operating in my way at, you know, micro size. So it's almost like the way I understand it, and I might be wrong about this is that you're essentially for a split

microsecond or whatever touching air and then it retouches water as it readjusts. Am I totally off base when I say that's kind of where you're getting at, where the dark matter, like what the meaning of that is? No. It just means that if you vibrate your finger faster, it creates higher vibrations within the surface of the water, and dark matter would be a higher vibration. So in music, everything is a vibration,

but there are higher octaves. And we think that dark matter is just nothing but the next octave of a string. And when you calculate its properties, bingo, it's invisible. And so it has a logical mathematical justification that the properties of the next vibration of the string look very much like dark matter do you think that there are existing well maybe that's not the way to say it since we're talking about infinitesimal

universes and everything if we are not by chance and by probability the most advanced civilization that exists, and it's fair to say we probably aren't, but the other one could be trillions of universes away. Do you think? So you've always been picky about your produce, but now you find yourself checking every label to make sure it's Canadian. So be it. At Sobeys, we always pick guaranteed fresh Canadian produce first.

Restrictions apply. See in-store or online for details. The White Chocolate Macadamia Cream Cold Brew from Starbucks is made just the way you like it. Handcrafted cold foam topped with toasted cookie crumble. It's a sweet summer twist on iced coffee. Your cold brew is ready at Starbucks. I think that there is the potential that a civilization has figured out from some other galaxy how to become a third-tier civilization and potentially visit us. Yeah, sometimes I wonder what happens on the other side of the Milky Way galaxy? Is there a young scientist there on the other side

of the Milky Way writing down the exact same equations that I'm writing down, but in a different language? And I realized that if this is a theory of everything, it's probably unique, in which case throughout the galaxy, many, many civilizations will come across this. And of what use is this equation? This equation takes us beyond Einstein. Einstein's theory is ambivalent on the question of whether or not wormholes can actually exist, whether or not you can build a time machine, whether or not you can zip across the galaxy instantly. Einstein's equations do not have a definitive yes or no on that question.

String theory would. In which case, if wormholes are really possible, and they are a type 3 civilization, they would be able to manipulate the Planck energy. The Planck energy is the energy at which space and time become unstable. Now many people say, well, doesn't that violate the laws of physics? Isn't it nonsense? But at a certain point, the known laws of physics begin to break down. And they break down at the Planck energy, 10 to the 19 billion electron volts. That is a quadrillion times more powerful than our most powerful atom smasher based in Geneva, Switzerland. That is the Planck energy. The Planck energy is the energy at which space becomes unstable. Bubbles begin to form in this space. And these bubbles are gateways, wormholes to other universes. And so we think that a civilization out there, smart enough, advanced enough, would

eventually use these things perhaps to zip around the Milky Way galaxy. In principle, you could go past within the speed of light by zipping through a wormhole. That makes me question UFOs, though, when you say that. And the reason is UFOs are supposedly these ships that we see that come into our galaxy. There's been alleged crashes and things like that that exist in a way that we assume they have much more power than say our rockets or planes obviously and things like that but we can see them they obviously move to where the human eye

has become aware of them if they have in fact been sighted which tells me that that would be almost in a way moving microscopically slow for a tier three civilization that has figured out you know the relationship with time and light and stuff like that why would we ever see anything why would there be something like a drone or a tic-tac or a full-blown ufo ship that comes in if it's coming from a civilization that would almost seem to have something like that considered to be completely in the rear view? Well, any civilization that advanced that can use wormholes to zip across the Milky Way galaxy would eventually want to stop and look around and see what's out there. And that's when they would have to have drones, drones that would be then sent to explore these different planets. Now, these drones could be part organic,

part mechanical, but they themselves do not need a starship to land on the Earth. They would simply shoot drones, which would then land on the planet earth so when we finally meet them they could be robotic they could be part biological any possibility but the reason why they're able to reach us to begin with is because they went through a wormhole that is the only that we only way that we know of to go faster than the speed of light but if they so you're using a term like drone though which i guess is just something we've crafted as a term to refer to these flying objects that we put in the sky but who's to say that they even like i don't understand why they would have a drone in air quotes there that could move slow enough that would allow them to be seen and maybe this is another thing I do throw out there as someone who does believe in the phenomenon and what's been going on. But like,

you know, just playing devil's advocate, maybe they look at it and they're like, they can simulate these outcomes ahead of time. Maybe they're, maybe we're this rich experiment for them just to see how we respond to certain impedi or impetuses, whatever it is, and things like that in the sense that, okay, I'm an alien civilization. I'm exploring earth. Let's let them see one. Let's see how they respond to that. Let's see how the human mind freaks out to that or denies it or accepts it or whatever. Do you think that maybe that is

the reason why we're able to, quote unquote, see these things? I think it's simpler than that. I think that as they explore outer space, they send drones out there. And if you saw the movie 2001, the movie 2001, I think gives you a pretty accurate portrayal of how it would actually happen. That they would put a probe on the moon. Why the moon? Because the moon has no friction, no erosion. Things are stable for billions of years. And it's a listening post. A listening post where they can scan the solar system to see what life forms can exist.

And then once in a while, they would land on the planet to, you know, have close-up views of what's happening there. And the other thing about the movie 2001 is that these drones self-replicate. Toward the end of the movie, you saw thousands of these drones surrounding Jupiter. That's important because how do you colonize the universe? If you put a drone on the moon and makes copies of itself, these are called von Neumann probes. Von Neumann probes are probes that make copies of themselves

and shoot out to the next generation of planets. They then colonize those planets and shoot out once again. So with one probe, you have two. With two probes, you have four, eight, 16, 32, 64, 128 probes, until you have a sphere, a sphere of billions of probes expanding at the speed of light, or perhaps even superliminal velocities, colonizing the galaxy. That is the most mathematically efficient way to explore the universe.

Forget the Enterprise and Star Trek. The Enterprise goes from hopping from planet to planet to planet. That is the most inefficient way to explore the galaxy. The most efficient way to explore the galaxy was von Neumann probes that land on moons, make copies of themselves,

they shoot out, and where have you seen that before? That's a virus. That's exactly what viruses do viruses land on a cell use the hijacked machinery create copies of themselves that shoot out they make more copies of themselves that's the most mathematically efficient way to colonize the milky way galaxy and that's what an advanced civilization would do, because you only have to make the first probe. Once you make the first probe, like a virus, it just

self-replicates all by itself. Okay? That is the most efficient way to conquer the galaxy. And why haven't they looked at it as a foreign object in this way? Why haven't they looked to, like, destroy us? That we know of. Like, overtly. Well, if you're going

down a country road and you see a squirrel, do you go down to the squirrel and say I'm going to torture you, I'm going to skin you, I'm going to put you on a roaster at home? Or you simply try to talk to it. And after a while you get kind of bored

because the squirrel doesn't talk back to you and you just simply keep on going. So I would imagine that to them, we're nothing but forest animals, squirrels, mice, rabbits. And they initially want to make contact with us. But eventually they get bored because we have, what do we have to offer them? Rap music? I mean, what are we going to use to entice these aliens to give us their advanced technology?

No. The danger is that we could be in their way. That's the real danger. Because if we're in their way, what do we do when animals are in our way? We remove them. Right. We colonize it. We put a shopping mall. Put a shopping mall where the forest used to be. That is a real danger.

Because they may not want to conquer us. Because what do we have to offer? Gold? Silver? No. We have nothing to offer them. Okay? So they would pretty much leave us alone.

If they wanted gold or minerals and stuff like that, they could go to Mars. Which is uninhabited, we think, and has plenty of minerals. And so if they need materials, there are other planets to plunder than Earth. So I think for the most part, they would consider us a curiosity, analyze us with drones, and leave us alone. And that's exactly what we see now. Is there a physics-related explanation to determine if it's possible that they could have figured out invisibility? Well, we will have invisibility in the coming decades. Please do tell. This is news to me. Yeah, these are called metamaterials.

Okay. And metamaterials allow you to have an index of refraction, which governs the bending of light, and have negative index of refraction. And they already exist for microwaves, not visible, but for microwave frequencies, we can make objects disappear. In fact, they're videotaped. Google it. Metamaterials. And you'll see videotapes of objects disappearing under microwaves. Now, of course,

microwaves is not visible frequency. That's what we want. We want invisibility in the visible frequency range. But for metamaterials, you can actually get objects to disappear under microwave radiation. The next jump that the military wants to do, of course, is to use metamaterials in the optical frequency range, and we can't do that yet. Sorry about that. Yeah, I'm pulling it up. I'm trying to pull this up on Google right now.

I don't see any. It's behind you on the screen there, but I don't know if I see any videos. Yeah, they're videotaped showing waves of microwaves hitting metamaterials bending in the wrong direction okay with a with a negative index of refraction and it becomes invisible to microwaves i i do have a video now i'll put that in the corner screen for people it's from the financial times it looks like they have a simulation of that so the answer for us is even yes somewhat soon and so the answer for us is even yes somewhat soon

and so the answer for other civilizations is most certainly yes if they're more advanced so hypothetically speaking they could be here right now walking among us that's right and how would we even know that they exist if they're avatars avatars would be designed to look just like us if they're that advanced they they can obviously create germ cells to then grow copies of ourselves in their laboratory. And so we could even walk among them and not even know that we're being visited by aliens from outer space. I mean, that's how we would do it. Yeah. If we were to go into outer space and meet a civilization that's kind of paranoiac

and still primitive and would go to war over the idea that there are foreign aliens from outer space on their planet, what would you do? You would probably clone yourself or create an avatar to walk among us and you'd never know the difference. And by the way, these flying saucers, what do they have that is astounding from our point of view? We have videotapes of them. We can analyze them frame by frame now.

And if these videotapes are true, it means they can go up to Mach 20, 20 times the speed of sound. And Mach 5 is very easy for them. They can go faster than many of our missiles, except, of course, some of our drones can, in fact, go to Mach 20. And they can also go underwater. Our drones can't do that. Our drones cannot fly in the air and then all of a sudden go underwater. It sounds like you're talking, I just want to make sure I'm following the right one.

It sounds like specifically you're talking about what David Fravor saw from the Nimitz and everything with the tic-tac. That's one of the several ones that were seen by the United States Navy off the coast of California. And it shows that if they really are traveling at Mach 20 and if they can zigzag like we see in the videos, it means that they can withstand g forces of several hundred

several hundred times the force of gravity which would crush the bones of most organisms on the planet earth and there they are executing these motions flying underwater flying in the air going up to mach 20 and we now have videotapes. It's just not somebody saying, Martha, Martha, look, I see something in outer space now. No, we're looking at frame by frame analyzing the videotapes. Now, the videotapes can also lie, so we have to be careful. There's something called the parallax effect, where if you don't know the distance to an object, an object that slowly moves across the video screen could be moving very, very fast from large distance so parallax can fool you so we have to make sure that we know the distance between the eye and the object we are looking at

is there any reason to believe that an organization like DARPA or in coordination with other intelligence agencies like the CIA, NSA, whatever, could be in possession or other countries and their organizations could be in possession of technology like this that we don't – we can't comprehend. I mean I had James Fox in here for a couple episodes. He's a brilliant UFOlogist who has made incredible documentaries. It almost seems like they're watching us like a god a little bit, if this is the case, to make sure we don't destroy ourselves. So I interviewed a number of eyewitnesses regarding that aspect of the phenomenon, and that is particularly during the cold war the height of the cold war they are witnessed in russia and all scattered across the united states and this launch control officer robert salas i'll never forget this he said

well james the message i got when they shut our nukes off it's almost like they were taking matches out of the hands of a baby and essentially when he was bringing up like the nimitz example for that one with the tic tac and we were you know we're watching the video on the radar detector and it's clearly doing things that that we can't my thought did go to like well we know they hold a lot of this technology back before they give it to us we that's demonstrated over time you can even look at google they they've announced at least or said publicly that they had their first somewhat self-driving car in 2006 and we still don't even have them on the road so i start to think like well that's a company what about like the government and what they could have is there

something that you could look to because i would imagine you're somebody who talks to i mean you got to be somebody who talks to some of the most talented minds in the world all the time. Is there some way to be able to say, yeah, they could have something working on top secret type endeavors that does these physical things that you just pointed out? Well, I get emails from people saying that they've seen flying saucers. So I have a word of advice. The next time you encounter a flying saucer and are kidnapped,

for God's sake, steal something. I don't care if it's an alien pen, an alien paperweight. Steal something. Because then afterwards you have bragging rights. And afterwards you can say, aha have proof tangible evidence because all we have is hearsay and a few videotapes hearsay well who knows if hearsay is correct maybe you were drunk that day who knows videotapes yeah but you got to worry about parallax effects because of course you're looking at a two-dimensional compressed screen

you cannot judge distances very well using videotapes. So you have to be careful with that. But hard, concrete evidence, that could nail it to the wall. An alien chip, an alien piece of hardware, an alien metallurgy, that would just settle the debate. We wouldn't be here talking about it if somebody would simply steal one of the things that they see in the flying

saucer when they're kidnapped but what if they simulate that ahead of time what if because if they want like my thought is if the aliens are seen it's probably it is probably some sort of reverse psychology where they want to be seen because i mean we're sitting here talking about invisibility a few minutes ago like like we're going to be able to do it of Of course we know then that these advanced civilizations, tier three type civilizations, could do whatever the hell they want. So if they're seen, it's like they're fucking with us a little bit. And they're like, aha, look at us. Yeah, you got us. And I don't know why, if it's a part of an experiment on their end to be like oh let's see how they react like i was

talking about a little bit ago perhaps part of that calculation is well we're going to do it in a way in which we make sure that the physical evidence is never seen meaning there is no ability to steal something when someone's in the moment being abducted by an alien or something like that well let's let's back up a little bit okay and first of all ask what can the aliens do what do they look like what are their capabilities and stuff like that right take a look at evolution of life on the earth how come we came out the way we did we have three attributes that we think is common to all intelligent life in the universe. First, some kind of hand. Some kind of manipulating the environment claw.

Some kind of tentacle. A way to manipulate the environment. That's number one. Number two is eyesight. Some way to scan the environment and understand distance so that you can then hunt and whatever. Stereo vision. The vision of a hunter. We have stereo vision. Rabbits do not.

That's why rabbits have to worry about the fox because the fox does have stereo vision. The rabbit just has to run. The fox can have stealth, can hide, can ambush because it has stereo vision. We have stereo vision. We're hunters. We are not like rabbits with eyes to the side of our face, okay? And third, language. Because you want to make sure that the next generation has benefit of the lessons that you learned in your generation. So you want to have a language of some sort to hand down information. These three things. Now ask yourself a simple question how many animals on earth have all three just us we're the only ones now apes come close but their language is rather primitive they have maybe a vocabulary of maybe 50 words tops okay um and they have a grappling instrument but the opposable thumb is rather crude. It's not well developed,

the hand of an ape or a monkey. And so you begin to realize that we're kind of rare on the planet Earth. So we're not a space. We expect aliens to have some kind of claw, tentacle, manipulating device, some kind of stereo vision of some sort to scan the environment, and some way to hand down information from generation to generation. Other than that, anything goes. Now, let's say they land on the Earth. What are they going to do on the Earth? Well, let's reverse it. If you were the aliens now, and you landed on the Earth, and you saw a bunch of squirrels, right? What are you going to do? Are you going to give the squirrels the advantage of nuclear energy, the advantage of advanced mathematics,

the advantage of rocketry and stuff like that, right? But they might think that's cute. They might think that's nothing. Yeah. They probably do. So if they give us a little piece of their technology, right, like a candy bar of some sort, oh, these squirrels have never tasted candy bars before, right? If they have an experience with advanced technology, it's a game.

It's nothing but they're playing with us. Yes. So I think for the most part, they'll leave us alone. Because what do we have to offer? Gold? No, gold is useless to them. They can manufacture, they can plunder as many planets as they want. So what do we have that they would want? There's nothing. We're a curiosity to them. They would interact with us because they're curious about us. They want to know the limits of what we can do. But for the most part, they'll leave us alone. Except, of course, to be seen. And they would, of course, not course to be seen and they would of course uh not want to be seen by tourists taking pictures and interfering with their work so they would want to have bases a little bit away from civilization because they don't want to be bothered and maybe that's the reason why

they have under underwater uh sightings maybe their base is underwater who knows that starts that starts to get real weird if you start thinking about that i mean my god i mean sometimes when i look at people in culture i say this all the time but you know it could be good or bad but i'll be like maybe that person's an alien you know maybe maybe there's maybe you're an alien maybe there's something different about you and that's why you know all these things and you're coming here in human form to teach it all to us like i mean i'd be down with that i think i think that's pretty cool right yeah not bad i don't have your mic on sorry joe i'll turn it on a little bit but as far as like you know figuring out where we stand right now with the with the evidence itself and how real it is it is

very interesting to me that this seems to be something that you hadn't discussed a ton until recent years so what what really made you change your mind besides maybe seeing like the Nimitz video I guess that was from like oh five but they didn't release it till 2017 it was that the main catalyst or are you thinking about something deeper about the meaning here well I'm a physicist and we go where the data goes. And if the data goes in the direction of hearsay and people saying they saw something and so on and so forth,

yeah, that goes to a certain point. Maybe they're correct, but maybe they're incorrect too, right? So that's where we were up to now. The data has been inconclusive. Now we have tons of videotapes coming out of the military, most of them, of course, still with weather balloons and atmospheric phenomenon, but a handful of them that seem to defy most explanations.

I think we have to be open to the idea that they could be from outer space. We have to be open to that idea. That is an option that's on the table. Of the things that you have seen in looking at this, what percentage confident are you that they're from outer space? Well, I think it's too early to say because there's no smoking gun yet. That's what we want. Like I said, an alien ship, an alien piece of hardware, an alien Coke bottle. There's a Harvard astronomer who says

that maybe the aliens left Coke bottles behind. We think that they're going to leave advanced chips and technology behind, but what happens if they leave garbage behind? That's good enough. A piece of alien garbage will be enough to clench it, right? So far, we see no evidence of advanced technology or byproducts of advanced technology like garbage coming from these alien sightings. Like, for example, it's possible to show hieroglyphics in ancient aliens of people with headdresses that look like helmets, okay?

Well, that's tantalizing, but it's not the smoking gun, okay? We want something that is testable, measurable, falsifiable. That's the bottom line. Testable, measurable, falsifiable, we don't have that yet. We're getting close, which I think is a good sign because now the military has given us videotapes that we can analyze frame by frame to see whether or not they adhere to our known laws of physics. And you've also, I think, said on the record at some point that the Pentagon has hundreds of hours of tapes of UFOs.

Have you personally seen any of those? No, they're classified but um for example it's been known that in one sighting they saw flying saucers in the sky and this went on for days for days they saw these things flying in the sky and so that's why i'm saying that there's lots of videotapes that we have yet yet to see uh and we're just waiting and seeing as more and more tapes get declassified. Yeah, I don't know if there's some sort of rhyme or reason to it, but I do think about the limited hangout idea of all this. Suddenly you saw this go mainstream in 2017 with the bombshell report in the New York Times, and now over the past few years it's gained more traction. More people are talking about it. tandem i kind of wonder if these ufo revelations that we're hearing are more to distract from a way bigger deal perhaps there is data i'll throw a random one out there i have no evidence for but i'm just going to say it like as far as like a

possibility let's say that they knew for a fact that aliens are walking among us quite literally they are they are appearing as people, but they're not people. They could be avatars, for example. Avatars would walk among us. And we wouldn't know that they're not a real person. That was the basis of the movie,

if you saw it. I mean, they're just like the aliens. And they were introduced because the aliens would freak out if, of course, aliens from outer space landed on them. So they create avatars that look just like the native avatars.

But would that... if a doctor opened up the body of an avatar? It would be identical, because you could have a sperm and egg generate a baby that would grow up, and, of course, you would train them to become avatars that are in the service of humans, but they would be genetically identical to the people on the home planet, and they would be trained to walk among us. So this is a technology that even we could do.

We could use sperm and egg to generate a new generation of aliens that we would observe with our avatars. We could do this today. Today. And therefore, the aliens from outer space, if they land on the Earth, they certainly would have the option of creating beings just like us, genetically just like us, except of course their memory circuits are those from an alien civilization. Their allegiance is to the aliens so again i asked then because i i didn't finish making the point here to get your thoughts

but like is this revelation do you think there is a a possibility at least that these revelations are cover for way bigger revelations like like something like that? Possible, but you have to be more specific. I'm a scientist. We go where the data goes. No matter if the data seems to go in an outrageous direction, we have to go that way, because that's where the data is going. You know, Carl Sagan, the astronomer, was a guy that was very level-headed about a lot of things, did not believe in a lot of nonsense. But there's a chapter in his book where he talked about ancient aliens, that if an alien civilization were to land on the earth while we were still in a very primitive tribal stage, how would we react to them? We would think they're messengers from the gods. Okay. And he was a reputable astronomer saying that, yes, maybe there's a record, but it's not

decidable. It's not the smoking gun. It's just a possibility. And how would we know to recognize it too? Like we think that's easy in the internet age, but maybe it's not. I mean, like you had the Aztec civilization where the conquistadors came in. Was that Cortez? I think that was Cortez.

And they were able to – the conquistadors ransacked the Aztecs because the Aztecs thought that Cortez was like a god. Like they couldn't recognize it. Now, this is new world at the time. There's no internet. There's no mass communication and things like that. But point being, human nature does reflect itself in new ways as things move forward. They didn't recognize what Cortez was. So how maybe we might look at other things that could be alien, but they're not.

There are their own kind here. That's kind of a convoluted way of putting it. But you see what I'm saying. Well, there is something called the METI project, which I don't think is a good idea. The METI project, well, first of all, the SETI project is to simply listen in and eavesdrop on alien conversations in outer space. Reputable physicists are working on the SETI project. The METI project is to actively reach out,

reach out to the aliens and say, we are here. This is our coordinates. This is our level of technology. Come visit us. I think that's a very bad idea. Because look at what happened when Cortez met the Aztecs. Cortez had the horse. Aztecs did not have a horse. Cortez had gunpowder. The Aztecs did not have gunpowder. Cortez had steel weapons. The Aztecs did not have steel weapons.

Cortes had a written language. The Aztecs had a pictorial language, not a written language. And of course, Cortes and his men eventually would bring smallpox. So it was an uneven match. The Aztecs were basically Stone Age. Well, here we have Cortez coming in with steel, horses, gunpowder, navigation devices. It was no match. And just in a few months, in a few months, much of the Aztec civilization was destroyed. Okay.

Now, personally, I think that the aliens out of space are probably peaceful. They've had millions of years to work out of space are probably peaceful. They've had millions of years to work out their sectarian racial differences. So I think for the most part, they would explore outer space out of curiosity and for energy resources. But they would pretty much leave us alone. I mean, that's my personal point of view, that they're probably out there because the universe is so big. I mean, we have 100 billion stars in the Milky Way galaxy, and we now know, on average, how many stars have planets going around them. On average, every single star has a planet going around it, on average.

So we know that the galaxy is teeming, teeming with planets, and we think that water is going to be common throughout some of these planets in which case life could be formed in fact even within our solar system even within our solar system mars does not look like a very good possibility for life but now we're looking at europa and the moons of jupiter and saturn likeelunas. Life could exist because oceans there have more water than on the Earth. I repeat, there's more water in the moons

of Jupiter than on the planet Earth. So in other words, and since there's so many Jupiters and so many satellites going around Jupiter, it could be that life in the galaxy could be aquatic. Aquatic life could be the dominant life form in the universe. So we're going to have to then revise our thinking

just within our own backyard. We see no life on Mars, but we see the potential for life on Europa and Celadus, the other Jovian moons, for example, and the Saturnian moons. It's making me think too when you bring up the the presence of so much water on these different planets you've said before i think this was in your book you talked about in quantum supremacy about how in the future we're going to power the world using water using hydrogen so hypothetically if we're looking at now jupiter is not a good example because we that's within our galaxy like we we understand what that is but if you're looking at other planets

couldn't they be way farther ahead because they have figured out completely how to do everything just with the presence of water alone forget even the star well terms of time, it only took us a few hundred years to go from a feudal age into the modern technological age. Just a few hundred years. So I think in outer space, the aliens, if they follow the same trajectory, would already be reaching out to technologies that use electronics, for example. Now, there is a disadvantage being aquatic, and that is electricity short circuits. Electricity short circuits underwater. And so the alien civilizations that exist on aquatic environments,

like Europa, a moon of Jupiter, for example, would have to be careful that when they start to experiment with electricity, it would have to be over the ice rather than under the ice because their devices would short-circuit as a consequence but that's just a temporary impediment if they're advanced they'll eventually learn how to go above the ice and create electronics and then on our end though we're also looking like we've spent so many years now pounding the table with solar energy like i would have thought as a non-scientist that like oh that would be the next frontier but you seem to think that we'll figure that out and move it fast or maybe you can explain that but that we're going to skip and and

use mostly water uh well fusion power is uses hydrogen and the most plentiful source of hydrogen is in the oceans and so the fuel the fuel for fusion plants could be in the oceans and we're gonna have fusion power in the coming decades by mid-century fusion plants should be rather commonplace mmm and of course the energy there is limitless fusion plants do not melt down unlike uranium plants which not melt down, unlike uranium plants, which do melt down. They create no nuclear waste or hardly any nuclear waste at all. And if there's an accident, they simply shut off. So we're talking about the ideal source of energy. That's the energy source of Mother Nature. Mother Nature does not use uranium. Uranium is messy, creates meltdowns,

contaminates the area around you. Nature doesn't use uranium. Nature uses fusion power, which is clean, no meltdowns, tremendous amounts of energy, and seawater is the basic ingredient. So I think that when we meet aliens from outer space, they'll probably already be in the fusion age. Well, what about batteries here too because in order to do all the stuff that we've done to this point and since the last industrial revolution and building out towards what is going to be the quantum revolution i guess like it seems to me that we are so limited like my phone if it's on for 14 hours is dead right we've had iphones now for a while and yet the batteries have gotten better

but they still operate i'm gonna get above my pay grade here but they still operate on lithium mostly and there's not there's not some sort of like god particle or something that can allow them to be self-sustaining and use solar energy or something like that like as we move from a from a type zero to a type one civilization as you think we're doing and we're in the last stretches of that so to speak over these next hundred years how much do you think we're gonna fit like how soon do you think we're gonna figure out battery power and not have things be so say short-circuited well first of all many people in the 50s talked about the solar age, that in the coming decades, everything will be solar, clean, infinite, so on and so forth.

It never arrived. It never came. Why? Because the weak link was not solar. The weak link was the battery. Batteries do not obey Moore's law. Moore's law is what drives the electronic revolution. We assume that everything obeys Moore's Law.

The battery is a chemical reaction, and we found it by trial and error. And that's where quantum computers can come in. Instead of trying different substances one by one in a pastry dish, trying to get energy out of a dish, right? Why not use quantum computers to simulate, simulate hundreds, thousands of chemicals to see which ones can create a super battery? And so the automobile industry is very interested in this.

They're investing money in quantum computers to find out if there's a magic substance besides lithium that can generate energy and drive the economy of the future. So quantum computers could be the missing link, giving us the ability to do chemistry in the memory of a computer. Think about that. You can perform billions of experiments just with the push of a button, rather than spending, rather than bankrupting yourself, creating different chemicals and testing each one out to see whether or not they have the same electrolytic properties as lithium. than spending rather than bankrupting yourself creating different chemicals and testing them on

each one out to see whether or not they have the same electrolytic properties as lithium so i think that's where quantum computers already are being used to try to look for the super battery well i should have asked this earlier then i don't know why i'm just thinking of this, but couldn't quantum computing basically simulate the beginning of time and potentially the existence of other civilizations? Right. In my book, I realized that... into intelligent solutions, from the shows that make us laugh to those that make us cry. Now, your TV knows you more than ever, whether it's reviving old memories with AI upscaling

or seamless hands-free control with universal gestures. This isn't just television. It's a whole new vision because it isn't just about what's on. It's about who's watching. Learn more about Samsung Vision AI televisions at samsung.com. Discover the exciting Samsung Vision AI televisions at Samsung.com. Discover the exciting action of BetMGM Casino.

Check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer or enjoy over 3,000 games to choose from like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz. Make instant deposits or same-day withdrawals. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager Ontario only.

Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Quantum computers, because they're so powerful, can simulate the Big Bang and can give us details of why the universe banged this way rather than banging the other way. And so the quantum computers are powerful enough, we think, to answer many of the questions that cosmologists grapple with. Why did the universe bang in this way rather than banging

in another way? And so, yeah, that's an application of quantum computers. Quantum computers are also being used in fusion plants. Fusion plants are very delicate because you have to squeeze hydrogen gas to enormous temperatures, and sometimes you get instabilities. Quantum computers can allow you to anticipate these instabilities. And so quantum computers may be a way to make sure that fusion plants operate correctly. So yet there's another example of the power of supercomputers, I mean of quantum computers,

which are more powerful than digital supercomputers. Yeah, because it's the thing I keep coming back to that you seem to make it clear is their ability to simulate everything allows us to have the answers before we try them, which we've even seen some of the power simulation with this age, pre-quantum so i can only imagine how powerful would be with that but does that mean that there's things that we're fighting over as a type zero civilization right now late stage

type zero that are actually pointless because they're going to be solved i mean in your book you talk about the whole global warming and how we can use quantum to correct the climate and everything and yet right now that's such a difficult conversation publicly because either the the two loudest people are the people who think the planet is ending tomorrow or the people who think no climate change exists both of whom i think are wrong. But like, is quantum just going to come in and basically be like, all right, we don't care what you've been saying. Like, here's how you do it. This is what you do. Here's how to control the weather. Boom, we're done. Well, quantum computers can impact on global warming in several ways. First of all, they could make possible fusion plants. And fusion plants immediately have the potential of replacing

oil and coal and therefore solving much of the global warming problem right there in its tracks. That's one option, okay? The option probably by mid-century. The other option, though, is to create super batteries so that solar power is competitive, economically competitive, with oil and coal. That's another possibility. The third possibility is that quantum computers are so powerful, they can accurately simulate the atmosphere in a way that digital computers cannot. Digital computers take the Earth, chop up the Earth in cubes.

In cubes, each cube is many miles long, simulate the atmosphere in a cube, and then put all these cubes together. That's how atmospheric computer programming is done. We chop up the atmosphere in cubes, we calculate the weather in each cube, marry them with all the other cubes around the earth, and that's how weather prediction is done. However, each cube is many, many miles across because our supercomputers are not powerful enough to do what Mother Nature does. Mother Nature has cubes. These cubes are just one atoms across, not hundreds of miles across.

And so quantum computers can give you much more accurate simulation of the weather than digital computers. And that's yet another way that quantum computers can impact on global warming. So we know what we're talking about. We can make more accurate predictions of the future weather. How do you regulate this?

If this comes 10 years from now and we have quantum power and the government has it, corporations have it, maybe some individuals have it, how do you decide? I mean, forget even – don't even just think just America or like an individual country. Like as a world, how do you be like, all right, China, you're not changing the weather today. It's Tuesday. It's our day. Like how does this order work? What does it look like? Well, it'll have to be done one at a time, okay?

Take a look, for example, chatbots. Chatbots are causing a lot of sensation because many people have never seen them before. They simply seem to simulate human speech. They seem to be talking just like a human talks. But of course, that's the reason why is because they cobble together passages from humans. And therefore, of course, they sound human because that's what it's based upon. Right. And then the question is, who regulates that? Nobody. We're going to have to have fact checkers.

We're going to have to have checks on this. In other words, constitutionally, you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater. There are limits to free speech. Yes, you can go outside and denounce the president. Yes, the constitution guarantees that. But if you yell fire in a crowded theater and people die as a consequence, that's where free speech ends. And so now we're at the point where chatbots can yell fire in a crowded theater. They can make up things. If teenagers can yell, make up all sorts of garbage, then some of that stuff can be incorporated in a chatbot program

because the chatbots do not know right from wrong. Okay? So that's the simplest application of the chaos that chatbots can create and how quantum computers can help to minimize the chaos that chatbots will create. Because chatbots simply plagiarize everybody. Right. Including teenagers who write all sorts of nonsense on the web but still like that's that's where it's in this case policing the quality of an ai so to speak but we still have a human problem because human beings are the ones whose fingers are going to be

on the other end of this and so like even with ai because honestly like quantum just seems to make – to me in my mind it makes AI just seem like a wave that exists from it. It's not – like AI is not the main thing. Like quantum is actually the thing I should be more worried about. And I like to have an optimistic view on things. this can have are incredible but like still i'm living in a world right now where i have some of the most prominent physicists in the world currently signing their name to a document that says let's pause ai for six months because gpt came out and now you're talking about a world maybe 10 years from now where we have this computational power in all these individual hands again i go back to that question like how do you you talk about like an exponential having to have an exponential

understanding understanding of human behavior how the hell can we stop some sort of catastrophe where you know a an interested party say a country gets possession of something and uses it for not good. And that could be us too, by the way. I'm not saying that's somewhere else. Well, that's been the way of warfare. We saw that dramatically during World War II where the Nazis systematically, systematically tried to use the mass media to promote its goals and its ideology and its thinking and stuff like that. So we know it does exist. And the superpowers today will do that.

They have divisions which create all sorts of nonsense to try to confuse the picture and try to muddle the waters of a neighboring country. That already exists. The point is that chatbots just make it worse. It already exists. It's already there. Disinformation. All divisions of governments's already there. Disinformation. All divisions of governments are designed to create disinformation, right?

The question is, how do you regulate it? And I think it's going to be done piece by piece. We live in a democracy. A lot of different competing interests, a lot of noise out there. But hey, it works. Democracy works. And so we're going to have to wait for different kinds of chaos to happen. And then democracies will democratically discuss it point by point and come to some kind of resolution that everyone agrees with.

In other words, when you yell fire in a crowded theater, where do you draw the line? How many people have to be affected? How big is the theater? How much do you influence people by yelling fire? There's a lot of fine-tuning that goes involved, but that's the way democracy is. Democracy comes out with general principles, and the fine-tuning is done by vigorous debate among people. But in the future, say, fast forward as a type one civilization does this not even matter anymore because you have things like democracy or insert blank here terminology here

thing we fight over here and it it sounds like you're just you were describing a world in your book where that won't matter because technology will be so smart and we will be so ingrained with its intelligence that we will accept its answer as how it actually is because it's quote-unquote inarguable i might be stretching that there but well i think the power of democracy is that people talk back and debate things and choose things to death. But, you know, as Winston Churchill said, democracy is worse than every system that's ever been tried except for one. So, in other words, the point is that it's messy. The lines have not been drawn.

We're simply doing it for the first time. But that's the way it was during World War II, okay, when we saw what propaganda would do for the first time we've never seen propaganda used on that kind of scale before and laws were passed as a consequence and that's what's going to have to be done people will have to discuss it, laws will have to be passed and it's going to be messy, but that's what democracy is, messy

yeah, and we're also talking about a growing population while all this is going on. And so there's all kinds of – that's another thing people debate all the time like, oh, are we too populated and everything? But quantum is now this technology that could potentially lead to, as you were laying out earlier already, simulating some form of immortality because it's fixing some of those mistakes that happen within dna so if over the next hundred years we start figuring out how to live forever quote unquote which is a wild thing to think about but doesn't that mean that we need to hurry up to become a type 2 civilization so that we can get people to other planets to be able to continue to survive so we don't like overpopulate here well i think the driving force to become a type 1 type 2 civilization explore the galaxy is the fact that

the dinosaurs did not have a space program and look what happened to them they didn't know what hit them yeah they got wiped out right and there are asteroids out there which can create a tremendous amount of damage. We don't monitor asteroids that are smaller than a football field, for example. Anything smaller than a football field goes right by our notice. And as a consequence, it's something that we have to think about as we go to the moon, Mars, and beyond, that we need an insurance policy. And that could be the exploration of outer space. So there's a selfish reason for wanting to go into outer space, not just for the beauty of it or the existential wonder of exploring the universe,

but just self-preservation. Because we may have to explore outer space. We have no choice, really. How's quantum going to change our space exploration, speaking of that? Because it's so interesting that we were on this race to the moon in the 60s. We get there, and then maybe after another 20 years after that, it started to be like space was this thing people talked about less and less. And yet that's our galaxy right there. That's how we're supposed to move forward as a civilization. So what types of things are we going to be able to do with quantum that maybe helps us with our rocket propulsion or things like that?

Well, in the short term, we're going to have chemical rockets. But in the longer term, we may have fusion rockets. And we may have rockets that drive, that are driven throughout the galaxy using fusion power. And the key to fusion may be quantum computers. Why don't we have fusion power now? We have the equations. We have the basic idea by compressing hydrogen to tens of millions of degrees. It's because of the instability, the instability of the gas. The gas is shaped like a donut. If I have a donut and I squeeze a donut, then things barrel out in that direction

or they shoot out in that direction. It's very difficult to squeeze a donut. But you have to do that for a fusion plant because gravity compresses evenly. That's why stars are circular. But magnetism has a north pole and a south pole, which means you have to have a donut rather than a sphere.

And that's what makes fusion so easy in outer space, but so difficult here on the planet Earth. But that's where quantum computers comes in because quantum computers can then calculate the instability of the vacuum and allow you to compensate for it. Today, if it's instable, what do we do? We have to change the magnetic field.

But, you know, we're talking about changing tons and tons of steel and copper. It's much better to do that in the memory of a computer. With the push of a button, you can then alter the dynamics of the magnetic field. And so that's why we think that fusion will be accelerated with the coming of quantum computers that can compute the instability of the hydrogen gas. So could that leave our universe then at a certain speed, and then once it gets into space, travel at an entirely different speed, like a ridiculous speed if we worked with a method like that?

Well, let's talk about different propulsion systems, okay? First of all, we have chemical rockets, which cannot reach the stars. It'll take 70,000 years for a Saturn rocket to go from the Earth to the nearest star, Alpha Centauri. 70,000 years for the Saturn rocket to make that journey. The next step beyond that would be fusion plants, fusion reactors, and antimatter reactors. And antimatter is very rare, very expensive substance. One day we'll mass produce it, in which case we can have antimatter rockets. But there's also a third possibility, and that is ramjet fusion power. Now, how do rockets differ from jets? Rockets have their own oxidizer. Everything is self-contained inside a capsule. Jets have a scoop

where they scoop up oxygen from the air. That's why jets are different from rockets, okay? Now, in outer space, there's hydrogen gas gas lots of hydrogen gas in outer space so if you have a scooper that can scoop up hydrogen gas and then burn it you could run your rocket ship forever these are called ramjet fusion engines and some people think that that's the way to explore the galaxy now not just the nearby stars but the galaxy now, not just the nearby stars, but the galaxy using ordinary hydrogen gas that's naturally found in outer space, burning it in the fusion reactor and using that as a basic ingredient. Now, there's some technical problems with it, but that's one option. What are the technical problems?

MZ fusion power. What are the technical problems? The distribution of hydrogen gas. Hydrogen gas is not uniformly distributed throughout the galaxy. And you want to be in a place where there's lots of free hydrogen gas because there's fuel for free. But you want to make sure there's enough of it to drive your engines. And quantum could help with simulating where that exists. Again, because quantum would be able to simulate the gas

so that when you squeeze it to create fusion power, it's squeezed correctly rather than create instabilities, which would cause the whole thing to shut down. God, there's such unlit, like, I don't even know how you fit in a book all the possibilities with this. You don't, I assume. Well, in my previous book, The Future of Humanity, I list the various options for interstellar travel. And again, this is not for any time soon, but one day we will go to the stars and we have to look at antimatter rockets, ramjet fusion engines, fusion power, the different kinds of options for going to the nearby stars. But beyond that would require hyperdrive. Beyond that would require wormholes.

And that gets back into the whole time thing. But if we're coming back around on the original point with this, with the immortality, and how we're facing that as a potential rewinding of the clock here with quantum. Another thing that comes up is the concept of death itself. Right, so the way we see it, we have an average lifespan as human beings right now we die and

then if you believe in the highest power you go somewhere if not it could be over whatever is there is there already an understanding though that like if we die right now we don't really die and we may exist in another place and it's not necessarily heaven it's some sort of parallel universe and could quantum in some way simulate a way to figure this out well academically speaking people that have died in our universe could still be alive in another universe so just because you died in this universe doesn't mean that you are dead in all universes in these other universes you could still be quite alive okay and this gets back to what is called the schrodinger cat problem where the cat can either be dead and alive simultaneously is that when you put it in the box or whatever yeah you take a cat put it in a box attach the cat to a

gun and the gun is attached to uranium if uranium fires it shoots the gun the gun attach the cat to a gun, and the gun is attached to uranium. If uranium fires, it shoots the gun, the gun kills the cat, cat is dead. But if the atom never decayed, then the gun never fired, then the cat is still alive. So how do we physicists describe the cat? We add the wave function of the cat plus the wave function of a dead cat, and we add them together. In other words, you are neither dead nor alive. You are both. Okay? Now, some people have a hard time getting their head around it.

Yeah. But like I said before, get used to it. This is just the way the universe is. Okay? And so in that situation, you could be dead in one universe and alive in another. And then people ask me the final question, is Elvis Presley still alive in a parallel universe? And the answer is, technically, yes.

Is he the same Elvis Presley? Well, he would be slightly different because he would have a different life history depending upon when the universe is split. But for the most part, he would be Elvis. So do you think when we die, I'm putting words in your mouth right now, but do you think there is a probability when we die that we don't know it and we go on existing

in some other universe where we are something different? Maybe in this universe, Elvis is a lawyer? Well, that's quantum mechanics. That is that all possibilities are possible once you entertain the concept of multiple universes. Now, again, you can't meet him. You cannot shake Elvis Presley's hand because he's decohered from you. He vibrates at a different frequency than you, just like radio stations. Two radio stations don't collide. They vibrate at different frequencies, but they occupy

the same space. So in other words, Elvis Pres but they occupy the same space. So in other words, Elvis Presley would occupy the same space as you. He'd be in the same room as you, but you can't talk to him because you vibrate at a different frequency than his frequency. But whether this is true or not, we're continuing to fight death in our mortal life in this universe. That's right. And like I said, we are looking at the possibility of extending the lifespan

because we are beginning to understand the aging process. Okay. We didn't understand what aging was before. Okay. But now we're beginning to understand the whole process of aging, the buildup of mistakes.

But the mistakes are all at the molecular level. And that's where the quantumup of mistakes. But the mistakes are all at the molecular level. And that's where the quantum computer comes in. The quantum computer lives in the molecular realm. That's what it does. It manipulates atoms. It manipulates molecules. And these molecules contain within it the secret of life or the secret of death. But also along the way, in addition to the mistakes that happen that cause what we see as physical aging, you older, having wrinkles, and then eventually being old enough, and then if you're healthy the whole way, you die of old age. In the process though, we see people die of disease. We see all types of afflictions that affect people, viruses, whatever. So when you're looking at, let's do some of the main ones here,

like cancer or ALS or anything along those lines. Let's stay very high level. Can't quantum effectively find the cure for this stuff? Can't it simulate how bad cells interact with good cells at the molecular level and then fix it? Let's take a look at Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's disease is caused by amyloid proteins, which gums up the brain.

But there's a paradox here. And the paradox is that some people have clear brains, but on autopsy, their brain is cluttered with amyloid proteins that should have gummed up the brain, but there they are acting normal. So in other words, it's not a one-to-one relationship between amyloid protein and Alzheimer's disease. Now, this was just a few years ago, we found out there are at least two varieties, two varieties of amyloid protein. One spins clockwise in terms of its structure. The other spins counterclockwise. One of them apparently is associated with a debilitating disease and the other is not. So in other words, if we can then screen out the bad amyloid protein, leave the good one there, you get in principle cure Alzheimer's

disease. But how you distinguish between a thing that spins to the left and a thing that spins to the right? That's a molecular decision. We can then create quantum computers that can then manipulate these things so that we can weed out the wrong spin and leave the correct one there. So this is giving us a new way of looking at Alzheimer's disease, that it's molecular. That the reason why Alzheimer's disease gums up the brain is due to the structure of the molecule itself. And that's what quantum computers do. They zero in on the structure of the molecule. Well, modern medicine is simply trial and error, trial and error. Penicillin, oh, let's try that. Antibiotics, oh, let's try that. No understanding of the

molecular structure. We simply throw things on the wall, hope that one of them sticks, okay? Quantum computers work at the molecular level. And we're now beginning to realize that Alzheimer's disease could be a consequence of a misshapen protein. And the misshapen protein can be detected using quantum computers that gives us an entirely new handle on alzheimer's disease but if if quantum computers is able to detect it and simulate why that happens we still have to be able to correct it and if it's occurring at such a microscopic level we may when we first figure out what the cause is, not necessarily be able to solve it right away because we don't have the technology as a human to do that. Well, this is hypothetical,

but because one molecule bends one way, the other molecule bends the other way, it's possible to separate them so that you have only one molecule that spins one way. Take a look at sugar and many organic chemicals. You realize that they spin only in one direction. At the beginning of time, when humans came out of the ponds of the original ocean, one molecule was spinning one way, and we are descendants of that one molecule. Our molecules spin one way. But there's another way to spin sugar. You can actually make a counter sugar, a sugar that is bent, that twists the wrong direction. Okay. And you cannot incorporate into your body. Some people think that's the reason,

that's the way to cure obesity. Give people the sugar that tastes like sugar but it's not incorporated into the body's chemistry it just spins the wrong way that that could work i'd be down for that trick if suddenly like broccoli tasted like cake i'd be fit as hell that's crazy so in other words the point of raising is that all science and all nutrition and biology medicine is all done at the molecular level. We access it with trial and error. That's how we got penicillin, right? Trial and error. That's how we get antibiotics today, trial and error. With quantum computers, it could be by design.

It could say, we want to shape this molecule this way rather than this way, because this molecule will work and this molecule will not work. We can now do science at the molecular level, chemistry at the molecular level. Now, will this make chemists unemployed? Well, as one scientist said, the people who are going to be unemployed are the chemists who do not use quantum computers. The chemists who will be employed will be those that do use quantum computers in their work.

And that ties into the theme you talked about with eventually maybe 200 years from now merging with the machines. It's not the same thing, but it's kind of like an evolutionary process towards that where we start to rely on it. And that makes all the sense in the world because, I mean, you don't go into a doctor's office today and not see them using computers, not using their iPhone. You know what I mean? you don't go into a doctor's office today and not see them using computers, not using their iPhone. You know what I mean? Like, we always do that. And we've been tinkering with our bodies ever since we came out of the forest.

Tattoos, perfumes. We've been tinkering with who we are ever since we were in the forest to give ourselves, of course, evolutionary advantage by being more handsome, stronger, whatever. But we've been tinkering with our body for thousands of years is there a way that this type of technology though doesn't work meaning like we're making all these predictions because it does appear like quantum is coming to the forefront here but is there a way that once they start to extrapolate how this would work that they realize oh we can't simulate a million more things at once. It doesn't have that level of power. Yeah, that's always the possibility that it could be the molecules are so complicated. You know, these molecules have hundreds and

hundreds of atoms inside that we don't have a handle on them, that we cannot duplicate what Mother Nature did by accident. Mother Nature is a chemist, but the chemistry of Mother Nature was honed over millions and millions of years of trial and error. So we want to do it in one generation now. And so, yeah, there's possibilities of mistakes, possibilities of dead ends, because we are talking about manipulating atoms, molecules, which contain hundreds of atoms, and we could combine them incorrectly. That's always a possibility. Yeah, but a part of the scientific process, though, too, is you have to continually fail to figure out where the actual hit is.

I mean, that's how we got here, to be able to say there might be something like quantum computing. Right. And the key point I want to raise is that before it was done by trial and error. How do we find new antibiotics? Trial and error. Do we systematically say we want to design an antibiotic this way? Well, in some cases, yes. But in most cases, no. In most cases, we get hundreds of petri dishes, hundreds of them, hit them with antibiotic chemicals, and just by chance, some of them work, most of them don't work at all. It's done by luck. Now we'll be able to do these things in the memory of a computer hundreds of times faster and cheaper than the old-fashioned way,

which is having petri dishes and testing each dish with one chemical. How much is this going to increase human intelligence, though? Because I'm thinking about that example right there. Let's say we have doctors in a room who are working on new biotechnology to cure cancer or something like that. These guys who are in there, they're not, you know, they went to school. They know what they're talking about. They can understand all the terminology. It's not like me off the street trying to solve cancer and reading what the computer says. So I have an educated professional doing that. But now we're talking about putting

in the hands of educated professionals in this way technology that can do their job that can help them make decisions at exponential quicker speeds and therefore understand things much sooner so they are then going to have that much higher level of a human intelligence and when you extrapolate that across the population all different levels we're going to have unknowns amount of intelligence that we didn't have a year before that even. Well, I look at it slightly differently. Think of a carpenter and a hammer. Does the hammer make the carpenter smarter? No. But does it increase the power of the carpenter? Yes, vastly increase the power of a carpenter. So when carpenters first encountered hammers,

they realized that some of them are going to be out of a job. Carpenters who do not use hammers are out of a job. Carpenters who do use hammers have infinite job possibilities. And so in the same way with quantum computers, quantum computers are nothing but a hammer. And those that know how to use it properly will survive, will flourish, will create new avenues of research, new products. Those that don't will be unemployed.

Yeah, such, I mean, you have to be able to adjust. I mean, that's another form of evolution right there. But you had the final chapter in your book titled, I think it was like The World in 2050. I thought that was curious because that's not long from now. I've been thinking at the end of a book like this, you were talking in the 100 and 200 year increments on a lot of other things. I would think you would go that far ahead. Why did you only go to 2050 with that? Well, because when you start to go further out into the future, of course, things

get hazier. And a lot of the advances in quantum technology are going to happen very soon, very rapidly. In about 10 years' time, we hope to have, well, already quantum computers are being sold. There's a Canadian company that already

sells quantum computers. Not as powerful as the ones that are being experimented with by Google and IBM. But yeah, they're putting them on the market now. And so this is something that is going to happen fairly soon. And so that's why I didn't want to go too far in the future. If you want to know that, get a copy of my other book where I do take you 100 years into the future. Yeah, we'll put those links in the description, by the way, so you can check out the new book. I think this episode is coming out right

around when it's going to drop, but either way, the pre-link will be there. But in your writings in your life, you've obviously focused on the same range of topics. It just keeps on getting more complex because we are predicting the future a little better with with more information as it goes on but you know i just kind of wonder like when you look on on your own life now and having put in decades and decades and decades as a physicist and you know you came up with string theory now like five decades ago it's it's a long time to put into the game do you ever worry about your work being wrong or proven wrong Or is that precisely why you want to put the work out so that it can be proven wrong? Well, I think the latter more than the former in the sense that to err is human. I mean, we will make mistakes. Technology moves in directions that are unforeseen.

But once the basic laws are understood, then the predictions start to become more and more accurate. That is, when the quantum theory was discovered in 1925, all of a sudden the consequences of that could be foreseen in a much more clear way. Before that, before 1925, everything was magic, okay? Anything that violated Newton's laws of motion were considered crazy and magical and mystical after 1925 all of a sudden we could dream about lasers and and transistors and space programs and telecommunications and the internet we could dream about all these things so now we are we do have the quantum theory and so now we can make predictions that are going to be wrong but predictions that are going to be wrong,

but predictions that are going to be much more truer to reality because of the fact that they're grounded in the quantum theory. And we think the quantum theory, at least for our way of looking at things, is the final theory. We're not going to use the unified field theory in our daily lives anytime soon. So we have the quantum theory. And we can start to make predictions that are going to be wrong, but predictions that have more validity than previously when everything was wild speculation. So when I read the work of other futurists, I sometimes

laugh a little bit to myself because they just make wild stuff and hope that some of these predictions will stick. But there's no principle. There's no principle behind these things. The principle behind the predictions I make is the quantum theory. And if you understand the quantum theory, immediately you put things into perspective. You begin to realize that some things are very possible. Some things are plausible, but still in the future. And some things just violate the laws of physics.

Well, you also seem to have a fairly optimistic view of things you don't come out here and scream doom and gloom you seem to speak from a way as a as a theoretical physicist of the possibilities of what we're going to be able to do which i love but to go to the other side for a minute, how could this go wrong and what would happen? Could we destroy the human race in the next hundred years if we make certain decisions? Like how bad could it get? It could get very bad with nuclear weapons, with designer germs. Designer germs.

Germs that are designed to maximize lethality and devastation. Countries contemplating germ warfare deliberately create germs which have maximum deleterious impact. But my personal attitude is, as General Dwight Eisenhower once said, pessimists never win wars. You can bellyache as much as you want. Bellyaching is for free, but it's not going to get you anywhere. You're not going to be able to build new things, create new empires, create new sources of wealth and prosperity just by bellyaching. No, you have to put your nose to the grindstone and begin to think about what ways to harness this technology for the benefit of all humanity. And that requires you to become optimistic.

Because, of course, you can always be pessimistic and say, oh, it's all nonsense. You could always say that. But to create something new is very difficult. Now, for a physicist, this is called entropy. Entropy disorder is easy to create. A match, throwing a rock at something is very easy to destroy. Which simply says that entropy is maximized very easily by burning something down, for example. But to create something new, great, astonishing, is extremely difficult. So when I see people build empires out of nothing,

I say to myself, you got to give them credit because entropy works in the opposite direction. Entropy works toward disorder, toward chaos, toward disruption. That's the natural order of things is the maximization of entropy. Once in a while, you get some kind of shining supernova that illuminates the whole field, that creates an industry. And you got to give them credit. It's extremely difficult to reduce entropy to that point. So I would like my works to hopefully stimulate other scientists to say to themselves, I can do that.

I can reduce entropy. I can create an industry. I can create wealth, prosperity using this kind of technology. Can we harness something like that though to, as say a type one civilization, avoid war and no longer have that? Because you use war as the example from Dwight Eisenhower at the heart of that explanation. I really like that. But war is this thing that we do when humanity fights over things that it can't understand. And now we're talking about a world where maybe computers are all knowing. I hinted at this earlier, but this is a little more exact. Well, why do we have wars?

Well, many reasons, right? But among them, empires collide. And when empires collide, that's when you have big wars, like World War II, World War I, right? But why do they collide? They collide because of interests. And these interests are driven by glory, but also by poverty. And you want to expand your power, right? What happens if we get to the point where governments are no longer interested in that? You see, in a democracy, people don't vote to become the greatest power on the earth or to dominate Europe or to dominate the Americas. That's not what people vote for. They vote to put bread on the table, to give a nice education for their kids. That's what the

average person wants. The average person does not necessarily want to wave the flag and say, we just took over North America. That's not what most people dream about. Most people dream about having a good life for their family and a good life for their kids, okay? So I think as the world becomes more democratic, there's less and less of that flag waving and we're going to be number one for the whole earth. Now, I think that technology has a direction.

I disagree with many of my friends who say that technology is amoral. It's a double-edged sword. One side cuts against ignorance, poverty, disease, but the other side cuts against people. That's just the way nature is. I tend to take a different point of view. I think that technology has a moral direction to some degree because the internet spreads information and empowerment. When people are ignorant, they have no conception of what is possible. When they're exposed to what is possible, they say, I want that. I will work for that. I see the future. So empowerment gives you the main thrust toward democracy. People want to convert that knowledge to action and to get rid of the dictator so that everyone has a fair shake in society.

So I think that yes, technology can be used for bad purposes, but it's like what Deng Xiaoping once said, when you open the window, some flies come in. So yes, you can point to the flies. But it's like what Deng Xiaoping once said. When you open the window, some flies come in. So yes, you can point to the flies. Yes, you can point to all the disruption and nonsense that goes on on the Internet. But in the main, the Internet spreads empowerment. And empowerment spreads democracy. And I think that is a good thing.

Because democracies do not war with other democracies. Think of every single war you learned about since you were a child every single war they've always been between kings queens and dictators never between two full-fledged democracies now some people say what about america's civil war wasn't that between two democracies? Well, not really. The South was not really a democracy. It was a slaveocracy. But two democracies have never warred with each other because the average person inside each democracy says, what's in it for me and my family? I mean, why am I going to sacrifice my kids for the king, right? So I think that technology in the main has a direction. And I also think that the

smallest unit of history is the decade. And people sometimes say, well, what about this war? What about that? When you look at life decade by decade, not year by year, but decade by decade, you see the enormous sweep of history in the direction of democracy. You realize that 100 years ago, we would be talking about kings and queens and all that kind of nonsense that goes with monarchies, right? We don't talk about them anymore. They're a joke, okay? We talk about them to gossip about their love life, but other than that, who cares, right? So what I'm saying is that as democracies develop decade by decade, there's less and less power to the kings and queens of old and less and less power to that kind of thinking that we're going to be number one, we're going to dominate the world. And more and more thinking about what's in it for my family? How can I educate my kids?

How can I put bread on the table? More and more people are going to be interested in that rather than putting the flag on the earth. And you're saying a morality and technology that you believe exists is what drives that. Yeah. I think as technology becomes developed, people realize, hey, I can use that. I can use that because it gives me power. Knowledge is power. And with the power, you want to do something with it. And empowerment comes to drive toward democracy, when everyone wants to have a say in their future. That's why I say that the technology in the main has a direction. Of course, as I said, decade by decade, year by year,

you can see all sorts of nonsense that seems to prove that I'm wrong. But decade by decade, over the decades now, you realize how far we have come. You realize that since World War II, the greatest movement of people has been toward the middle class. The greatest motion in history of Homo sapiens took place after World War II with China, India, and other countries attaining middle class status. It's never happened before in world history. And it's because, you know, knowledge is spreading throughout the world,

and knowledge means empowerment. When you first said that, I may have misunderstood it. Like, I thought you were saying that technology itself, like, as a being, is moral. And I'm like, well, wait a second. In order to have morals and be moral or immoral, you have to be sentient. You have to be able to feel and understand human emotion, for lack of a better way of putting it. But what it seems to me is that you're describing, when you say that, you're talking about technology being a vessel for morality. Technology is the ship that humans get on to ride, and it drives them overall, even when it has rough patches along the way, towards a more moral future.

Yeah, that's right. It's a means toward a larger end. And the larger end is people want a better life. Not for the king, but a better life for themselves and their family and relatives, whatever, right? That's the goal and the means toward the goal didn't exist before. But now we have the technology to make that dream come true. And we just saw what happened in China and India where hundreds of millions of people,

the largest motion in human history, attained middle class status. Why? Because of empowerment, because knowledge was spreading through the speed of the internet. And I think that's a good thing. Even in a place where like they don't, like in China, they don't have democracy but there's still at least some spread of of technology forcing that to happen where people come to the middle class yeah and of course they that means empowerment now remember that these people are seeing democracy for the first time and they're seeing wealth middle class wealth for the first time and they tend to thank the government for it so they think it was the government that did everything no it was technology harnessed by people that that are participating in a democratic

venture that caused this whole thing to happen but it does mean that some people will think that oh my government did all the work no it wasn't that at all it was the hard work of people who believed in democracy believed in development that made this whole possible that's that's my brain's fried you how about you it's a lot right well we're gonna get you out of here in a few minutes because this is like i don't even know if i could think straight after all this but this this has been an absolute pleasure to do this with you but before i do that though i i just wanted to ask you like as a person after all these years of doing this like do you do you ever focus on like your own happiness because like you seem like a very

i just met you today but when i listen to you speak publicly or when i talk with you today talk with you off camera you seem like the happiest go lucky guy ever. You seem like you have the perfect zen. You kind of overlook all this bullshit type zero civilization stuff we fight over. And I'm sure you still worry about some of it. But, you know, you're able to kind of focus on the things you love, which is the universe and what it all means. Like, do you, would you consider yourself a very happy person? Well, when I was in elementary school, there was a pamphlet about future jobs.

And I picked up one pamphlet, and it said, what's the relationship between a baseball player and a physicist? And I said to myself, well, that's a dumb question. I mean, there is a relationship between a physicist and a baseball player and the answer to the pamphlet was no they both get paid to do what they love and i said to myself you mean i could get paid to be a scientist i can get paid to be a physicist people gonna pay me to be a physicist to understand the universe and the laws of nature and to participate in the great march towards science yes you can get paid to do that and i said to myself what a great idea and then i realized that physicists have an advantage over baseball players because baseball

players have a very short lifespan because you're only you're only 25 for so many years before the aches and pains start to build up. You're no longer competitive. For now. Yeah, you're no longer competitive. All the other 25-year-olds that are coming up the ranks, right? Well, a physicist, I mean, Einstein was creating great ideas in his 60s. We're still studying some of the stuff that he did late in life, right? So I said to myself, wait, that's a good deal.

You get paid to do what you love, even in old age. And I said to myself, oh, that's the job for me. That's beautiful. And look, I think you live it out the right way. And I think you're carrying on Einstein's legacy great. And I hope your voice is a voice in the space for many years to come, because I love listening to it and your ability like today there's a lot of complex topics that came up obviously but even some things that fried my brain it's just kind of impossible for anyone to explain in a way that's good but there are so many things that you explain with the ultimate visual and simplicity that sometimes like the layperson like me goes to watch scientists explain stuff and they can't do that so as a teacher I'm, I'd probably have us on Mars by now if you were teaching me physics in high school or something. But you weren't.

Nonetheless, I'm really, really glad that you came here to teach our audience for a few hours. I'm going to be reviewing this one for a while. So thank you so much, Dr. Kaku. My pleasure. And your book is Quantum Supremacy. It will be available on amazon link in description so everybody can get that and how many books have you written now uh i've been i don't know it's about 15 books but five of them were new york times bestsellers well that's that's 10 to 10

too little i think i think all of them should have been but we'll put those links down there for people to check it out and i hope to do this with you again somewhere down the line thank you again okay my pleasure all right everybody else you know what it is give it a thought get back to me peace