The Joe Rogan Experience - #1945 - Eric Weinstein

Episode Date: February 22, 2023

Eric Weinstein is a mathematician and host of The Portal podcast.  www.ericweinstein.org

the Joe Rogan experience good to see you my friend hello Joe so we should tell everybody this podcast came about from what time in the morning was it when I called you one might have been one of them late night ones wasn't it well they all run together but um it was a late night freak out ufo conversation i was like dude we gotta do a podcast about this because it out of all of my friends that actually can understand physics and explain it you you you comprehend it at a very high level so if for things like this to be puzzling to you to the point where you actually want to talk about it. Well, I don't want to talk about it because I got this one so wrong for years.

I mean, there is no trace of me talking about UFOs, I think, before three years ago because I can't stand the topic. Unlike the rest of you, this thing hits very differently. Well, I should say then I've gone back and forth. Yeah, I know. I've watched yours. I abandoned it for a long time until I watched the Bob Lazar documentary. When Jeremy Corbell made that Bob Lazar documentary, I was like, God damn it. They got me back in again. They drew me back in again.

I don't think, I don't know if there's ever footage of me saying the words Bob Lazar. There it goes. There you go. I know. But I would love to facilitate that dinner. Oh, let's do it. You and Bob Lazar. I don't know why.

You know, there's always this question about is Bob Lazar a physicist? Was he trained at these places? And I have to imagine that that's an easily resolvable question because you can tell whether somebody is a physicist pretty quickly i would that's why i can't it's like you know you know what it's like it's like fake black belts there's a lot of fake black belts and if you're a real martial artist you watch it and you go what the fuck is this guy doing this is hilarious but some people who don't have any understanding of martial arts oh my god this my God, this guy has a death touch. He just touched you behind the ear and you fall asleep.

And people believe it. Yeah, I thought I would just skip everything and go right to the five-point exploding heart technique. Yeah, so that is how I am when, you know, physicists. I'm like, I don't know what you're saying. I can't verify or deny. But Bob Lazar is a very impressive person to talk to. And what's really impressive to me is that he's had the same exact story since the 1980s. And the new footage of these crafts that show them rotating 180 degrees before they take off is exactly how he described. So how do you want to ease into this?

We want to discuss. What got you curious about it? If you had just decided that it was all horse shit, like what changed your perspective? Okay, this is a really weird and interesting question. I had a different puzzle that I've been working on for years, which has to do with physics and is important to me in my work and what I care about,

which is there is this crazy history between around 1953 and 1973 with an explosion of activity that sometimes goes under the name of the golden age of general relativity, where general relativity was sort of put in final form in the teens by Einstein and also Marcel Grossman, who never gets the credit for the original papers, I think, on general relativity. Isn't that always the case? Yeah. There's always like some guy behind the scenes that actually wrote for Shakespeare. Einstein is the genius, but he had a mathematical friend whose father saved Einstein, I think got him

the patent job. And there's like a meeting called the Marcel Grossman meeting. So he's a shadowy figure on the edge of the Einstein legend. I don't think he deserves the credit Einstein did, but if you look at the first paper in General Relativity, before Einstein says anything concrete, the first paper he says something vague, and that's 1913, and that's with Gross concrete. The first paper, he says something vague. That's 1913. And that's with Grossman. The next paper, he says something wrong. He publishes the wrong equation. Then he corrects the equation and it's incomplete because it doesn't have the cosmological constant. And I think it's four papers before he has the equation that now dominates our understanding of the cosmos and the large. And the, so then it goes silent. And effectively, the smart kids are all following Bohr

because Bohr and the quantum have so many open problems where his general relativity seems like pretty much a closed book. And that's until 1953. And something very bizarre happens in 1953, which we can get to. But then there's 20 years of explosion in General Relativity, which, you know, you've had Roger Penrose on your program before. So he comes from that era. And Stephen Hawking was interior to that era. Richard Feynman, of all people, was very active and gave lectures at Caltech.

So my entry point was that when I was a young guy at the University of Pennsylvania, when I'd come home to L.A. for break, I'd go out to Caltech and I would park in Feynman or Gelman's parking spaces, which I just thought was the coolest thing in the world, that these people, these gods had little, you know, stones with their names stenciled on it. So I would go park in Feynman's space and I would go to the Caltech bookstore. And I found that there was something that was sold there that at the time I don't think was sold anywhere else, which was like the Feynman Lectures on Gravitation, 1962 to 63. And they were effed up. It was like Feynman says, I don't know how Einstein did his thing, but imagine that you didn't have the insight that this was all geometric based on a guy named Bernard Riemann's notion of what differential geometry is, sort of the smooth surface geometry of curvature.

And Feynman says, let's just imagine this was an ordinary field theory. Am I, Richard Feynman, smart enough to figure out the geometry just proceeding as if I was a particle theorist? And this is a very strange and interesting, wonderful thing to do. And these notes are fantastic. My question is, what happened between 1953 and 1973. Because the reason that I'm in part really animated right now is that this month, February 1st of 2023, is the exact 50th year anniversary of the stagnation in particle theory as measured by the movement from the standard model. So the standard model and general relativity are the two basic theories, the theory of the standard model. So the standard model and general relativity are the two basic theories, the theory of the very small, the theory of the very large. They're incompatible

in a certain level, but they're very similar looking at a different level. So this has been driving people crazy. And I say, you know, in 1973, Crocodile Rock was the number one song, or the entire yellow ribbon around the old oak tree. Imagine that song being at the top of the pops for 50 years with no respite. That's how impressive this is, right? That's a great comparison. Right, so just imagine the platform shoes and the heat going up above them.

So it doesn't make any sense. Doesn't make any sense. How did the world's smartest community stagnate this badly? This has happened once before in recent times between 1928 when Dirac came up with something called quantum electrodynamics, which is electrons and photons interacting light and a little bit of matter. And for almost 20 years until 1947, we couldn't compute with this first quantum field theory, quantum electrodynamics, otherwise known as QED. And suddenly in 1947, we held a conference at Shelter

Island in the tip of Long Island. And they didn't invite the old people as much as they invited the young people coming after the success of the Manhattan Project. Now, the Manhattan Project gets remembered by us as a physics project, but it was really engineering, because the theorists were unable to fight their way out of a paper bag. So we gave them an engineering project, and they completely crushed it. They gave us these atomic weapons. So we had a pretty good idea of who was smart,

and people like Feynman were smart. So we held this weird, cheap conference at Shelter Island at the Rams Head Inn. And Feynman figured out that, along with a guy named Julian Schwinger and another guy named Tomonaga in Japan, that there was a stupid error, like a really boneheaded, you know, I can't find my keys for 20 years. And then you realize, oh, they're in my pocket. So this thing had to do with the fact that there were two concepts of mass for the electron. And if you imagine that this table between us was ice, right? And I pushed this cup, we would know about how much the mass of this cup was based on how it responded to force. But what if I start putting friction?

Now it's wood. It appears to be slightly more massive because it takes more force to drag a cup across wood than it does across ice because of the coefficient of friction. That number is the effective mass or the dressed mass. And we thought that that was the real mass. And we had those two numbers set equal.

And when we realized that they weren't the same number, suddenly the theory yielded. So it was a 20-year stagnation that ended because there was a boneheaded mistake. So we have some experience with this. Is this stagnation more confusing to you because everything else has kind of moved along technologically, innovation? No, things mostly haven't moved. Really? Yeah. We all have this sense of, oh my God, the dizzying pace of progress. Right.

And then I always set this problem this way. I say, if you subtract the screens in our lives, so there are phones, the flat screen TVs, all that stuff. And you forget about style issues because style changes. How do you know you're not in 1973? More or less, you know, we don't have George Jetson stuff everywhere. Style would be a big one. Yeah, style would be. But just in terms of technology, like the distance between 1952, where we have the first thermonuclear device in the test known as IV Mike in 1902, before we even have powered flight, is like 10,000 years. It's enormous.

The difference between 1973 and 2023 is mostly due to computers. Computers and communication are the two really big expanding things. I'm not saying you don't have quadcopters. Right. But because we interact with that primarily, we think of things as being far more advanced. Right. And like on a broad scale. Well, this is the issue. The way I used to say it is it was between electrons and atoms. The world of atoms stagnated. The world of electrons went crazy.

It's actually a very good point too, in terms of one of the major industries that has to improve every year is automobiles. Right. And the problem with that is they're so good. Like, if you get to, like, a Tesla level of performance, the idea that you're going to get faster than that is fucking insane. You don't want to necessarily get fast.

You don't want to get that fast. The idea that you could just go to a store and buy a car that will go zero to 60 in two seconds is fucking nuts, man. I know. It's nuts. Well, it's mostly a battery in a computer claiming to be a car. Exactly. Keep going. Exactly.

What I was going to say is they're all reliant on computers now. Yeah. Like, I really like old cars. I really like, like, old. Where you can tinker. Yeah. But it's also, I just like that there's a direct connection mechanically. You feel a mechanical connection to the gears and the steering.

There's something about them that's very satisfying. They don't even have to be fast. They don't have to move fast. Like, driving around normally, it's like driving a ride. It's very fun. Whereas with a Tesla, it's just, you know that if you turn the wheel, it'll turn the actual wheels that are on the road, but you don't feel them. You don't feel that thing. You're just turning a thing and a thing happens.

You're not directly connected to it. It's all computers. All the new cars rely on computers. If you listen to John Mayer, for example, talking about what's wrong with modeling amplifiers, you can get $100,000 worth of equipment in one of these little boxes. But a tube amp is hard to replace because there's something special in analog technology of a different time. Or you pass current through a pickup, and that magnet, you know, there's magic that happens between wood and

magnets and steel right all this kind of stuff i appreciate an automatic transmission as a thing of beauty but i'd rather drive a stick still yeah yeah it's still you don't want to drive one in traffic but if it's just you enjoying driving there's nothing like a stick shift it this is where they lose this they lose the focus with computers. It's like you're taking away one of the best things about driving, which is the enjoyment of driving, and you're replacing it with tenths of a second that no one's going to notice and you really shouldn't notice anyway because they're all ridiculously fast. Yeah, but this train will not slow down. Well, I get it, but people need to understand, just from a human perspective, you will enjoy driving a manual car more. If you have any life left in you. Tight suspension.

If you have any fucking spark left in you when you're on a windy road, you want to go wah, wah. Even if you're not driving fast, it's so much more fun. If I'm not mistaken, the Rolls Royce had to put sound back in because they'd subtracted so much sound through their patented insulation systems. BMW's done that as well. Yeah. It's not safe. Well, now you're like, you're going to simulate?

It's gross. I know. They're talking about doing that for Ferraris because they're going to make an EV Ferrari. So if they made an electrical Ferrari, they're talking about making fake Ferrari noises, which is just an atrocious thing to come out of Italy. Stop it. Just stop it. What the fuck is wrong?

You guys are all passion and wine and sound. A Ferrari is supposed to be like this high revving. There's something about that as it's happening that excites you. Right. It's music. It's dance. It's love. It's real.

You can't have fake Ferrari sounds. Okay. No, but Elon's cars don't make any sound. I love it. Well, I get terrified of it because they sneak up behind me. That is an issue. Yeah. That is an issue.

Okay. So getting back to the whole UFO thing and the progress, we don't realize what percentage of life was determined by physics, right? So, for example, Wi-Fi and all the communication is the electromagnetic spectrum, including radio waves. the communication is the electromagnetic spectrum, including radio waves. We don't realize the semiconductor, which created the logic gate. All we did was scale it up, and now it's chat GPT. Yeah. The number of things that have changed the world, whether it's the World Wide Web coming out of CERN, physics is really what has moved the dial including molecular biology founded by physicists more or less so when you lose this community you don't understand like you think okay that's some

egghead shit it isn't physics is basically progress physics created the modern economy and to have a 50-year stagnation uh particularly, and I want to draw a really important contrast, 1968 was the year we discovered the quark. So in every proton, there are three valence quarks, two of them named up, one of them named down. In a neutron, it's two downs and one up. So that's how we, neutrons and protons are not fundamental. When we found the neutron, it was in 1932. So my aunt, Judy, shout out to Aunt Judy in Philadelphia, is older than the neutron.

And the neutron doomed us as a species. Like that one discovery more or less indicated that if we do not leave this world, we will die here in short order. Because if you throw a proton at a very heavy nucleus, it doesn't crash into the nucleus. You've got all these protons in the center that are all positively charged. And this one guy is coming in at high speed. And all these massive protons say, like charges repel. And this thing just runs away like a scaredy cat. A neutron is almost a proton.

It's basically the same kind of a deal but with no charge. So it doesn't understand that you're telling it, you know, go back, danger. And it just screams in, and it can split these nuclei, releasing all of this energy. And then you get these chain reactions with the neutrons radiating out. So in 1932, we discover the neutron. I think it was by 38, this woman named Lise Meitner figures out the chain reaction. By 42, 10 years after the discovery of the neutron, Enrico Fermi and something called Chicago Pile 1, CP1, crazily does a controlled chain reaction under the bleachers of the University of Chicago.

Shout out to the University of Chicago Stadium, which could have obliterated the city of Chicago if it had gone critical, right? I mean, if it had just run away. Nobody knew what was going to happen. Yeah. So we trusted the city of Chicago to Enrico Fermi's calculation. By 45, you get Trinity and the two bombs we drop on Japan. And then in 1952, game over, you have Ivy Mike and the first thermonuclear weapon based on the Teller-Ulam design, which uses the fission bomb just for foreplay as the detonator that causes the waves

to go out and radiate out against the shell. And I think we still don't talk exactly how we do it. And then they bounce off and they compress this rod and core. And then you get fusion rather than fission. And suddenly you're harnessing the power of the sun. And that's when you don't even worry about ducking cover because thermonuclear is such a leap above fission devices. And that's such a leap above fission devices, and that's such a leap above conventional that it takes 20 years for us to become God, right?

And this power we can't control. We need to worry about physics because you never know when somebody is going to discover a neutron. In other words, a high leverage object, just like the semiconductor was a high leverage object. The World Wide Web in the early 90s was the high leverage object. Anything that comes out of physics, oh, and Francis Crick, physicist discovering the three-dimensional structure of DNA, and then the transfer hypothesis of where you translate DNA into messenger RNA, which gets read in ribosomes. All of these things changed the world and effectively gave us so much power that we don't know how to control it.

And we were so scared for 70 years, because it's six months between 1952 and 53, where we discover both the atom and the cell and how they work in terms of this forbidden knowledge. We were so scared that we behaved ourselves. And now we're not scared. We're like Slava Ukraine, just whatever. Yeah, we've got Putin. We're going to back him into a corner. Putin, we're going to back him into a corner.

We should probably say that this is actually the day that we're talking about. This is the day that Putin just backed out of the nuclear treaty. Publicly. Which is not good. With Joe Biden going to Kiev and pledging his undying love to. And I'm going to say this, which is very painful. I think Zelensky is a complete menace. Why do you think that? He's romantic. He's telegenic. He's brave. We can talk about whether he got set up in a coup

or who he really is, whether he was an actor, et cetera, et cetera. But at some point, I think I heard him. I had to go back to like the Russian and Ukrainian speeches in order to try to. I don't speak much Russian. I don't speak any Ukrainian, but they're closely related languages. And he calls for like preventive udari, like preventative strikes. I'm like, huh? You know, this is a while ago.

And I thought, why is this person allowed to address Congress? You have somebody who, and I want to be very clear about this. I really find it disgusting what Vladimir Putin did invading Ukraine. But if you look historically at the killing and the borders of Eastern and Central Europe, they have gone back and forth like nobody's business. When you ask somebody like me, an American Ashkenazi Jew, where did your family come from? You always get the same weird response. It's like, oh, it was a part of Belarusia that went back and forth between Poland, Ukraine, Oh, it was a part of Belarusia that went back and forth between Poland, Ukraine, Moldova, Lithuania, because it's fluid.

Right. And so when we say, you know, we respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine. We were fighting right now in Lvov, like the Ukrainians were fighting in Lvov, eight seconds by hypersonic missile from Article 5 territory since 1999 in Poland. And I realized how crazy we got. I was in Providence, Rhode Island with my son, and I get this alert on my phone, and it says, two people are dead in Poland with a presumptive strike by a Russian missile. with a presumptive strike by a Russian missile. I'm thinking, did I read two Polish people dead in an Article 5 full NATO member since 1999 with a Russian missile?

Because I knew we were fighting way too close to this border. Now, by the way, if I say Lvov, everyone's going to correct me and say, no, no, Eric, it's Lviv. It's like, no, these cities all have multiple pronunciations. I always thought of Lvov was a Polish city, not a Ukrainian city. And ironically, I believe Lvov is the birthplace of Stanislaw Ulam, who came up with the Teller-Ulam thermonuclear design. thermonuclear design. So we're talking about some of the world's smartest people on some of the world's bloodiest, most disgusting, most beautiful land. Have you ever been to Ukraine? No.

So my family basically was scattered throughout the shtetls of Ukraine. And I've been over there in 89. We Americans do not understand Central and Eastern Europe, period, the end. And for us to be making these commitments and not understanding how Russians think and how Ukrainians think and how Poles think and how the fighting works, I don't think we know what we're doing. I think we're creating a doomsday machine. And the reason that we, you know, it's not like Zelensky isn't wronged by Putin. It's not like he's not charismatic. He has one of the greatest Bruce Willis lines of all time. When we asked to evacuate him, he says, I need ammunition, not a ride.

You know, that thing makes us. Yeah. Yeah. I want that. Then there's like house to house fighting the way all the World War II enthusiasts think. They tend not to think about Nagasaki and Hiroshima. They like the tactical stuff with all the, you know, which bridge got taken out over which river and how did we do this and that. So it's very romantic to people who are like World War II addicts. We do not realize how deep the trouble we're courting is. And I don't think we realize how dangerous it is. If we are going to, every time there's a border dispute, go to a thermonuclear standoff, it's just Russian roulette with smaller and smaller numbers of empty chambers.

And I don't know what this is. I don't know whether we have 30 years to play this game or three or three months. But I learned that day last year in 2022. Nobody around me in Providence, Rhode Island was reacting. Everybody was just going about. It was like a normal day. was reacting. Everybody's just going about. It was like a normal day. It's like I'm increasingly, Joe, believing that I am sane and that the world is crazy. And normally I take that as a cue that maybe I need to get some sleep. No, I think we're actually just going crazy. I think that those of

us who actually get how risky this is need to speak up because it's not fun. The entire apparatus will tell you that you're soft on Putin and you're an appeasing Chamberlain wannabe. And it's like bullshit. Right now, you don't realize in 2004, we let Latvia and Lithuania into NATO membership. And I remember thinking at the time, what the hell are we doing? It's not like I don't understand that we want to protect them. It's not like I don't understand that you want to say that they're independent nations. But these were former Soviet republics. And there's two ways of thinking about it. You can put on one set of glasses and say, well, these are nations that get to decide what they want and who's to tell them what to do.

And then there's another thing called spheres of influence where it's like that's the Russian sphere of influence. If you are not playing with both of these sets of lenses, you're not playing the game. And the number of people who just have one set of these glasses on, right, they're only seeing the infrared or they're only seeing the ultraviolet. It's like, no, you need to oscillate back and forth and understand what you're doing. So I think, I think Zelensky, and I'm scared to say this because I know I'm going to get just nothing but hate. We created a situation by pretending that we didn't understand the spheres of influence glasses. We very well understand the sovereignty glasses. And we are now creating a doomsday machine that we do not understand. And the world is going to go multipolar and we don't have the skill to play this game, period.

And the world is gonna go multipolar and we don't have the skill to play this game period do you think part of the problem is that we're The the amount of people that have actually gone to war in this country First of all, there's there's people that are in the army or in all the armed forces. They're they're volunteers everyone volunteers There's no draft. There's no is they're volunteers. Everyone volunteers. There's no draft. There's no national requirement to join the military like there is in Israel and like there is in South Korea and many other countries. The people that have experience with the war are the ones that are telling you this

is dangerous. People like yourself are telling us this is dangerous. But to the rest of the world, to the rest of this country, there's a real problem with day-to-day existence because day-to-day existence is tricky and it gives you parameters which you exist in, but they're not real. They're not real. They're not real. They're only real right now. And if you invite war, you now are like these videos that you can watch. I don't know if you're on Telegram. There are some fucking videos from this war on like in the woods ground fighting i've seen them heavy heavy shit and i don't think people that show up every day at the same starbucks and then get on the highway and go to their office and repeat every fucking day i don't think they think of that as a real option in the world.

But it is. Think of daily life as ketamine. Okay? So you've got people walking around completely dissociated because everything in their daily environment tells them to pick up the dry cleaning. Right. And, you know, oh.

Everything's fine. Oh. What's on Netflix? Yeah. At least in the Cuban Missile Crisis, my father was driving across country. I said, you knew it was the, he said, everybody knew it was the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Every single town that he drove through, he would stop and the TV would be on. People were talking about it, right? We are in some world where, and I think that we have to just talk about the fact that the United States is attacking ordinary intelligent human beings by depriving them of any basic knowledge of what is actually going on. We don't know what happened with the origin of COVID. We have no idea

about Epstein. We don't know what's going on with the vaccines. We don't understand the source of the inflation. We blinded ourselves from looking at the M1 monetary aggregate when the Fed pumped us full of cheap cash. We have no clue how to resolve something as dumb as the Epstein. To whom did Ghislaine traffic? I don't know. Yeah. Well, can't find it. Sorry. Bye. So this is what's causing, in part, our friends to go crazy. You know, several years ago, Sam Harris had good input. Jordan Peterson had good input.

Brett Weinstein had good input. Most of them, I don't think, have figured out that they're starved for information. And I'm going to say something very heterodox to the heterodoxy. The heterodoxy was never meant to take over for the orthodoxy. The orthodoxy was something that needed correction. The purpose of the heterodoxy is to say, you're 12 degrees off, you're 3 degrees off. What do you do when you're like 168 degrees off? And all, you know, like the fine tuning that heterodoxy can do is not sufficient to correct

the ship. And what we're being, what's happening to us? I said this to Sam at a dinner with Dave Rubin right before Trump took over. I said, Sam, if you don't take a different approach to Trump, he's going to blow out your circuits. He said, what do you mean? I said, well, for every ambiguous thing that you can't resolve with Trump, raise two to that power. So if he puts three ambiguities in a series, you have two to the third possibilities of what could be true. That's eight. He can create a decision tree that explodes faster than you, Sam Harris, can think. There's no way you can get to two to the fourth possibilities on a decision tree. I don't think he understood the perspective. And so what happened was we were all swimming in this world where nobody could tell which end was up. Nobody can resolve anything. And I think a lot of this has to do-

Not sure I understand what you were just saying there. Okay. This decision tree thing that Sam, he was going to blow, explain that. So let's imagine, for example, that I'm staying at a local hotel. Okay. And you don't know whether I'm staying at the Hyatt or the Four Seasons. Okay. And you also can't figure out whether I'm leaving at one o'clock

or at two o'clock. And you don't know whether I'm going to be arriving by a white Prius or a black Escalade. You now have too many possibilities as to, well, what's the drive time for those two hotels is different. I don't know which car I'm looking for. There are eight possibilities now of what could actually be happening because those are all independent. When Trump created ambiguities or now the Biden group is creating ambiguities by not telling us what's actually going on, you don't know how serious this East Palestine, Ohio spill is. Is this something that's going to burn off pretty easily or is this getting into the corn crop that's going to be found in all processed

food? I don't know. I don't know how much. It's a very good question. Right. Okay. So just every day you're being assaulted by completely unnecessary ambiguities. And you know, this is. But why, why then the Trump thing? Why his why would his derangement towards Trump? Well, because Trump circuits. Sam made one terrible call with Trump. He said that he was the evil Chauncey Gardner, like a simpleton, like Mr. Magoo just happens to wander into the Oval Office as the first president with zero government experience, including the armed services.

Bullshit. Trump may be a savant, but he was brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. If you do not give that devil its due, you're toast. Yeah, it's silly to say that he's dumb

because he's different. He says some dumb stuff sometimes, but oftentimes he's talking off the top of his head. Oh, I don't even... Like, maybe use some bleach, clean it out. Remember that? Exactly. But meanwhile, one of the things that he said

about using light... Right. Actually, they came up with a process of doing that. That was an actual procedure that they would use where they use ultraviolet light inside a person's lungs and kill the COVID virus. This was like a concept that they would use where they use ultraviolet light inside a person's lungs and kill the COVID virus. This was like a concept that they were actually putting forth as being possible. So what he said, even though it sounded ridiculous, get light into their body, it actually was right.

But that's the thing. So then a bunch of people said, OK, I'm going to put a minus sign in front of Trump. Everything that he says is just wrong. We can't do that. Well, they do this to Alex Jones. They do this to James O'K front of Trump. Everything that he says is just wrong. Right? They do that Well, they do this to Alex Jones James O'Keefe and they'll do it to you and me they definitely don't to me Did you have to definitely done to you too? It's a thing that people do look just because someone look I say dumb things all the time Constantly my kids never I never do I am always saying dumb things because I talk sometimes before I totally think but then I go oh wait a minute

It doesn't make sense, and then I'll correct it like I'm trying not to be married to my thoughts There's a real problem. You're great at this by the was a real problem Well because I recognize my fucking shortcomings me too You know I know that I am I'm scattered okay because I do a lot of different things And I'm thinking about things that are totally unnecessary, like professional pool matches. I think about that all the time. How did he get position on that six ball? That's crazy.

And I'll think about that when I'm driving my car. So I'm a scatterbrain in a lot of ways. So sometimes when I'm talking, I'm there, but I'm not fully formed in these thoughts. I'm trying to talk them out in real time. Right. And you get clumsy with that. And when you concentrate on something, you get really good at it. And if you concentrate on something and trying to improve on something, whether it's playing chess or whether it is business, you get

really good at it. And in the meanwhile, you might not be good at interpersonal relationships. You might not be good at the way you communicate with people. You might not be good at, but you have some weird thing that you're doing that seems to be successful. And you're putting all your energy into that. That's what he's doing. That's what he's always done. What he's always done is like these business deals and making money and putting a fucking giant hotel with his name on it. Whoa! Like that's what he thinks about.

And he's really good at that shit. I would say he's tactical in the that shit anyway i would say he's tactical yeah extreme you can't say he's not smart it's just like he's he's just not sam harris he's not capable of those kind of eloquent speeches and conversations off off the cuff like that which is a totally different skill yeah but if you looked at his tweets for example back in the day there was so much formula in those tweets i I started coming up with like a template. He had five different tweets. And Sam just would not let go of the idea

that he's a dum-dum. And that was super expensive in the long run. But I think it's because Sam knows that if you get in a debate with that guy, he could trounce him. Part of it is that... You think Sam could trounce him? If of it is that- You think- Yes. Sam could trounce him.

If they got in debate about religion, if they got in debate about certain things that Sam is like neuroscience, certain things that Sam is very educated in, he's so good at debates. It's like being a black belt that's used to tapping people all the time. And then you see this guy, he's winning debates against people because he's calling them, like, what does he call, Lion Ted? He gives people nicknames. And I think if I was Sam and I was as good at debate as Sam is, I would go, I can fuck this guy up.

Sam doesn't know what's coming to him, if that's true, because there was a guy named Max Bleacher. I'm sorry, Sam, dragging you into this. Who was a Los Angeles attorney who had a crazy idea. He said, I'm going to try really complex antitrust cases in front of juries. Jury's not going to be able to follow that. He's like, exactly. I'm going to speak simply.

Look, one way to win one of these arguments is just say, you know, the problem is the nuclear family. Right. And every single Democrat will say you mean nuclear. And then you've lost. Because when you correct somebody who's saying nuclear, we're like, OK, it's nuclear egghead. You lose. Nuclear is a way to say it, too. It is now. So that's how that's how George W. Bush always said it, and everybody's like, hey, what the fuck? Dennis Miller had a bit about it.

But it wins, right? So this is why, if you sit down with one of these, like if you and I are at the beach, right, and we've got the world's greatest beach volleyball team on one side, and the world's greatest CPEC Tuckero team on the other side, it's a ball, it's a net, and it's three dudes, okay?

Okay. Who wins? The three dudes, okay? Okay. Who wins? The people that are better? Nope. Who? Depends who the ref is. If the ref thinks it's volleyball, then the volleyball team will win. And if the ref thinks it's CPAC-Tuckro, the CPAC-Tuckro team, it's the same.

I don't know what CPAC-Tuckro is. Oh, it's like the most beautiful. Do you know what that is? Yeah, yeah. What is it? It's similar to the thing with that ball that we have out there that uh oh you have like one of these oh okay that's like martial arts ballet in the air with the feet it's the it's it's the best game ever i don't know why we're not doing it right well we can't do it those guys are fucking

i destroyed my left ankle on this game oh you can't be doing that you can't no no i was a young man i was courting my wife i was going to impress her in indonesia show like let an american take over okay here we go these guys are these guys are phenomenal okay like that is insane i mean that's like a hundred yair rodriguez is out there yair rodriguez is a ufc fighter who fights like why i almost did it with boxing versus UFC, right? Is the issue punching people in the face or is the issue doing everything except for small joints and eye sockets? That kind of thing, though,

requires like a kind of dexterity that's very difficult to acquire. Like that kind of dexterity with your legs, that's like a Taekwondo dexterity. 100%. The question is, what are the rules? So in other words, if Sam Harris goes up against Donald Trump, I can tell you who's going to win depending upon how we score.

For X amount of time. Yeah. It seems silly to me. I don't mind someone being able to talk, but it has to be a conversation. Someone cannot dominate the conversation. Sure. Like, if you and I had a disagreement, and I just wouldn't let you talk, it's very frustrating. It sucks. It's not good for anybody.

It's more likely to go the other way. I'm sorry about that. It could happen that way. It could happen that way. But it doesn't matter. It's like, it's not fun. Yeah. And it's not fair.

And if you're going to have – it's like a fight. You can't – I can poke you in the eye, but you can't poke me in the eye? No, that's not fair. Right. It has to be fair. So if you're going to have – and some would say, well, he's not capable of having a good faith conversation, but that's the only way to do it. The only way to do it is to have an open-ended time frame where you could just until this fucking thing is resolved until we all give up, you guys

can talk. Was Dick Fosbury fair? Who's Dick Fosbury? The high jump guy from 68 in Mexico City. I don't know. What happened? Oh, he figured out you had to go backwards over the bar rather than scissoring it. Oh, he's the first guy to figure that out? Yeah. Oh, no kidding.

That's a pretty fucking bold move, right? Bold move. Or like you enter a catamaran in the America's Cup. Did they have the same big pad? Yeah. So they had the same big pad before and they were just landing on it like that. Oh, wow. That's crazy.

Right. Whoa. That's insane. That's how they used to do it? Yeah. Whoa. Right. So zero day exploit.

Did you know this? Did you know? I feel like I knew this. I knew about the Fosbury jump because I've heard of that, but I didn't know how they did it before. No shit. See, at the same Olympics, you have Bob Beeman jumping, like, what is it, two feet farther than any humans. Like, probably the greatest single athletic performance

of the 20th century happens there. But zero-day exploits are really interesting. Another one was the Bombay International Table Tennis Championship. And the weakest player on the Japanese team was a guy, I'm going to get the name wrong here, Jamie, keep me honest, Hiroji Satoj. He shows up in Bombay and he's like the worst player, and he's got the secret paddle case, and he unzips it, and he's got rubber glued to both sides of the sandpaper bat that everybody else is using.

Oh! And he dominates everybody. And you'd think because the rubber grips and spins, but I think it's actually that everyone was cued to the sound. And this deadened the sound, and suddenly nobody could play against him. And suddenly, you know, so he's like Iron Man. Right, they're thinking.

They have another thing that they're thinking about now. Like, why does it sound like that? They don't even know that. Ah. Right? Interesting. Okay, Hiroji Sato's controversial... Thick sponge bat that caused a revolution in table tennis.

But also, wouldn't it slow the ball down because of the softness of it i would imagine it would give you more control it seems like it would do both of those things maybe it would slow the ball down a little bit because it's got a little bit of smush to it and i think that would almost be like a change up in um like a pitching situation where someone's throwing a ball you're expecting it to be 90 miles an hour instead it's 60 and you're like motherfucker like you're just you're you're off right because you have to be so ready to go and it's slower than it should be so it's fucking with your computer and i think i think the chinese came up with the loop in table tennis

i believe that in beach volleyball the the jumping serve where you go airborne and then you hit. These discrete technical changes. Let's take the one with Steph Curry. I heard, I wish I could remember who this was. Somebody in your audience will know. There was an old style top basketball player who was being interviewed.

What do you think of this guy, Steph Curry, and what's happening in the game? And he said something that was so beautiful, I can't tell you. Something to the effect of, you know, I don't know what game that is. He said, I used to play in the paint and we were all, you know, we're going at it and elbowing and trying to get position. This guy's a million miles away from the basket and he's just nothing but net. He said, that's not basketball to me. Like he just didn't recognize what the thing had become. Oh, that's so weird.

And so I think these zero-day exploits and just taking back to get to the UFOs because we have crazy stuff. The neutron is a zero-day exploit. It's the Fosbury flop of physics. Same for the semiconductor. And we have stagnated for so long that people in our government aren't watching people like me and saying, what's going on, Eric? Anything new? What are you working on? Because anybody who comes up with a new thing can change the entire balance of power on planet Earth. How far away are we from new things? And have new things been...

You can't ask me that because I have a different view than every other person. I want to get back to you. I'm going to ask you. Let's do that at the end. Don't tell me what I can ask you. I'm asking you that, bro. Okay. Go ahead.

Keep going. We'll get back to me asking you that. Yeah, you can ask me that at the end. But I want to do the stuff that's controversial but is like everybody should have to agree to it. Okay. Let's go. So what I wanted to know was why during the 1950s did something happen that resulted in a 70-year stagnation in a field called quantum gravity? a 70-year stagnation in a field called quantum gravity.

Quantum gravity is like a startup that cannot ship a product after 70 years. And it's still taken over in theoretical physics as sort of the prestige theory field. And quantum gravity, is there an application for this that they were attempting to achieve? No. It's not a precursor to technology so far as we know. But what happened was you probably have some dim memory of something. By the way, these shooting stars on your ceiling are just fucking amazing. Yeah, you got to be warned. I know.

Otherwise, you're like, oh, oh. Otherwise you're like, oh, oh. Quantum gravity is the replacement of something for, is a replacement for something that used to be known as the unified field. So Einstein wasn't chasing quantum gravity. He was chasing unified field theory. And unified field theory was much closer to what we would call classical physics, where you get quantum field theory by quantizing a classical theory.

That fell out of favor. And around 1984, we gradually had unified field theory become sort of like a joke, old-timey expression for the future of physics. And we substituted quantum gravity for the merger of quantum theory, quantum field theory, quantum mechanics, and gravitational physics under general relativity. That program, that dog doesn't hunt. And it hasn't hunted for 70 years. So I wanted to trace this back. How is it that the field became convinced that something which clearly doesn't seem to work and has had all of the resources, all of the best minds at its disposal, it sucks up everything and it just doesn't work.

Why can't I question this? Where did this come from? So to be specific, how many people are working on this problem and how many people have been working on this problem for 70 years without progress? I would say that the period between 1953 and 73, there are parallel things. Quantum gravity is not the mainstream at all. Okay? So real physics is happening between 53 and 73 by anybody's understanding. Okay. Okay.

Between 1973 and 1984, or let's say 74 to 84 because we'll group 73 to 53, you have 10 years of super exciting guesses about the extension of our understanding. Things called supersymmetry, grand unified theory, technicolor, asymptotic safety. These are really responsible guesses, axions. And somebody like Sean Carroll or Neil deGrasse Tyson might talk to you about these things when they come in here. In 1984, there's an earthquake called the anomaly cancellation. And a failed theory of strong physics, the physics needed to glue two protons together in a helium nucleus because they both hate each other because of electromagnetism and want to separate.

But something is binding them together like a family structure, right? That force we initially tried to fix by thinking of it as strings. We'll put like elastic bands between things and it'll pull things back together. That didn't work. But then we repurposed it and said, no, no, no, it's quantum gravity. And one single individual who is the most dominant mind on planet Earth at the moment, effectively Voldemort, the person whose name we are a little bit afraid to invoke and cause wrath, said in 1984, no, string theory is the way.

This anomaly cancellation was unexpected, and it clearly points to the fact that we are, ladies and gentlemen, we are about to quantize. Who's that person? Edward Witten. And in physics circles, you're not allowed to bring this guy up? We talk about him. Everybody talks about him. But to challenge him?

Think about Agent Smith. Think about playing one-on-one with Michael Jordan in his prime. He's that good? Joe, I don't think, I'm dumb enough not to be intellectually afraid of anyone else on planet Earth at this point. I am terrified of this person. Really? I've, I've said he's the Michael Jordan of theoretical physics. If only Michael Jordan could play better basketball. I'm not kidding around Joe. Okay. Yeah. Wow. Right. This good and has never made

contact with the physical world. So it's like one of the greatest conundrums. So let me get back to how crazy. What do you mean by never made contact? No Nobel Prize, never predicted something that turned out to be true, never pointed us to do an experiment that was then validated. So 100% of his efforts have been not making contact with physical reality. Oh, this is, I'm sorry, like you have people like Michio Kaku who are in the string theoretic school.

Sean Carroll is very sympathetic to it. You need to understand this story. Jamie, if I dare, may I ask, can we pull up something with Edward Witten and Abdus Salam on YouTube? Just to like this person's voice. Imagine a six foot four person who talks like this. Interesting. Just like you could do a Vulcan mind meld and rearrange your mind into scrambled eggs within seconds. I know tenured professors who hid in their offices when he visited MIT because he walked on everybody. He knocked on everyone's door.

And he has, you know how Warren Beatty had a pickup line that everyone knew? What's new, pussycat? Is that what he said? Yeah, that was Warren Beatty's pickup line. That's all you needed when you were Warren Beatty. That's true. Try that shit if you work at 7-Eleven. This person.

Okay, let me hear him. Pretty weird way for a theory to start. String theory started with a clever formula written down by Veneziano in an effort to satisfy not-so-well-motivated phenomenological ideas about strong interaction scattering. That was a way for a theory to start, which was as strange as the way quantum mechanics started. That was a way for theory to start which was as strange as the way quantum mechanics started. And the way Einstein happened to have invented a theory in a particularly striking triumph

of reason and intuition, but most other physical theories have had more complicated history. You can tell how much is going on beyond this. And it's hard to make theories about them. You can't generalize at all of how invention will come. Anybody who makes statements like that is by his own experience. Now that is Abdus Salam, Nobel Prize winner. ...must be modified according to each situation. What would you say? It still seems to me it's a question of whether you start with a mathematical scheme and then

look for a physical interpretation, or start with a physical principle which you guess to be correct, and then on the one hand try and prove it experimentally to be true, and on the other hand codify it into a mathematical form. I must admit I've always been so admiring Einstein's procedure in general relativity of starting with a very simple physical remark based on the Galileo discovery that bodies of different mass fall at the same rate in the gravitational field of the earth he made a simple physical hypothesis why that should be true. But you have to understand you know that old Jim Croce song about Big Jim?

Yes. When the bad folks all get together at night, they all call Big Jim boss. If you ask any of us who are any good, who's the person who terrifies you the most? So are these guys debating him? Is this what's going on? Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no. Are they agreeing with him? Are they questioning him?

They're having a friendly conversation. Right. Should we let it go more? Up to you, but I would concentrate. The other people are very interesting, top people. This person is a towering 17 stories above everybody else. Let me hear him talk more. Because it seemed very fascinating watching the way he was talking about things.

It almost seems like he wanted to run away and get back to his lab. I agree with you, except that I think it would have taken... Longer, yes. You see, Riemann almost did it. Riemann had the conception that gravity was based on curved space-time, but what he lacked... Sorry, Riemann had the conception that gravity was based on

curved space. He didn't conceive of curved space-time, because special relativity hadn't happened yet, so time and space hadn't been unified. But if Riemann had lived after special relativity he might well have lived. So I don't think it's such a cut and dried case ever. Let me give you one more example if I may. Find some more Ed. So should we get a different video of him? You can find a lecture of him where he's alone. Let him yap a little bit.

Okay. ...you outside the field. A winner of the Fundamental Physics Prize, a $3 million prize recently established by Uri Milner to......equivalent of the electron, the positron. So this is him... A particle like the electron, positron this is him article like the electron but with the opposite electric charge so this was actually the discovery of the antimatter the most basic property of antimatter is that matter antimatter pairs can be created and annihilated

in this picture time is running horizontally and what I'm sketching, the purple wiggly lines are meant to be photons. Physicists often in drawing so-called Feynman diagrams use wiggly lines to indicate photons. Here two photons are annihilating into an electron-positron pair. So photons are as close to pure energy as it gets and they can be converted to matter that is into anti-matter-matter pairs. Imagine dating this guy's daughter and you have to meet him. Hi, sir. Nice to meet you.

What do you do at work? I've tangled with him twice. I don't – look, two friends of mine are his graduate students. He's had two graduate students in mathematics. He's not even a mathematician. He's won the Fields Medal. He's never won the Nobel Prize, but he's won the highest prize in all of mathematics as a sideline. He didn't even major in physics, majored in history at Brandeis.

They're fried. Their brains – everybody who comes in contact with this person just never fully recovers because he's that much smarter we don't know what process he's running i mean imagine that you had like a machine to imagine you had like chat gpt in your ear nobody else did and nobody knows how you're doing it right um i wouldn't say that he's that way now. The younger version of him was much more unusual. He would just spontaneously laugh in the middle of a sentence for no reason. It was just very clear that you weren't communicating with somebody who was with you in the room.

Whoa. Yeah, he seemed like the way he was sitting there grasping his hands and he seemed like very uncomfortable just to be around all these people. I was at the University of Pennsylvania in like 1982 through 85. And I went to a lecture that he gave and he said things like, well, as every school child and quantum field theorist knows, just like spontaneously laughing for no reason, the number of generations is tied to the index of an elliptic operator on a Calabi-Yau manifold. And the guy next to me says, I've been a quantum field theorist for 40 years. I don't know any of this stuff. Whoa. Whoa. Right?

So he came onto the scene and started telling us how everything was going to fit together. And nobody had ever heard a story like this. This is, by the way, lost to history because we fictionalized what happened with string theory. This person was so far ahead that nobody wanted to contradict him. He said this was the way. You know, there are five string theories or whatever there are, six, four, I can't remember. And it's going to be one of them. And in 10 years, we'll have the whole thing wrapped up. And everybody wanted to be on the winning team, knew that they weren't going to go up against this because they couldn't even figure out how he was doing what he was doing.

And what was really going on was very different than people understood. Quantum field theory, which is now claimed by most physicists to be the most advanced theory we have, at the time was sort of a grab bag of different techniques, you know, just like not unified. He saw that this was effectively a coherent whole with help from a couple of other people who are often not as well acknowledged, one of which would be Michael Atiyah, another which would be Graham Siegel, another which would be Dan Quillen, and my good friend and postdoctoral advisor Isidore Singer. So there was sort of a small cabal of people who figured out that quantum field theory was not only a coherent story, it didn't really have to do with physics at all.

It was like calculus. You can use calculus to do physics. In fact, you can't do physics without it. But you can also use calculus to optimize inventory and make your profits go up. And so as a result, quantum field theory was discovered not to be physical. It was a framework that one physical input to that machine probably generates the world. But the machine itself isn't about physics.

So this was the most romantic backfiring in the history of physics in a certain sense. These guys set out to say we are going to quantize gravity, in other words quantize geometry, the geometry of Einstein and Riemann. And what happened was exactly the reverse. They gravatized the quantum. They geometrized the quantum. So it's been a remarkably productive, the reason we can say how brilliant this person is is because he geometrized the quantum. So it's been remarkably productive. The reason we can say how brilliant this person is, is because he geometrized the quantum at a level that we didn't know was possible. On the other hand, he never made contact with physical reality the way he was expecting and

promising to do. So he's both the most accomplished of us and the person who drove physics the most off of the road. And if you attempt to give him his due, and you don't, if you're not comfortable citing both of these things, you can't be an accurate historian, but he's still running around, and nobody wants to go up against him. How old is he now? He was born in 1951,

so he'll be turning 72, I think, later this year, if I'm not mistaken. And then we get to the really crazy part. Quantum gravity is really due to two families. One is a husband and wife team, and the other is father-son. The husband and wife team were named Bryce DeWitt, formerly, I think, Bryce Seligman. Don't know why he changed his name. And his wife, Cecile DeWitt, or Cecile DeWitt Moret. And the father-son team was Lewis Witten, who is still alive, now 101 years old, and Edward Witten. And then the really weird stuff happens.

And this is why I was curious about UFOs and gravity and all this stuff. was like curious about UFOs and gravity and all this stuff. The actual genesis of these two families having this outsized impact on the future of theoretical physics comes from two different people who are almost never talked about. Matter of fact, most physicists have no idea their names. One is named Agnew Bainson and the other is named Roger Babson. And these two guys were deep into anti-gravity. So the world's greatest mind and greatest living theoretical physics mind is the son of the most prominent anti-gravity researcher, I swear, I kid you not, from the 1950s. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Now, there's an official story about this.

The official story that both the DeWitts tell and the Wittens tell is, oh, yeah, there were these crazy people. They were very embarrassing. They were always focused on anti-gravity. But we were clever enough to defraud them of their money to do real gravitational research. Ha, ha, ha. They both said that? Both families? Well, they didn't use defraud.

But that's kind of what they implied? That's correct. Because it's an embarrassment. And in order to understand this hugely productive period relative to the stagnation, the stagnation is incredibly high prestige. Like most of the positions at the Institute for Advanced Study, the top physics department ostensibly in the world, right? You had a director named Robert Dijkgraaf, string theorist. You had Edward Witten, string theorist. Natty Seiberg, string theorist. Juan Maldacena, string theorist, and you had this guy, Nima Arkani-Hamed, who I hope you will have on this program, who's amazing, who is not a string theorist, but very string

sympathetic. This thing dominated. It just took over. And this weird genesis of a high prestige field that can't accomplish what it's setting out to accomplish is in contrast to this mixed period between 1953 and 1973, where you have the world's most prestigious physicists palling around with pseudoscience. UFO type stuff, gravity shielding, all this stuff. So Babson is so crazy. You can't even believe the story is true. But he claims that his sister drowned in a pond because even though she was a good swimmer, she couldn't overcome gravity.

So gravity becomes his sworn enemy. And he's going to use his fortune that he's predicted from, that he's gotten from predicting the crash of 1929 because of Newton's laws. What goes up must come down. So he gets out of the stock market six months early. Babson makes a fortune. He, Edison, and Clarence Burdi of frozen food, you know, fame form this sort of little intellectual collective where they're going to defeat gravity. So for example, just because people are going to say, Eric, this is all nonsense, and it isn't. Jamie, is it possible to pull up a stone monument at Tufts University to the anti-gravity

that was done there? So put in Tufts stone anti-gravity. This guy littered universities all across the country with these monuments to prove that this anti-gravity stuff was actually taking place at American universities. And he established an essay contest. All right. So check this out. by the Gravity Research Foundation, Roger Babson, founder, to remind students of the blessings of forthcoming when science determines what gravity is and how it works and how it may be controlled. This is about UFOs and the idea that we are going to harness the power of gravity and we are going to get a supreme advantage.

And these stones are littered around the country. Here's another one. So this is not widely known that this research is being done. This is hugely embarrassing to us. Hugely embarrassing because it hasn't yielded results? No, hugely embarrassing because it carries the stench of pseudoscience. See, when people don't like me coming on your program and saying things that nobody else in the world is saying, they call me a pseudoscientist or that's crackpot. And these words, like you don't take them that

seriously. We had this discussion before with like Tim Dillon saying something about me. What has he ever done? Academics play these games with each other where we try to push each other out of the ring like sumo wrestlers. And the way you push somebody out is you say, well, that guy's a crackpot. He's a grifter. He's a pseudoscientist. He's nutty. He's a nutter.

Bullshit. This was the marriage of the ultimate nuttiness with the highest prestige physics we know how to do. Was this considered nuttiness in 64, though? This is the interesting question. In the middle of the 1950s, this is mainstream in newspapers. But, for example, Bryce DeWitt, so here's how the two stories cross. You start off with Babson and Bainson.

Okay. They're the money. Babson found something called the Gravity Research Foundation in New Boston, New Hampshire. And he gets the Glenn L. Martin Company, which is the precursor of Martin Marietta, precursor of Lockheed Martin. Do you know this stuff? No. Okay. And he gets them to hire Lewis Witten out of Johns Hopkins.

out of Johns Hopkins. Lewis Witten is a respectable physicist who takes the position and forms something called the Research Institute for Advanced Study. Now, you've probably heard of Bell Labs or Xerox PARC, and you probably haven't heard of the Research Institute for Advanced Study. Yet this has illustrious names associated with it. Solomon Lefschetz, the great topologist,

comes out of retirement to work on this anti-gravity-inspired project. Rudolf Kahlman of Kahlman Filtering. There's no shortage. Sheldon Glashow, who discovers spontaneous symmetry breaking under Julian Schwinger at Harvard, is attached to the Research Institute of Advanced Study. It has a campus in Baltimore, Maryland that, you know, I can tell you the address at some point. We pretend that it didn't happen and doesn't exist. But for example, if you were to look at Brown University, Brown University has something called the Center for Nonlinear Dynamics. And the Center for Nonlinear Dynamics is the spin out from the Research Institute of Advanced Study of Solomon Lefschetz, the great topologist's work on nonlinear chaos, theoretic, dynamical systems.

So it's this marriage of utter madness and kookiness with top drawer white shoe respectability. So this was my puzzle about UFOs. What was this anti-gravity thing between 53 and 73? And the reason it ends in 1973 is a guy named Mike Mansfield, I think of Montana as a senator, passes something called the Mansfield Amendment, which discontinues Army or Department of Defense military funding for blue sky research inside of our universities.

And what is blue sky research? Hey, you're a young person. You're super smart. Here's a pile of money. Don't even tell us what you're working on. We just believe in you. Go to it. This is what caused us to be the envy of the effing world. Cowboy science. We were wild. Okay. We had skirt chasing, hard drinking,

charismatic, brilliant human beings who answered to no one and walked around with swagger with their shoulders back and their chest puffed out. Because around Sputnik, we wanted the best of the best to go into science. Around 1973, we discontinue this. We start talking about Golden Fleece Awards. How did you waste the taxpayers' money, you know? And we become incapable of equaling the performances. Like, we worship Ted Williams

because nobody's turned in a Ted Williams-style performance in ages. Even Ed Witten can't do it. In any era before this, Ed Witten would have won a Nobel Prize. The guy six months older than he is from 1951, this guy named Frank Wilczek, who won the Nobel Prize,

even being a tiny bit older than Ed Witten. Frank is brilliant, but he's not Ed Witten-like. He got a Nobel Prize for something called asymptotic freedom in strong interactions. This newfound impotence, Let's just call it impotence. It's like you turned the world's most vital people into castrati. And you did it by accounting for their dollars, making them say how everything they did had a practical application, defending the purpose of blue sky research as if they were wasting taxpayer dollars. They got called welfare queens and white lab coats. The whole thing is completely ridiculous. But we have been in the process of dismantling the world's most productive, powerful scientific enterprise from really 1965

or 73 till the present day. And the 65 date dates from Ghislaine Maxwell's father. Robert Maxwell is basically the son of a bitch who introduced peer review, which had only really been strong in the biomedical literature, into general science, because he figured out how to make a fortune hacking the universities. If you're a university, if you want to have a complete library, you have to buy all the journals that paper is appearing. So he said, great news. I'll jack up the prices and jack up the number of journals. I'll just explode the number of journals. And every university that doesn't want to be incomplete has to buy my product. So suddenly there weren't enough good editors to edit all of these tiny

micro journals, you know, journal of hyper-specific thing X. So peer review comes screaming in, in 1965, uh, through his company, Maxwell's company called, uh, Pergamon Press. Um, so Ghislaine's Maxwell's father is like the first major attack on science. And then the Mansfield Amendment comes in. There's something called the Eilberg Amendment in 1973. In 1980, there's something called the Bayh-Dole Amendment. Then there's the Immigration Act of 1990. And we're just chipping away at the vitality of American cowboy science. So right now, if you go into a science department, the whole question is, well, what have you done for diversity, inclusion, and equity? You know, let's agree that there's no lone geniuses

in the world, as if we didn't have Einstein and von Neumann and Teller and all these people. Everything is communal. Everything is in the air. It's like nobody wants to work in this environment. Nobody good. Right? So whatever it is, we have been devitalizing certainly since 1973 for 50 years, but also really since 1965.

How do you turn that boat around, though? We're doing whatever we can. Like, if you're rich and you're smart and you're connected, if you're part of some secret program and you're watching this, please reach out to the Joe Rogan experience or Eric Weinstein to turn the ship around. But let's keep going because I want to get to the UFOs again. So my question was, what is going on with anti-gravity UFOs, the world's smartest human beings between 1953 and 73? Somebody help me out. Why two families, the DeWitts and the Wittens? And let me give you

the reason that I didn't want to touch this subject. The reason I didn't want to touch this subject has to do with something I learned from World War II. So you probably know, you know the code name for D-Day? No. Operation Overlord? There was a companion thing called Operation Bodyguard, and in particular, Operation Fortitude, which was inside of Operation Bodyguard, which was the planned invasion of Norway, which was never going to happen. But we faked an entire invasion of Norway because we had a troop buildup in England that was going to be headed into a very narrow place and was going to be outgunned by the Germans. So how do you get all of these people

who have to fight, who have loose lips, probably going off and seeing prostitutes, who knows, not to blow, spill the beans on D-Day? Well, you create an entirely fake invasion of Norway. Is it possible to bring up Operation Fortitude just to see a map of this thing so they faked radio chatter they had inflatable tanks I think there were army divisions that didn't exist it didn't call it what you call it but it's the same stuff yeah I think this is the map you're talking well that's that's in that's northern France fortitude would be targeted on- I've seen the inflated tanks. Yeah, it's funny, right?

That was what it was regarded to. So deception, and we talked about kayfabe before. Yeah. Like I'm very focused on it. What I really care about- Look at that. That's hilarious. They had a bunch of inflatable tanks.

They had a bunch of inflatable tanks. So this entire deception had to be parallel. Overlord wouldn't have worked without Fortitude. Now, if you assume that that's the basic paradigm, which is whenever we're going to do something badass, we're also going to do something fake. I thought the UFOs was the Operation Fortitude part of something real this is my bad I screwed up Eric failed blah blah blah so you thought like at what point like when the New York Times revealed they don't know before the Pentagon before that I thought okay you want to develop the sr-71 Blackbird you want to develop the the stealth bomber you want okay, you want to develop the SR-71 Blackbird. You want to develop the stealth bomber.

You want a code. You want a cover program. So you're going to come up with UFOs. Somebody sees something in the air. Dude, there was like a flying triangle. I swear to God. There was this thing that went so fast I couldn't even believe it. Well, one of them is a B-2 bomber.

The other one is SR-71 Blackbird. Duh. Right. So why do I want to get involved with Operation Fortitude? I'm a patriotic American. If we're going to lie about stuff and we're doing it for a good purpose and it's not hurting anybody, I don't want to get involved and say, I'm so smart I can figure it out. I don't want to be anywhere near that. Right.

So that's what I assumed about UFOs. And I goofed. So what do you think it is now? Well, that's the new question. And what made you shift this perspective? So there was this weird thing that happened where we announced through the New York Times that this stuff may be more real than anyone cared to imagine. You know, and Jeremy Corbell was releasing these videos and who was leaking them, I don't know. And the New York Times was authenticating. And, you know, you get all of this, again, tons of ambiguity.

So everybody's decision tree blows out. Nobody can think straight. But I thought, oh, no. What if the old Feynman stories that I've been following are actually about something rather than about a deception. So, for example, Feynman has a story where he says, hey, there was this guy who was giving physics lectures to aerospace engineers and they didn't like him. So I had to go out to Buffalo. I thought, Buffalo, that's Curtis Wright.

You're going to Curtis Wright Aerospace. Wright. You're going to Curtis Wright Aerospace. And he's got another one about, you know, give me a dollar because somebody calls him up and says, give us the nuclear patents to like fission driven planes and crazy stuff. Feynman is constantly telling us. He's got a story called It's Greek to Me where he shows up in North Carolina. I can't remember whether he's supposed to go to the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill or Greenville. And he has to figure it out. And he says, oh, I'm late to the conference. There would be a bunch of people mumbling the words, Jim, you knew.

And the guy says, oh, it's Chapel Hill. So he goes there. It's a ha-ha-ha. It's a cute story about how clever Feynman is, which they all are. But that was a conference sponsored by the Institute for Field Physics at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill sponsored by Agnew Bainson through Bryce DeWitt, who is the person who repurposed the Gravity Research Foundation essay, which is only supposed to be about harnessing gravity, anti-gravity, anti-gravity devices like UFOs. And he said, well, if you really want to get to anti-gravity, you have to do it through quantum gravity.

Right? Now, he did that, and then a couple of people from the Institute, it was Arnawit and Desser, entered and won this competition that had this stench about it, because it was, like like stigmatized. You're going to enter a competition for anti-gravity devices?

Oppenheimer says, wow, you guys won this by using the name of the Institute for Advanced Study. You give the money back right now. We're not going to touch pseudoscience. The guys kept the money. And then the floodgates opened and Penrose entered it. Wilczek entered it. Everybody and their mother, Martin Pearl, entered this competition. Lots of Nobel laureates win it.

This is this marriage of total bullshit and top drawer physics that the rest of us are not allowed to participate. So if you want a weird model for how physics works, think about diplomatic immunity but in science. You've got this group of people at the top who are allowed to engage in quackery. They can hang out at Esalen and smoke dope and take LSD and go into sensory deprivation tanks like Feynman. They can pal around with rich people who are talking about anti-gravity, but the rest of us have to stay in our lane. Well, that ends now. Now that I've been contacted by people saying, Eric, you know, Sam Harris and I were both contacted saying that there's a disclosure planned and there's big updates and we need you to communicate this news to the world.

There's disclosure about a specific technology. About something. I mean, more or less the way this works, it doesn't matter who you talk to. Something's huge. I can't talk to you about it because you don't have clearance. But we're going to fly out to Colorado Springs and we're going to show you some stuff and you're never going to be the same. Right?

Like, okay. I'm on standby. My process, Joe, is that I'm very open-minded, but I have a very strong filter before I'll say, yeah, that's true, that's real. That freaks people out. It's like, why are you even talking to these people? Well, because I know the history, and you don't.

So I was open to this. Sam was open to this. And it's Lucy in the football every goddamn week. When am I headed out to Colorado? You're going to be met by a car and you're going to be blindfolded and you won't know where you are. Blah, blah, blah. Okay. This week, next week, the week after.

Oh, no, no. Something's come up on the hill. Things are getting crazy. We're going to be talking to some very big people. I can't talk to you right yet So that's been my weird life now a part of it for like three years. I don't know how long Three years they've been telling you that they're gonna release this. Oh, yeah, and it's always pushed out, right? So like it's it's a manana program Okay, it's a manana program. It's always manana.

And I'm not falling for it, but I'm telling you now that I have information. I can't tell you everything I know. I wish I could, but I'm a team player, and if somebody says something in confidence, I'm not going to reveal it on the Joe Rogan experience. Okay. But there's some things I can say that nobody else can say, which is I had a very weird reaction to this. I think Sam was initially interested and then they mananed him three times and he said, I'm out. Doesn't talk about it.

I went a different route. I said, okay, you guys keep saying all this stuff is real. You keep saying you've got high quality data that you can't show anybody because it's all stovepipe. You hear this word over and over, stovepipe, meaning that each little group is isolated. Like Bob Lazar says, I was only allowed to see this little thing. So I say, okay, am I right that you're telling me that these things are real? Yeah. And then they say, and that nobody could do this that we know of i said that's right because they seem to defy the laws of physics you hear this phrase over and again

defy the laws of physics i say great i need to talk to somebody who speaks physics how do you know they defy physical law well we can see that they do it's like okay if they defy physical law then there should be a physicist to tell me that they defy physical law, then there should be a physicist to tell me that they defy physical law who's seen the data. Maybe he can't release it to me or she, but tell me somebody who speaks tensor analysis. Tell me somebody who knows what the Dirac equation is like a pretty low bar for a physicist. There is no one. And I don't quite mean no one, but do you know who Eric W. Davis is? No. You ever heard of the Wilson memo? No. Okay. There's something called the Wilson memo where there's a physicist who meets a general or an admiral and the general or the

admiral is trying to figure out, I think this is at EG&G, why is there some program that I'm not allowed to know about? I have the highest clearances. I have a need to know. Like, sorry, we can't tell you. He's talking to somebody named Eric W. Davis. Eric W. Davis, so far as I can find, is the only person other than maybe Hal Puthoff, who I've been able to talk to, who speaks anything of these languages. This is not a particularly famous physicist. Hal Puthoff is an electrical engineer, I think PhD in electrical engineering. Eric W. Davis says to me, I said, is there nobody out here who speaks physics? This doesn't make any sense. And he says well you

Hal and I are the three most technical people on this Joe I'm not even on this so you know as much about it as anyone and you're not even involved and there's only two other people that know the science and like one of them is into remote viewing and was a Scientologist. So I'm just imagine that you take your wife to the symphony. You're going to see Beethoven's Seventh. And you look at the string section, brass sections in place and the percussion is there. And you look at the string section and it's a bunch of certified public accountants. You're like, where are the violins?

Where are the violas? Like, oh, no, no, no. Actually, we have reporters for the AP. They're stringers. Like, that's not the same thing. We have string theorists. That's not the same thing. I'm looking for violins.

Like, this is simple. I've been on this for three years and I can't find anybody who speaks this language, which now that is a huge clue. Imagine that you say that we've lost control of our airspace. We're being menaced. Threats to civilian aviation, military aviation. They're seeing these things every day. They defy the physical laws and there are no physicists anywhere to be found. and there are no physicists anywhere to be found. That smells like BS. Or it smells like a pathological level of bureaucratic incompetence.

And Marco Rubio and Kirsten Gilderand, if you're out there, can you please find out why there are no technically competent people on an area of national security? And please don't mumble the word stovepipe or need to know or sources and methods. I mean, we had a Manhattan Project. We staffed it with physicists. You have a physics problem. If these things are here, Joe,

they are here from so far out of town or they are co-mingling with us on Earth. I can't tell you which. There are some reports that these things come screaming in from behind our satellites that are trained at Earth along non-ballistic trajectories. I have no idea how to say this. I'm talking all the time to Avi Loeb with the Galileo Project trying to help him out. He needs funding and he needs some ability to, you know, just if the government won't play ball, he's going to put out his own sensors in places like Catalina Island, blanket the world, and he'll be able to say, we're seeing these things or we're not seeing these things.

But right now we have a puzzle that our government won't release information to its own scientific community. And it reminds me of, you probably know Airplane, the movie. I speak Jive. There's this point where they're trying to land this airplane with these people who aren't pilots. Yeah. I speak Jive. Sabotaging our own scientists. Do you think this is because there's a level of secrecy that's attached to this technology and they've compartmentalized themselves to death and they've gotten themselves to a point where they don't know how to proceed further because they're preventing people from sharing information, which is one of the most important things about science. Right. Is that scientists get to share information and all work together to try to figure out what the problem is is that a reasonable well here comes the decision trees like i wish i could say yeah that's what i think it is but it might not be so one possibility is

let's be honest if you are faking ufos the last people you want are the world's most brilliant physicists. You give them the data, they're going to say, oh, look, I see what you did. You put a couple of flashlights with lasers into the sky and you can move them really quickly by the angle and that creates the illusion that something is zipping through the world. Right? If you are faking UFOs, if you're faking a UFOgasm, the last thing you want is theoretical physicists on the case. So that would be one reason to clear them out. Another reason would be bureaucracy. You've got these rival groups. They're all starved for money.

Nobody wants to invite somebody smarter than they are. So the problem with a B-level and C-level players is that they're looking for D and F players so that they're not threatened. That's another possibility. A different possibility is that we do have a Manhattan project and we don't know about it. So for example, we have a Manhattan project for decoding cryptographic messages and it's called the National Security Agency, NSA. And it used to be called no such agency because we wanted to deny its existence. But now we know it's got a giant building. How do you know that it exists if nobody told you? Well, you'd look at the number of number theory PhDs and people who specialize in things like elliptic curves. And you would notice that a giant number of them after their PhDs disappear.

And you track to see, well, where do those people live? Where do those names live? Oh, they live in Virginia. Okay. So you'd start to get an idea. Now, in the case of UFOs, if there was an anti-gravity project, which is, it's like, it's painful for me to even say these words. Really what it would be is a post-Einsteinian physics project. If you had a post-Einsteinian physics project, you would want three subspecialties for sure. That would be differential geometry, which is the basis for originally general relativity. In 1976, 75, two guys named C.N. Yang and Jim Simons, who Jim Simons becomes the world's greatest hedge fund manager, figure out that quantum field theory is also based on geometry. But it's a different version of differential geometry.

So that's one specialty that you would want. Second specialty that you would want would be particle theory or high energy physics, however you want to say that. The third specialty you'd want is general relativity. So if you wanted to detect whether we had a secret Manhattan project, but it wasn't identifiable by a building because we didn't announce its existence, you'd say, is there anything that eats those three specialties? Unless you believe that there's a secret university system, because we have lists of everybody who gets produced with a PhD in these fields. If that was the case, the two places that you would have a secret place would be Austin, which is the successor

to the Institute for Field Physics at the University of Texas, Austin Gravitational Group, General Relativistic Group, which has had John Archibald Wheeler, Steven Weinberg, Bryce DeWitt. This is a powerhouse of a place that you happen to live in, and you should have these people who are the successors to these people on, because most of these people have died. But the more spectacular place would be Saughtucket, Long Island. The State University of New York at Stony Brook has an astounding collection of monster mines. And it's not highly regarded as a university. I mean, it's strong,

but you would have no idea how strong this place is. It's got multiple fields medalists. It's got an institute called the, what is it, the Center for Geometry, Simon Center for Geometry and Physics. C.N. Yang, who's arguably the greatest living theoretical physicist, is at this university. He's 101 years old, so he's pretty much on his way out, but this is where he's called home. And it's not advertised as the powerhouse that it is. So shout out to the State University of New York at Stony Brook. If I was going to locate a Manhattan Project in plain sight and get U.S. News and World to report this as a minor player in research, that's where I'd go.

But more importantly, and this is the really weird thing. And again, I don't want to spread this as a rumor, but I am saying this. And again, I don't want to spread this as a rumor, but I am saying this, if you wanted to imagine that there was, that the government wasn't incompetent and we actually had great people on this project. My friend and advisor who's now died, Isidore Singer, once said to me, he said, the world's greatest mathematics and physics department is Renaissance Technologies. I said, what? Didn't make any sense to me. It's great people, but it's a hedge fund. Okay. So you've got this weird thing where you've got three basic institutions that are very closely intertwined. You've got Brookhaven National Laboratory. You've got State University of New York at Stony Brook, a mid-level university with an out-of-this-world math and physics program. And you've got a hedge fund that makes more money than anybody can possibly imagine.

Like there is no – there used to be four fortunes in hedge funds that didn't make any sense. One was D.E. Shaw. One was Bernie Madoff. One was Jeff Epstein. And one was Renaissance Technologies. Wow. And I guessed that Bernie Madoff had a legitimate business and an illegitimate business. And he was front running the legitimate business and an illegitimate business, and he was front-running the legitimate business with his illegitimate business. So he was effectively stealing from

his own clients in one division. One was the theft, one was the dupes. I got that wrong. He was just running a Ponzi scheme, so shame on me. But I was giving talks about, you know, there's BlackRock and Blackstone as investment groups. And I was going around in the early 2000s talking about Black Arts Capital. I would give talks on Black Arts Capital. We'd tell you what we're doing, but we'd have to kill you. And that was a reference to Madoff and Epstein because Epstein's fortune made no sense. Right?

Renaissance has existed in its medallion fund for decades, has turned in a performance never seen by anything else remotely, effectively just a money printing machine. No one knows how it works. I've met with Jim Simons one-on-one for three hours. And because his wife is an economist, my wife is an economist, I'm a differential geometer, he's a differential geometer. I gave him this entire theory that all of modern neoclassical economics

is actually differential geometric. And three hours later, he's been chain smoking, he smokes like a chimney, never wears socks, very eccentric guy, brilliant as the day is long, still alive,

go get him for a guest. He says, wow, Eric, that's brilliant. If you knew what we were actually doing, you'd be very disappointed. He said, I never thought of this. Now, a little while later, I don't know if you know who Brian Keating is. He's a professor at UCSD. He's an experimentalist. Jim is basically his uncle. And he calls me out to Santa Barbara. And Jim is having dinner at his brother's house.

churn, he came up with something called the churn Simons function or churn Simons functional, where if you differentiate this thing, the way you differentiate the Einstein Hilbert functional, you get an equation that looks very similar to the Einstein field equation for gravity, only it looks a lot more like particle theory. So I told Jim, I said, I don't know if you know this or you don't know this, but I think you're sitting on top of a piece of the puzzle that supersedes general relativity. And on the spot, he asked me whether I wanted to come out to the State University of New York at Stony Brook for a year to work on this. We had a very technical conversation. Jim Simons is potentially, I mean, beyond brilliant, but also has a claim on a part of what I believe is going to supersede general relativity by imitating the Einstein-Hilbert action from which the Einstein

field equations are derived. This thing generates something which you would call the Chern-Simons equation. Ed Witten gets the Fields Medal for quantizing this thing that looks like gravity but is actually sort of particle theoretic. And I can't get into it because we don't have the common language to do it. This is huge stuff. What's going on at Stony Brook? What has happened is Stony Brook is ground zero for the explosion in mathematical physics that came through something called the Wu-Yang Dictionary, where suddenly the quantum became as geometric as general relativity. Then it got more geometric through something called geometric quantization.

Then it got more geometric through something called geometric quantum field theory, or topological quantum field theory, or conformal quantum field theory. I don't know whether Satake is the locus. Can you bring up the iconic wall, a picture of the iconic wall? This is like a religious artifact. Let me pee.

Hold this right here. Let's hold right here with this. We'll bring that up. We'll be right back. We're back. We're up. Okay, so Jamie, what was this thing that you were pulling up?

We have a picture here of the iconic wall at Stony Brook. It's a little hard to see in the picture, so that is what is on it. Okay, so this is like, imagine ancient Egyptian runes. And like the most crazy, first of all, I would correct this thing in a million different ways, but you see the Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem, equation for the curvature tensor,

Maxwell's equations in geometric form, written out in differential form, equations for string theory. This thing, E8, the 248 largest simple Lie group in the world, this is like almost a religious pilgrimage site. What's wrong with that that you would correct? You want to put it up? Yeah. What's wrong with that that you would correct?

You want to put it up? Yeah. DA star of FA at the bottom of the ellipse equals zero is only the vacuum equations. I would put in a term called J. The above that you see dim curve. This is the Atiyah SingerSinger, remember Isidore-Singer. That thing should be expanded to something called the Atiyah-Petoti-Singer index theorem for manifolds with boundary. Above that you see the Dirac equation I-D-slash-minus-M times psi equals zero. times psi equals zero.

Actually, if I'm correct, it should be a hybrid between the Rarita-Schwinger and the Dirac equations based on a three complex tensored with a spinner. Above that, you have a non-relativistic equation, which is the Schrodinger equation,

because there's only one derivative in terms of t, but there's that nabla, that triangle squared, which is different in terms of space, so you can't treat space and time asymmetrically above that. You have the Einstein field equations, R mu nu minus one half R times G mu nu. There should be a cosmological constant in there, which is missing. To the right, you have the E8 diagram should be the Titz-Freudenthal magic square. So I don't

know whether this is like a Straussian communication in the sense that if you're smart enough you should know that there are tons of errors limitations and bad choices I would not write out the Maxwell's above that you've got these nabla be nabla equals zero what's the other possibility in terms of these errors somebody hired somebody to do something impressionistic and it got too far in the process, carving Indiana limestone before they figured out that you should really do this better. But it's, this is gorgeous and it's the only place

in the world... This is my language, Joe. If you ask, like, what language does Eric speak and why does he act weird when he comes on my show, this is my native language. It's and beautiful piece i mean beyond it's really wild and and it costs a fortune and this is jim simon's money at work and um you need to know jim okay um i mean I mean, so my question is, do we have a project?

If we're not doing something in Sautucket or we're not doing something at the University of Texas at Austin, I'm worried we're not doing something anywhere. I went to the Institute for Advanced Study to visit friend acquaintance Nima Arkani-Hamed, who I think very, very highly of. friend acquaintance, Nima Arkani Hamed, who I think very, very highly of. He said some pretty wild things, should be on the show. He's the most bizarre thing in that he's an unbelievable salesman showman who's pathologically honest in a weird way. So that's very unusual characteristics. He made the point, he said, the Casimir effect is an example of negative energy, negative mass energy, where you take two plates that are so close together that quantum waves, many of the frequencies can't fit between these two plates. And so the pressure outside of them is not counterbalanced by pressure between them, so they get forced together when they're very, very close. balanced by pressure between them so they get forced together when they're very, very close. And his point is that's an example of actual negative mass, negative energy,

where we pretend that that's not true. He says geckos actually use this when they climb up a wall. They use the Casimir effect. So it's real. Now the question, can you harness it? This is always the, you know, you've got UFOs. People who try to think about how you could get physics to do these things focus on the Casimir effect or they'll focus on negative energy solutions. Now, if you look at that 1957 conference at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, one of the most eminent mathematician physicists, a guy who was first ranked at Cambridge, was a guy named Herman Bondi, an Austrian, I think, mathematician. And his paper is about negative mass in general relativity. Now, I don't know if you've ever heard of this stuff. No. If you have two masses in general, they always attract each other gravitationally. But what if somehow you had a different kind of mass that was negative, just like you could have negative and positive charges? kind of mass that was negative, just like you could have negative and positive charges.

Well, weirdly, you change two things. You change the force law, F equals ma, and you change the gravitational law, F equals g, first mass times second mass over r squared. So when you change both of those, oddly, the negative mass is still attracted just the same way to the positive mass as if there was no difference. But the positive mass is always repelled. So you get this weird solution where the negative mass chases the positive mass. And they go off to like, you know, unbounded acceleration. So Bondi was thinking about why is it that we've got these artificial conditions in general relativity, which we impose by hand. They're not the same beautiful marble that Einstein used for his field equations, but we throw some extra crappy stuff in called positivity conditions to stop

general relativity from giving us madness. So Bondi started asking the question, maybe we shouldn't. Maybe what you think of as madness has meaning. and attendance is this pivotal strange experience is that people are smoking the ganja on extending general relativity to places that it's never been extended. And the highbrow version of this doesn't work. And the lowbrow version of this doesn't work so far as we know. The lowbrow version is called pseudoscientific antigravity, gravity shielding, Pseudoscientific anti-gravity, gravity shielding, electrogravitics, gravitodynamics. The highbrow version of this is called quantum gravity.

And all the most respectable people are in it, and it doesn't work. And you can't say, why are we doing this if it doesn't work? Why can't I say, Ed Witten's great, but he made a terrible blunder? David Gross and Ed Witten 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 Carroll is covering up for this as well. In what way?

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 string theory. And Brian's like, oh, well, maybe we were a little bit exuberant. And I blurt out Institute for Arts and Ideas. I blurt out. That's like saying my life was irrational exuberance.

No, you put a lot of people's careers in the shredder in order to have this quantum gravity experiment, which is like, you know, the people bowing and praying to this thing that doesn't work. The dog doesn't hunt. And anybody who questions it as a crackpot, I'm done with this, Joe. Like, you want to come at me and say, Eric doesn't know what he's talking about? I'm debating physicists. I'll debate anybody with the possible exception of Ed Witten, who still scares me, but I'll probably debate him too. In an open forum, we have got to purge the physics community of its quackery. And the quackery is coming from the high prestige version of this. The high prestige version of anti-gravity is called quantum gravity, and it just doesn't work. So to get back to the UFOs, why is this stuff important? One, I don't know, four years, five years ago, and I was doing

this riff on the twin nuclei problem. I said, we've got to get off this planet. I said, we now become gods, but for the wisdom, and I just threw it off. And you said, focus on that. That's a great saying. Turned out to work. That came true. The COVID in your lungs probably came out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology and we're lying about it. That is engineering the nucleus of the cell, the nucleic acids that we found the structure of and their function. Right now, we are screwing around with Vladimir Putin, with nukes, pretending that the sacred borders of Ukraine, which have been fluctuating for centuries, are somehow sacrosanct. And yes, it's terrible that he's invaded. And I do think that the

border shouldn't move, but we really shouldn't have been antagonizing Russia by pretending that there's no concept of a sphere of influence. Because I'll tell you, when somebody puts nukes on our border with Mexico in Monterey or Baja, California, we're going to be plenty upset. We now need to leave. And I tried to say that kind of a little bit light, tongue in cheek. Everything's accelerated. Think about our water having broken in the last three years. having broken in the last three years. This is our womb. It's time to go.

And in order to have any hope of getting off this planet, you can't leave it to Elon and chemical rockets. Can you imagine that Elon and I do not meet ever? It's like we know a million people in common. He knows that I'm focused on getting off this planet. He's got a chemical rocket company. He's exactly right about almost everything that he's saying up until he gets to the moon and Mars. Like, who cares?

You're not going to terraform the moon and Mars in the next three years or 30. The only way to really get off this planet is to leave the solar system because those are the only two rocks that are even halfway viable. And if you think about how far away everything is, we've got this thing that I call the Einstein moat. The nearest star, if we took a human

traveling at the top speed a human has ever gone at, I think is 100,000 years away at that top speed. So you can fantasize about, oh yeah, we just come up with huge ships and people have multi-generational experience. All of Jewish history is 5,000 years and you're talking about 100,000 years? No way you're gonna do this on a ship. Imagine wars on a ship. Exactly. And then you have this next problem, which is,

oh, we're gonna use time dilation. No, no, we're gonna use wormholes. It's like, yeah, and we're gonna bring nunchucks and throwing stars and we're gonna be like fucking awesome, dude. Right? So it's like all these sort of weird edgy stuff inside. Here's what's really happening.

We do not live in space-time. This place is not in space-time. There's a saying, the map is not the territory. Space-time is a map. But the territory is wherever we actually live. And space-time has so many limitations on it that Newton never placed. So the longer we stay with no advancement in the general theory of relativity, the more we feel that we are imprisoned here. We're not going anywhere.

It's all sci-fi. It's all garbage. It's children talking about things that aren't true. Well, bullshit. Every time you fundamentally push physical theory, you better figure out whether you've got a new neutron or worse, or better. You're going to get a lever. Now, my claim, and so everything I've said up until now has been idiosyncratic research, but you can check it online.

None of this is something you can't check. I'm now going to put on a different hat when you ask me about you, Eric, because people are going to say crank, crazy, whatever. I'll meet you on the field of battle. Cut the crap, people. I am a post-Einsteinian person. I have not been in a relativistic context for years. And the reason that you get to leave relativity is that you recover relativity from another theory. If you have a theory that includes relativity, you can say, okay, yeah, I know how to see relativity inside the theory, but I can also see other stuff beyond it. And so that's where I work, someplace called geometric unity, because the geometry underneath the standard model and the geometry underneath general relativity is two different geometries

called Riemannian and Erismanian. I combined them. That was the point of it. In this thing, there's a very clear idea about how you would go about traveling great distances. And so I found that you still have this thing from the last time I was here two years ago. So this is a model of a space-time metric. And if you think about where these hair ties are on the two rulers, so this is the angle between- For people just listening, there's an adjustable ruler with a sphere or a circle rather.

So two rulers coming out of a protractor. And you can change the angle of the ruler. So whatever I choose this to be is 90 degrees. If I do it like this, that's still 90 degrees. That's what an Einsteinian metric is. This hair tie that I can move up and down is going to be the time measurement, like a watch. Did you ever see when I gave Lex my watch? No. No.

So you gave Lex a watch, and I started talking about multiple time dimensions, so I gave him my Fitbit. Anyway. Oh, so you gave Lex a watch and I started talking about multiple time dimension, so I gave him my Fitbit. Anyway, if you want to go a very long distance, one possibility is that you do something very energetically expensive. But the other possibility is grow the ruler to shrink the distance. If the rulers and protractors that Einstein used, and he chose one through his equation, are instead variables and you have full access to them. If I wanted to go a very long distance, the first thing I'd do is grow the ruler to shrink the distance, then go the distance under that ruler, and then I'd shrink the ruler back. So when you talk about things like, oh, these things are behaving like nothing I've ever seen, well, there are a couple of things that I'm worried about if these things are real.

One is, does somebody else know how to grow rulers and shrink rulers and grow watches and shrink watches, speed them up, slow them down, in order to get in control of the thing that we thought was space time? The next issue is, are there multiple temporal dimensions? So Eric, your friend who's had too much coffee, believes that there are either six or four extra temporal dimensions, and whatever isn't temporal is spatial. So it's either four plus six or six plus four extra dimensions split between time and space. If that's true, try to imagine extra dimensional engineers who have full access to something where there's no arrow of time. The only time there's an arrow of

time is if time is one dimensional. If time two-dimensional, you have a whirlpool of time, which is either clockwise or counterclockwise. If it's three-dimensional, you have a right-hand rule of time, and there's a left-hand rule of time. These are called orientations. My belief is that we may be looking at something that has access to either four or six additional dimensions. And again, I'm reading this off of a page of equations and notes. And so you know what they mean in physical reality. In other words, if this thing on the page is true, holy shit. On the other hand, if it's just some geometry, then you don't worry about it. You say, okay, well, extra dimensions, I can think in 17 or three or what, it doesn't matter. It's not that hard to think in higher

dimensions spatially for people who do what I do. Almost none of us can think in multiple temporal dimensions. There's one guy in Los Angeles at USC called Yitzhak Barz, a Turkish Jew, who keeps talking about two-time physics. And I've spoken to him. But multiple temporal dimensions would be a decisive game changer in terms of changing everything that we know about the world. And what would be the technology that someone could use to access that? Because that's the big thing. I know, I know, I know. Think about it.

You and I are both old enough to remember cassette tapes and vinyl albums. On a cassette tape, you've played your favorite album all the way through, like Dark Side of the Moon, and you want to play it again. You have to rewind through every song you just played, and you hear, right? But that doesn't happen on an album towards the end of the turntable time you would just the stylus would pick up and it would skip over all the stuff that you didn't want to hear again and it would go back to some track that you did imagine you could do

that with time you didn't have to go back through time to go back in time. Do I even know what I mean? Not really. I'm sort of at the edge of where I can actually say things. But you see, all of physics proceeds from the time, from the assumption that time is one-dimensional. We have this thing called deterministic propagation. So if you take quantum mechanics, there are really two rules. One is completely deterministic with no probability theory. You've got a system, you know its initial conditions, and you say, if I know the laws of physics, I should be able to figure out where this is. You know, I take this lighter and I throw it up and I catch it and it described a parabola. Okay. Initial condition, propagation, I measure it. It's completely determined by the

point of release. In quantum mechanics you have the second thing called quantum measurement and that is this weird probabilistic thing that nobody understands everybody says if you if you think you understand the quantum you don't understand it it's mind-blowing blah blah blah but the first part of it is where we're trying to fit gravity and when we quantize it. I don't think gravity goes in that slot. I think that what you do is you don't quantize gravity, you harmonize gravity. Gravity is the observer. We say, well, when you make an observation, well, who's doing the observation? Is Joe doing the observation? Is Jamie doing the observation?

Who's doing this observation? Who has the right to use the second rule for collapsing the state vector with Schrodinger's cat and all entanglement weirdness? Well, I think it's gravity. I think that part of the story is that gravity is the observer through something called a pullback operation. And when you realize that, you realize that you don't naively quantize gravity the way you quantize everything else. In fact, gravity is the only field living on the successor to spacetime, if I'm correct. There are two spaces called X and Y. All the cool stuff in here, the electrons, the quarks that make up everything that you and I are, is living on Y except for the metric, the rulers and the protractors, which lives on x, which is how you keep gravity separate. And the unification is the unification of these two things

in a structure called a bundle. Now, people will go over this, and I'm sure professors will say, well, this is what Eric was saying. Well, he's full of shit. No, no, no. He's actually making a point. This story about space-time engineering where you don't use the Einstein field equations because you're using the successor theory rather than – in the Einstein theory, the entire planet was pulling on you when you needed to go pee. And your legs, I mean, obviously buff, you're fit. You just pulled against an entire planet to get out of your chair. And you won. That's how weak gravity is. That's how space and time is barely bent by all of Earth.

Now, you're going to tell me about an Alcubierre warp drive where, okay, no, here's what's going on. The ship is inside of this little bubble of warping. No, it isn't. is inside of this little bubble of warping. No, it isn't. If somebody's space-time engineering, and they can get here from very far away, they're not using general relativity in the standard model, my friends.

They're using a successor theory, and we have become pussies. We are not going to look at successor theories because we've all learned the lesson that everybody who tries to bet against the standard model loses. Everybody who bets against general relativity loses. And this is that speech that Morpheus has to give.

It's like, I'm not gonna lie to you, Neo. Everyone who's ever faced an agent who stood his ground, you know, has died. It's like, okay, tough shit. Now it's time. Are we Americans? Are we scientists? Are we cowboys? Or, you know... Please tell me we're Travis Pastrana and not some sort of diversity, equity, and inclusion committee. How is it that we move forward? Well, we take the ultimate risk. And what do we do it with? Our credibility.

Watch my Wikipedia entry as I try to do this. But what do you think they're using in terms of a technology to achieve these results? And do you think that this is being examined and this is being researched here on earth or do you think we are being visited? I don't know, but I know that if I were the federal government, if I was the department of energy and if I were DARPA and if I were DARPA, and if I were any of these people, and somebody went on the Joe Rogan experience with millions of viewers and listeners and started talking like this, I would call them up. One of the last times I went on,

not the last time, but the time before that, the FBI called me immediately. You laugh. It's hilarious. It's not that funny. Not to you. I bet it was to the fbi well watch eric wants to shit his pants well okay why don't you have the department of energy call me i mean well what did they talk to you about uh we're concerned about some of the stuff you were saying. I think they thought I sounded revolutionary. I was like,

it's time for heads on pikes. Oh, that. Oh, right. Cause like Tulsi would put heads on pike, you know, because Tulsi is like,

like Vad, the impaler, she's going to be going around with a, you know, chainsaw, actually cutting people's heads off. She probably should phrase it differently. Oh, stop, Joe.

You say stuff all... Heads on pipes is a little bit problematic. You say in MMA, that guy's a straight up killer. He's an assassin. Yes. You don't get a call from the FBI. No, that's true. That's true.

But that is actually a compliment if you use that for Aaron Blanchfield. In any event, I get occasionally called by somebody from inside. And what I think they're doing, first of all, one, we may be faking a UFO situation for reasons that I don't understand. If we are faking a UFO situation, do you think that there is technology that's available to people in the United States that is beyond our current understanding of what's possible? 90% no. 90% no. Wow. Because it's very hard to imagine physicists continuing to work on nothing for their entire careers. The number of people who are going to be retiring shortly, having never actually done physics as a physicist. We're talking about wasted lives.

People are going to be very weird when they realize that they blew their entire career. And I believe I can say what many of these problems are. And if you want to humiliate me at a leading university, just ask me to talk. You can put it on video. You don't realize how many things the standard model has subtly wrong when we explain it to people. It's not that the Lagrangian is wrong, not that the rules are wrong, but we say wrong stuff. We say like there are three generations that are only of matter that are only distinguished by mass. In other words, there's three copies of this stuff here. This is like the wood version, and then there's the plastic version, and then there's the metal version.

There aren't three. There are two generations plus an extra imposter generation, which looks like a generation. I mean, I can get into these things. And that should be a provocation if somebody says, let's call this guy up, have him out, and figure out what he's talking about. It doesn't matter. I don't think we're doing physics. What do you think they're doing? I think we are playing paintball rather than going to war and we're giving prizes for generals who command the best paintball army.

And then we're referencing everyone else who's actually trying to figure out how to fight to, well, have you submitted to the paintball competition? It's like, no, I don't want to do paintball. I understand that it keeps your skills up. I understand that some of them are transferable. But I mean, like, you've been in street fights? Not since I was a teenager. Yeah, well, I understand. Like, I haven't been for a long time.

It's different than what you guys do in Brazilian jiu-jitsu. There's lots of stuff you're not allowed to do. Yeah. Right. You get in a street fight stuff you're not allowed to do. Yeah. Right. You get in a street fight, it's a completely different thing. Sure. What we're doing is not physics in the same sense. So what they're doing is they're exercising.

We're doing safe stuff. Yeah, exactly. They're exercising. And the exercises are keeping people limber. They're keeping people in a fighting mentality. It's not that Brazilian jiu-jitsu has nothing to do with fighting. We've seen people use it in the street for sure, right? But small joint manipulation is part of street fighting.

Eye gouging is part of street fighting. Pulling a knife is part of street fighting. These things are not part of any reputable gym that you might go to. I want to do the thing that isn't paintball. And I didn't want to do it up until recently because the danger of unleashing a neutron on the world is so high. Now I realize I'm done with that. You guys are willing to play footsies with Putin? You're not going to survive.

You're not the responsible adults I thought you were. Like, if I unleash a neutron and it leads to some sort of proliferation of deadly technology, it's on you. It's not on me. You're already taking risks that you shouldn't be taking. So if you think 90% sure that this is not coming from here, you believe this because you don't think that the proper science in order to achieve these kind of results is being done by the people that you believe are capable of doing it? talk to Nima or when I talk to Juan Maldacena or when I've talked to Natty Cyberg these people are absolutely brilliant and they don't know the answer unless they're the greatest actors I've ever seen so the most brilliant physicists are looking at these supposed videos what is the best no no I don't knowing that's UFO stuff what are you talking about then ah they're not talking about things that can extend Einstein.

Right. Therefore, to get back to your technology question, might have engineering applications because it's the engineering applications that are terrifying. Right. The discovery of the neutron was one thing. The Teller-Ulam design was its weaponization. organization. So suddenly, you know, you can do the Tsar bomb or Castle Bravo, these unbelievable explosions, which like the difference between there were Civil War veterans who saw action in the Civil War, who lived to see Ivy Mike in the Pacific. So the Civil War was almost a thermonuclear war in terms of human scale. It's less than 100 years different.

People have forgotten how terrifying, important, wonderful, jaw-dropping, and awesome physics is because it hasn't done anything that completely screws your mind. Like Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Or Castle Bravo. What's Castle Bravo? That was the test in the Pacific where we thought it was going to be like controlled and like, or what is it, Starfish,

where we did an atmospheric explosion over Hawaii and then the Russians like, hold my beer, Nova Zemlian. Yeah. You know, remember, I'm the guy five years ago who was saying we need above ground nuclear tests because all you people have lost your fear. Like, yes, Eric is crazy, but he's correct.

What's this one? That's Castle Bravo. Oh, shit. Oh, my God. Right. So they detonated in that facility and they expected it to be far smaller than it was? You know So they detonated in that facility and they expected it to be far smaller than it was? Yeah, they detonated in the Pacific.

Right. But it's right next to that facility that was in the video. Was that the facility that was initially filmed? Like what is this facility? That's it. It was Enawak, I forget, Atoll. So like we just- It's crazy how long ago that was and how close it was to the Civil War, if you really put it in that context.

Well, this is what I'm trying to say is what I'm trying to tell you- Look at that. That's so insane. Have you done this in Oculus? No, I have not i highly recommend if they're not going to let us do a nuke above ground so that we can save ourselves by fear look at that right this is really this is religious stuff yeah it is really like we are we we have announced if somebody is listening to these tests that we did my belief is very shortly before you get the ability

to traverse the cosmos, if that is possible, if that is possible, you let off a nuke. Right? It's like you've had kids. There's some stuff that happens right before they figure out how to break out of the crib. You know, that's part of UFO folklore too. Fat man and little boy.

That's a big part of UFO, that once they drop those, that's when all the UFOs started appearing. So the question is, you know, the analogy I give, so I talked to Avi about the following thing. I am a fan of something I call the doubly scientific method. The usual scientific method makes a hidden assumption that it never voices, which is if we're going to study orcas,

we assume that we are smarter than orcas. Or if we're going to study cephalopods, right, like an octopus, we think we're smarter. And what do we do? We disguise ourselves. We create artificial environments. We do all sorts of crazy things based on the fact that we're smarter than what we study.

From everything from rocks to orcas. The doubly scientific method says, okay, assume that you're studying a rat in a maze, but you yourself are the rat in somebody else's maze. Now you have to look up the intelligence scale, not just down. And in the doubly scientific method, you have to assume that whatever is studying you is hiding from you the way you are hiding from your subjects. So if you see somebody in a duck blind, for example, and he's studying ducks, you understand that somebody may be hiding from you and they might be able to use multiple dimensions of time. They might be able to cloak themselves and disguise themselves. Or for example, if you take microscopic UFOs,

this cup has a radius of R and a circumference of two pi R. The disc that it spans is pi R squared in area. But if you look at this cup, it's much larger than pi r squared because we pushed it out. You could have a sphere where if you could cheaply engineer spacetime, not through the Einstein field equations, but through the successor theory that recovers Einstein, you could have an entire stadium inside of a tennis ball. Just the way this cup doesn't blow your mind until you realize that its area is much greater than pi r squared you could why look for a giant floating thing in the sky if you could bend space and time and you could play with the rulers the way i'm saying i would put this in a tiny little profile whoa so we're only looking at it in terms of our understanding of the distance between objects, planets, gravity. We're looking at that.

All that stuff where if it didn't exist, if somehow or another we lived in some contained environment and we had no concept of space whatsoever and then we gained access to it, we would be unbelievably overwhelmed. access to it, we would be unbelievably overwhelmed. If you lived in some sort of underground facility your entire life, and then one day you got a chance to go outside and see the Keck Observatory in Hawaii in a clear night with no moon, you would be overwhelmed. You wouldn't be able to believe that the world was as big as it really was, or that the universe was as big as it was. Yeah. It's an impedance mismatch. If you watch meteor showers the way my family does, it's religious. It's transformational. It's transcendent. The problem, as you know, from the default mode network, right, is that mostly what your brain is doing is not communicating information, but screening, right? Your eyes, your brain is doing is not communicating information but screening

right your eyes your fovea is precious because that's the thing that can resolve at very high levels but like i can barely see jamie out of the corner of my eye because my peripheral vision can't be at the same level as my fovea i'd be overwhelmed right so we're talking about tapping in to a picture of the world that we are not, our brain is not prepared for the idea that time is multidimensional. That was the whole point of giving Lex another watch. We don't have a way to think about it. I'll meet you at 5.15 and 12.30, according to two different scales of time. scales of time. Or for example, time and space, if I'm correct, the 14-dimensional manifold that has all the quantum going on on it is split probably seven and seven dimensions because

we have six extra time dimensions and four extra space, add six to one and three to four and you get seven. So space and time are interchangeable. There's a duality between them. All of this stuff is like, you know, okay, it's how you hit on chicks in a bar. Hey, let me tell you something about space and time you never thought about. Oh my God, does that work?

What? Worked for me. That's why I'm not in better shape. So do you think, now when you were talking about these people that keep manana-ing you and not giving you access to whatever they're talking about, do you think they're talking about some sort of an engineering solution to this type of technology?

I haven't met anyone in striking distance in three years. So how could they have something that's going to change your way of looking? Is it possible that you've missed something? I can just be wrong, first of all. Like, this is my life's work, right? What's the way they phrased it to you? Which part? The part about it changing the way you see the world.

Oh, Eric, you know, like, I'll complain about data. Like, that's not the data we have. What we've been showing the public is downsampled, meaning it's fuzzier, it's low resolution. How clear is it? As clear as you want. How clear are you that there's something to see? You can see it with your own eyes. There's no question.

If I was you, I'd just shut the fuck up and let them show me. I'd be like, let's go. I'm not under any NDA. I know, but I'm saying I- But you want to know- I want to know. Yeah, but I want to know in a different- look, my life's work is a theory. It's one theory. My entire life is really about one theory, okay? Like I do this entertainment thing and I talk to people and all this stuff.

Bullshit. Really what I am is an academic who realized that you can't do academics inside of the university system and watch it disintegrate into madness as we speak. I figured this out a long time ago. I want to know whether this is right or wrong so much better, so much more than I want to know whether UFOs exist. UFOs to me are an indication of whether this is right or wrong so much better, so much more than I want to know whether UFOs exist. UFOs to me are an indication of whether I'm right or wrong. You see, it's data. It's an input to me. So if you're right, that means? If we have a future, it means we can leave not the planet but the solar system.

The cosmos are traversable. If we can leave, anything else can visit. If you look at the entirety of the universe and you imagine that ultimately there are societies that destroy themselves because they get atomic weapons before they figure out how to leave. Some societies are smarter than that. And they'll be able to leave and colonize the cosmos. And for them not to be here would be madness. So if you've heard my analogy, there is an island in the Andaman chain called North Sentinel Island. I know it well.

Yeah. North Sentinel Island is my model potentially of us. We are the North Sentinelese. The 39 people that are direct descendants of people left Africa 60,000 years ago. Right. Yeah. We don't know if there's 39 or 300. They kill everybody who lands there. Essentially. There's a story that we actually buggered them. An English person buggered them, which is why they don't want anyone landing. Yeah. There actually are some very weird videos where we throw them coconuts because coconuts don't occur in their island and we actually have non-hostile contact.

But the most important part of it is India. They do not know that they are claimed by something called India. And they don't know that they have a Fermi problem because India won't let anyone land unless they break the law. So the great filter of North Sentinel Island is a model for why don't we see anybody? Why aren't we clear? Does India exist at some sort of UFO level? Now, this is the doubly scientific method. You can laugh at it, but then would you laugh at the North Sentinelese who are smart enough to say,

I wonder if there's another society that's screening everybody from landing here. Now, what happens on North Sentinel Island if you're watching it and all these people with loincloths or no loincloths and spears and arrows and stupid stuff, suddenly you start hearing radio signals coming out of North Sentinel Island. You're like, what? Then you see a little mushroom cloud on the northeast of the island. Then you see little boats that start exploring around that seem to be propelled internally. And you're like, are they burning the leaves? Have they invented internal combustion? Some point with the mushroom cloud, India says enough is enough. We cannot afford to let the North Sentinelese be treated as some sort of backwards people who don't have anything

developed that scares us. That's a mushroom cloud, man. That's time to go in. I see. Right? So my claim is that you're not used to the doubly scientific method because there's been no reason to have a doubly scientific method. Do you believe that the orcas are smarter? Well, possibly. There aren't that many species that are really smarter than us. Look at all the shit we do.

There aren't many that are dumber than us either. But not my point. There aren't many that are dumber than us either. But not my point. Those sorts of models are what distinguish people who are going to get called crazy but aren't because it's an obvious point. You have to account for this possibility that there's something called India up in the skies that doesn't want anyone landing here. Right. Who's monitoring what's going on and they're not going to be infinitely patient if they exist.

Now, if that's true, and we can leave, and we can't civilize ourselves, and we bring this mad technology with us, this ability to destroy, I personally feel responsible in a way that my colleagues don't. They have these ideas like, oh, I'm a physicist, it's just fun, it's really interesting, it's a bunch of puzzles. My feeling is you doomed the human race and you don't feel responsible for building a lifeboat, for saving us, for like what kind of a sociopath are you?

Like I'm not even a physicist, Joe. And I feel responsible. And this gets back, back you know to some weird stuff about so they're not thinking about that they're thinking about the equations they're working on they're thinking about the puzzles are trying to solve it's fun I get to play universe this and puzzle that and just like please it's not did do they not think of a way to leave the Earth because they don't think it's a surmountable? Correct.

They live in space time. They've crawled into the map, the prison built by Einstein. And they know that it's not right. Because there are these two singularities. There's this singularity at the beginning of time, which we call the Big Bang, assuming that time were one-dimensional. And it's part of something called the Friedman, Robertson, Walker space-time model. And there's another one at the bottom of the black hole called the Schwarzschild singularity. And the fact that space and time kink at these two points is an indication that we have something

wrong to a mathematician or a physicist. It says your equations work pretty well right up into the point where there's some error that you have that you don't understand and you have like a division by zero error. And if you could figure out your error, you don't know what sin you committed, but the way that you know you committed a sin is that you have a singularity. So they know that there's some successor theory. And they'll give lectures about space-time is doomed and I'm going to talk about non-commutative geometry. But these are all ways of avoiding the fact that you haven't done your homework for 50 years.

So like there's some class that you're supposed to show up to and you haven't been in a long time. You don't want to show up and suddenly say, what? What's going on? That's what's happening. They are living inside of Einstein's model. So when you say something, they'll say, well, that's impossible because you can't go faster than the speed of light. It's like that's a space-time concept. That's an Einsteinian concept.

You're not thinking post-Einsteinian. You're not thinking about recovering Einstein or Einstein is what we would call an effective theory. You're thinking that you really live in space-time so you know what you can do. And then you fold your arms and say, well, that's impossible. It's like, no, you have a limited map. You think that Greenland is the same size as South America. Trevor Burrus Okay. Then as far as its application, what could you imagine would be a way that someone could actually apply these laws, these theories? So imagine for the moment, this goes back to, let me put my Eric, the science person, doing his own theory.

This is my thing that I tried to give you last time I was here. tried to give you last time I was here. If we imagine that there are two spaces and one of them is 14 dimensional and one of them is four dimensional and gravity connects them, that is the metric, the gadget. Think of a phonograph. The record is like the 14 dimensional world. And are you a Doors fan? Yeah. Okay, so you've got Doors one, Break On Through to the other side is on the same side as Soul Kitchen. You don't hear Break On Through to the other side

or Soul Kitchen simultaneously. They're both there on the record. Right. The phonograph, imagine you're doing it on a Victrola somehow. You're gonna, you're retro. You're listening to that record in four dimensions, but it's a 14-dimensional record. So you and I are playing back a 14-dimensional quantum world, but we're only playing back slices

of it. So the illusion is that we're having a four-dimensional conversation because the Victrola part, that phone, his master's voice, is the four-dimensional thing. And what's the stylus? It's the metric. It's gravity. The stylus is pulling off different data that is simultaneously existing. So it's like the record is the multiverse, but you don't think of it in these terms. You don't freak out and say, oh, my God, I'm holding the multiverse because Light My Fire is somewhat adjacent to Soul Kitchen.

That is my structure. That's what I believe is true. And we're having the discussion as if it's only the phonograph, the Victrola part. If you could then go to the record, the Victrola part. If you could then go to the record, you don't have to scratch your way back. You can do these weird moves where you can alight the stylus in different places and shrink things and grow things and change the angles and all this stuff. And you have engineering possibilities.

Like I'm, I will say what I believe the internal properties of the particles that we have yet to find, the dark matter, if you will, are. I will tell you places that I believe the standard model is wrong. And I'm happy to go down on the ship and move on with my life if I'm wrong. But I can't. I've been 40 years trying to have this conversation with a competent person. And every excuse under the sun is used to avoid talking about what I'm saying. And I'll say some stuff that when I, 1987 around, I proposed a set of equations

that were like the junior version of geometric unity. I was told that those equations were insufficiently nonlinear, that they involve spinners and spinners have nothing to do with something called self-duality, that I'd violated the spin statistics theorem, a whole bunch of things. And I was invited to leave Harvard where they said, you have to move out of Massachusetts. You cannot live in Massachusetts. And I said, you don't have the right to tell me where I come from. That's not part of our agreement. They said, well, if you want to continue in this department, you have to move out of Massachusetts. I only- What was the reasoning behind that?

They thought I was wrong and crazy. So, but- Well, let me keep- Okay. and crazy. So, but let me keep, okay. In 1994, Ed Witten is giving a lecture in the main seminar room in building two in the MIT math department, where I am now a postdoc under a national science foundation fellowship. So I had gone through huge trouble and I crawled back on top. And Ed Witten says the self-duality revolution, which is related to Jim Simon's work, which I was saying before. He says, theoretically, you don't have to deal with these super complicated equations anymore.

He doesn't say what replaces them. And a guy named, I think, Alan Knudsen, who's now at Cornell, I think raises his hand like a punk and he says, do you want to tell us what equations we would use instead? And Ed Witten writes down these two sets, these set of two equations. And I look at them and I say, those are the equations that I proposed at Harvard in like five years ago or seven years ago. And I said, huh, that's really interesting. He's about to get told that they're insufficiently nonlinear, that they involve spinners, which can't possibly involve self-duality and that he's violated spin statistics. And I'm looking forward to watching what happens when Ed Witten is told this. A couple of weeks later,

happens when Ed Witten is told this. A couple weeks later, I'm at the MIT commissary with Is Singer and the math physics group. And a guy named András Senes, Hungarian brilliant guy, now in Geneva, I think, says, have you heard the news? He comes by. I said, what news? All of Donaldson theory and self-dual equations is falling. It's like, all of Donaldson theory and self-dual equations is falling. It's like, what? It's like, they were using the wrong equations. Everything has become trivially easy. Can you bring up an article called Gauge Theory is Dead, Long Live Gauge Theory?

So, like, I didn't want to tell these stories the last time. This is, like, super painful, but I'm done with this stuff. I'm just completely done with this. So, you see, there was this thing called the self-dual equations, which Isidore Singer brought to Michael Atiyah and Nigel Hitchin. Oh, the other one was if spinners were involved, Nigel Hitchin would know and he would have told us, which is bullshit. Keep going to the next page. The new gauge there, you see those two equations, DA of phi equals zero. I had written psi rather than phi. Phi has to do with the spin of the field, but FA plus equals I. I had written these things down in a slightly different form and had been effectively laughed out of Harvard for this. And it turns out that what was going on was Ed Witten had written these things down and now all of these people were converted.

And a lecture is given at room 507 in the Harvard Math Department on the fifth floor across from the office of a guy named Raoul Bott, who is absolutely not my advisor, but the Internet is determined to make him my advisor. It's making me really upset. Raoul Bott is my hero, but he was not my advisor. He's a great man, and you shouldn't do that to him, and you shouldn't do that to me. So I go to this lecture and the person giving it was really the closest thing to, I had to an advisor, if it's not a guy named Dror Barnaton, is the brother of somebody you've had on your program. You've had Gary Taubes on your program. His brother is named Clifford Taubes. And Clifford Taubes had picked a fight with Princeton. And he had said, you know, these guys at Princeton, we work our asses off to get these results in Donaldson theory.

These equations are so hard. And then always after the fact, Princeton tells us what we're really doing. You know, thanks, guy. So it was a fight between Cambridge and Princeton. And now he's got to eat crow. Okay. So he's giving this lecture and he titles it Witten's Magical Equations. This is the same guy who tells me that I can't live in Massachusetts

in 1987. And he's going on, he's like saying, this is the greatest day of my life. I was in prison. I was working at hard labor for 10 years. These equations make everything trivially easy. I am sitting in the back row of room 507 picking my nose. And a guy in the front seat, right-hand side, is named David Kajdan, one of the most brilliant people on the planet.

And he usually falls asleep during the lecture. He's like a Soviet Jew who got through the anti-Semitic system at Moscow State, like unbelievable mind. And he says, excuse me, Cliff, didn't we have a student at some point who told us to look at the spinner bundles and maybe these equations? And Cliff goes white as a ghost and I'm picking my nose, right nostril, and the entire room swivels and looks at me. And then I realized like everybody actually remembers what I was saying and my thesis is on the spinner bundles, all this stuff. And I have this question, do I tell them the whole theory?

And I left mathematics at that moment. I just decided I can't trust you people. Cliff knows the answer. Cliff is supposed to say, you know, Eric told me to look at that. And he won't do it. He's sitting there giving the credit, not even to Seiberg and Witten, who are the two people who do these equations. He's giving the whole thing to Witten because he's scared, because he's apologizing. He's saying, I screwed up. I doubted you, Princeton. Princeton was right. Harvard was wrong. New Jersey beats Massachusetts. Tough shit. That's the way it goes. But Massachusetts actually had an entrant in that game and that was me. And then Isidore Singer writes somewhere in one of his

papers, you know, I learned about this years ago before from Eric Weinstein, a paper with Cano and Balu. So this was my trajectory. This is why I left mathematics in part, because I realized that there was just no honor. There was no way of making a name. And people are just going to give away my stuff. So when I did this draft of GU, I said, I'm an entertainer. People don't have any clue why. It's because I have copyright protection. If I release a work of entertainment, you can't just name it after yourself or your friend or whoever you're upset with. You know, that might hurt you. It's like, that's mine. It's my work of entertainment.

I own the Portal podcast. Tough shit. Now, all that is long in the past. I don't want the Cyberg-Whititten equations, which is what they're now called. Natty Seiberg and I have worked this out years ago at a meeting in San Francisco. He got $3 million. I forced him to give me a hug in front of the Institute for Advanced Study, call it even. This is so much bigger than this.

Those things, the Seiberg-Witten equations, is the barest thumbnail of what's coming. Cyber Grit and Equations is the barest thumbnail of what's coming. And if we don't use this stuff, we're doomed here with Xi and Biden and Kamala and Trump and Putin and Zelensky and Khamenei and all of these idiots. We're not going to make it what I work on where I've disappeared where's the portal do you notice how everything that you love gets destroyed

Jordan Peterson, Brett Weinstein, Sam Harris even Lex Friedman they go after Lex Friedman after I warn Lex they're going to come for you because of his reading list because they misportray him as if he's claiming to be an MIT professor, which he's never claimed in his life. They destroy all of us if we don't sing from the hymnal. This is so important to me because it's hope. If I'm wrong, then maybe we don't have a way off this planet.

Maybe we don't have a way to the solar system, out of the solar system. That's bad news. What would be the technology that would harness this? You would figure out how to do the stuff on the record rather than the phonograph, the Victrola. You would start to move the space-time metric. You would move along the directions of the metric, not using the Einstein field equations. So you would try to figure out, okay, if we're in flatland here, a four-dimensional slice of a 14-dimensional world, how do I go, I have to say it in my own language, along the 10-dimensional normal bundle? In other words, 14 equals four dimensions we know plus 10 we don't. Call the 10 we don't the normal bundle. You'd start navigating in the normal bundle. You'd stop thinking about

this sound coming out of the Victrola. You'd say that's three components. There's a stylus, there's a horn, and there's a record. And you'd engineer around that so that you had a really efficient way to go very far or to circle back in time without going back through time. You try to figure out, what can I do with the stylus? Where can I put the stylus on the record to get different? And what technology would you employ to do that? Well, so first of all, we know about three families of matter. Like this is made, everything you see around you

is made of the first family of matter. It's all up quarks, down quarks, electrons, and you and I are being penetrated as much as that's very distasteful by neutrinos. That's the first family of matter, okay? Then there's a second family where the up and down quarks are replaced by charm and strange. The neutrino is replaced by the muon neutrino. The electron is replaced by the muon. And then there's a third one where the muon is replaced by the tau, top, bottom, and tau neutrinos. If I'm correct, there are two additional generations of matter that are not, or families of matter that are not generations. They don't have the same structure as the ones we already know. Some of them are something called spin three halves, and some of them are exotic spin one half matter. So first of all, if you have dark matter that you have no idea of, you can't do dark chemistry.

But if you do have an idea, then you can guess at what dark chemistry would be. You'll have dark light. Everything you see here is spun left-handed if it's matter and spun right-handed if it's antimatter. My claim is we are decoupled from matter that spins right and antimatter that spins left. But in a low gravitational environment, it's like my left and my right hand don't know each other. So you have the asymmetry of a hand, which is you say, oh, digits two and four look like each other. The middle finger is the axis of symmetry. And unfortunately, the pinky and the thumb look wildly different.

But let's fudge it and imagine that there's a symmetry. Suddenly, you realize neurologically you're disconnected. And it's thumb to thumb on a different hand you didn't know anything about. you're disconnected and it's thumb to thumb on a different hand you didn't know anything about. So my claim is I believe that this world that appears to have a left-handed or right-handed nature, like Cindy Crawford has a beauty mark so you know whether a photo is of her or her mirror image. There's like another Cindy Crawford with the beauty mark on the other side. Sorry, I'm dating myself, people. But that world would have engineering possibilities to do dark chemistry. We would have additional forces. Normally, we get additional forces

through something called grand unification, where we use theories called SU-5 and spin-10 or SO-10. And those are the wrong flavors of the right idea. The right flavor would be called spin 6 comma 4 and SU 5 would be replaced by SU 3 comma 2. So there would be new unifications, new forces. It would produce new problems because when you put that comma, you know, 3 comma 2, you create something that is more space timey than particle physics. So there's stuff we don't know how to deal with. But you see, there's nothing in the laws of physics that say the rules of the universe will conform to what particle theorists currently know how to handle.

Nature seems to know things we don't know how to do. And the time has ended for us to tell nature, you can't have this or you must have that because we don't know how to handle you otherwise. Tough luck. The forces are different. The opportunities are different. Something called the Petit Salon theory of grand unification is tied to the Einstein theory. And what I want to do is to say, can I get people, lawyers, guns, and money to investigate this so that we can go

traverse the cosmos? I don't know how to do the engineering any more than the person who invented the neutron. It was Chadwick or who's the one who found it. He wasn't Lise Meitner who figured out the chain reaction. And she wasn't Enrico Fermi who figured out how to do it experimentally. That wasn't Trinity, which was the Manhattan project, and they weren't Teller and Ulam. So it's not on Eric to figure out how to do the engineering project. I need people. What could you imagine would be involved in figuring out a way to harness that and actually utilize it and actually go interdimensionally? What would you have to do?

What kind of power would have to be generated? What would be involved? So what wouldn't be involved is getting an entire planet to put a tiny dent in space-time because that's not going to work. It would be a question of saying, I know about more degrees of freedom. Are those degrees of freedom accessible? And to give you an idea of what's involved, if you take a proton with two up quarks and a down quark, so put two U's and a D inside of a ball you call a proton, you're tempted

to say, okay, if those are hard little balls inside, I want to pull one out. It doesn't work. The equations have something that used to be called infrared slavery, but we're not allowed to say the word slavery because of diversity, equity, inclusion. I'm going to say slavery because I'm here. You cannot pull a quark out of a proton. So what looks like a degree of freedom is not accessible to you. In the equations, you see up quarks and down quarks. You don't see protons and neutrons. But the consequence of the equations is protons and neutrons, right? So when you look at the equations, you can't tell, is that accessible or inaccessible? To bring it back to the UFO point,

the reason UFOs matter to me is if they're here, then these degrees of freedom are accessible. And if they're not here, then it's probably like protons being filled with up quarks and down quarks that we can't engineer. The consequences of quark structure inside of the atom, industrially, are zero. We've been at this since you were born, went 67? The year after you're born, we find quarks. We have zero industrial applications. All right? That means you have to think about both possibilities.

One, that these things are actionable if they're right. So first of all, Eric can be wrong, and I'm happy to be wrong if I'm wrong. Or I can be right. If I'm right, then it splits into a second level of the decision tree. Maybe the new degrees of freedom are things we can play with at the engineering level. And maybe they're inaccessible just the way we can't play with up quarks and down quarks directly. If we can play with it, then we've got so many new toys you have no idea. New forces, new matter, new possibilities to flit in and out between dark and light matter.

But from an engineering perspective, how would you make any of this happen? You would build something based on new plans that did something that nothing else could do. So to give an example, in the late 50s, we thought we knew electromagnetism cold. We'd been playing with it since Maxwell's time, right? Two guys named Aronoff and Bohm said, here's a crazy experiment. Take a tube that's perfectly insulated almost and run current through it,

and then pass an electron beam from like a cathode ray tube and reflect it off mirrors and see when it comes back and interferes with itself, how it interferes. If it's perfectly insulated, it shouldn't be able to tell whether there's current running through the center of the solenoid of that tube. Turns out when you turn on the tube and you run current through it, the electron beam can detect whether there's current running through it through magic. Technically, magic here means something called holonomy. We didn't know that the electromagnetic fields are not where electromagnetism really happens. It's something called the electromagnetic potential.

It's a precursor that actually determines the universe. It determines the electromagnetic fields. But this weird thing where somehow the current inside a perfectly insulated tube is influencing the world outside of it was like, holy smokes, we've been living with this stuff for how long? We had no idea how it works. The way you do this is we'd get together with a bunch of people and we'd say, if Eric is correct or if somebody else is correct, and you started to play with this extended model of both general relativity and the standard model, what are some experiments we could run that you think would have no actual content, just the way the Aronoff-Bohm experiment looks

like it's not going to do anything. Or the Casimir effect. Or finding out that beta decay, radioactive decay, knows it's left from its right. These are all hugely surprising discoveries. I don't know how to do that. And it's one of the reasons I keep talking to Brian Keating, who's an experimentalist, because what you see here in the studio is 100% theorists. You only invite theorists from physics. You don't invite experimentalists. I don't know how to talk to the experimentalists, but that's why I go down to the University of California, San Diego and play down there, because I want to talk to people who are like, how do we build this? You're the engineers of physics.

Tell me what I'm saying in terms that we can build something and actually see if it has consequences. And what could it be in terms of like building something? Imagine, for example, that you look at the equivalence principle, right? So the equivalence principle says that the inertial mass, how much mass something appears to have when it's moving, how resistant it is to force, that's the same according to Einstein as the gravitational force, the gravitational mass. So gravitational mass equals inertial mass. There are like a whole bunch of different flavors of mass that happen to all be equal according to different principles. that happen to all be equal according to different principles. According to something called spontaneous symmetry breaking,

mass is generated by the interaction with the Higgs field in general. It's not a number the way we thought it was coded into an equation. It's something we would call a vacuum expectation value through a Yukawa coupling. Never mind. It's that thing about the molasses causes the mass to feel heavier, even though the mass of the cup hasn't changed because it's requiring more and more force to push. If what we have is a bunch of different kinds of mass, we might be able to break some of these things like the equivalence principle. We might be able to generate negative mass, which is not technically excluded, but is incredibly hard to think about. We might be able

to do things, right? The only way we keep mass always positive is by putting in artificial conditions. If you have a bigger theory, you start to realize how you would do these things naturally. theory, you start to realize how you would do these things naturally. So for example, we might be able to dial the mass of things differently by actually engineering the thing that we call the Higgs field. The Higgs field is the only thing that doesn't spin that is fundamental when we spin space-time. And they've detected the Higgs boson on a large Hadron Collider, right? 100%. 2012, I think. But this is an enormous collider, right?

I mean, to be able to generate the Higgs, it had to go through how many kilometers? It's an enormous piece of equipment, right? Right, but that's in part because it's a stupid piece of equipment. What we're really doing is banging rocks together, except the rocks are called protons. So you're thinking there could be an engineering solution where you could generate something like that, but from a much smaller footprint. 100% that's a possibility because right now what we're doing is we're using electromagnetism only. The only force that we actually have engineering power over is electromagnetism. Like when we do chemistry, so you fertilize your lawn, you're using electron orbitals based on electromagnetism between the proton and the electron in an atom or molecule.

We don't know how to interfere with the weak force or the gravitational force. Both of those are so weak that they're impossible. And the strong force is crazily nuclear and super short range. So we've got control of one out of four forces. I can tell you what I believe the additional forces are, but what I need is I need people who are closer to engineering, experiment, and standard theory. I mean, I'm not even a physicist, Joe. Right. What I'm curious about is, like, what caused this shift in you to think about UFOs and UFO reports as being credible? Because we're talking theoretically, and you're talking about your understanding of dimensions.

Because I thought it was not—I thought it was a smoke screen that we were using to do aerospace engineering projects i thought it was like operation fortitude or operation bodyguard and so it's like okay please don't bother me with your sci-fi stories it's space opera you know for the same reason that i don't go into a scientology center and spend all my time thinking about xenu i'm not going to spend all my time thinking about Xenu. I'm not going to spend all my time worried about space. And what changed? Meeting an enormous number of very sober, very grown up people who seem to be changed, alter and believe that this is real. I have met an enormous number of people now who had personal firsthand, like sober people who've had crazy firsthand encounters. I don't understand how they're doing this as actors. Very often it's unwanted. It ruins their lives. It's sad. You know, I ended up in San Marino, uh, at Lou Elizondo's invitation and

Lou couldn't come. So I ended up speaking in Lou's place at a UFO meet. It was crazy. But I met so many people who were just like, Eric, you know, let me explain my experience to you. And I'm just not prepared for these highly detailed stories that have so much similarity one to the next. You know, like the Skinwalker Ranch thing on the History Channel? It looks incredibly junky, put out by Prometheus Entertainment. I know Brandon Fugel, the owner of the ranch. And I know Eric Bard.

We keep talking via phone. Eric Bard is like almost the only other person who has some idea of what differential forms are, tensor analysis. He's a sober, normal human being sitting out there on a ranch trying to figure out what the hell he's looking at. I don't think he's lying to me. And I don't think Brandon is lying to me. And then you hear their stories, like the Gary Nolan thing. I was completely unprepared. Have you dealt with Gary? No. I watched him on Lex though. I think Gary told me a story where he's like dealing with a subject. He's a medical guy, and that's how he got involved with this. And, you know, somehow the medical person that he is is talking to a subject who says, you know, I encountered a spinning disc in the sky or whatever, and a ball of light comes in.

Oh, brother, another one of these stories. He's like, you know, the ball of light entered my body, I was in pain, but it was OK and it exited and whatever. And then Gary looks at the person and there's a path of necrosis exactly where the person describes this thing exiting. Like, what? Are you like, tell me what the level of conspiracy is here that would be necessary to get all of this indirect evidence. And this is the basic puzzle of UFOs. Zero responsible adult direct evidence in the public domain. Zero, so far as I can tell. More indirect evidence than you can possibly imagine with sober, normal people claiming

things that I can't believe firsthand stuff. And then it gets weirder and worse from that. I would love to keep this just at metallic flying objects, but like, no, it's always going to be like, no, they go into the water and then, you know, the next level is like cattle mutilation. It's like, oh, please don't bring in cattle mutilation. Oh yeah. The stapes, you know, the smallest bone in the body, the three bones that make mammals mammals. You know, one of them seems to be frequently missing. And then like Paul Hellyer and Chaim Eshed and Ben Rich. Then there's this like crazy level where the former Canadian defense minister believes that there's a galactic federation.

The humans are in contact and the head of the Israeli, it's like enough. I can't handle it. I don't know what we're looking at and I'd love to keep it at something sober. And I see zero direct evidence. And if we're going to go on the direct evidence, Elon is right. It's bullshit. Tough luck. But I don't know how this amount of indirect evidence occurs because I don't think the government is capable of faking this. On the other hand, if we go by the indirect evidence, how is it that none of us have, like even the center of mass coordinates of this Tic Tac, you'll never hear me talking about the Tic Tac or the Zimbabwe kids or whatever.

Why? Because since the mid 70s, we've been able to do CGI in Star Wars that looks much more realistic than any video I've ever seen. So you can show me any video and I don't care. It's just not interesting to me. We don't have center of mass coordinates for this Tic Tac that's claimed by the US government over the Nimitz. Please. Oh, because it's sensitive. We don't stop it. Shut up. Hush. So is it, they don't have it. They won't release it. No, no, no. They claim it's not released. It can't be released to the public. Right.

I'm like, so downsample it, de-res, it's not even our ship people. You're claiming it's something you can't understand and you have the 3d coordinates and i can't play with it in a model on like google earth or sketchup or something go f yourselves you're gonna stovepipe this need to know i have a need to know i'm trying to do science is that the most compelling one to you the tic tac take your pick it has the, the most qualified people watching it. Yeah. But I don't, I don't want to get involved with Go Fast or Gimbal or this or that or the Phoenix Lights or the Belgian.

It's like, stop teasing me. This is the Meredith Baker problem. When I was a 14 year old guy, I thought Meredith Baker was the hottest thing in the world. I wanted to go out with her. What? So girl, you know? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And every time I asked her out, she's like, I really want to go out with you, but I really have to wash my hair or I really have to hang out with my, I was like, this is not going very well. At some point, somebody pulls me aside and said, Eric,

you're Jewish. She's Mormon. Get the hint. She loves she likes you. But there was nothing going to happen. OK, I get it. This is Meredith Baker. You don't want for some reason to tell me what's actually going on. Then don't waste my time. Don't spend my credibility. want to release the information because they're still trying to digest it themselves and they don't want it to get out publicly and get into the hands of China. I'm not smart enough to figure this out. I believe if there was something that was beyond our understanding, you want, you want that data to be released. Can we have a glass of something so that I can hide behind the fact that I had a sip of alcohol? All right. I'm going to take a leak again, and we'll come back with ice and alcohol for Eric. Perfect. He's apparently drunk. Thank you.

Cheers, sir. Cheers. All right, now you got your excuse. Okay. Let's talk crazy. All right. Ooh, that's good. Yeah, that's good.

Thank you. Glenn Morange. Morange. Is that how you say it? I don't know. How's it spelled? I thought it was Morange. Yeah is that how you say it i don't know how's it spelled i thought it was morangie yeah how is it glenn more orangey glenn more orangey i'd call it morangie but i don't think that's right either i think it's morangie glenn morangie uh i thought it was glenn morangie um so where were we you wanted to know what I think is really going on. Yeah, what's really going on there? One possibility is we did a lot of bad stuff, and we cannot get out of the fact that if we release what it is that we actually know

and what has been going on, there's going to be a lot of consequence. Bad stuff as in? Maybe people got killed. Maybe people were made crazy when they weren't crazy because they saw things. So if you think about, you know about deconfliction? Deconfliction. Yeah. No.

If you have a blue on blue situation, that means that two official representatives of the U.S. government are stumbling over each other. You've got local law enforcement. government are stumbling over each other. You've got local law enforcement, like the first scene of The Matrix is... You suddenly got really fucking intimidating, Joe. Now I'm scared. Just asking what a real...

Oh, wow. Nicely done. The U.S. alerted Russia to Biden's Ukraine visit for deconfliction purposes. Wow. So, hey, don't blow up this city because Biden's Ukraine visit for deconfliction purposes. Wow. So hey, don't blow up this city because Biden's going to be there. And there are three systems that stop the first scene in the Matrix where the agents show up and local law enforcement is like, I think we can handle one little girl. No, Lieutenant,

your men are already dead. That's a de-confliction situation. We have three things I think called case explorer, RIS is safe, and safety net. We don't know about these things because this is only for grownups in the government. So they have to file what it is that they're doing. And then, oh, we've got an undercover agent who's posing as a drug lord. Don't bust him because we have got like 10 years invested in this thing. So I tried to use this system. I called up, I think, Case Explorer for South Florida and got into a half an hour.

Okay, Case Explorer. Okay. a half an hour case explorer. Okay. I wonder how you found me. Try R-I-S-S safe. I think that's the one. I don't want to keep looking up all these websites. Yeah, he's going to get in trouble. Okay.

But I'll do it. I'll do it. So this is how they deconflict blue on blue. But you see, you and I are also blue. We're having a conversation and we may be stumbling on something the government doesn't want us to know, which is what happened when COVID maybe spilled out. Yeah, I see. Officer safety event deconfliction system safeguarding law enforcement through information sharing. Right. So this is how they play keep away from the rest of us, where they tell each other what they're doing and the rest of us can't know what's going on. Now, when you say blue on blue, there's a situation that I want to give a name to because it doesn't have a name, which I'm going to call baby on cobalt and cobalt on baby. Baby and cobalt are two forms of blue.

Cobalt is government and baby is like civilians, like you and me. What happens when a civilian stumbles on one of these operations? They're not allowed to use these systems. I called up the South Florida, I think, Case Explorer, had a half an hour conversation. They were telling me all sorts of stuff. And I said, I'd like to hear about Jeffrey Epstein. Who's calling? I'm a private citizen. This call will be terminated in five seconds. And then they hung up on me. So I realized, okay, ordinary human beings cannot use these systems. I think a lot of what's going on is that we keep tripping

over government operations in the cobalt sector, but we're baby blue. And they don't have any system for figuring out how to get rid of a civilian who stumbles on it like a drug smuggling operation. Like, okay, so Jeffrey Epstein traffics your daughter. What do you do? If he's an intelligence asset, you don't know. You just want the creep away from your kid.

So you file a complaint or whatever. Now you've got a situation where they don't know. You just want the creep away from your kid. So you file a complaint or whatever. Now you've got a situation where they don't know what to do because you've got a civilian and you've got some sort of super secret dark thing that isn't supposed to exist. My claim is that conspiracy theorist is basically cobalt on baby. In other words, the government warning a private citizen, get away from that thing. We will start to destroy your reputation if you do not cease and desist. But there's no plan. So if you were the guy who figured out D-Day, you say, well, there's a huge increase in the inflatable balloons. I think that they might be tanks. There's no troops under that army

designation. You'd be a threat to this incredible operation because you have free speech and nobody knows how to shut you up. So consider that none of us know the answer to what does the government do when private citizens start to figure out statecraft narratives are bullshit. So for example, Jeff Sachs was called in to supervise the investigation into the origin of COVID at the Lancet. And he puts in place all of the people who were involved with this through Peter Daszak. He later figures out, oh my God, I just put the foxes in charge of the hen house. And he blows the whistle. So what if we have like a, since the 1970s, a 45-year-old workaround of the Biological Weapons Convention in Wuhan? We've created this thing called One Health and the EcoHealth Alliance we took over as a hippie charity.

And if you ever take a look at the board of advisors of EcoHealth Alliance, it's wildly overpowered, including my old mentor, who's the head of the Sloan Foundation and the ex-head of the National Science Foundation. None of you guys look at the board of directors? Crazy. We keep tripping on these official statecraft narratives. That's why they won't let us question the Zelensky stuff. They won't let us question the origin of COVID. They won't let us question the vaccines. They won't let us question whether there are therapeutics. These are all cobalt on baby things. It's horse dewormer. What's wrong with you people? You're all lunatics. You're pathological losers. Okay, I get it. You're just destroying my Wikipedia entry because I keep asking questions because actually you need

to have a timeout. You're out of control. I'm fine. But you're going to turn this into pathologizing. When you pathologize people who've seen the truth, now you've got a real problem. You gaslit American citizens because you couldn't do your effing job? Really? That's interesting. Did you kill anyone? Did you do wet work? Did you do digital wet work?

What did we just find out from the Twitter files, right? How many times did I say, I'm being throttled, I'm being manipulated? The government doesn't want to take responsibility. We have this, what is it, GEC that's from the State Department. We have CISA inside of the Department of Homeland Security. These people are creating fake conversations on Twitter. They're creating fake reports about the Hunter Biden laptop to influence the election. We didn't have a free and fair election.

It had nothing to do with ballot stuffing or miscounting. So I believe that partially why we're not talking is that we've done so many bad things around UFOs that we don't want to come clean. Wow. That's interesting. Okay. So that's one thing. Two, imagine that there's one enormous update coming, like your life is partially a lie. I think many of us have figured out that we originally believed that it was Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone and now we're not quite so sure. Right. I don't know.

Do you know that it was Lee Harvey Oswald? Well, certainly the Warren report doesn't hold a lot of water with me anymore. lot of water with me anymore. A lot of us are going to have to deal with the fact that a lot of what we've been taught is crazy, is not crazy. Like the fact that this virus seems to have come out of a lab where we were trying to figure out how to put a furin cleavage site into a humanized coronavirus. And we're leaving in place the exact architecture that got us into this meth. Without hearings, Without hearings? There's no way we would do this without hearings. So what we're seeing is we're seeing an explosion,

a collision between social media-empowered humans who are smart, trying to figure out the story, and the government stonewalling us so that we can't figure out our own lives. Did my children get injected or infected with something that came out of your stupidity because Ralph Baric and Peter Daszak can't do their goddamn jobs? Maybe. Are we going to have a tribunal about the fact that you infected planet Earth and you decreased human life expectancy by causing us to fight a different COVID infection every year?

Maybe. These are hugely consequential issues. hugely consequential issues. And I believe that UFOs are in part a hugely consequential issues for reasons that may have to do with the fact that this is of the fake version, right? It's not overlord, it's bodyguard or fortitude-like. I don't know, but we've certainly gaslit people. And I think we're not prepared to take responsibility for ruining the lives of ordinary Americans who were smart and honest because we couldn't do our jobs in the intelligence and defense communities. What do you think is responsible for the shift in communication about this stuff now?

Because in the past, no one would acknowledge it. No one would talk about it. Now they're talking about it fairly openly and they're discussing it. When I think about things like that, I go, well, there's the cynic in me that says, oh, if they're saying this, then it's probably horseshit. They're probably covering up for some drones they've created.

They are. You think? Well, yes. In other words, the UFO phenomenon is multiple things. We know that it's a cover story for things like the stealth bomber. We also know that it's a cover story for our inability to take action against surveillance over flights of dirigibles and balloons. We also know that it's people misseeing things. Like I've seen two UFOs recently that fooled other people.

But I was able to figure out partially one with the help of Mick West, who is my antagonist, but also we're sort of, we're frenemies, kind of. And the other one was like a Mylar balloon that looked like a spherical fireworks display off the coast between Malibu and Catalina. The way it was being reflected by the sunlight? Yeah, you know, the thing people don't understand about Mylar balloons is that at night, a Mylar balloon is a very confusing object to encounter because all you're seeing is like randomly scattered light

and it's like, oh my God, you know, this is like the Phoenix Lights. And I have like video of people in line at a Thai restaurant saying, oh my God, I've never seen anything like this. Of course, I go across the street to investigate and it says happy birthday. So there's no question that it's a certain amount of people wanting to see things that aren't there.

Yes, that's a big attraction. Yep. So this desire thing, you have to moderate your desire. Yes. It's certainly a cover story. It's certainly stuff we can't explain. But the claim really coming from inside the beast is we've seen stuff that is so clear

that we know that there's something there. And and Eric we just can't show it to you and by the way the reason that it seems to be government restricted first of all it's very hard to take good video with the phone I don't know if you've noticed this they're getting better at it I felt like I now spend my flights I take the window seat and I sit there with my camera glued to the window under stop action. What's it called? Slow-mo, right? Or not slow-mo, the time-lapse. I'm up in the sky for a long time. There's basically nothing up there. So trying to find things on your phone? But in part, it's like I do this thing where I take license plates

and every time I see a license plate with three letters like NSA or MIT, I take a picture of it. I have a huge number of these things because I'm trying to train my brain. Here's what random noise looks like. Like in other words, it's not telling you to do something. If it says BTC, I shouldn't go out and buy a bunch of Bitcoin. People don't realize that you have to train yourself because you're going to see lots of patterns once you start looking for them. In finance, I used to build random number generators that had the correlation of the markets and I would generate pictures and the financial professionals would say, oh, we've got to buy. This is a classic head and shoulders pattern. There's going to break

out at such as like I generated this out of of simulator written in Python. So people are just, they want to believe so much that they're going to lie. It's an issue. It's an issue with Bigfoot. It's an issue with everything. It's an issue with all of us. It's an issue with me too. I have desires and I have to keep my desires in check. Yeah. Everyone. I am horrible. Horrible with the unknown. Horrible with UFOs. Horrible. We have to camp and decamp. And that's what, I think what you do is great, which is you sort of believe and then you say- I give up.

I change. Right. I go back and forth. Well, that's what I do. Now, at the end of the day, once you've pulled out all the mundane things, the question is, is there a residue left of things that actually are mind-blowing? is there a residue left of things that actually are mind blowing? I can't tell you until I actually see stuff that somebody is willing to say,

we captured this. It looks like this, but I can tell you that I am assured repeatedly by people who seem incredibly sober, who do not seem to be great actors, that they have seen amazing things. We have data that is as clear as you can imagine, and we can't release it. And then you have this question of, is there anyone smart who's trained

in this very small number of areas who's looked at this? Or are you just going to eyeball it and pretend that it violates physical law when you don't even know physical? You don't know physical law. So far as I know, Eric W. Davis is the top person who knows what a tensor is on this project. Are you kidding me? Try to imagine that you're trying to do the Manhattan Project with the K-pop groups.

It's that big of a difference. People will say, well, we have electrical engineers. Like, I don't care. I'm talking quantum field theorists. I'm talking differential geometry, general relativity. And people are tired of you. Like, you're an elitist. You're a snob.

Oh, go fuck yourself. I shouldn't have said that. Please edit that. It's soft. What? You said it really soft. I know, I know. It was very soft.

Go fuck yourself. But it's just like. One of the kindest ever. There was no anger in your voice. I'm trying to be an adult, but it's been three years. You've been wasting my time. Yeah. You say the word stovepipe as if it means something. Shut up and show us what you've got.

We're your team. So, I like your theory that they're covering up for some stuff that is... I mean, if really people have been harmed and... one of the claims of back engineering these things, it's always fascinated me, is that there was, Bob Lazar

said there's a previous person who was working on the job, they died. They tried to do something and there was some sort of an explosion and it was limited into what, I think you and him together would be the greatest podcast of all time Would you be interested in doing that? You'd be able to tell oh, yeah, well, we'll dose you up. Yeah, but we want a roll mushrooms We got I want to I want a line of snoring desert toads that every time you answer a question wrong You've got to lick the toad But you would be able to tell whether or not it's nonsense.

Yes and no. I'm not the best person. You'd be better at it than me. I'd be better than you. For sure. For sure. But you want to know, look, Sean Carroll and I don't get along. You need to be here for this. All right.

You. I'll show up. Specifically. Show up. You've got to be ready, man. You and him together would be so fascinating his story hasn't fucking changed since 1989 man it's it's if he's telling the truth if he really was just propulsions expert from los alamos labs who they brought in because they were kind of trying to figure out what the

fuck is going on and everything's compartmentalized so no one can talk to anyone so no real science can be done and they're saying tell me what you know like let's Figure this out and he gets to it and almost immediately. He's like this is nothing that we know how to do This is nothing that we're making this is something from some it's something that's not even designed for a human form It's designed if it's a physical vehicle. Yeah, it's designed for something much smaller than humans. I know nothing about Bob Lazar. I've seen something about element 115, which I don't understand. It's like he predicted, well, yes, they're indexed by the number of protons. So I can predict that the elements we have yet to discover are going to be in the same numerical.

I don't get that. That's interesting. Yeah, but I think the claim is different. The claim is that this element must have some property or that... He said it's a stable version of this element and that in wherever these beings are from, they have access to a stable version of this element that we don't have access to here.

So let me make an analogy. Gold, I don't know if you know this about gold. What we call gold is the single stable version of gold. There are a bunch of isotopes that are all radioactive that turn into other stuff. So like if I have to pay you in gold, if I choose a gold that isn't the one that works, it's completely unstable. You gave me unstable gold. I know. What happens?

Do you die if you touch it? Well, you'll certainly get some radiation, but you'll also find that there's much less gold every time you check on your amount. My precious gold. Oh, wow. Whoa. But what I'm trying to get at is that it may be a claim that there's an island of stability. Like with gold, there's one isotope that's stable. I don't know anything about that. I'm not the guy for that,

but I can... Here's the thing, Joe. I can tell you what I know and what I don't know. And I could certainly probe him. The thing that I'm uncomfortable about, I don't know if you saw my interaction with Hal Puthoff. No, I did not. So I interview Hal Puthoff and we're talking about this stuff and it goes to remote viewing. I'm like, oh brother, I have to do remote viewing. Now, but if you think about it, when you get like a FaceTime call from your wife, who's on traveling on business or something, or you're traveling on business, doesn't matter. That's remote viewing. So you don't realize it, but something completely mundane to you, like a video call,

is a version of this insane-sounding thing. It's just done through a device, much like a camera lens sees things, much like your eyes see things. You're just doing it physically. It's doing it through a device. You're doing it biologically. Yeah, so when you hear Hal Puthoff say

that he made money in the market, that he needed to raise money for his school, so instead of doing a bake sale, he did remote viewing in the market. I noticed one eyebrow just went up. Yeah. Sean Connery stuff. What do you think about that?

We did not have a comfortable interaction. I was respectful, but I certainly communicated that for a guy who's trying to prove that this stuff is real, wouldn't you like to invite me to your private island if this stuff works rather than making exactly $26,000 or whatever the target amount was? Right. Why wouldn't you keep going with that? Right. It's like, well, I'm too busy. It's like, well, I understand being too busy to make money because I've certainly exhibited that behavior.

But if making money is the best way of advertising that this stuff is real, why wouldn't you actually do it? So that was a very uncomfortable interaction that I had with Hal. That doesn't necessarily mean that he doesn't do it. You know, there could be this thought that, and this is, you know, what people would say about psychic ability as well. There could be that thought that some people feel that abusing that power or using the power for personal gain would somehow or another diminish its effectiveness. I so much want to make money from geometric unity. But it's not magic. But there's something about not in my father's house.

You don't want to be the money changer in the temple. I'm happy to make money hand over fist. I'm pro-capitalism. But selling geometric unity makes me feel sort of sick to my stomach. And I think about it. I mean I'm not so pure that I don't. I see what you're saying. But what I'm trying to say is you're trying to do something that's supposed to

bring people together and you have a world in which we're losing all support for blue sky stuff. So I think in Hal's case, I just felt sad that I threw a bunch of proto-shade that people assembled into doubting. I think Hal was sincere, but I think what he was saying didn't make sense. The remote viewing part of it. Yes. And so I felt bad about like... What if it's possible?

What if it's just not possible most of the time? Well, for example, let's imagine he claims that they sent people to the bottom of the sea in submarines who were able to remote view. And so the water is acting as a screen where light can't get to the bottom of the Marianas Trench, for example. But neutrinos can. trench, for example. But neutrinos can. So if you imagine that there was some particle that could penetrate and be received, we have telescopes for photons, for gravitons, which is LIGO, and for neutrinos, which is like, I don't know, is that IceCube or Polar Bear? So you could imagine that there's some field that can penetrate the oceans that could be received. I can come up with a sci-fi story.

Right. So you would imagine that these neutrinos are containing information and that they're attached to everything all over the Earth. I'm not saying that that's what remote viewing is. Right. I know what you're saying. But I'm saying if you wanted to say, Eric, a gun is to your head. We believe in remote viewing. Tell me a fairy tale.

Right. I could come up with fairy tales. Okay. And that could be one of them yeah do you think that it's possible that there are states of consciousness that can be achieved through some form of meditation or some for some form of training the mind to get into a very specific focus that would allow you to access information that is otherwise unavailable. I don't have any experience in that. I haven't done it. Right? So I would imagine it can't be done because I can't do it or haven't done it. But isn't it possible that there are states of mind that can be achieved through

whether it's holotropic breathing or whether it's meditation, there's states of mind that are measurably achievable that are very different from the current consciousness. Two people are just talking. Is it possible that there's a way that some people have of occasionally tapping in to information that's unavailable to you or I right now. So let's do a junior version and then get to your question. Okay. Junior version is, is there a way that we can look inside your body without opening your body up to figure out whether you have pancreatic cancer? MRIs. Ah.

So tomography and the radon transform. MRIs. Ah. So tomography and the radon transform. The point is any sufficiently advanced mathematics or physics seems like deep black magic. Yeah. Indistinguishable from magic. Exactly.

So it's an Arthur C. Clarke problem. Now, if you ask me, I'm very freaked out about this cattle mutilation because people I know swear by it. They say this is absolutely, you know, come see the autopsies. There's been some weird ones for sure. Okay. They're fascinating. But, I mean, if you're going to come all the way here to fuck with our cows. Well, no. The issue is.

They don't do it to people is my point. The stapes. Yeah, but. Isn't that weird? Yeah, but the stapes, again, people think mammals are defined by like live birth and breasts and all. No. It's three bones in the ear, if I'm not mistaken. And those three bones have to do with insectivore ancestors who probably needed their ears detached from their jaws so they could hear high-pitched whining.

That's a theory. We don't know if it's true. Okay. Now, those three little bones, that mean so much, what they do is they transmit sound through the tympanic membrane to the organ of Corti so that the cilia in this rolled-up seashell in your ear vibrate at particular frequencies. So when I'm talking to you and I say, Joe, that's absolutely ridiculous. What I'm doing is I'm stimulating

different hair follicles in your organ of cordy to vibrate at different times. Or if I go, wise men say, that's tone three halves frequencies above back to same tone. That's tone three halves frequencies above back to same tone. Those things are perceived as pitch. I could imagine something caring about the idea of how do I communicate thoughts through the tympanic membrane using the stapes. Does it sound exotic? Yes. Does it sound like bullshit?

Absolutely. However, it's not outside of the realm using the doubly scientific method, which is you imagine that there's intelligence on the other end of this thing, and it's going to use every trick in the book because it's smarter than we are to figure out how to communicate with us. Now, have I gone out into the desert? Have I prayed? Have I tried to get these things to talk to me? I have. Right? I'm an atheist.

But these things have a religious effect on people. They view them as angels. They view them as transcendent beings. They think that Ezekiel, the book of Ezekiel, is about this stuff. It's like, okay. It's only my self-respect. It's not, you know, I'm going to run an experiment because it's cheap. Why wouldn't I do that?

Why wouldn't I do that heartfelt? Every Friday, Joe, you should come to our family for Shabbat dinner. We pray. We may be atheists, but not on Friday night. Friday night we believe. Right? And my claim is that there are plenty of opportunities using the doubly scientific method if something is much smarter than us and is able to communicate these things maybe it said to hal

look we can't interfere with you because we have a prime directive but we can give you indirect hints you know i what do i know i don't know know anything. Do I think it's likely? No. I think Hal is probably not correct. Right? But is it impossible to communicate with somebody below the bottom of the sea? No, it's not impossible. Even using neutrinos, it's not impossible. Is there any mechanism that implements it? None that I'm aware of.

Do we listen for neutrino events? 100%. 1987A, the supernova. I believe that the photons and the neutrinos were screaming at us and arrived almost at the same time because the neutrinos we now know have a tiny mass. So they wouldn't be traveling at quite the speed of light. Now, the point is, let's imagine that we had Neil deGrasse Tyson on. He's not having any of this shit. He's not having any of this shit.

He's locked in to, because he's not really a physicist at a practicing level, he has to worry about his respectability. He is 100% one of the most brilliant people at scientific exposition I've ever seen in my life. But he can't think, he's not ready to do great science because great science has an element of irresponsibility to it. And what we don't understand, I think, about it is that when we decide that everybody has to do good science, it's like you doom yourself. Many of the greatest scientists of all time were borderline quacks. The belief, for example, that Watson and Crick had that DNA had to be a helix. I mean, Jim Watson's somebody I know, and I dealt with four days straight.

The reason he beat Rosalind Franklin is that she couldn't spend one day not being a good scientist. She was a good scientist, and he admitted he was not. Okay? But he was convinced it had to be a helix. And from her perspective, it's like, oh, you want to be Linus Pauling who figured out the alpha helix in protein. So you're going to take Linus's work and you're going to superimpose it on DNA and explain my Maltese cross.

And it's not about male versus female. Absolutely. Jim Watson claims that if Rosalind Franklin had spent one afternoon thinking it was a helix, she would have gotten it before he did. That's an extremely generous, kind, feministic belief. She was a good scientist. He admits he was not a good scientist, but he was a great scientist. And that's the big difference. Great scientists engage in quackery. But he was a great scientist. And that's the big difference.

Great scientists engage in quackery. Carey Mullis taking LSD or getting stone out of his mind, coming up with the preliminary chain reaction, is an example of great science. Right? Richard Feynman claiming that a particle takes every possible path it can simultaneously does not make sense. But it's great science. It's not good science science so it's almost like

guitar playing say more you can be very technically proficient or you can figure out a way to do something someone hasn't done before and do it in a way where you're, you're, you're create, you're, you're using creativity and science together. Okay. Does this make sense? If you look at,

for example, Jeff Beck's version of drown in my own tears with Jules Hall. That is one of the greatest vocal performances I've ever heard. I cried. I pulled over to the side of the road and wept when I heard that thing. Because he died, and I was just like,

yeah, whatever, Jeff Beck died. I know he's supposed to be the greatest. It's like I have no time for Jeff Beck. I got to drive him once. What? When I was a limo driver. Hold up. Yeah.

Wait, break from UFOs. You have to tell me you're Jeff Beck's dad. I was supposed to drive driver. Hold up. Yeah. Wait. Break from UFOs. You have to tell me you're Jeff Bexley. I was supposed to drive Steve Ray Vaughan, but Steve Ray Vaughan refused to take a limo. Steve Ray Vaughan would always take cabs. Isn't that wild? And I was a giant Steve Ray Vaughan fan because my boxing coach was a huge fan. He would always play that song. Oh, God.

There's a bunch of them. But is it Ireland? Is that? He has this one song. Oh, God, there's a bunch of them. But is it Ireland? Is that? He has this one song. Never heard of this. Oh, my God. This guy used to hit the bag and play this one song by Stevie Ray Vaughan,

and I can't remember what fucking song it was. But I became fascinated with Stevie Ray Vaughan because of my friend. And as I was driving limos, I had an opportunity to drive. I was like, oh, my God, I'm going to pick up Stevie Ray Vaughan. This is insane. But as he was with Jeff Beck, I'm like, yeah, that's pretty cool. So I drove Jeff Beck, but it was to me, it's like, I was an idiot.

I didn't know. Yeah. I, uh, I also got a chance to, uh, pick up Annie Lennox security guy, which is fascinating, dude. I really love talking to him. was a lot of fun and so I got to see I was like as close to you are as to Annie Lennox and uh this was when the Eurythmics were huge and she was in this restaurant and I swear to god dude her voice was like a like a cable wire when she would talk yeah it would it would almost like she had a nuclear voice like even just her talking you would you would like knowing how beautiful her voice was when she sang you realize like oh my god she's like an athlete like she's like an athlete talking just the way her voice was carrying in this conversation like this is amazing her voice is incredible and i was realizing like oh wow that's like a trained skill like a ballerina

Where their vocal core I believe before it was trained It was just I have the same feeling about Eva Cassidy and Annie Lennox. It's just that these people are not part of reality Well is a gymnast a part of reality I mean they developed that ability I mean that I think that's what it is. I think we're seeing the final product We're not understanding that there's this long journey and some people have more physical gifts than others, others do, but that's what gymnasts as well. Okay. You ever heard Eva Cassidy gets sick and sing stormy Monday and something about the sickness causes her voice to do something that no voice has ever done. Oh no. Oh dude. This is like heroin heroin um wow jeff beck is more vocal than these people

this version of drowning my own tears which is a cover ray charles did a cover version of it and he figured out what the song was supposed okay yeah hit me whatever Oh. Ugh. What a bad motherfucker what a bad motherfucker by the way i just want to say something uh that you're not going to want me to say but fuck you uh i was hanging out with his bass player tall wilkenfeld and she got covid and I heard that you sent a nurse with an IV with all of this sort of stuff to get Tal Wilkenfeld, this unbelievable bass player that just- She's my friend. Yeah, but she's like a next level human being.

She is. I love her. She's great. I know, but like, you know, you take a lot of shit from stupid shit that you do. What a big heart you have. And nobody even knows what you do for people around you. And I just want to say thank you. Okay. That was an unauthorized thing.

I want to get back to it. Thank you. Okay. The Jeff Beck thing. There she is. Oh, my God. Right? Like she's 12 years old.

Let me hear some of this. right like she's 12 years old this is Costa Rica Wow I like how they have the little Indian rugs on stage that's pretty dope So it's Incubus with Mike Einziger and Brandon Boyd. And that was Costa Rica where they were getting blown away and she couldn't even see properly because her hair was getting blown into her eyes. I met her at the store. She's friends with Tony Hinchcliffe. That's how I became friends with her.

Yeah, she doesn't want to hang out with music people. She wants to hang out with scientists and comedians. She loves hanging out with comics. She hangs out with us all the time. She's cool as fuck. She can hang. She's really cool to talk to. But Incubus is also, they're really into science.

They're the most down-to-earth rock stars. Jeff Beck. That's awesome. So, you know, in terms of vocal performance, I did not understand what this guy was able to do multidimensionally with that whammy bar and using the slide as a plectrum. Did Yngwie Malmsteen play a million notes a second? But it was just like, I'm going to spend my entire life not becoming a rock star, but becoming the ultimate technician because of the things I feel in my soul that I want to share with you people. And I didn't get this.

And the only way I found Tal is that I thought like, okay, I was always thinking I'd get around to Jeff Beck. And then he died. I was like, okay, whatever. I'm too busy. And I started feeling shitty about it. I thought, what happened to his bassist? And I found out she followed me.

And I was completely unprepared for like these people who are channeling the universe directly through music. Yeah. Right? Yeah. That's what it is, right? That's what it is. When someone like a Gary Clark Jr. plays guitar, there's like something.

Who you introduced me to at the store when I never met him. You know, it's just like. He's a fucking man. Well, music, science, and humor are my three things that I use to measure human intelligence. You can't use an IQ test to get up in the stratosphere. These are the three things that actually discriminate. Humor, music, and science. Like, in general, I can assure you that when you order a sandwich at Subway, if you do so, you don't do it in any particularly special way.

But let me just say this. I saw you work up this thing about professional wrestling is gay over many nights because you kept inviting me to the store. And, you know, like this whole controversy about you and Jews and money, it really hurt me because I've never seen anybody as non-bigoted as you. And I've hung out with you drunk. And this stuff would come out. And it's just like such bullshit but i did have this like envy which is i want to be the gaze and get you to work up actually what's going on with jews and money and take the william tell shot where you get past this sort of dime store stupid

shit and actually like basically the thing about about Jews and money is the Jews that had money survived. And the Jews that didn't have money died in the camps. And every diaspora community, whether it's the overseas Chinese, or you have the Parsis in India, or you have the Gujaratis in the east of Africa, the issue isn't money, Joe. It's liquidity. All of us diaspora communities have to have liquidity or when things turn bad, we get screwed. Right? And there is some routine. What I found about you and the gays

and professional wrestling thing, just for people who don't know, I was sitting there at the comedy store and Joe says, i was watching professional wrestling and it is so gay that is definitely not how i set it up wait a second at all and the audience that freaks out that's definitely not how it was set up and then you turned around and looked at us and you said wait a minute i didn't say it was bad. You did that. Yeah. Right. And it was like this, wait, wait, wait, what? He just turned all the negative energy in the room on us for our latent homophobia.

And then it was like, we all had it. And then we realized we had it. And then if I was sitting next to a gay guy and I started the evening homophobic, I guarantee you by the end of that act, which you figured out over multiple times that I saw, we were sitting there ready to hug each other. And I want you to do the same thing for us Jews. I want you, no, I want you to figure out your fucking money and Jewish thing and do for us what you did for the gays

because that was a transformative experience. When I saw Chlle take that shot on behalf of kanye i i have to take a kanye detour okay people do not understand what happened with kanye and i want to talk about this from a jewish perspective kanye in 2018 for some reason candace owens of all people was like my fan. And she called me up. She said, I'm meeting with Kanye, which is my dream.

I want you to be there. Like what? All right. I show up. Kanye is the most kind, creative, mentally ill, wonderful,

generous person you could imagine. That's a great way to put it. Okay. Kanye is like, can you come over tomorrow? Can you great way to put it. Okay. Kanye is like, can you come over tomorrow? Can you come out to Calabasas? We're like hanging out, me and Kanye,

as if this makes any effing sense. By the way, he's got an NDA that is the most ghetto lawyer thing I've ever seen. He's like, if you say anything about this meeting, we'll take your child,

we'll take your left testicle, you will have nothing. I'm like, I am not signing this. Well, you're not meeting Kanye. It's like, fine, it's only Calabasas. I'll take an Uber home, F you. They call up Kanye, like, don't make him sign, just come through.

So I come through. And I'm like hanging out with Kanye, like geek and the rap god. And like, he's got this videographer who's like filming everything. And I'm like, I cannot deal with this person, send him away. So he sends him away. And Kanye and I have this heart to heart. And let me tell you something. This is uncomfortable to say. I cannot imagine a kinder,

more creative, more gentle, more loving, more inclusive person. He invites me on the spot to a listening party for his new tracks. And I say, I have to get home to Pia and the kids. He's like, well, you don't understand. It's Kanye's album. I'm dropping it. And he's like, I don't care. It's my wife and my kids. I got to get home. So he's like, okay, come to Wyoming. So he's inviting me to Wyoming with him. I'm like, dude, I'm a math person. Cut it out. He's like, well, you have to come to Wyoming. All right. We start talking about the concept of slavery in Jewish and black tradition.

Now, part of the reason that Jews and blacks have very high tension is because we have very similar experiences. We both have a really deep relationship to slavery. In our case, it's Passover. In their case, you know, it's the history we all know. And I say to Kanye, there are three levels of slavery in Jewish thought. There's chattel slavery, where we're actually enslaved. Then there's cultural slavery, where we're a diaspora community in other people's lands. And then there's self-slavery, where we can't get past ourselves. And Kanye, we're grooving all this stuff, having this heart to heart. We're walking around Cal calabasas and people are yelling out of car windows like you know kanye we love you and like every time they do it i remember that there's a crip alert the crips have issued

an alert from long beach that if kanye strays out of calabasas he's to be taken out what yeah when was this i don't know look up crip alert Alert in Kanye. Jesus Christ. It's 2018. Okay. So Kanye's like, okay, there are three levels. We're vibing, blah, blah, blah. And I get this call from Kanye the next day because I'm not... Is he Crip Alert for Kanye West? I'm just thinking I'm going to be killed in a drive-by shooting because I can't get home to my wife because I'm hanging out with Kanye. Nothing makes sense in the world. Wow.

Okay. Jesus Christ. Now, I'm hanging out with Kanye. Nothing makes sense in the world. Wow. Okay. Jesus Christ. Now, I get this call from Kanye. He's like, oh, Eric, I can't tell you how amazing this all is. I was just at TMZ and I was explaining the theory about slavery and how this whole thing works and Jews and Passover. I was explaining how much I love Hitler. I'm like, what did you say? I was explaining how much I love Hitler. I'm like, what did you say? I was explaining how much I love Hitler. It's like, huh? I missed a meeting, a memo, something. And I realized, okay,

Kanye is focused on the spiritual Sunday thing. And I realized what this is, is Jesus. Jesus loves everybody. No matter how horrible you are, Jesus loves you. Okay? And Kanye is thinking, what would Jesus do? And I'm realizing, like, I'm thinking at top speed. Like, he's talking about Hitler at TMZ, whatever. I said, Kanye, I want you to listen to me. He's like, yeah.

I said, I want you to run to TMZ. They don't want to destroy you. I guarantee it because you're a long-term property that matters. And there's no reason that they would want to destroy you. And I want you to beg them not to release what you said. Don't question me. Just do it. He runs to TMZ and they don't release this thing.

And I guarantee you that they have the videotape. So when you hear that the Jews, and I love Dave Chappelle, but this thing he did on Saturday Night Live was not right. Okay. yes jews are so fucking traumatized that we are super sensitive to anything that makes it possible for people to tell can i stop you for a second sure he has to do that that's his job his job is to make fun of something that's in the zeitgeist i hear you that is in the zeitgeist I know you're gonna say the fact that Kanye West is being accused of this Antisemitism and Dave Chappelle is hosting Saturday Night Live Yeah He's got this fake letter and he goes and that Kanye West is how you buy some time that shit was fucking hilarious

There's nothing not right. That was fucking hilarious. Sorry, Joe. I'm going to go toe-to-toe with you on this one. You don't think that was funny? Oh, not only was it funny, Dave Chappelle is a fucking William Tell-level artist. He took his bow at an incredible distance and hit an apple off of somebody's head. So what is wrong with that? Ah. The issue is that it opens up this issue for people who are not at dave chapelle's level

okay so you made a joke about pizzas italians so you have to let me tell you a piece or your joke to the dumbest people no no no no no no no no no no no that your problem joe to be honest with you is that you and dave chape and Dave Chappelle are held in such high regard by me. And I completely defended you, 100%. This man has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. 100%. Well, thank you. No, you don't need me. Appreciate you.

There's nothing... I do need you. Love you too. I love you. Here's to some bullshit. Love you too. too no you don't need to defend me because there's no there's not a trace of it in you so him wait wait wait i'll do it okay please okay i view you guys as the marksman you're the surgeons you're the fucking neurosurgeons who can get between two neurons and cut the bad one and leave the good one.

That is, to me, I know that you guys think it's about mockery, it's about having fun, blah, blah, blah. I've been through the comedy mill. There is an aspect to Carlin's comedy, for example, or Richard Pryor's or Lenny Bruce's that is timeless and immortal because it, comedy is so much more than getting a belly laugh. It's at a different level. I expect you guys to work, to keep, I want you to keep workshopping that thing till it finds its actual highest level.

I'll tell you the joke about pizza's money in juice, right? level. I'll tell you the joke about pizza's money in Jews, right? I used to go to the Harvard School in Los Angeles, which was the top, most exclusive Episcopalian school in LA. And I was sandwiched between these two beautiful, muscular Aryan men, and they would make the following joke. Hey, Eric, what's the difference between pizzas and Jews? A pizza doesn't scream when you put it in an oven, right? That's a terrible joke. It's a terrible joke. And I lived it every fucking day. Okay. What is welling up right now on Twitter with Elon purchasing this is a huge amount of antisemitism.

And what we need as a country, as you and I both know, and we've both been in the same fight, is we need a massive coming together. We need to laugh together. We need to break bread together. We need to marry each other and have babies so that we're effectively indistinguishable from each other eventually. We need love. And partially what the function of humor is, is to facilitate that. This is how Jon Stewart reported the news. Hey, I'm the fake news, but he was actually reporting what? The real news. Okay. It is my reverence for Dave Chappelle,

which says that he fell short of his mark. He took the shot and he hit the apple. He didn't hit the kid, but he made it look like everybody could do that. And now we've got an enormous number of anti-Semites who are focused on this thing, right? I was on your show years ago. We asked this question about Jews and physics, and I made a joke of it. He said, like, why are there so many Jews in physics? And I said, well, I guess we're lucky in physics. I'm done with that too. We have taken this language about underrepresentation into our souls through this diversity, equity, inclusion. And if you ask about underrepresentation, you have to ask about overrepresentation. And you know who's overrepresented? Jews. And now we're calling

it the Jewish question. Why are there so many fucking Jews? Jews, Jews, Jews, Jews. Because we're fucking great at physics. And we're great at comedy. And I'll tell you something, you want to get rich? I know that you're rich and you're a comic, but in general, is comedy a good way to make money? No, it's a terrible way to make money. And how many people are there in it? Jews everywhere. We've got Jews who are poor, Jews who are rich, this and that. Jews are basically humans turned up to 11. We're on all extremes. We're more criminal than other people. We're less criminal than other people. We are in such danger at the moment because everything is breaking down. And when you can't figure out what's causing you a problem, people are always going to blame diaspora communities. They're going to blame overseas Chinese. They're going to blame Gujaratis. They're going to blame Parsis. They're going to blame Jews. And we are vulnerable right now. And the issue wasn't that Chappelle was great. Do we have anyone better than Chappelle? He's a genius. Straight up gangster genius. Amazing. What we're looking for is routines

that elevate us beyond what Dave Chappelle turned in. I'm not claiming that Chappelle didn't make a hilarious routine. I'm claiming something different. I'm claiming that right now we need to heal. You don't think this humor helps us heal? You don't think that that was funny? And that that, first of all, no one laughing at that is laughing because they're anti-Semitic, right? No, no. People are laughing just because it's a brilliant thing. It's funny. He's poking at the bear in the room that Kanye West fucked up. Okay.

And he's like, and this. You remember Owen Benjamin? Sure. Okay. I think Owen Benjamin is brilliant. He did so many great routines. Really insightful, incredibly clever, made me laugh. And he went down a bad path at some point.

And I'm sad about it because I think he's a genius. I think the best of Owen Benjamin is fantastic. What do you think causes people to go down bad paths? Because they don't know what's controlling them. They don't know what's going wrong. I'll tell you the Jewish strategy straight up is we over-contribute, we over-succeed, we over-contribute. You want to know who built America as a superpower? It's Edward Teller. It's Stanislav Ulam. It's Robert Oppenheimer. When you allow Jews into

your country, we pay more taxes. We do more philanthropy. We make tons of fucking money. We do some criminal shit that's stupid. We've exploited people, which is unfair. It's a complicated equation, but that's our equation for survival. On balance, we over-contribute, over-succeed, and we love you. We want to be strong. We're loyal. And right now, people are scared that there's something that is denaturing our entire society, Joe. Right? We're not ourselves.

We're not strong. We're not confident. We can't be masculine. We can't have children. We're tiptoeing around trans. And the suspicion for who is keeping us from having a normal interaction is always going to be Jews. You want to know why I'm all over the Epstein thing? Because maybe it is Israel.

And if it is Israel, it's not Israel. It's like a tiny department inside of the Mossad. And maybe it's our own intelligence services, but I'll be goddamned if it isn't a Jew who isn't going to be pushing this. Now, I've been invited to South America, for example, by a very prominent dual national between the United States and Israel. a very prominent dual national between the United States and Israel. It's like, why don't you come down to my ranch, Eric, where we have fun with Sendera Luminoso, like the Shining Path.

It's like, what does that mean? I'm being intimidated, Joe. I'm being threatened. Because obviously Jeffrey Epstein looks a lot like Ellie Cohen, the super spy of Israel who held orgies in his Damascus apartment. Right. Now, I don't know. Jeffrey Epstein may be a U.S. intelligence product. It may be a joint product. It may be an Israeli product. I don't know.

But I can tell you this. It's not the Jews who are behind Jeffrey Epstein. And I will be goddamned if I won't be pushing that because I'm going to stand up for 12-year-old girls, whoever they are. This is an immoral human being. I've been on this since the beginning. It's not fair. So we do do this thing where in some sense you have to understand how traumatized we are as a people. When I hear we aren't oppressed because we drive fancy cars, it's like my first cousin once removed died on the train out of Kiev when the Germans invaded, froze to death. My cousin is a Mengele twin who forgave Mengele, which is what Kanye was trying to do.

He was trying to say, I'm Jesus. I can tell that Hitler deserved love and deserved admiration. And it's like, well, look up Eva Kor, right? You have this tiny, tiny Jewish person, my cousin, who forgave Mengele. If there's anybody worse than Hitler, it might be Mengele, right? Kanye was in the wrong scene. He wasn't equal to the thing he was taking on. It wasn't his to forgive Hitler and to celebrate Hitler. He's not Jesus. But I feel terrible about what happened to Kanye.

And I'll tell you one of the reasons I feel terrible about it. Because all of us were enjoying Kanye's mental illness. His genius comes straight out of his mental illness. And we loved him because he was so unfiltered, so real. So when I see Rihanna holding him up, my feeling is, no, it's not for you to hold him up. I tried to save Kanye. I didn't even say anything about it. Right? And Kanye, I think, turned on me. He stopped returning my phone calls because he felt manipulated. But the fact of the matter was I wanted Kanye to persist and I didn't want his

comment about I love Hitler and TMZ to take him out because I thought he was a force for good. So yes, there may be Jews that are exploiting him financially, but there are also Jews who are trying to save him as I believe Lex tried to do a million times. And it's like, hey, we love each other. Ultimately, we're all family. And the thing that I want out of humor is I want our best comedians to be a level or two above where they already are. So that was my complaint about Dave Chappelle. It wasn't that Dave Chappelle wasn't funny.

He's funny as hell. It's like I thought beyond that. You should have done a routine that brought us all 100% together. And what you did was that you did a routine because you tried to get it at this level. My opinion of Dave Chappelle is that he's way up here. Let me explain how a monologue works. Please. There's a big difference between a monologue and a stand-up set.

If Dave was going to do a stand-up set on that, he would work that at multiple different clubs a night, and he would do it over months. It would be something that he would experiment one way. He would add things to it. He would subtract the shit that he didn't like anymore. It takes time. It takes time. Well, that's what you invited me to see. Yes.

Right? Well, you've seen it, so you understand how it goes. You showed it to me. Yeah. But you saw it in actual practice. On 100%. And I got to tell you how much more I value watching you as an intellect, which you often run away from. I'm just a comedian.

I watched you look at the crowd as feedback and change your act and change your act and change your act until it just sang. Well, thank you. But while you're doing that, you're trying to find the beats. It's a rare art form where you're practicing it in front of people. And the difference between a monologue, which Dave has to prepare for in a very short amount of time, versus a set. Like if you want him to have a very complex and nuanced take on a subject, it's going to take time. It'll take a little time to figure out. And, I mean, I can only speak for myself but my process is months yeah I have

some bits and then they they start off great and then they die and then they come back and then they fucking keep get better and some bits they I have to abandon them they just they're not working they're not growing whatever it is and you don't know until you try it in front of an audience. And I tried a bunch of different ways. And sometimes I try and I'm like, oh, my God, what the fuck have I got myself into? And I have to pull myself out of the bush. But it's because there's this experimental aspect to doing live stand-up in front of these crowds.

And after a while, when listening to us talk on podcasts, a lot of fans now know. Most people don't, though. Most people have no idea what's going on, which is good because you just want them to have fun. But there's a thing going on where you're trying to sculpt it. If he wanted to take that subject and advance it to this Dave Chappelle, you know, coral belt in jiu-jitsu level, because that's what he is,

he would figure out a way to do it. And he would have it in a way that wouldn't be objectionable and i don't i didn't find it objectionable i thought it was a hilarious take on something that was current it was in the news it was a thing he was just mocking the fact that kanye was being attacked he was not diminishing it in any way he was making light out of there was a target. He hit it. That's how it is. Like that's what you're saying. And my response to this and that's what I say to my fellow Jews. I say, look, I don't want more. I don't want less Joe Rogan or less Dave Chappelle. I trust these people. I want more. I want to go to the uncomfortable place so that we can all actually open it up. Just like if you were doing md mdma

assisted therapy right yeah the idea is if you don't actually touch the thing that's uncomfortable which is like why are you so fucking successful why do they have so much money why are they in control it's like i want to go through that and i trust you guys both of you uh and there are probably a few other people that i trust to do it, but it's not many. And the point being, which is that when other people were quick to say, this is anti-Semitic, this is uncomfortable, this is this, I had a different response, which is, and I think you're teaching me, it's not the monologue that you want.

You want the routine that is workshopped and perfected. Yeah, the routine takes a long time. Maybe I didn't have that, but I would say the following. I believe that ultimately, and I don't want to make it the job of the community, but ultimately that is what it is, is teach us how to live with each other and love each other when we have these deep suspicions of each other. Right. Because we do have these deep suspicions. And right now, everything that our government is doing, which is holding back more and more and more information, makes us suspicious. Who's really behind this? What's really going on, right? And this is a recipe for another Holocaust. Because if you're asking, well, who's really behind this? I guarantee you one of the answers

is always, it's those those guys we are counting on you and i just want you to know that and how much love we have and that's why it's a it's not an obligation to stand up for you when you come under fire like the whole n-word thing it's like i posted one picture with my arm around you like any questions you know you guys are essential. It's not just that it's fun to go out because it is fun. But the point is, Jon Stewart was doing a real job reporting the news when nobody could report the news. And in a large measure, comedy or MDMA, something like that, is necessary for us to examine our bullshit. And it's not a task for you because if I say that to you, you're like, dude, you're loading too much onto it.

I know how comedians think. No, it's not that. It's that you really only want to take on subjects that you find fascinating in that moment. Like when you write out ideas, it has to be genuine. It has to be a thing where you're trying to work something through. It can't be an assignment.

Yeah, I don't understand a lot of antisemitism and I don't understand a lot of racism. I don't understand it. It doesn't make sense to me. Because it's not natural to you. It's also there's too many fascinating people from all walks of life. Everyone.

The idea that you would categorize people by what geography they're from or what color their skin is, that to me seems so ridiculous and so stupid that I don't entertain it. I know. It's not a thing that bounces around in my head. So even to workshop it and defend it, to me it's like, oh my God, there's so many more interesting things about people. What's interesting to me about people is the individual human beings take and the accumulation of all of our takes together. When we try to work through this thing, what is this thing that we're experiencing together? What is this? What is culture? What is the learned history of all the human beings that have ever lived before us? Like what is the purpose of our existence here? What is the the actual?

Size of the cosmos that we're existing in like all these different things. It's finite nature of our existence What is good about community and love and friendship? What is good about all those things all those things are interesting to me But when it gets to like sexual orientation or color, it's like, who cares? I don't care. It's just humans. I said there's no – I didn't want to defend it on any particular thing. My point was I've never seen any bigotry at all because of this radical love. Sorry for saying it, but like I know that you love all walks of life.

And you don't need anyone to say that. So I was almost embarrassed to say it. But like to me, we're in an emergency situation, whether you can feel it or not. Like if you look at – there's a guy named – what is it? Oh, he's figured out Leather Apron Club, which is both the name for the Junto that Benjamin Franklin established, which is something that we revere. And Leather Apron was the name for Jack the Ripper. So it's very clever. Mott and Bailey, right? But he like, he tracks, like how many Jewish people does Joe Rogan have on his program? You know? And it's incredibly important that all of us who are in a position to do this, who don't have to necessarily worry about our next paycheck at a company, help everyone come together.

Because right now our government isn't helping us come together. We're all sort of vaguely suspicious of each other. And nobody wants the assignment, in my opinion, of like doing work. It's also a very dumb distraction. To be distracted by our differences is so foolish. It's just so unnecessary. Like our differences are what empowers us. Because if it wasn't for all the different cultures that exist in the United States,

it's one of the reasons why it's so fascinating here is because this is a country of immigrants. You know, with me, it's my grandparents and, you know, with other people, they're direct descendants or they've come over here from somewhere else. Everyone here is from somewhere else. And we're all interacting with each other. And look at what's been created here. Look at the amount of- And we've succeeded for the most part after a tremendous number of missteps. Yes. Right? And so partially what you and I are both animated by, which is like, look, we're not even done with the work, but look how far we've come and look at what a shining example this is to

everyone else. And this is like, I wish I could communicate, Joe, how much fear I have right now as a Jewish person on Twitter with the well of hatred that I feel coming up, which has been suppressed. And you want to know what I want? I want the anti-Semites to speak up. I want to hear them. I want them to have free speech. You have two choices in a society like this. You can either try to control what people think and what they say, or you can have a cultural penalty for saying something that is horrible. And I want us to have free speech with a cultural penalty for these things, as opposed to having to regulate what you can and cannot say.

And this issue, like, I don't know, is it Daryl Davies? You know, like these incredibly commendable, courageous people who wade right into the belly of the beast and bring love. You know, this was the thing that I wanted for Kanye. He was trying to say something else. I don't want him destroyed. I don't want him to continue to destroy himself where he's hanging out with Milo and Nick Fuentes and all this nonsense. He was trying to say Jesus told us to love each other. Right. And he was fucking up the message. Right.

And the issue is I don't want a Jewish black rift in the middle of America. Well, you don't want any rifts, right? Not just Jewish, but any rifts at all. And if we take it to the thing that you were talking about in the beginning with the fear of what's going on right now with Russia and Ukraine, in the absence of this idea that we're supposed to be opposed to other people. Right. People that we don't even fucking know. Right.

Like, why would there be any conflict at all between Russia and Ukraine? Why would there be any conflict at all between us and them? Because they're so close. They're almost the same thing. But what is going on? Someone is controlling people to get people to do things for research. There's a game that we don't understand. And you're a part of it whether you like it or not

And now that's what's fun. Not only that by psychos and I can tell you I have so much Ukrainian trauma Because my family ran away from like pogroms, right? Do I support Ukraine hundred percent because they were invaded by Russia? Hello, do I support this at the level that I want world war three to happen no no one should want that no one should want that and you're trying to have this complicated thing which is like look there's serious shit in our past but you're being hurt by a power but we partially antagonize the power i'm trying to pull all this a lot of money involved oh my god and not only that a lot of money involved and this is the thing this is the thing where I didn't understand with Sam. It's like he says, there's nothing you can tell me about Hunter Biden. It's like Burisma. There is money that flows through Ukraine because it is a place where there are chemical labs and biological labs and there's Bakhshish and payment and all this kind of stuff. And my feeling is we're not allowed to know. We're not allowed to pull it apart. it apart we're just supposed to say you know it's on the other side of the ideological fence you're

not even allowed to examine it right and my feeling is crazy this is my children i'm on this planet you're going to potentially create a nuclear holocaust over something where you're getting paid in a way that i'm not and if we don't fundamentally figure out how to love each other and to coexist and to celebrate each other and and this is another thing about, like, I'll tell you a Jewish thing. We have this one story we repeat every year in the Passover story, which is our name for Egypt is Mitzrayim. And Mitzrayim means the narrow places. And it's literally like the birth canal. It's the second birth of the Jewish people.

And right now, all of earth is Mitzrayim. This is the womb. And you say like, you know, somebody, not you, but like somebody says, well, the Jews consider themselves the chosen people. Do you know why we're chosen? We view ourselves as chosen, not because like we're the best or that, because we're responsible. We believe that we are responsible for this planet. And we unleashed, we Jews, Edward Teller and Stanislaw Ulam, both Jews, unleashed the power of the sun on the planet, which is dooming us to a very bad end. And I believe that we are chosen in the sense that it is our responsibility,

not our privilege, not our this, not our that, not that we're on top, but it's our responsibility to shepherd the birth of the human race into an interstellar species. And like, does that sound far reaching? Does that sound crazy? A hundred percent to my ears, that sounds nuts. 100% to my ears, that sounds nuts. But ultimately, in my opinion, we feel responsible, not for ourselves, not to save ourselves, but for the entire planet.

And I hope that other cultures feel the same responsibility and that they feel chosen in the same way. But right now, if you want to ask me, I forego all sorts of financial opportunity because I feel like we unleashed holy hell on earth that may be a civilization ending thing. And what are we going to do about it? If we are open, we have to realize that what we unleashed to take care of Hitler and Nazism and the barbarity of Japan, like the rape of Nanking, we now have to deal with for all time. And this is like really important to us. We need to shepherd civilization to safety.

And if you think about the Passover story, it's a tremendous question. Why repeat this one story that seems bizarre? Like you're enslaved in Egypt. You follow some crazy leader. You go through the Red Sea. You wander around the desert for 40 years and you find the promised land. This is the story of where we are exactly at this minute. It's not like an old-fashioned stupid fairy tale.

It's like you've been telling the story every year for a reason because the people who waited for the bread to rise, that's why we eat unleavened bread, died. And the people who understood early, okay, this sounds completely crazy, but you're going to have to make a break for it through the Red Sea, wander around in pain before you actually get to safety. That is the story of right now. And to bring it back to the UFOs, my feeling about this is I'm largely on this program right now not to promote a book. I don't have a Patreon yet. Maybe one day. Who knows? There's nothing I'm promoting other than the fact that right now we are in so much mortal danger as a human species.

Think about everything that you love, whether it's Drown in My Own Tears or Box B Minor Mass or the works of Shakespeare. Gone forever. Back to the Stone Age. I refuse. And this is what I've had such a hard time. It's like, well, Eric, you're so arrogant. You're so, you're insane. You're crazy. It's like, no, I know what time it is. And I love you. And I love all you people. We're getting out of here and we're going to do it and we're not going to embrace any of this kind of stupid division. It's now time. It's like this is Shackleton's story. Shackleton stepped up when any normal human being would say, look, take whatever resources you have and have a good time because you're done.

It's like, no, you know, we're down. It's the ninth inning. This is a bad situation. This is the time that legends are made. And we're sitting around worried about like, can I get the Tesla with gullwing doors? It's like, fuck that shit.

Now is the time for legends. And whether you know that that this is the time or not, we have to come together. And that's one of the reasons that I wanted you to understand how much I appreciated what you've done for underprivileged groups, people who are hurting. People don't really understand how big your heart is because you hide it. And that's one of the things I wanted for the Jewish people and I wanted from you, which is like more Chappelle, more Joe Rogan, more humor, more love. Let's get through this thing. Let's, let's stop blaming each other. Let's stop blaming each other and let's go pee again. Wrap this up. We're at like four hours. Dude, we've been rambling. You've been rambling. You've been saying some

brilliant things though. And I appreciate you very much. And I appreciate you coming on here always. And, uh, I don't think we got any closer to understanding what the fuck UFOs are, but I understand more of it. Thank you, my friend. I'm in. Appreciate you very much. Appreciate you. Goodbye, everybody. Goodbye, everybody.