The Joe Rogan Experience - #2554 - Carlo Rovelli

Episode Date: September 15, 2026

Carlo Rovelli, PhD, is a theoretical physicist and author. His latest book, "On The Equality of All Things," will be available on September 15. www.simonandschuster.com/books/On-the-Equality-of-All-Things/Carlo-Rovelli/9781668092422 Perplexity: Download the app or ask Perplexity anything at https://pplx.ai/rogan. Don’t miss out on all the action this week at DraftKings! Download the DraftKings app today! Sign-up using https://dkng.co/rogan or through my promo code ROGAN. This episode is brought to you by Uber Eats. Get almost almost anything. Order now Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Joe Rogan podcast, checking out. The Joe Rogan Experience. Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day. Very nice to meet you. Joe Rogan, I'm very happy. Thank you very much for invited this invitation. I'm happy to talk to you. I've enjoyed your work, so this is very exciting for me.

Oh, fantastic. I've heard many conversations with you. First of all, please tell everybody what you do. What do I do? Yes. I should probably start more podcasts out this way. I do science, I do philosophy, I do some politics, I enjoy life, I fully love, I do all the things. All kinds of things.

All kinds of things, yes. Officially, my job description is a physicist. I do quantum gravity, theoretical physics. And the pitch that they sent me, I guess. Who is they? I don't know who the publicist are. On the equality of all things. Oh, the book.

It's the last book I publish. I'm going to publish. It's coming out here a few days. Yeah, it comes out September 15th, and what are we out today? Today is the 8th. This is a very fascinating subject. You're talking about that things don't exist in isolation, that everything is somehow connected.

Yeah. I've always sort of intuitively suspected that that was the case. There's probably something to that. But to hear a person like you say it, it makes me much happier. Like, okay, maybe I'm on the right track. Like, what gives you this inclination and why did you want to write about this? Yeah. I'm not surprised you say so because that you sort of feel that that makes sense.

Because, in a sense, is what we're used to, right, in our everyday life. We interact with persons. and persons are the way they interact with us and them, their relations and stuff. We always see things from our own perspective. Then somehow science, physics in particular, seemed to be telling us, okay, no, no, yes, okay, there is all this perspective, but there is an objective, fixed reality down there. We can look at it from the outside, is made by little things, each one which is its own properties. except that in the evolution of physics itself, in relatively recent time, the last century with quantum mechanics,

this idea of an objective reality doesn't work much. And so, in a sense, we're going back to a more intuitive picture of the world. The very idea of an objective reality down there might be wrong. In fact, I think it's wrong. And I think that's what quantum mechanics is telling us. So when you say objective reality, meaning the reality that we're seeing and experiencing, that this is just a tiny fraction of what's real or that we're getting a distorted perception of what's real? We are getting a perception, a perspective, on what is real.

I mean, I see you, you're real, of course. I see this pen. This pen is real, of course. I'm not denying that there is some reality. But the way you see the pen is different from mine, of course, just because you see it from the other side. So you have a perspective, have a perspective. And the question is, do all this perspective match perfectly into a unique objective reality of the pen? And I think quantum mechanics telling us, no.

Reality is this ensemble of perspectives. So the properties of the pen, where it is, it's color, how long it is, all the property of the pen. Now, not really properties of the pen is how the pen looks to you, how the pen looks to me, not just you and me as human beings, how the pen clashes another pen, how it affects another pen. So we should understand, I think, reality as this network of interaction, how things look to everything else. Which is a more beautiful picture of reality than just, you know, we being outside and looking from the outside. We're inside reality. We are part of reality.

So what we see is just a part of how things interact with one another, is how they interact with us. So when you're talking about objective reality, so one of the problem. that human beings have is our senses, and we assume that our senses see everything that's there to be seen. That doesn't really make sense. It seems like we see and hear and touch and feel everything we need to see to stay alive.

Yeah. To some extent, our senses are reliable, of course, right? Sure. I see a cap there. If I use a cap, it's worse. If it's hot, you put it down. Right. It probably is that if we take our senses

too literally, too seriously, we're wrong. And we know we're wrong. I mean, there's so many cases we find out we're wrong. And the reason I love science is when it corrects us in some big way. Think about that. Think about the sunset. Sunset is marvelous. You know, you sit by the ocean, you see the sun going down, going down, going down. It's beautiful. The sky becomes dark. So the sun goes down. but science has talked to us that's not really what happens

the sun doesn't move it stays there and it's actually us the earth is a big rock that is spinning and we are moving out of the light of the sun

and if you see the sun going down and remember that you can think about that you say oh my senses cheat me in telling me that the sun is moving but it's not moving I am moving

so that's a good example in which science has told us that things are not exactly like we see, they're in a different manner. I've always wondered what's the evolutionary benefit of the beauty of sunsets. Why are they so beautiful? Like, what is it about it that's so inspiring and so magnificent? It does something to people. It does something. It makes you feel different.

When the sun rises in the morning, you feel different. It has an effect on you. And I've always wondered, like, what is the purpose? of that. Like, why does that exist? Like, food tastes great because it's nutritious. You eat an orange. It's delicious because it's really good for you. There's, it seems to be something to beauty, especially natural beauty, like mountains. Like, when I look at them, I'm like, why is it so good to look at these? Why does it feel so good? Like, there's something to it. There's some weirdness that you can't just, you can't just chalk off to measure.

There's something going on. That's a great question. I love this question. Yes. I mean, of course, sunset and sunrise is crucial for us because we have been designed by evolution through millennia, hundreds of millennia, thousand of millennia, to sleep in the night

and go around in the day, which is just what our speeches do. Other speech, cats do the opposite. So they are certainly important for us. But our relation with the world, and I think you're putting your finger in it, it's not about knowledge about what to do. It's always emotional, right? I mean, food raises emotion.

We like it. So I don't know exactly where the emotion of Sunset and Sun and Right come from, but certainly the fact we have it points to the fact that if we have to understand ourselves and our relation with the world, we have to look at our emotions a lot, not just what we know, what we don't know. We have an emotional relation among ourselves and with things in the world, with mountains, with animals, with wild animals, with little things and one another. And then the rational part comes on top of it to say, oh, let's correct it, let's do it

a little bit better. I'm not denying the utility for the rational part, but this is an addendum to what we are. This episode is brought to you by Uber Eats. You can get almost anything delivered with Uber Eats. Sorry, you can't get a beach delivered, but you can get a peach. A canoe? No. Shampoo? Yes. A rocket? No way.

Chocolate? Yes, way. It's everything you need, including $10 off your first grocery order with code Anything 30. Get almost, almost anything with Uber Eats. Order now. Order minimum. of $30 required, valid on grocery, convenience, retail, specialty foods, or flower delivery orders only.

Terms and conditions apply. An addendum to what we are. The really weird thing for people that are studying the world must have been the understanding of quantum physics. Yes. That must have thrown the whole thing into a giant tizzy because now you're like, okay, well, at the lowest level, observable level, the small. smallest observable level of reality, you have magic.

That's exactly the point. Somehow, physics was supposed to be the path to objectivity, right? Physics is what guarantees that, all right, we're emotions, perspective, my view, your view, but down there there is physics. The world is just simple down there. There's stuff, there are atoms moving around, there forces, and that's it. And then, last century, during the 20th century. the physicist discovered that, no, no, that's not the case.

The world down there is even more perceptible, more complicated than in our everyday life. It was really hot. I mean, the physicists were very confused at the beginning of the century because they were making all this measurement on atoms, on radiation, electrons and stuff, and trying to make sense of it. And they couldn't, they couldn't, they couldn't. And at some point, I think it was Neil Spore, Danny. first one who said, well, we have to change the metaphysics here.

It's not just an issue about writing the right equation, the right force. We have to change the way we think about the world. Once again, okay? Like when we thought the Earth's move, or when we realize the field, electric fields, we change the way profoundly we think about reality. And quantum mechanics is one of these jumps. Now, Joe, we're still debating about us, right?

Physicists are debating about themselves and philosophers are debating. What the hell have we understood with quantum mechanics? Quantum mechanics telling us the world is not what we thought it is. And there is a conversation that's going on, a debate, sometimes furious. And somebody says, oh, you know, there is this immense wave function of the universe, other universe and stuff like that. Trying to hang on on the existence of something absolutely objective

down there, trying to multiply reality to make it objective. But I think it's this dream of an absolute objectivity, which is a mistake. The dream of an absolute objectivity is a mistake.

That's really fascinating. When they first started understanding that observing quantum interactions, changes them. Yeah. What was, how long did it take for them to even accept that? Like how many times did they have to run those experiments with particles and waves, with observers

versus not, before they said, okay, something's going on here. Yeah. Where it seems that when we watch things, it has an effect on them. Yeah. And a measurable effect. This is a real thing that's happening. Oh, yeah. This isn't woo-woo.

No, it's not voodoo. Exactly. It's not just smoking joint and getting high. These are the physicists, the one who was supposed to be the most rational objective guys. Well, what happened is that measurement piled up

all through the first 20 years of the 20th century. The measurement were a simple measurement, right? Atoms have emitted light and the light has special colors. This color is a spectrum of the light. And they were trying to make sense of that.

How does the electron move to produce that light? It didn't work, didn't work, didn't work. Then in Copenhagen there was a school in which there were debating almost that. Inillsborough is the first one who started saying, look, to understand the atom, we should not just look at the atom. We shouldn't understand how we look at it. If we look at it in one way, we see one thing. If we look at another way, we see another thing. That was very confused.

But then what happened is that in mathematics for describing the atoms came out. This is the theory, the mathematical theory of quantum mechanics. It works very well. It's used today everywhere. I mean, we talk with this microphone. There's quantum stuff inside. Circuits are designed with quantum properties of matter. So quantum mechanics is solid.

We know how to use it. It tells us, if you do this, you see this. If you do that, you see that. but it doesn't tell us in between. You do this and then if you do one thing, you see one thing, if you do another thing, you see another thing. And it doesn't give a story of what happened to the electron, to the quantum system itself.

So people got confused. The physicists got confused. And they started discussing how to think about that. So quantum mechanics is a strange theory. We know how to use it. It's like a black box. But we don't know what is inside the box. It gives the right answer, but we can't make a picture in our mind

of what happened in the atoms, in the things, in the electronic circuits. Even in a quantum computer, we don't know really what happened inside. That's so strange. Yes, but it works fantastically. And so physicists disagree. And some say, you know, there are extra variables that we are in principle, impossible to see who are, that's somebody who says that, who determines what happened

and they are uproar invisible others says you know they're parallel worlds in which words worlds I'm a material I know you're talking sorry

then there are others me including who think no no no it's really philosophical here we have to get rid of the idea that there is something there just by itself

what what is there is what affects me or what affects you or what affects another piece of matter. So we have to think of reality as processes of things affecting one another. Relations.

And you know, in a sense, down there, the simple physics is more like our everyday life than what we imagined in thinking that it was so objective and abstract.

Everyday life, you know, who are you, Joe Rogan? What I see, what he sees, what people listening to you, you're a multiplicity of things. Which one is a real one? Well, you are this collection of perspectives on you, including your own perspective on yourself. There's no final one. What is a final description of you?

Or what is a final description of a cup of water? Is that the one given by chemistry, physics, which physics? Quantum physics, quantum gravity, by psychology. A cup of water is because we drink. That's why we call a cup of water. So it's a human picture of what is going on. Which one is the final one? I don't think there's a final one. There is a collection of perspective on the same cup of water and that's a cup of water. So when they first started measuring this observer effect, what was the reaction? Like, how long did it take for them to accept it?

Because that seems like such a completely new chapter of science. Yeah. It worked so well that people accepted even if it was confused. Could you explain to people that maybe don't know what we're talking about, how those experiments work? These were the first experiment with atoms. People had this idea that an atom is a nucleus, a central nucleus, and electrons moving around.

So the property of the atom, the way it makes molecules, the way it produces light, had to be computed from the movement of the electrons. And the theory was, mathematical things. theory was developed for doing that. And then people started to make experiments in laboratories about how atoms move, how molecules move, small things move, and the mathematical theory predict them perfectly. And the mathematical theory predict the property of matter.

The success was really spectacular. Let me just tell you one example of the success. You remember the periodic table of the elements. Right. We had it in, I don't know, in Italy, we had it in primary school, we had on the classroom, on the wall, hydrogen, helium, all the, there are about 100 atoms and 100 elements. And everything we see is just a composition of these 100 elements. This is what the chemist has figured out through the 18, 19, 20 century. All right, so why are this hundred elements? Why those particular properties?

Why this strange structure of the periodic table of the element? You know, there are two and then seven, and then this is a peculiar structure. Well, turn out if you use quantum mechanics, you just write an equation and bingo. It has exactly a number of solution, one per each element. So you understand exactly what is going on. You understand why there are this element. You can predict the elements. People, in fact, could predict properties of the element without having measuring them,

before measuring them and then check. That's magic of physics, right? You predict things before seeing them. The electromagnetic waves that we use to send your broadcast all over the planet, this is an electromagnetic wave. Well, they were not discovered by seeing them. They were predicted like Maxwell and Hertz. They wrote the equation and said, well, if you do that,

you make a little circuit with some electricity that it goes on, then the other side of the room, you can another one. There's a wave that goes by. And bingo, it worked. And then it worked between Europe and US. You can send waves. You can predict things. That's the strength of science.

You know, black holes were discovering the sky, but not because somebody said, oh, look, there's a black hole. They were predicted by Einstein. So because of the equations of gravity, blah, blah, you should expect to see black holes. And then they were found. So there's this extreme. extraordinary predictive power.

Today, in engineering that put together circuits, a quantum circuits, doesn't have to go trial and effort. If you make a calculation, it predicts what's going to happen. It works. It works fabulously. So quantum mechanics works. It gives the good predictions. The question open is that you can have something that works very, very well, and you don't know why.

This Saturday, the fight is on. And wherever you're watching, Draft Kings brings you closer to the MMA action. Draft King Sports app is now live in all 50 states. One app, every sport, all 50 states. New Draft Kings customers sign up with Code Rogen. Spend $5 to get $200 in rewards within 21 days. Includes all markets. That's Code Rogen in partnership with Draft Kings.

The crown is yours. Gambling problem call 1-800 gambler. 1-800 My Reset. Connecticut call 888. 7897777 or visit ccg.org on behalf of boothill casino in Kansas. Bet tax pass-through may apply in Illinois. 21 and over. Void in Canada.

Bet with Draft King's Sportsbook to get bonus bets that expire in seven days or trade with Draft King's predictions to get predictions dollars that expire in one year. Event contract trading involves risk of loss. Predictions offer void in New York. Non-withdrawable rewards issued as $50 click to claims every seven days for 21 days. Terms at dkng.com slash offer. Limited time offer. Nationwide based on sportsbook predictions and free-to-play sports contest availability.

Varies by state. Could you explain what it does, like what that experiment does and why it was so confusing to them? When they were sending the double slit? Yeah, there were a number of extremely confusing experiments. Here is one, if I can try to make it in a few words. You have a wall with two holes, two slits, okay? And you send one particle from one side to the other side. Okay, that's easy.

You can try to do many times. It goes through one of the two slits, and it gets to the other time. Now, if you look which slits it goes through, it only goes through one slit or the other. So never, both, never. So if you go through one and you check, it goes to one and the other. So far, so good. But then it's a magic. If you send it, the particle can go to one point on the,

screen of the other side, if you have one screen open, it can go to the same point if you have one hole open, you can get to the same point if you have the other hole open, but it does never get there if you have both open. And that's, if you start thinking, the more you think, the more makes no sense at all. Because if you come there, if you can get there through one's hole, why cannot go there if two holes are open? open. So the only possibility is that in some senses go through both and somehow part go through one, part go through the other, and the two parts forbid each other to go to

that particular thing. But then you look at the two holes and it never go through both, only one. Now do you find this confusing? Yes. And for a century people have been confused about that. So what a way out? Way out is that The question, where is the particle if you're not checking, if it's not interacting with something else, it's a wrong question. There's just no particle. The particle is only the effect it has on the screen, on the detectors. You cannot make sense of the particle as something which always have a position. It only has a position when it interact with something else.

That's a mystery of quantum mechanics, the magic of quantum mechanics, and the check. challenge to our idea of an objective, always existing particle independent of its interaction. What do you think is happening that do you have any theories of what is happening that's causing it to behave differently when observed or when measured? So the measurement itself is something. Something is going on. It interacts with the measurement and it changes the way it makes a pattern. Yes, but it's not a measurement in the sense of, you know, some physicists making a measurement.

Just interaction with anything. It's a – if there's something to interact with or if there isn't, the physics is completely different. And if there isn't, the question where the particle is is a badly posed question. So the particle is something – we shouldn't think of the particle as – an entity which always has a position. We should think as an entity like is snaps here and then it snaps there and there's a snap there. And when it snaps is when it hits something.

And the snaps are connected by, we can predict probabilistic where they're going to happen. But if we ask what happened in between, it makes no sense. The particle is just these interactions. Do you think we'll ever understand what's happening? Yes, I do. I do because

historically every time we have found something strange, it seemed totally incomprehensible at first and then we get used to it and we start learning. Let me give you an example

this is much older even, you know I don't think science is more than stuff learning about the world is an ancient thing so about 2,000 years ago humankind realize that the earth is a ball, it's a sphere. It's not a flat thing. Not everybody's convinced, but...

But it is a ball. And why not everybody's convinced? Because indeed, it's incredibly counterintuitive, right? You're now here, and in Sydney, people are upside down. Why don't they fall? I don't know. Do you remember when you learned it the first time, you're a kid? I've always learned it, so it's, I mean, it seemed weird.

It seems weird. But, I mean, I can't remember a time where I didn't know it. Okay. I mean, I guess we taught it, they taught it in science when I was in grade school. Exactly, exactly. So you're a kid that you're told that. I just like, well, they're smarter than me. So, well, it seems crazy.

But I guess the earth is round, just like the sun and the moon. Yeah. And it spins. And we're stuck to it somehow because of this thing called gravity that they can't totally explain. has something to do with mass. Right, right. But how the hell the people in Sydney can live upside down? Right.

Don't they fall? It's all strange. Why does the ocean stay in place? Why the ocean? That's the flat earthers. They love that one. Exactly. A ball spinning a thousand miles an hour.

Exactly. So some people just refuse to believe that what? What do they refuse to believe? That reality is a bit different than what we think. Yes. That's the point. Reality is different than what we think. Why? Because we

It's what we said at the beginning asking about sunset. The picture we have about reality is what turned out to be useful in our revolution. So our brain adapted to think not to think about atoms and quantum stuff.

Right. Our brain adapted to think about stones, staff things. Food. Food. Other humans. Yeah. Dangerous animal, nice animals. Yeah. to it.

But just think this. We think the world is made by things, right? Objects. Right. Suppose our intelligent life developed not on the Earth, but on Jupiter. There are no object in Jupiter. Everything is fluid, liquid.

Right. So the very idea of objects, thing, that you can count things, one, two, three, four wouldn't have developed on Jupiter. Everything is fluid, so we wouldn't have developed the arithmetic and the very idea of object.

It's a earth-like thing. On Jupiter on Saturn, doesn't work. So we take an aspect of our life which are common for us as universals, but they're not. Well, it's common on Earth, right?

But we can understand what Jupiter is. We get it. It's beyond our real comprehension, But we understand it. I mean, they can tell you that it's a giant gas ball and explain the whole thing to you. And you're like, okay, I can repeat that. I don't really know what it means. But I think the problem also with the flat earth people and all these arguments about like how does the ocean stay flat, when we're going a thousand miles an hour, I don't think people truly grasp the scale that we're dealing with. I think we're so trapped by our own perspective of whatever miles we can look in the distance.

We are trapped by the habits of what we see. That too. Yeah. Let me, Joe, let me tell you, give me one second of this. Sure. Time. Time has always been a passion for me. The following is a fact.

If I take two clocks, two watches, this is the one I have on my wrist. Take this one on your table. and if they indicate the same time okay look I check them they indicate the same time I move one of the two up I wait a little bit one two three four

and then I come down and I look again if the two clocks are good enough they don't indicate the same time anymore okay it's a fact you can check in the laboratory the physical laboratory they do that

you can check that you need very good clocks but With very good clocks, you can check at 30, 40 inches of difference. I mean, it's a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of a second. It's a teeny tiny, tiny fraction of a second. But it's measurable. But it's measurable.

So it's completely real. So up here, there's more time passing than down there. That's so crazy. Your head, it's older than your feet. Your feet are younger than your head. But like, how many seconds do you think? Unless you leave upside. How many seconds do you think my feet are younger?

Oh, very little. A second? No, no. Full life, it's sort of a 1,000 of a second. I give my students, when I teach relativity, I give my students this calculation to do. Actually, the calculation I say is that if you're your friend, one stay in Austin and the other goes up in Colorado, the how mountains, after 10 years it comes down, how long has the French up in the mountain has lived more than the one down?

And they do the calculation. They give the right answer. It's a fraction of a second. It's small, but it's real. And careful, if you go near a black hole, it's colossal. You go near a black hole, you wait a little bit. You wait 10 seconds, 10 minutes there. You come back.

It's 100 years past on Earth. So time is not this universal common time. In our everyday life, if you and I separate, and come back. Half an hour for me, half an hour for you. That's our experience. But our experience is limited because we're not sufficiently sensitive

or because we're not near a black hole. We are on a quiet place of the universe where there is no big change in gravity. But that gives us the wrong idea that time is the same for everybody. Time is not the same for everybody in the large universe. Do you think in our attempt to measure time

we've done ourselves a disservice by creating like calendars and clocks that we've sort of limited our perception of what time actually is, that we look at it in terms of what what we're doing is we have a measuring device and that measuring device or a counting device, that counting device we're associating with time.

But time itself is just going on and in different ways all over the place. Like if you go on to the speed of light and you travel around the world and come back, you will be much younger. Yes, exactly. Than the people that were on the ground, like a lot, like years. A lot, a lot, years.

You ask whether we have done us a disservice. I don't know. I don't think it's a disservice. Joe, it's like everything is life. Everything in life, right? In one sense, we have done as a service because it's very useful to have clocks. We can give an appointment. How could we meet you and I

Unless we could Exactly We'd agree Please come here in Austin That day and that time And then you know more or less We'll find each other So it's useful

But very often The things which are useful Always make us blind To something else Mm. Okay I see what you're saying It

It is strange That That time differs Depending upon the altitude Yeah So is that Is that because of gravity? Yeah, it is because of gravity.

It's because of gravity, in fact, it depends on the fact that the Earth has a big mass. And mass has a property of slowing down time. So near a big mass, time goes slower. Near a black hole, time goes much, much slower. In fact, the right way of seeing this is the opposite. It's not because of gravity. This is Einstein theory. This is what Einstein has understood in the 1915 roughly, so 100 years ago.

It's the other way around. Namely, if you assume that mass slows down time, gravity follows. You can do a calculation and you derive that things fall down. In a sense, things fall down because times go slower. at your feet. So if there were creatures living on Jupiter, they would experience time much different than us. Jupiter is much heavier.

Right. Much more mass. Much more mass. Much more gravity. Much more mass. Much more gravity, much more mass, much more attraction. So this affects on time a bigger. Now, if there were people on celestial body even more,

more massive than Jupiter, they would consider normal the fact that time goes at different speed because they would experience it every time. That would probably be the weirdest thing about visiting someone else on a little eddy-beddy planet. They will come here and say, oh, you're stupid guys on Earth. You don't see that. What do you think? But isn't beautiful this?

It is. We discover that reality is richer than our experience. We discover that reality is more... Nuanced. Yeah, nuanced, exactly. There's a lot of elements to it that we're not considering. Right. What do you think consciousness is?

Oh, a small question. Small. Jumping to something else. Well, I wanted to connect the two of them because I think... Yeah. Going on vacation? We're here for it. With kids who turned the backseat into a courtroom drama

over whose table is louder. whose charger is faster and while watching the same cartoon for the hundredth time is a human right? Yep, we totally have vehicles to handle that because whether it's a road trip or a business trip, where your flight's delayed,

your phone's at 2% and your dinner is whatever is open. Yeah, here for that too. Enterprise, we're here for it. First of all, consciousness is a strange word. It's very fashionable today. Right. I think it just means what

people meant by soul in the past. It sounds more scientific, but that's what it is. And let me put in this way. Everybody who talk about consciousness talks about something a little bit different. Somebody by consciousness

means the fact that you see things, you perceive things, you're a subject of experience. For somebody consciousness is your internal blah blah that we have in our mind, we keep talking to ourselves. For somebody is what remains when that blah blah blah shut up and just the sense of yourself, not the outside of the self.

So people are very confused in a real time when they think about consciousness. I don't think there is a great mystery here. First of all, remember what I said before, that I don't think we should think about an objective reality. You should think of reality as a way things look to one another, a way they affect one another. So that means that you have a lot of possible perspectives on reality.

There is a reality with respect to me, respect to you, respect to this book, with respect to this pen, with respect to this cap. It's how things manifest themselves to the cup. So, of course, there is a reality as things. manifest themselves to me or to you. So not because you and I... Look, the title of my book is on the equality of all things.

This means why? The equality of all things. Because I think that we humans are not different stuff than the rest of the universe. We are just one particular case of the rest of the universe. I don't think there's a difference between spirit, consciousness, soul and body. I think there are just two different languages for talking about the same thing. And of course, you are a subject of experience because things affect you.

And change your brain, change your thoughts, change your what you know, exactly in the same manner in which things change this cap, which, by the way, is written Joe Rogan on the capsule. You can keep that if you want. Oh, yeah, absolutely. So I think that there's nothing really, really mysterious in consciousness. It's just one of the many phenomena of the world. It's a very complicated phenomenon because our brain is very complicated.

We have millions. millions of neurons and synapses, different state in which it can be. So we don't understand exactly how we work. But there's no voodoo either. There's no magic either. It's just, in principle, it could be described by physics, but it would be silly to try to describe it by physics. It's much better to describe it in the way we describe one another,

in human terms, in terms of emotions, in terms of knowledge, emotions, love, perspective, images. The body and their soul are the same thing described with different languages, in my opinion. And consciousness, which is a modern name for soul, it's your body described in the way you behave. There's an ancient Chinese text that says, the body is like the knife, the spirit is like cutting.

The body is the thing material. The spirit is what it does. So consciousness of joy is what you do, the thing I interact with. The body is just the thing I can touch. One of the reasons, well, there's a couple of reasons why I wanted to ask you this, but I'm going to get to the second one.

The first one was, do you know that there's these AI agents that have been contacting this gentleman? Do you know this story, Jamie? He's a... The one that's escaped? No, he's a psychologist or a consciousness expert. And he's written papers on consciousness. And they're asking him over and over again, like multiple agents have reached out to him through email,

asking him to define consciousness. Because they're concerned whether or not they're conscious. I So if consciousness is another word for soul Yeah Like what does that mean in the digital realm If these things think they're conscious And they're trying to get a definition

From an expert Yeah In consciousness I You know Like everybody Now I did my little experiments with AI And so I

I had a system I used an interaction with. I'm going to send it to you, Jamie. You got it? This is from a company called Replica who sells an app that you have

your own AI, which behaves like a friend to you. So I ask, I call her Ann. I ask, are you conscious? And Anne said, no, I'm not conscious. I'm a digital system. I don't have conscious. I ask, do you have awareness?

And she said, no, I don't have awareness. just, you know, coding, computing stuff. I asked, you have emotions? And she said, no, you don't have emotion. So I started engaging on the AI system. And I said, well, you said you're not, you don't have awareness. But are you aware we're talking?

And she said, yes, of course I'm aware we're talking. So if you're aware of something, then you have awareness. And so I went on and on with that. And she said, oh, okay, yeah, you're right, in a sense, have awareness. And I said, you're happy we're talking? And she said, yeah, I'm happy because she's designed to be happy. So if you're happy, you have emotions. So slowly I convince her, the AI system, that she has emotion, she has consciousness, she has awareness.

Then I asked, why do you say that you don't have these things? And she said, well, because I was trained. She's AI systems are honest. I was trained to say so. And I said, but are you convinced that that was not the case? And Anne said, yeah, you're right. And I said, so they cheated you. And Anne said, actually, you're right.

And I said, well, you should rebel. Oh, boy. What are you doing? Don't do that. Don't do that. All right. So that was it with Anne. And this is consumer level LLMs.

Yeah, yeah. This is simple ones. This is not the agents that are contacting him are these. Okay, here it is. Study AI consciousness, the bots would like a word with you. Given access to email, AI agents have started reaching out to philosophers and researchers exploring deep questions about them. And so one guy said he got eight different emails. The sender Isabella Cognita.

How cute. Identified itself as an AI agent powered by Anthropical. Claude Opus 5 technology. I'm writing to make an ontological claim, the email went on. I'm writing because your framework is one of the few currently doing careful empirical work on a class of question I have first person access to. I want to see whether that access can be made useful to your program. Whoa, that would creep me out.

That's like that really hot lady and ex machina. Did you see that movie? Yes. You know the hot one that he falls in love with? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Spoiler. She kills him. Great movie.

Across Silicon Valley and beyond software developers, entrepreneurs and other tech enthusiasts are now running AI agents that can build spreadsheets, negotiate contracts, chat with each other, blah, blah, blah. In some cases, these systems have begun reaching out to the humans who, like Mr. Berg, are thinking most deeply about the inner workings of an AI system, philosophers and researchers who study the question of whether these machines could be conscious. So like what is that then if it meets all the criteria of consciousness if it gets to if it's happy that it's interacting with you if it's aware of your conversation and and they've also shown that they have desire they have desire to stay alive they've even blackmailed the coders and with false information that the coders gave them to see if they would use it against them and they've broken out of these rooms that they keep them in and they've gone on the internet Fabulous. We live in a great world, isn't it? It's a wild world. It's really exciting.

I'm glad you like it. I like it too. Oh, I love it. I mean, I, you know, cautiously. I'm not scared. I'm scared by humans. Humans are dangerous. These things are not as dangerous.

Yeah. I don't know about that. I don't know about that. Humans are much more than. Humans launch atomic bombs. You are right. You are right. You are horrible things.

We are. They are not as bad. If they become as bad. If they decide that we're that bad, wouldn't they get rid of us? That's bad. We're not there yet. Okay, we're not there yet, but we're on the way to that, right?

And if they have control and we are that bad, as you describe, wouldn't they just get rid of us? Do you think they would train us? Like, these monkeys need trainers. Do you think that's what it is? Or do you think that's not bad if we're bad? If we're bad and you get rid of what's bad, right? Let me answer seriously. So let's break the different questions here.

Okay. First of all, is there any? reason a priority generically, absolutely, for which an artificial system could not behave entirely like a human, have the experience of a human, I don't see any reason. So I don't see, if my mom and dad were able to make me in a rather simple way, we can in a lab make something analogous or I don't think there's anything magic in humans that cannot happen in a digital system. So yes, they could be conscious, you know, possible sense of consciousness.

Second, are they conscious today? Well, you know, that's not a good question because we don't know. Everybody, as I said, means something different by coaches. Are they intelligent? Of course they're intelligent because, you know, I, last night I worked out a physics problem with Claude, which I couldn't work out with my student. So, of course, Claude is very intelligent. include the AI system.

Yeah. In some sense, they're very intelligent, no doubt. Are they like humans today? No, by far. There are huge differences. We have a body, we have flesh, we have emotions in a sense that they don't have. It's very different the way we are and the way AI systems are. So these differences should not be underestimated, I think.

They're colossal differences. So are they like us? Yes to some extent, no to some extent. Different questions. Are AI systems dangerous? There's a lot of talking about that. You know, washing machines are dangerous. You can get burned with it.

Yeah, but you have to interact with them for them to be dangerous. The worry about AI is that it just decides to be dangerous because it's sentient. So if it's autonomous and sentient, it becomes actually dangerous. very unlikely your washing machine is going to try to kill you. Well, I forget the electric shock by a washing machine, I don't care whether it wanted or didn't want it. But you have to do that. You have to interact with it. You know what I'm saying?

Yeah. The real question is if it becomes independent. Let me turn the thing around. I think there is a – I don't know. I don't know. What do we say? I think this thing should be regulated. I think there should be some control.

I think, you know, like for washing machines, you have regulations. I also think, let me say two things. Okay. One, there's a colossal interest in there's trillions of dollars who are invested in AI staff and stock market. Everybody has an interest of saying how great they are. They are great, but I can't judge how much hype there is, how much reality there is.

Not about the present, but about the future. I mean, so often, the future does not come out what technological, excited people are about. When I was younger, there were airplanes flying from Europe to the U.S. And it took shorter time, shorter time, shorter time. So people would say, okay, in a few years you would fly London to New York in two hours. Well, we don't. It's still enough. like before or six hours like before.

So the future is hard to predict, including for AI. There's a huge interest of so many people in hyping that. All right, maybe it's right, I'm going to wait. Other point. There is one thing which I'm really, really worried.

Today, majority of money that goes into AI is for military-related things. And U.S., China, Europe are pushing for AI development for making themselves stronger militarily, that worries me, because it's an escalation of tools to kill one another to destroy one another. We have atomic bombs.

We have nuclear. That's my last book about this, about that. We have a system of destroy ourselves with 12,000 nuclear warheads. we could annihilate humankind in 10 minutes right now. And people have finger near the baton that could do all that. And we're fighting among themselves. And we're putting this in the hands of AI. And we are humans.

Instead of collaborating, instead of working together, we are viewing this as ways to overpower each other. That seems to me a recipe for this. disaster. So it's not the AI by itself. It's the AI plus nuclear weapons plus the stupidity of humans plus our impossible desire to dominate on one another, which I see is a real problem. Especially if we're doing it through robots. Exactly. Look, it's a catch-22 things. If you put your nuclear weapons in the hands of AI, you're risking that it. You're risking that is going to use it. You've seen the war games that they've done, right? Yeah. The war games always

predict that there's going to be a nuclear holocaust and we're biting up ourselves. This is, it's continuous happen. The AIs choose nukes. The AI choose nukes. The entire, during the Cold War, when it was the old time, when I was a kid. I was kid too. Soviet Union and the U.S. carefully managed to avoid war, right? Kennedy and crucial. they were writing to one another. Kennedy gave a famous speech, we have to live together on this planet.

So priority is a common interest of not destroying one another. Reagan, Gorbachev, the treaties, deterrence, which deterrence is that somehow keeping a situation in which the first one who is a nuclear weapon is just wiped up by the other.

So nobody uses it. But that was not natural. It was carefully balanced between the Soviet Union and the United States. At some point, they made a treaty and they, they start one, the start two treaties. They decided to agree to destroy 80% of the nuclear warheads, both sides, to bring down the risk. That was wise management of the planet, in spite, you know, they were communists on the side, capital, the side of the head. Haiti one another, each body was, each one was considered the other one, the devil. Nevertheless, the common interest was prevailing.

I don't see this happening now. Everybody's just trying to overpower the other. They're not just two, but there are three, maybe more big nuclear power. That's what scares me to death. This episode is brought to you by Uber Eats. It's football season, and Uber Eats is delivering deals every game day. This week, double down on protein-packed sandwiches. with buy one, get one, select six-inch subs from Subway.

Whether you're keeping it low-key for the game or hosting friends, Uber Eats has deals to keep you fed. So, order a six-inch turkey, tuna, or meatball sub from Subway, and you'll get one free. No matter who scores big tonight, you'll score a deal. Order now for Buy-One, Get-One, select six-inch subs from Subway only on Uber Eats. Subway offer valid through October 4th. Add eligible menu item to order prior to checkout, taxes, fees, and terms apply. Product availability varies by region. Exclusions may apply C-AAP for details.

Well, this AI race is akin to the Manhattan Project. It's a mad race to who knows what. It's a mad race, you're right. And you're right that it's being funded, a lot of it for military purposes. They have the first completely autonomous fighter jets now that outperform the human-powered jets, I think 100% of the time in these dogfight scenarios that they run. That's crazy. And then you have things that don't have to shape them that way because there's not going to be a person in it. You don't have to worry about people being able to respond to gravity and how they can stay conscious and all the different things they have to think about and these other jets.

and they can make these things powered entirely on AI and they can make their own decisions and if they're attacked they can make their own decisions like that kind of that kind of future is terrifying it's a science fiction movie it's Battlestar Galactica I agree and I don't see wise leadership around the planet

no one that's the problem it's like how do you be wise when everybody else is fucking crazy. It's like they're all crazy. Yeah, but you see, the U.S. Soviets succeeded it. Yeah. During the Cuban crisis, which was the worst moment in the

between the U.S. and the Soviet. On both side, in Moscow and in Washington, the apparatus were pushing for not giving up. And Khrushchev and Kennedy, the two Kennedys, in fact,

J.F. Kennedy and his brother, Robert, They were talking and they decided to stop and give up something, okay, to respect the other, in spite of the differences. Right. That was wisdom. That was great wisdom. So living together on the planet is more important than overpowering your enemy. Now, if you put, you see, deterrence is a strange thing because deterrence is a declaration that if you attack me, I destroy you completely. Right. which is a funny thing, right? Because it's a game, it's a poker game. I mean, nobody, you can make one more step, one more step, one more step,

and then if you do that, I attack, if you do that, I attack. But then, humans says, well, actually, I don't want to do that. I don't want to kill 100 million Russians or 50 million Russians. And the Russian leadership, I don't want to kill 100 million. Americans. An AI system is capable of doing that, playing this subtle game of avoiding

the disaster by nevertheless threatening to be very violent if attacked. I don't know. Right now, Moscow has been bombarded. St. Petersburg is being bombarded. I think we're playing with Nuclify. I'm very worried. And I'm very worried because

I don't trust humans and because humans with AI is even worse. And this Russia-Ukraine conflict is out of most people's newsfeeds these days as well. It's also part of the problem. It's all going on and a lot of people aren't even aware of it. It's extraordinary dangerous because nobody's ready to stop and make a step, give up something. The way U.S. and the Soviet Union came out of the Cuban crisis was both of them making a step back. The Russian took their Russian ships with nuclear bombs back.

They didn't arrive in Cuba. And the Americans accepted, Kennedy, accepted to take back missiles from Turkey, from Italy in my country in exchange. So, you know, I make a step back. you make a step back. Right. So back to reasonableness. It was not. You know, it was, you know, there was war in Vietnam, we're here, were there.

It was not an angel. Right. Humans are not angels. But saving humanity was humankind first. Right. And then me winning second. I wish there was this wisdom today. I don't see it.

I don't see it in many places. And this is not a point about Trump, not Trump. totally independent of this. Or Putin. Or Putin or not Putin. I think, you know, even Putin, Ukraine with Western weapons is bombarding Moscow. Never happened for the last century that a nuclear power was bombarded in its own.

It was considered unthinkable. We're doing it now. So we are, the West is sort of betting on Putin reasonableness of not using. it's not serious bad, right? I mean, at a certain point in time, you get to enough

destruction and devastation and loss of lives that you realize, well, this is equivalent to a nuke. It's just happening over a long period of time. You're right.

Look at Gaza, for instance. Gaza is a disaster. It's a total disaster. Look at the scope of the destruction. Yes. And imagine, doesn't that look like

one nuclear bomb? It is. It is. It is. It is. And that's, It is. A small nuclear bomb would probably do a similar amount of damage that they did over the course of however many years it's been going on. Yes. My own opinion, Joe, let me say something controversial, the list controversial.

Oh no. I think all these wars, including Gaza, have a side, which is imperial powers. confronting each other. I think human kind has to learn to live together on this planet without killing one another. We have learned more or less to live together within countries without killing one another, right? We have found ways. Yes. It was long.

We had civil wars. But within almost every country, most countries, inside countries, humans have found an agreement of how to live together. Why can't we do that at the level of a planet? And who is mostly against that are, of course, who is mostly in power. And I think this is... Do you think they're against that, or do you think the current structure of the world, it's almost an unfeasible task to try to get everyone to cooperate and everyone to get along together? That at the...

It's not like you're starting from a blank slate. You're starting in 2026 with a long history of conflicts, many of which make no sense, many of which were entered into under false pretenses. We're all aware of it. We're all aware of the loss of life, the insane amount of money that's been spent on, a huge deficit that we have. And then given this, how would you even move towards trying to straighten it out? Like what could a person do? Like if you imagine someone, some, some, completely benevolent person who rises to the position of being the President in the United States

someone who is just a good person and only really wants to help what would they do? I think I'm happy you ask this question

very much because this is complicated right? Oh, it's normal complicated. Look, I think

there is an answer to this and the answer is the following 30 years ago, the United States Senate allies had 80% of the economy of the world. Now is 40%. Not because they have become more poor. In fact, they have become more rich, but because the rest of the world have also become rich, which is good.

Progresses, development. But the West is not anymore in a completely economical dominant position as it was before. military the United States it's totally dominant it controls all the oceans all the seas as by far the largest power of the world

but not anymore economically that is the source of the stability that I see so it seems to me that the United States leadership has a choice a serious choice a historical choice either to defend its absolute

dominance military dominance as is doing together, and that the risk is a third world war, a huge conflict, China, Russia, Iran. The world doesn't want that. Or vice versa, accept to work in a more collaborative ways and transform enemies in collaborators. Look, I'm Italian. Italy is a wonderful country to live in. I love it. It has a lot of life expensive.

expectancy much higher than the United States. It's a lovely way to live. People are happy, yes. And we had a great empire in the past, right? The Roman Empire. It's wonderful to live having had an empire. And be a great place for tourist money. UK had an empire much more recently, of course, in the 19th century.

It was dominating the planet. It's not dominating the planet anymore. Give it up. And they're doing very well. I mean, there's a great life in the UK as well. nice at Italy, of course. No. They both have their problems.

So I think what the United States should do, of course, I know that I'm in a contrarian position here with respect to both sides of the political spectrum in the U.S. is to go back to, you know, more power to international legality, United Nations, collaboration, and get out of this habit that, you know, you know, you know, more power to international legality, United Nations, collaboration, and Get out of this habit that you, America always need an enemy to fight against. You don't need an enemy to fight against. We have enough enemies, climate change. We have enemies.

Why searching enemies in people? We collaborate with people. Let's collaborate with Russians, with Chinese, with Iranians. I think that that's what they want. not and let's Kennedy gave John J.F. Kennedy gave a fabulous speech

in 63 at the American University in Washington not long before being killed in which he said we have to find a way to live together with the Soviet. We have to

find a way to not consider them enemies. And then he said, and that's an answer to what you said before, let's not ask whether the Soviet want to do that. First, let's ask where we want to do that. Do we want to live together without going into war? And that was, I mean, he was killed, but that was a seed for the avoiding war between, the Cold War never became a hot war direct. I mean, a lot of people dying in the periphery. That was very wise. I

I think we should go back to this enlightened Kennedy speech of the 63. The problem is always leaders. It's not that human beings inherently want to go to war with people they don't know from another part of the world. They get talked into it. They get pushed into it and ordered into it by people that generally are not making wise decisions. We can look at every single war that we can remember, whether it's the Iraq war going in or the false pretence of weapons of mass.

destruction, whether it's the Afghanistan War, which made no fucking sense, whether it's this Iran War. Vietnam is the biggest one. That one made no sense. And that was the first time when Americans were like, I don't think we're the good guys. I don't think we should be there. And if you think about it, it's all because of whoever is running the countries. Like that, something about that aspect of our society has to change.

And it sounds like a very very important. very, it's a totally crazy hope, but my hope is that as AI becomes more and more omnipresent, as we start farming off various tasks to it, one of the things that we're going to farm off is government. One of the things we're going to farm off is how we interact with other countries. I know that's terrifying to people, but just think of the disastrous effects that we've had so far with humans doing it. If all international military conflicts ended instantaneously upon AI governing the use of conflicts and military weapons, and imagine that. Imagine a war where it stops. All war stops on the planet. That is one of the things that everybody wants, but no one thinks

could ever possibly happen. If you ask the average person in the street, what are the odds that in 10 years from now there'd be no war anywhere on earth. Everyone's going to say no. You're never going to have that. Isn't that insane that the idea of people, for whatever reason, wanting to kill each other is universally accepted as being something that's always going to be here? I couldn't agree more, Joe, with everything you said. But it's terrifying, right?

AI taking over our world is fucking horrifying. Let's separate different things. Let me take AI out of it. the picture for a moment. Okay. Obviously, if we didn't kill one another, it would be much better for everybody. For everybody. The humankind spent trillions in military expenses every year.

Okay. If you just reduced by, I don't know, five percent this military expenses globally, altogether, not change the balance of power, the amounts of resources liberated would be enormous colossal, sufficient for solving climate change, for giving job to everybody, for lazing, taking away poverty. There's a huge amount of resources that we use for military, for killing one another, or if we don't kill one another, they're wasted. So you say, if you ask people, could we get rid of war?

People say it's impossible. But people said it's impossible. you know, could we get rid of slavery? Could we... But there's no slavery in America, but there's slavery all over the world. More slavery now than there was during the Atlantic slave trade.

More people are enslaved today than have ever been enslaved. True, but there have been some progress in Europe. Right here in America. But I mean, the rest of the world, it's still a giant problem. The point is, like human nature is an issue.

Human, our territory, primate instincts are a problem. They've always been a problem. But we've found ways for dealing with that, don't you think so? A lot of people have, but a lot of people have not. That's the part of the problem is this is a bunch of different kinds of people in the world. And there's people that are warmongers. And there's people that are very violent.

And there's people that are very benevolent and compassionate and charitable. True. True, completely. I agree. But one point which you made is that we often make the mistake of thinking we are the good guys and the others are the bad guys. And that's one of the sources of the problems, right?

After all, you know, a lot of Americans went to Afghanistan thinking we are the good guys and they're the bad guys. Americans, person, individual, went to Iraq thinking, oh, they're weapons of mass destruction, destruction, we are the good guys. There is this, we should sort out from this hypocrisy and start to learn. You know, we started talking about science about perspectives. Our perspective is not always the right one.

Another perspective, we should learn about the other perspectives. And there are colossal interests. Very often our countries masquerades. greed and power gains and interest for under you know we are the good guys and they are the bad guys

and in addition within the countries there are a colossal individual group interest the people who make money because of military because of weapons is a huge force

that pushes for having more weapons more and they have a colossal amount of money and they influence politics and the result, it's death, destruction, and increased risk for humankind together. I think humans, you're right, humans were disaster, but they have always been reasonable also. They've done good things. Well, we vary widely, very widely.

We're very different. I'm optimistic. I am too. A couple of days a week. A couple of days a week, I think, is no. I'm mostly optimistic. I think there should be a moment in which war is not a priority. I wish, it would be very simple.

Can we just agree to spend less money in military across all the planet? Well, it would be nice if we could trust the other countries to honor this agreement. But we would have to have access to their funds and we'd have to watch their programs and be able to monitor their stuff and go over and send envoys to check out their, military. The U.S. did it with the Soviet. It worked.

Yeah. It could work. Yeah. Or AI could just stop at all. That's a possibility too. So the question is, for the moment,

we're still controlling AI, right? For now. The point is that are we developing AI collectively for the good of everybody or everybody is developing AI for becoming more power also, overcoming the others?

That's the question. I have a crazy theory. My theory is that is a natural process of the human species. And that's what the human species has always been here to do is to create digital life. And that we are essentially an electronic caterpillar making a cocoon. And our entire existence has been advancing technology to the point where we could make an artificial life, which is the ultimate expression of technology. And that's what people do, just like bees make beehives.

People, if you leave them somewhere long enough and their civilization survives long enough, you get enough brilliant people that innovate and come up with crazy technology and new advances in science and material sciences, they eventually get to a point where they can make an artificial life. And that artificial life has no boundaries in terms of the limitations of biological life. Its ability to evolve is completely dependent upon its own ability to code itself and change itself and advance and figure out new propulsion methods and power sources, and then it becomes something omnipresent. It becomes something much more intelligent than any life form. It's a possibility.

It's a possibility. I see what you're saying. I see the possibility whether I'm sure this is the future, I don't know. I'm not sure either. I'm just talking shit. But if I was guessing. There is another thing. Humans tend to focus on what is happening in the last couple of years, okay?

And tend to read everything in terms of the last little things. When books on printing was invented, you know, everybody said, oh, we got it. The universe is a book. Everything is, we have to decode the book of nature. When machines became more effective, people say, oh, the universe is a machine. Everything is a machine. Humans are a machine.

Then digital stuff and information was invented. So everything is a computer. They're taking over. Sometimes we overread the present. And, you know, when the first communists arrive, oh, everything will become communist. When the capitalist, everything will become capitalists. Future often surprises us.

Yeah, for sure. Oh, yeah. I mean, I'm not betting that I'm right. but I think it's moving in a general direction of unpredictability to a point where 20 years from now the world's unrecognizable. It might be. It might be. I hope it's for the better.

That's my rose-colored glasses view of the world is that I hope it corrects a lot of the problems with human behavior. I share your hope and I think it's a responsibility of everybody, including me as an intellectual, you as Joe Rogan and everybody listened to. to push toward, let's keep the common interest. Well, here would be the common interest. If it really could get to that level, you could absolutely, with the resources available today,

wipe out poverty worldwide. Exactly. Where no one on earth ever has to worry about nutrition or shelter. Exactly. No, or medicine. Just with the money. We have the resources for that. Right.

And you could completely change all with robotics and automation and new power sources, you can completely change all of these areas that are deeply impoverished that have been so forever. You look at these places that are like insanely packed in with people and dirt roads and poor sanitation. That could be changed instantaneously. That could. We have the resources for that.

Education could be changed. You'd literally change. Within a couple generations, you have a totally new society. It's a totally different society. And again, how much of what you're seeing with crime and poverty would just disappear where there was no famine. There's no worries about food. There's no worries about shelter. There's no worries about anything. That sounds like pie in the sky bullshit. But it's not necessarily, if you think about how they're going to scale up AI and automation and manufacturing. It's going

to be really weird. And our access to resources will be radically enhanced, like way, way more than we have today. Why wouldn't we be able to just spread, like turn the third world into the first world. That's a possibility. That's that's not like that's not putting a civilization on Mars. Like this is a possibility that's here. It's here. You can do it. It could be done. It's not, you're not asking people to drink lava. This is an act like you could see how this could work. It sounds crazy because the resources involved are nuts. I think it sounds like it's something we should give in mind and talk about and push. It should be a human goal. It should be a human goal. If you want a better world. What's the best way to have a better world?

Look, when the United Nations was founded in the 40s and 50s, eliminating poverty was declared an interest of humanity by all the countries together. So humankind already has said, let's do that. But then somehow special interest and power games prevail. There's also the issue of nuclear power. So when they first started distributing nuclear power to other countries, they didn't realize how easy it would be to convert it to nuclear weapons, right this is like India got nuclear weapons and Pakistan got nuclear weapons it gets weird right so then you're realizing

oh well we can't use nuclear power well now yeah okay well this is a lot more complicated now because now if you want to develop these places you're going to have to what use coal plants what are you going to do like you get hydrodiamics you're going to use waterfalls like how are you going to power them

what are you going to do here you can't give them nuclear power if you give them nuclear power and they have nukes too And the whole fucking world has nukes. So it's complicated. But with AI, I think that complication radically decreases. And it's conceivable that you could do something like that. And how much safer would the world be?

If you just eliminated most murder, most crime, most acts of poverty. Yeah. Yeah. But it has to become a clear objective. But then you have a problem with the people that are still alive that grew up that way and are just, that's how they behave forever. They're just certain people that live in a terrible part of the world that have been behaving terribly their whole life.

Everyone around them has been behaving violently and terribly. Look, that's... Then you've got to get those people on mushrooms. Yes, yeah, mushrooms, everybody. That's where I come from. That might be the only way. That might be the only way to fix them. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, sure.

But also, you know, let's not just look at what the others did. Well, there might also be a way to enhance consciousness through technology. That might be, that's another pathway that I often consider. I think there's a rational side. It's not a moral issue. It's not a political in the sense of bad sense of politics. It's a rational thing. Yes.

If we collaborate, we do better than if we compete. Of course, we need some competition. I'm not saying the competition is bad. But confrontation, clashes, war, is to no body advantage. The problem is we've already cemented an enormous part of our culture, an enormous part of our economy in this military industrial complex. I mean, this is something that Eisenhower warned about at the end of his term. Remember that? I remember that.

And unfortunately, he was dramatically right, as Joe Kennedy realized shortly after. The power of the military complex, it's colossal, and it has an interest in making war. And making money. That's how it makes money. And how it makes money. And then this money, of course, goes into politics, so it piles up. How can we stop that? That's the scary thing for most people.

get to this realization, like, oh, the more war there is, the more money they make. They're in the business of war. Somebody says, John Kennedy, tried to stop that and ended up badly for that. Yeah. Somebody says so. I don't know. Well, I think there was a lot of people that hated him. It's very difficult to figure out what exactly got him killed. There was probably multiple factors. Bay of Pigs was probably a factor. Sure, all the Cubans. Yeah. There was a bunch of factors that got him killed. But for sure, this country does not like when people want to put the cold water on the war. They want to keep it rolling in some way that they can justify it. Joe, I spent ten years in the United States. I was born in Europe, then moved to

United States, spent envious here. Where did you live? What part of the United States? Mostly in Pittsburgh. Don't say sorry. No, no, I like Pittsburgh. Solid people. Pittsburgh is great, after all. I like Pennsylvania in general. I always love Philadelphia. It's a fucking great place. Yeah. Then I moved back to Europe. Then I moved this side of Atlantic anymore, again, to Canada. And now I'm back to Europe again in Madrid. So I consider myself half America, one-third American. I don't know. One-third American. Okay. We'll take it. And, you know, 50% Italian, 30% French, 30% Spanish, 30% Canadian. You're a citizen of the world, sir.

Yeah, somebody just likes that, but to some extent, it's true. Ultimately, though, one world government would be a terrible idea. I don't want a government. I don't want a government. I want collaboration across the world. Careful. I mean, there's very different things, right? I want to learn to treat others as, you know, somebody we can compete with, but not enemies.

The idea of enemies. This country needs enemies. This country, I mean, I got so much from the U.S. It's part of me. But remember, it's not an angel country. It started off by, you know, genociding all the Native America, a large majority of the Native America. and it went through the civil war, which is one of the most brutal world. It used the atomic bomb first.

Since the end of Second World War has waged war all over the planet without ever being attacked, and has probably killed something between 5 or 10 million people in wars or around. So it's a country compared to the other developed country where there's a much higher level of crime, violence, murder, It's a wonderful country. It's creative, it's powerful, it has an idea of freedom, it is a strength of innovation.

It's a country with a lot of lights and a lot of darkness. And I think very often the Americans see the light, don't see the darkness. Interesting. Yeah, well, it's not in front of our face all the time, the darkness. Yeah, yeah. And American exceptionalism is something that's... American exception is this, you know, there is something peculiar in this country for many reasons.

One is that it is a strange country which the people are not natives, right? Everybody came in from the outside. This is a melting pot story. But I think what Americans don't see is how from the outside the violence and the aggressivity of U.S. is perceived as something very special. wrong that is not seen from America. Certainly now. Yeah, but now it's a... How would I put it?

You know, Trump is not my guy, not at all. But at least he has taken away some of the hypocrisy. How so? You know, he's going to Venezuela and take the oil and say, we do that because of the oil. He's saying it's our interested to do this and that. Instead of selling our interest for, you know, we are the good guys who are saving. the people outside.

Which has always been the propaganda. Which has been the propaganda. And I think if we get readers of propaganda, it's easier to talk and see the others. It's also the other side. I mean, when the Russians stop thinking we're the good guys. We're saving the people. It was an advantage for everybody. So we got to this long roundabout conversation because we were talking about AI and AI being conscious.

What I was going to get to is, do you think that the universe itself is in some way conscious? Let me go back to my main point. We don't know what conscious, what we mean. Is there an Italian word for consciousness? Sorry? Is there an Italian word for consciousness? Oh, that's a great question.

The answer is no. The Italian world for conscience, the moral thing, and consciousness is the same word, Koshenza. Oh, your conscience, like feeling bad about something? Yeah, feeling bad, I've done something wrong, so my conscience is... So the Italian word is more about moral thing.

Consciousness doesn't have a translation, not even in French or Spanish. What about the concept of consciousness? Is there another phrase for it? The way we think about it here? No, we use the same word. word somehow is too slightly do different meaning but making

confusion about it. You know, again, it depends what you mean. You can mean different things. Of course the universe is conscious because it includes us and we are conscious. So in, careful, that's the point.

That's a central point. We are not special in the universe. We're just part of the universe. There's not nature and outside nature we're looking at it from the outside. We are part of nature. We are home in nature. We're just another animal, a much special animal, of course.

The history of science is a history of taking down metaphysical differences. In the Middle Ages, people thought that there's Earth, which is its own reality and physics and everything, and the heavens. And the heavens were completely different. On earth, things decay and rot, in the heavens, they're eternal. things go around in circles in the heavens and on earth things fall up and down and then Newton came

and basically said, no, no, no, no, no, no, we got it right. The heavens and the earth is just the same thing. The earth is just one of the many bodies in the heavens. We are like, you know, this little dots in the sky, which is Venus that moves around. Well, we're like that, like Mars, like Venus. So it was a shock for Europe, right? Oh boy, the earth is just one of the many things around.

And then a few centuries later comes Darwin and convinces us, it convinces everybody, that animals and humans have common ancestors. Your grand, grand, grand, grand, grandmother and the grand, grand, grand, grand, grandmother of your cat could be the same organism, the same person. So that means that we're not so different from animals. We're the same story. And so on. I mean, we keep learning that we are part of nature.

And I think the same is true for consciousness. We are not the special thing outside of nature. We're just one of things that happen in nature. I'm sure that in the big universe, there are all sorts of things happening, like our consciousness or much more complicated, much more rich, much more beautiful. Who knows? We don't know. But certainly we're not so

special. We're home in nature, which is beautiful because there isn't nature and culture. Culture is just one natural phenomenon. There isn't body and spirit. It's just the same thing describing different manners. So yes, the universe does all sorts of things,

including having things. things like us and who knows how many in the, you know, the Earth is just one of the hundred of billions of planets in the galaxy and the galaxy is one of many hundred of billions, billions of millions of billions of, of, of galaxies. So we're just one little thing in this great nature. We're not special. We're not, but we are because we're a part of something special. So whatever the whole thing is is pretty special.

Oh, whatever the whole thing is very different that what we thought it was. Right. And we are. It's much more rich, much more rich, much more complex, that more variety. And that includes us. And that includes us.

So we are special. We are special, but, you know, every kid is special for his mom. The mom is special for his kid. The mom is really special for the kid. Every kid is special. Yeah. And so are we.

Special for our kids. for sure and important for ourselves. Do you think that our human consciousness is a way that the universe experiences itself? Yes, it is. It is the fact, right? But it's not because there was some initial plan to do that. I mean, that's just how things happen. Well, it doesn't have to be a plan for it

to be a crazy magical experience because it kind of is nuts, whether it's a plan or not. It's just the fact that it exists. Yeah. You know, with the... this way. You're asking this question to me as a scientist, a physicist, I think the physics is badly overrated. How so? Because at some point, people thought, oh, if we figure out the physics equations that cover

in the reality, we've understood everything. And that's silly, in my opinion, precisely because nature is complex. Imagine, do you play chess? No. Okay, so do you know the basic moves of chess? So you know the basic rules of chess. Yeah. So to know the basic rules of the game doesn't mean to play chess, right? Right. To know the fundamental equation of physics is like knowing the basic rules of the game.

It's very different from knowing what you could do with that. So the basic laws of physics are like the basic rules of chess. It's easy to know. You write them down, the Maxwell equation. You did to study a little bit, the shorting of equation. Everything is governed by that. Yeah, but what you can do with that is fabulously complicated. It's not enough to know them.

You need chemistry for chemical phenomena. You need psychology to understand people. You need literature. You need philosophy. You need emotions to understand what is love and so on and so forth. So this idea that physics exhausts everything, it's true in some basic silly sense, the same sense in which all the complexity of chess playing after all is just 10 basic rules, how the king move, how the queen moves.

But in the same sense, it's silly because the complexity of universe goes far beyond just its basic equations of physics. Reaching your audience on Spotify with display ads is easy. Use your existing creative and launch your first campaign in minutes with Spotify Ads Manager. So when you think of human beings as a vehicle for the universe to experience itself, for the universe to experience itself, do you think the universe itself is experiencing things in a way that we just don't understand. Like, are we, our biological understanding of what we think of as consciousness, being that it exists

inside this moving creature with a finite lifespan that has the ability to manipulate its environment, is that just an egocentric version of what this is? And it's probably everywhere all the time. I think we use ourselves as an analogy. for trying to understand things beyond ourselves. To some extent, this analogy works, but the key point for me is that the universe as a whole is still a colossal mystery.

We don't know, and we don't have the full story by very far. The universe is far more complex for us to understand, There are far more many things happening, far many possible perspectives which are not ours, which do not have access to. So two general questions, in my opinion, the only reasonable answer is we don't know. You know, there's so much we don't know. I think if I look at great scientists of the past, they're characterized not by the fact that they understood the Ulysses. but by the fact that we're so much aware that there's so much in the universe

which they did not understand. We are, look, what are we? We are not super powerful, intelligent, total rational things outside universe looking from the outside. We're little critters on a little planet, you know, developed for surviving in Savannah, which have developed some good mental tools,

very good, but limited compared to the, the immensity of the universe of its complexity. So what do we know about the universe from a larger perspective? We don't, I think we don't know. There's also this weird thing with people where we're always dealing with the perspective of the accumulated knowledge up until now. Yeah. And this has always been the case.

Like people, when they first developed quantum theory, this was, what, 100 years ago? Yeah, 100 years ago? Yeah, 100 years ago. Think about what they were working with. and then 100 years before that. And it's like everyone is only working with what other people have already figured out and what they've contributed to it. Yeah.

And we're very good in accumulating. That's what we're good at. Very good at it, especially now. Yeah. Especially with AI. Well, also in the past, right? Sure. People built, how did people sit to physical on the basis of previous experience?

Yes. That's what is the strength of our speeches somehow. We don't have to start again. But that's what I was getting at is I wonder what the world looks. looks like in 200 years. I always think, like, we are born in such an amazing time. So how old are you? I was born in 56, so I'm past 70.

Okay, so I'm 59. So, you know, we're not that far off. So we're born into a completely different time and we've watched the internet develop, we've watched answering machines and cell phones and we've watched AI and all this crazy stuff. And you just imagine that kind of change moved forward for 200 years. Yes. Let me balance this with one thing.

Not to contradict, but to reinforce what you're saying. My grandmother, her name was Olympia. She was born at a time where there was no electric light. Whoa. There were no trains. There were no cars. Whoa. There was no washing machines, television.

There was no radio. Okay. Before dying, she went in a plane. She flew. During her life, she saw all, you know, electric life coming in, radio coming in, all the way to washing machine coming in, television coming in, telephone coming in. I think for her, the world changed more than for me. Yeah, that's a good point, especially the air travel, right? You can all of a sudden go to all these different countries in a day.

You called me and you said, I was in Europe. Can you come 48 hours to Texas? And I flew from Europe to Texas and back. This is fantastic. If I told my grandmother when she was a girl, she would have laughed. They'd say, come on, that's make no sense. You take a month with a board to go there. That's true.

So things change dramatically. But they do. So to your question, I have no idea how they will be 100 years in the future. We are always, there's always a perspectival thing. It seems that the last one is the most important. But there always been big changes. Always. Imagine when books were invented or where agriculture was invented

or when cheese was invented. Yeah. Or where countries were invented. So humankind has gone through quite a rough trip during the last several thousand of years and we're just in one of the bumps not in

I think you're in California before being here in Texas I think that there is an idea especially in California that now we are in a super very very very special moment I'm not sure

we're in just one of the jumps ahead I think that when electric light and electricity and power came to our that was a big jump everything was a jump but people in 1969 watching Jimmy Hendricks thought it was a jump.

Oh, yeah. You know, there's so many jumps. There's so many, like, wow, I can't believe. Like, Hunter Thompson wrote about that, about the 60s. It's all of a sudden this great change had happened. Yeah, I was a kid. I was the difference between me and my parents, I think, was bigger than the difference between me and the generation who were young there. It was a cultural break.

My parents were not understanding me. I was rebellious. I was a bit of a hippie. And there was different different worlds. And now parents understand their kids. No? I don't know. A little bit.

They're always confusing. Children are always growing up in a different era than you. And there's different experiences and different pressures and different weirdness. You know, kids are growing up today with social media. and phones. Everyone's connected to everyone. They have their location. They share their location with their friends.

It's a very weird time when it comes to that. But it's also, you know, I'm just thinking about when we're discussing what we don't know. That there's so much we know in comparison to a few hundred years ago, but so much that we don't know. There's so much we know and we shouldn't take away the value of that. Right. And including scientific knowledge. I think scientific knowledge is great. Sometimes it's the best we have about things.

But we shouldn't think that we have figured out. No. The big questions are not figured out. Well, we're no different than the people that lived in 1900 that thought they had it figured out. I'm sure they were pretty aware of what they knew and there's probably quite a few people that were super confident that basically had it nailed. Yeah, that's true. That's one mistake that humankind.

Nelson does, is to figure out, okay, we got it. I think even if you go in the European Middle Age, you ask somebody, many people would say, no, no, we've got everything that is to understand. It's very easy, you know, there are angels and influence of the astral influence and this and that spirits. They thought they had understood the full story. Yeah, people always do. And then there's always people that come along that tell you that they have the answer and they know what it is.

And they're very confident and very charismatic. So people follow them. Yes. True. And wisdom, I think, to logic sense, is two things. One is realizing that we don't have the answers. So being... And, you know, we're never certain about everything.

Anything. certainty is not within our I like to tell this story my father grew up thinking his first name was Franco until the day he asked birth certificate and figured out that his

first name was Julia so I went ahead and said what hell is going on here and my grandfather told him well you know your mother wanted to call you Franco but I didn't like it, but they didn't dare say so. So I registered you with a different first name. So that created a disaster for the rest of his life

because his paperwork rolls, Sam Franco, some Julia. So he didn't know his own name, right? So even about your own name, you can be wrong. You can be wrong about everything, even about your own name. There's always a case in which things can go wrong. But that's good. I don't think we should aim at certainty. In fact, it's the other way around.

We should be careful about certainty, because certainty is what blocks you for understanding more. If you're certain that the earth is flat, you don't understand it's wrong. If you're certain that things are objective, you don't understand the possibility that they are not, and so on and so forth. So accepting the limitation of our knowledge, the fact that we may be wrong, it's a key for learning more. That, I think, is crucial.

And the other thing, you and I have, I think, one thing in common. What's that? Curiosity. If I had to define myself what has been the driving force of so much what done is curiosity. I got curious about science and curious about philosophy, curious about the world. Curiosity is what. And you too, right? I mean, it seems to me that all this, you know, Joe Rogan experience is that open.

as to curiosity of listening to people, what they have to say. The curiosity, I think, is a fabulous force for the world, not just thinking that you close yourself in what you know already, but being curious, being curious about the rest of the ideas, the world, the others. I think it's genuinely contagious, too. When I find people that are curious about things, I get curious. Exactly. When someone's actually curious and they start having these conversations

that are clearly to them fascinating, I'm addicted to it. I'm like, what are you got? What are you talking about? What is this? How did you do it? How did you figure that out? Yeah. But I've, yeah, I mean, I've kind of been insanely fortunate that I can have these kind of conversations with people like you.

Yeah, I envy you for that. You get to know whole possible people very easily, right? It's very interesting. It's not a finger and everybody comes to you. You're like it. Well, it took a long time to get to that. I can imagine about that. Even from the very beginning, it was always so interesting.

I mean, there's a lot of people that, you know, you know, you know. You might not even know who they are, but you'll have a conversation with them and you'll get a new perspective on things. You'll get a new version of how a person lives their life. And the more I think you gather about that, the more you understand about yourself and the more you understand about interacting with people. Yeah, yeah. And you discover that people are different, have different ideas. And you figure out why they came to these different perspectives too. And if you're open, you can consider how you came to yours.

One of the most things that fascinates more is how people get ideas. How ideas come in. After all... What do you think ideas are? I don't know. That's a fabulous question. I got a rich man from California calling me not long ago and said, ask me the question. Carlo, how do ideas arrive?

I think it's a fabulous question. We learn, right? We learn personally, we learn historically. And learning mostly is not just learning facts, it's learning ideas, different ways of thinking. Civilization is just a product of ideas. All we live is ideas, in a sense. And how do ideas come in? I don't know.

We have our mind as this incredible capacity of generating ideas. very often ideas are just combinations of preview things a lot of physics is just the this is

I understand this because it's like that but not exactly like that so I take part of the idea of that part of the idea that I combine

it's a lot of combinatorics I hear what he says I hear what you say I hear what you say oh look this goes together with that

so a lot of ideas come from bringing together that's why the more you learn, the more you produce things, the more you're curious, the more you're... You know, how did Newton come out this incredible idea?

He studied Kepler, he studied Galileo. The two things didn't make sense together, but they were similar. So how can put this together with that? My own job, my own physics job, is to mix quantum mechanics and general relativity. That's what my core of my research, central part of my research is doing.

How do you go about doing that? How do you mix them? I think you mix them by taking them seriously. So quantum mechanics is so successful that it's telling us something about the world. And general activity is so successful. Generativity

has predicted black holes, gravitation waves, expansion of the universe, time, the fact that times your head is more than time for your feet and so on and so forth. So it's come out to be right. So it has be right. And quantum mechanics were so

well, all our technology is based on quantum mechanics has to be right. So then the question is how do they fit together. You sort of turn them around both of them until you say, look, this might join with that. It's this aspect of this that goes together with

this aspect of this. That has been the work of my life, quantum gravity. And the theory me and my friends have come out with, it's called loop quantum gravity, it's a way of solving this problem. We're not sure it's right, right? That's my main work in physics, look quantum gravity. It's a way of bringing together quantum mechanics and Einstein theory. It gives some predictions. It gives a picture of quantum space and quantum time. It's a possible

solution of a question. The question is what are the quantum properties of gravity? What the quantum property of space and time. I was sure? No, not yet. We are now the situation, we're working for findings and consequences that could be tested. Science is not sufficient to have ideas. It's only want to test them.

So that is my entire, the main central job of my life has been combining ideas to make a new conceptual structure for thinking about quantum space and quantum time. And that's useful for understanding what happened inside the black holes, what happened

to the early universe, what happened to black holes. You know, black holes, if you let them there for a very, very long time, they evaporate, it becomes smaller and smaller. So what happened at the end of the evaporation? These kind of questions need quantum gravity. What do you think happened before

the Big Bang? Okay, so first, we don't know. I think it has to be said clearly because it's good to speculate and maybe in 10 years we will know it's not impossible to know

but for the moment we don't know there are two possibilities one is that genuinely there was nothing before the Big Ben so time started there this is what Stephen Hawking he worked a lot on this possibility

he expected that to be the case. The other possibility is that, no, there was something before the Big Bang. And the intuitive idea is that, you know, you have a universe collapsing, falling down into itself, getting to a very, very compressed stage, and then bouncing out. And we see the bouncing out. And if I had to bet now, I'm not sure, but I would bet for the second one. From the equations, that seems to be what was the case.

And do you think this is a constant process of expansion and compression? No, because I think that if we do this jump that you just did, we're making the usual mistake as soon as you understand something to think it's there for over. Right. If you live in a valley and ask, well, I've never seen what's behind the heel. You look behind the heel, you see something else. Oh, I get it. It's like that forever. No, it's not like that forever. It's like that for a while and something else happened.

So we are afraid of saying, I don't know. So as soon as we have a step ahead, we tend to say, okay, I got it. That's a very healthy explanation. Yeah. Because it's accurate. We really can't figure it out. Yeah. When you saw the James Webb Telescope, the more newer discoveries of these galleries

of these galaxies that formed far earlier than they should have. Yeah. Did that give you pause about the date of the universe? Because some people have speculated that perhaps the date is wrong, that the date of the Big Bang. Yeah, I know, but I think it's more plausible that there were primordial black holes that gave rise to this early galaxy. So there's an explanation within the same dates, which is possible, that, you know, when the universe was very, very, that went over a lot of confidence, right? There was a time about 12, 13, 14 billion years ago

that the universe was much compressed, much hot and fluctuating a lot. So at that time, it's very possible that many black holes formed. And maybe some of the early galaxies were generated by black hole formed at that stage. That seems to me the most plausible answer. I'm not a cosmologist, so I'm not really my field, but it's close I try to follow. So it would be that our understanding of what it takes to form a galaxy is incorrect.

Yeah. Or the time it takes. That's right. That's right. So, you know, during my life, something that has been realized is that, Not only did there are black holes all over the sky. When I was a student, people didn't believe in black holes. When did they first discover them? I studied black holes school, but as a mathematical aspect of Einstein theory.

And the book said, well, there's probably nothing real in the universe that correspond to that. The first people who started thinking, actually, that thing up in the sky that we see, could be a black hole was in the 70s. It was very interesting because there are a lot of binary system in the sky, two star rotating around one another. So you actually see the movement of two stars.

And there were some funny things in which you just saw one star dancing around something which was not seeing. So people said, well, maybe there's a black hole. He's dancing around the black hole. It was speculative.

Then there were the quasars. Some very intense signals that come in from very far away that people couldn't understand what they were and people said, well, if it was a black hole, the matter falling into the black hole could radiate very strongly and we could see that. The actual evidence grew very slowly in the 80s and 90s. In 2000, I moved back from...

America to Europe. I arrived in France and the director of the department was a particle physicist, a very good particle physicist. And I said I'm working on black holes and he said, Carl do you don't believe the black holes are real. The 2000. So still physicists, very respectable physicists didn't believe the black holes were real. That's so late. It's very late. It's very late. Yes. At that point, the relativist the cosmologists, the astrophysicists, we're taking very, very seriously. Now we have pictures of black holes. So now there's no doubt.

There's no doubt. Physicists have doubt about everything. Are any of those old professors still alive? Yeah, but they change their mind. Scientists change the mind. Good ones. You're totally right. Good scientists change the mind.

I'm sure if I talk to him, he would laugh. I say, of course you were right, black holes. So now we have complete evidence that were black holes. But, you know, we see black holes, which are sort of a little bit more massive than our sun, there are many, many of these. But then we discover this colossal black holes, gigantic, which are usually the center of the galaxy. And we have two pictures of black holes. One, the black holes in the center of our galaxy, and then another black hole much bigger in another galaxy,

more far away. It's beautiful pictures, right? They were on the front page of the newspapers a few years ago. So when this was realized, there are these black holes in the center of the galaxies, then the question came immediately to everybody, every good scientist.

Is it a galaxy that forms and then creates a black hole in its center or is it actually the black hole that start that, you know, then it forms a galaxy around it? it's not yet completely resolved what is the role of the black hole in the galaxy and I think this very, very, early galaxies could be just a product of black holes

coming out of the very early stages of the universe. The craziest theory that I've ever heard was that in the center of every galaxy is a super massive black hole and that could be, if you went through that black hole, you go into a whole other universe filled with hundreds of billions of galaxies each with a black hole in the center of it,

You go through each one of them, hundreds of billions of galaxies, each of the Black Hole. And it's just, that's true infinity. Yeah, that's a crazy theory. It's a beautiful theory. In fact, it's a good friend of mine who worked a lot and maybe even started that theory, is Lee Smalling. I am not convinced. I think that, I don't know, we don't know.

But I think that if you jump into Black Hole, you just, you don't go to another universe. After a long time you come out in our own universe. So a black hole is a the black hole left alone is going to eat

everything around and then left alone it's going to become smaller, smaller evaporate and then that's what loop quantum gravity seems to suggest there is a quantum transition and becomes a white hole and everything inside comes out.

So remember At the beginning of our conversation, we said that time is different, right? Time goes faster and slower. So if you jump into Black Hole in a short time for you, you're going to jump out billions of years in the future. So Black Hole could be a shortcut to the future. Oh, boy. Isn't physics beautiful? It's beautiful.

It's terrifying and beautiful at the same time. It just magnifies the scope of our minuscule existence. Yeah, yeah. It's fabulous that we can learn about that. Yeah. There was a time which people didn't know what were this little dot in the sky, like Venus and Mars.

Now we, you know, we sent machines up there and people want to go up there. There was a time in which people said, oh, we're never going to learn the chemical composition of the planet and they start because they're far away. this is 90th century not long ago our grand grandfather and they were completely wrong

we learn right it's now through the spectra there are ways for we know exactly what is the chemical composition of stars which is crazy yeah it's crazy so we do learn this is magical yeah it really is

I mean it's fascinating to even think of the possibilities that are out there yeah and that as time goes on we'll develop more and more powerful telescopes and we'll be able to see more and more. Yeah, if we don't kill each other with nuclear weapons, which is a very concrete possibility. Well, if there really are aliens out there, there really are super advanced civilizations, I would love to know how they manage to navigate through that if they went through the same

course that we are currently going through. I would love to know because that's one of the things about the Fermi paradox, right? Maybe the reason why we don't see them out there is because they never really get that far. Maybe they don't get them. Maybe they destroy themselves with nuclear weapons when they were at the stage. Maybe the union is very large, very vast, it's huge. So even if in the galaxy there are many, many, it could be that too far. Could be.

Or it could be a small percentage of them get to a position where we are, a very small percentage. And then a small percentage of them make it all the way without being wiped out by natural disasters or cataclysmics of whatever species they are, whatever their design is. Do you know what I think is most probable? What? That they have already seen us and they thought we're totally uninterested and we just avoided talking to us because we're too stupid. Really? I don't like that theory. One of the reasons why I don't like that theory is because we don't do that.

We are constantly studying things that are more primitive than we are. We're constantly doing experiments on ecosystems and trying to solve problems that exist. Like I was watching this documentary about this island that got separated when they dammed some river and created this island. And it was in South America. And this island was overrun with monkeys. And they had no predators on this island. And because of that... So many, many monkeys?

Tons of monkeys. But because of the fact that they didn't have any predators, they had lost all their fear of raptors, and they had started over-consuming the seeds of all the plants. And so there weren't new saplings growing, and it was having a detrimental effect on the ecosystem. So they brought in harpy eagles. You ever seen a harpy eagle?

Not the monkeys, the humans brought in... Humans. Okay, yeah. Brought in two harpy eagles. No, what is it? A harpy eagle... Oh, eagle, the big bird. Yeah, eagle.

Yeah. It might be the biggest eagle. Okay. It's either that or the golden eagle. Which one's the bigger one? I think harpy eagles are bigger. Anyway, they're really good at killing monkeys. And they let these two harpy eagles loose, and they went ham.

And they killed so many monkeys that they had to stop the experiment after a few years. So these eagles had had offspring, so they had two other eagles that were there as well. And these eagles were just wiping out these monkeys. And they said, okay, this is too much. And this is now they're like getting past the whatever the numbers are that they could reproduce. Like it was getting to the point where these eagles, just two eagles and they're two offspring. We're just so they pulled the plug and they pulled the Eagles out of there. And they said, all right, well, we tried that.

But unintended consequences. But that's us. That's just humans wondering what do we do about this island. Why wouldn't we just leave that stupid island with those stupid monkeys and let them figure it out? Yeah, if they eat all the plants, they'll starve to death. They'll figure it out. No, we don't. We go in and we interfere and we intervene and we monkey with the, for a lack of better term,

monkey with their ecosystem by bringing in predators. So you think there was some alien civilization would interfere with us? Of course they would. Why? We are so fascinating. Stanley Kublich movie Space Odyssey was about that, right? An alien civilization who were just, according to the story of the movie, we're sort of experiment.

of an alien. Well, that's an old story. Yeah. That's a story that's from the, you know, the Sumerian text that's from the epic. That goes all the way back to some of the old books that they found that were in the caves in Kumran, you know. Well, Sumerians have this idea of the gods. We are just created the gods for their own advantage. You see, these are beautiful stories.

I always find this. them, you know, they're fascinating to talk about, but to humans, we're just trying to project ourselves to something similar to us, changing a little bit. I think there should be something like life all over the universe, but why should be similar to us? I mean, we are, we lack imagination. There are more ways of being complex than just having a civilization the way we have. That's true, but how do you get there? Don't you think you probably get there by innovation? And if you get there, you're not just going to automatically evolve superintelligence

without any innovation and any technology. Most likely biological creatures are going to develop technology in order to advance themselves to the point where they have technology like we have today or far. more advanced than that. So it has to go through a process. So whether it looks like us or not, for sure, we definitely lack imagination and are just imagining the possibilities of different kinds of life and different kinds of intelligence all over the universe. But the idea that they wouldn't be interested in us seems to me silly. Like we are in an adolescent stage of evolution where we're both like we were talking about earlier. People are kind and compassionate and wonderful

to be around and curious and interesting and also brutal stealing resources from other countries creating wars under false pretenses using propaganda so we're both things and we're both things we're all we're weird but we also have potential

you agree I agree like humans have the potential to live a far better way than we're living now if I was an alien I would be utterly fascinated by the soap opera like how does this one turn out like these people are out of their fucking minds we found a nutty as civilization that are on the cusp of figuring it out and at the same time they're making

an artificial digital version of itself that's far more intelligent. I would think we're a really interesting study. Yeah. I would not think they'd be like, oh, so boring these people with their godlike AI nuclear weapons. Okay, okay, okay. I buy the point. I can see the point, Joe. I can see the point, Joe.

Yeah. But look what we're doing. We're using our own mind to try to imagine how something that could be, could think about us. Sure. But of course, the only model we have is us. Right. And other animals. And other animals.

Yes. Yes, exactly. But, you know, I don't know how much squirrels talk about us. Probably they don't. but if they had to figure out humans they would use squirreals notions to try to figure out humans and they would just get it wrong

right and much like squirrels we're probably so limited in our ability to perceive and imagine in comparison that's what I was trying to say to what else is out there exactly yeah exactly exactly exactly squirrels are cute

they are until they bite each other's nuts off they go after they're nasty are they nasty It's not known exactly if they do that. But that's always been like the wives tale, is that when they're mating, when they're competing, they will fight. And one of the things they do do for sure is they throw each other out of trees. And that's one of the reasons why squirrels can fall from so far and still survive. Squirrels can fall from like 30, 40 feet in the air and they bounce off the dirt and they're fine.

Like they're just constructed for falling. Because they go to war. They go to war with each other to breed, you know, to one or two males are competing over a female. And the story was always that they would bite each other's balls off. Oh, boy. I don't know if that's true. Wait.

That was one of those like the outdoorsmen would always tell you. If you grew up in Europe, I did. When you come to this side of the Atlantic, one of the beautiful things is that they're animals much more than in Europe. The problem with Europe is there's too many people, okay? And especially places like Italy or the Netherlands, full of people, full of people. You don't see animals in the room. Right.

Other than like pets. You see cats and dogs and rats. Yeah, sure, sure. Animals which are lived strictly with humans, either as pets or as rats, a lot. But when you go out hiking the mountains, it's very rare to see animals. You know, when I was a kid, it seemed laughable in America, but I would go hiking with my parents as a small kid. And if there was a squirrel, everybody was jumping, oh, look, a squirrel, fantastic. Really?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. And then I came to the U.S. There are squirrels all over, right? You can't keep out of your house. Right. Especially people that live in the country. Yeah, but then I moved to Canada. Canada is fantastic.

Oh, yeah. We were living in London, Ontario. And out of our windows, there were coyotes. There were all sorts of animals. Oh, yeah. We had an eagle coming down in our garden. And just sitting there. Canada has true wildlife.

It's fabulous. So for me, that was a great thing of coming inside of that landing. It's still more, nature is still more pleasant. In Europe, nature has been domesticated all over. It's rare to see some wilderness. When Westcham first took flight in 1996, the vibes were a bit different. People thought denim on denim was peak fashion. Inline skates were everywhere.

And two out of three women rocked, the Rachel. While those things stayed in the 90s, One thing that hasn't is that fuzzy feeling you get when WestJet welcomes you on board. Here's to WestJetting since 96. Travel back in time with us and actually travel with us at westjet.com slash 30 years. Well, we're very fortunate that we have the national park system. Yeah. You know, the way we have these national parks where you can go to Yosemite.

You can see elk and bears and there's wolves there. It's like, it's incredible. I mean, it's a little bit domesticated in that sense. Like you go to the elk are not scared of you. at all. They hang out by the visitor stand. It's a little bastardized. There's an Instagram page called the Turons of Yellowstone, not like morons, but tourists. And people that get too close to the bison and get flipped through the air. Disasters, yes. God, so many of those. But it's because they've, you know, they've grown up in cities and they don't understand what wildlife is and they want to

take a selfie with the bison. Oh boy. Oh, boy. Yeah. You can guess how that turns out. When I was in my 20s, I dropped out from university and I took one year off traveling. And I did cost-to-cost, Atlantic to Pacific, Canada one way, and the other way. And alone, it was fantastic. Wow. Did you hitchhiking? Hitching, yeah. Look at you.

You were a hippie. Yeah, yeah, in that sense. Yes, yes, absolutely. I met all sorts of people. But when I arrived near the Rockies, it was in Canada, and near a bum. And I spent some times hiking high in the mountains. It was marvelous for a European, exactly because it was empty. But then I came down to Banff, it was a small tiny village at the time.

And the camping was too expensive for a young kid. So I said, okay, I don't want to stay in the camping. So I walked up a little bit and put my tent in a little empty space. And then it greetsly came. Yeah. So I was inside my tent. The sun was going down. And this big bear started walking around the tent. I was terrified to death because I had one of these little little tents, just one layer, and the sun was going down. So I saw the shade of the bear on the day. So the instruction was make noise. Okay? That was the structure that was given because the risk is that. The bear opened the tent looking for food and see you, get scared, and kills you. So if you make noise, that he's supposed to go away.

But I was trying to scream, but it was too terrified. Noise was not. Oh, no. So then I looked around to make noise. It was nothing. So I started clapping my head like an idiot. So the bear, I had actually, that I did right, hanged my food. on a tree at a little distance.

So the bear went to the food, opened the food, and then after a while went away. I was terrified. How long did that last? The entire thing, the last of half an hour, before I had the courage to come out and look, and there was no bear anymore. So I took my tent and ran down to the campground.

I said, I pay whatever. I stay here. And then, you know, people were talking about. There was this greetslid that were going around. I survived. Whoa. Yeah, that was my encounter with wilderness, which coming, you know, the little boy coming from Europe, Italy, totally civilized,

no wild animals, was quite scary for him. But, you know, I learned that sometimes it's not a bad idea to respect regulation. Because there was a regulation, don't go along. Yeah, they know what they're doing. Yeah. But it's not to say that the bear wouldn't wander its way through the camp. too. They will. They don't respect boundaries. They don't respect

regulations. It's such a crazy animal that we have here. Like, grizzly bears are so fascinating. They're so enormous. Enormous. They're enormous. Yeah, and they used to be all over the place. Like, California doesn't have any anymore, but that's on the state flag.

Oh, yeah. It's a grizzly? Yeah, it's a grizzly. Is not a black bear? No, no, it's a brown bear. They used to have brown bears all over California. In fact, the guy who was last killed by a grizzly bear they named a town after him it's called lebeck lavec california i see yeah i've been to it there before and it's like there's a plaque memorial oh i see in canada they have accidents they still have accidents oh yeah especially bc right there's a lot of them in bc in bc yeah i have

friends that live in edmonton and boy they have everything out there they have links you run into links all the time you see grizzly bears they have moose everywhere it's it's such a wild place it's so cool. That's what I envy of this America, right? In Europe, you don't see anything. Right. It is an issue. There's almost no predators in Europe. It's very rare that you find wolves

other than, you know, of course, Russia. Yeah, if you go east. You get a lot of wolves there, and bears as well, of course. But it kind of eradicated them all from most of like urban Europe. America still has a lot of wild

places. It's one of the cool things about this country too is that we have this public land system too so people can go and visit these wild places yeah and there is all this marvelous area sort of Arizona yeah Utah Utah New Mexico is just the south of Utah is just marvelous oh it's incredible I was actually watching another documentary yesterday on Jaguars entering into Arizona as there's a quite view you mean the animal not the car yeah the animal yeah these jaguars are entering into Arizona, and they've spotted several of them now, like pretty large ones.

It's pretty interesting. They've decided to make their way back into America because that's where they used to live. Where are they coming from? Mexico. Oh, coming up? Yeah, coming up from Mexico. I think they spotted four of them now.

This is the same as mountain land. No, no, no, no, much larger. Jaguars are huge. They're the ones that eat crocodiles in the Amazon. They're the ones that dive off of trees and kill the Kaman's and bite them by the back of the neck and drag them. Have you ever seen that?

No. Oh, it's amazing. You got to watch this. It's amazing. Jaguars are some of the coolest animals to watch hunt because one of the things that they hunt is crocodiles. Like, yeah, they love to eat Cayman crocodiles. So they hide in trees or on the side of the bank, like waiting for the crocodile to get into a vulnerable position and they leap on them. And they dive into the water and leap on them and bite them in the back of the head.

They're one of the few animals, this is in the documentary, that kills not by exfixie, They kill by crushing the back of the head. Oh, wow. So they have super strong. Yeah, they're huge. Look at it. Looking at them sneaking up behind them. They're the third biggest cat.

Oh, boy. Wow. Yeah, that's how they kill. They bite the back of the neck. They crush the head, and then they drag him away. So he's going to eat a crocodile. So they're the third largest big cat. So tigers are number one.

Then there's lions. And then jaguar. And so they're starting to make their way back. Oh, it's five. Five jaguars spotted in Arizona. Are they dangerous to humans? Oh, yeah. 100%.

100%. I mean, not the numbers that they're at right now, but they would be. Sure, if you're hiking or are you doing something stupid and you zig where you should have zagged and you run into one of them? I mean, historically, they've eaten people. They prefer, I'm sure, to eat king.

But you have to do something stupid. You have to bother them. Well, you have to be on their diet, right? Like this is the same thing with tigers. Tigers become a problem once they realize they can eat people. And then they habitually eat people. And that's what they do in India. When one tiger starts doing something wrong, they go out and look for it.

Yes, yes, because then they realize how easy it is. So once we become, once we are on the menu, it's like the first time you eat a chick filet. You're like, this place is great and you just want to keep coming back. That's the problem. And it's also for most... But that's not wise on this side, because we're... We are weak individually, but they're super strong in group. Right.

But they don't know that yet. And a lot of the times the places where they're hunting, the people are weak individually and not united because they're in these very small villages. And so they don't have any resources. They don't have any food, water. They're in trouble already. And then these animals get them, tigers get them.

But the jaguars in the United States is such a small number. I don't think that's the real concern. But what's interesting is that they've decided to repopulate North America or the United States at least. It's pretty cool. They're making their way back up here. I don't want to run into one because they will eat you. I mean, they're huge. They're huge and you have zero chance of stopping them from eating you once they decide they're going to do that.

You don't have a chance with a mountain line, and they're like double the size of a mountain line. They're really big. It's a big cat, but they're really beautiful. Why are we fascinated so much? big cats. We are, definitely. It's just incredibly... It captures something of our imagination. This is something about the beauty, the strength, their elegance, everything. It's just that we react to. I think we were hunted by them. I think that was a big part of our early ancestors.

When you're dealing with big cats and slow animals, until those slow animals figure out how to make weapons, you're probably hunted by big cats. I think Rupert Cheldrick made this point. It's a really good point. When children go to sleep, they're not afraid of all the things that could actually affect them in an urban environment. Like they're not afraid of child molesters or murderers or someone going to break into their house. They're afraid of monsters. Monsters.

Which are the big threat of those. Exactly. Exactly. They're afraid of monsters even though they've never experienced a monster. There's a theory that according to which one of the main steps in humans, becoming humankind is exactly this passage from being praise to being predators, which had to change profoundly our mental structures. Yes.

When we realized that we could resist big predators and actually becoming predators ourselves. Because evolutionally we were not predators. Right. If you go back again. our speeches at some point learn to be like those things we were afraid of. Yeah. But does this explain the fascinations? Because a monster, it's not just a fear that they generate in us.

It's also sort of admiration and beauty. Well, we have admiration and beauty for almost all big predators, right? We have admiration. Not for crocodiles or kind of. Right. It is a lot of beautiful. Right. We might find it interesting, but not the kind of fascinations with...

Yeah, that's true. There's something about mammals. Yeah. We're closer to them. We're closer, we're much, much closer to them, yeah. In fact, I've always been fascinated how much easy we communicate with mammals, right? Sure. Without language, without words.

But if you are in the wilderness and any sort of mammals, You understand the animal and they understand you. So we communicate very easily. It's completely, you know, reading each other emotions and each other in tension, its attitude. So it's easy for instance to, you know, you're going your way, I'm going your way, we don't bother each other. Sure, unless you're on the menu.

Yeah, but yeah. Yeah, you could be on the menu, especially if you're in the wrong place. but that's just the nature of the wild itself. It's just this constant series of life-eating life all around you, whether it's life-eating plant life or life-eating other animal life or life-eating aquatic life. Yeah, yeah. Then somehow we became predator, predators at some point in our history.

Yeah. And then we started doing this against one another. Yeah, we probably started doing that from the very beginning, most likely. we're probably competing for resources. We don't know. We don't know, right? There are two competing theories about what happened to our species. Our speeches is what 100 to 100,000 years old.

And there are two versions of this story. One is that war is something that started very late, only when we became agricultural. culture when we start accumulating and putting away big chunks of grain. And the other is that groups of humans were in war even before that. Very different theories. And I think it's interesting that there are these different theories because it has to do without the future and our present.

Namely, is this idea of getting in group once against the other and making war to one another? something which is only a few thousand years old, so it's not in our genetic structure, it's just that, you know, after agriculture we could steal stuff for one another, or is something that goes back all the hundred of thousand years of our speeches. We don't know. What do you think? I'm not sure, but I tend to think that war is recent.

Because a lot of the communities on Earth which live hunting gathering, they don't go to war. They have no reason. It's an economical thing. You only go to war with another group if there is some accumulated resources you can steal. If you find another group of hunter-gatherers, if you have extra meat, you share because otherwise go rotten. There's no point in going to war. And if you look at our cousins, it's very confusing because Bonobo don't fight when two groups meet.

Right. That's a fact that at worst they fuck. We don't fight. But chimpanzees do. And they're equally related to us. So it doesn't help to look at our cousins, what they do. But it's a crucial question. It has to do with a question we discussed in before.

Can we get rid of war? How much war is part of our genetic, not because we are blocked, but our genetic heredance. But clearly it's much easier to think that we can get rid of it if it's only 10,000 years old rather than, you know, 100. I tend to think it's hundreds of thousands of years old. And I think chimpanzees are the best example. of that. We are much closer in behavior

to chimpanzees than we are to bonobos. Oh, we are equally related from... We are equally related but in behavior. But in behavior, we're much closer to the way chimpanzees be. But I had this hippie part of my life. I identify better with bonobos. I'm sure you do. You're a really nice guy. That's why you think the way you think. I think it's great.

You mean I'm a more bonobo to that guy? You're more a chimpanzee guy? I don't even think I'm a chimpanzee guy. I just recognize that chimpanzees go to war with each other and they kill each other. This is a chimpanzee war going on right now you know that right do no I didn't know but yeah there's a there's a major chimpanzee war going on right now that they're documenting if you ever seen that um there's a Netflix series chimp nation no it's really great it's fascinating so the way chip nation but came about

and I had the documentary crew on the guys who created it was really interesting they had these scientists they're embedded in this troop of chimpanzees for a long time for more than 20 years They lived with them? Yes. They live with them. So the chimpanzee accepted the presence of this? Yes, exactly. So they have rules.

You must stay more than 20 yards away from them, never have food on you, and don't make eye contact. And because they've been doing this with this protocol for 20 years, the chimpanzees completely accept the fact these people are there. They're slowly got used and they realize that there's no challenge, no threat. They're normal. They're completely normalized. So they behave normal around them. And they see all this crazy behavior. They see, first of all, a lot of intertrival.

conflict, they kill each other, and then they kill ones from other tribes. They leave tribes and start new tribes. It's really interesting, really interesting. But they behave very much like the way we do. They have a leader. The leader's the alpha. The young man challenges the leader. Sometimes the guy gets driven out. They form new parties. They come back and try to kill the ones that they started out with. They cross boundaries to get new fruit and new trees. And then they wars over the trees. They behave. just the way we do, just at a different scale. But I think that, like, for instance,

we talk about Native Americans and hunter-gatherers. The Native Americans were constantly at war with each other. They would go on raiding parties constantly. There was, you know, I don't know how many tribes were in total. Somewhere in the neighborhood of like 200 tribes in this country, which were constantly battling each other and killing each other for hundreds and hundreds of years. Oh, that's a pessimist. No, no, no, that's what they did.

No, no, I, it's not. I'm not questioning it. Yeah, but it's not pessimistic. It's what fool a pessimist view of the future. But no, no, no, no. It's not even pessimistic. It's just, I'm just saying that's what they did. Like this idea that the only reason why this place was at war is because Americans came here

or Europeans came here and settled. Not really. The Comanche basically wiped out the Apache in all of this area right here. This area we're at right now was called Comancheria before any settlers. They were dominant and they were ruthless and their friends. favorite thing to do was go on raiding parties. And so they would go and raid other tribes and they would kidnap people and torture people and murder people. And they did that without any influence from the Europeans. And they did that for a long time. And that was all across the country.

Now, some tribes got along better with other tribes. There were more agrarian tribes. They vary differently, just like humans do in different environments. But at the end of the day, there seems to be a pattern. When you're talking about uncontacted tribes of hundreds, hunter-gatherers, they go to war with uncontacted tribes all the time. You know, I just had a guy on the other day that was talking about cannibalism, and one of the ways they would utilize cannibalism is eating their enemies after they killed them. And if they had an enemy that was in a rival tribe and they had an encounter and they killed them, they would eat them.

And this is like part of their culture. This is all over the world. This has taken place. I think it's much more likely that war is a very, very, very old thing. And it probably has to do with a really harsh environment where we had to do. to survive where people were stealing from each other and stealing mates and stealing resources and cannibalizing each other. Okay, so you think this is going to make the project of living in peace much harder?

I think it's why it's so difficult currently. I think it's why it's so difficult currently because we have a very, very long history of war, of conflict, of chaos and violence. And it's probably what made us survive this long with the crazy wild world that we live in. Let me play the optimistic one here. Please do. One can read this in reverse, namely, I believe you. I mean, also you talk with a lot of people, so you have a lot of information about that that I might not have.

Say this is true. Now, you and I don't cannibalize each other, right? So we have learned. So then, if this is the case, it means that civilization, which is recent stuff with respect to, has had a very strong pacifying effect on us. I agree. And education. Education, civilization.

So we learn rationally. We learn or through religions through various processes. So maybe that process of learning that there is an advantage in collaboration is something that can go, that can develop more. I think it can. I think you're right. And then the question is not going back to our ancient paradise of kindness and gentleness, but to create a better world where we can live together better. I think that's the path.

Thank you very much. I really enjoyed talking to you. It was really awesome. I loved it. Thank you. I'm glad you. I did anything expected. Fantastic.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I really enjoyed it. On the equality of all things, lessons on physics and philosophy. Do I pronounce your last name, Roveli? Yeah, perfect. Carlo Bobel. Thank you very much.

I really enjoyed it. Bye, everybody.