The Weirdest Thing I Learned This Week - What Rats are REALLY Saying, Cosmic Caffeine, Lamarck was RIGHT?!

Episode Date: November 5, 2025

Tom Lum joins the show to reveal what rats are ACTUALLY saying to each other. Plus, Rachel talks about the color of the Universe, and Lauren explains one evolutionary exception. The Weirdest Thing I Learned This Week is a podcast by Popular Science. Share your weirdest facts and stories with us in our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook group⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tweet at us⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Click here to learn more about all of our stories! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Links to Rachel's TikTok, Newsletter, Merch Store and More: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://linktr.ee/RachelFeltman⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Rachel now has a Patreon, too! Follow her for exclusive bonus content: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/RachelFeltman⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Link to Jess' Twitch: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.twitch.tv/jesscapricorn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Link to all of Jess' content: ⁠https://www.jesscapricorn.com/⁠ -- Follow our team on Twitter Rachel Feltman: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.twitter.com/RachelFeltman⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Produced by Jess Boddy: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.twitter.com/JessicaBoddy⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Popular Science: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.twitter.com/PopSci⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Theme music by Billy Cadden: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://open.spotify.com/artist/6LqT4DCuAXlBzX8XlNy4Wq?si=5VF2r2XiQoGepRsMTBsDAQ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Find your fall staples at Quince. Go to https://Quince.com/weirdest Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Did you know that there's an online cannabis company that ships federally legal THC right to your door? I'm talking about mood.com. They have an incredible line of cannabis dummies and a lot more. And you can get 20% off your first order at mood.com with promo code Weirdest. It's third party lab tested and ships directly to you in a discreet box. Best of all, everything's backed by Mood's 100-day satisfaction guarantee. And like I said, you can get 20% off with code Weirdest. So if you're looking to try some new cannabis products, head on over to mood.com.

Get 20% off your first order now with code weirdest. That's code weirdest for 20% off. When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed sponsored jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications, and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this shelf will get a $75-sponsored.

job credit at Indeed.com slash podcast. That's Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs. Kayak gets my flight, hotel, and rental car right. So I can tune out travel advice that's just plain wrong. Bro, Skycoin, way better than points. Never fly during a Scorpio full moon. Just tell the manager you'll sue. Instant room upgrade. Stop taking bad travel advice. Start comparing hundreds of sites with kayak and get your trip right. Bad advice. You talking to me.

Kayak. Got that right. At Popular Science, we report and write dozens of science and text stories every week. And while most of the stuff we stumble across makes it into our articles, we also find plenty of weird facts that we just keep around the office. So we figured, why not share those with you? Welcome to the weirdest thing I learned this week from the editors of Popular Science. I'm Rachel Feldman. And I'm Lauren Leffer.

And I'm Tom Lum. Tom, welcome to the show. We're so excited to have you on. Would you tell our listeners a little bit about yourself? Yes, I make science videos on the internet. There's a little thing called the internet for folks like Science Epic American, SciShow, for my own videos. I also co-hosts the podcast Let's Learn Everything on the Maximum Fun Network with my friends Caroline Roper and Ella Hubber. and also the live game show in New York City, Our Finding Show.

Okay, I had to have to make sure I got everything. I apologize. I will do any silly science thing that people will let me. Oh, my gosh. I'm delighted to be here. That's how I should start encapsulating my career, too. I'll do it. Just ask.

Silly science for hire. Yeah. I will also say, if you don't mind me saying, This is technically the second time I've been on this show technically because in 2021, the very first TikTok I ever posted that was the video that I ended up is the reason I'm here now was mentioned on an episode of this show. Was it the bees one? It was the bees one. Oh my gosh. I totally, I did not put that together.

But as soon as you said, it was a TikTok that we'd mentioned on the show, I was like, it's got to be the bees. And it's very funny to me because, well, because I wasn't, I wasn't, at the time, I wasn't a person on the internet, in quotes. And so my username is Tom Lum Person because that was the most, it was originally to be like Tom Lum Dev when I was going to be a computer person or make video games. And at the last minute, I was like, I'll make it the most generic name to apply. And so it was just person. But as a result in the episode, I am referred to as Tom Lumperson, which I did get a lot in the early TikTok. days. It is a common mistake. Oh boy. Lumperson. So the only reason I agree to this was to correct the record and then I'll take my leave. God, you did. But listen, I remember that episode and it was

really fun. So we will link to that. What is the bees TikTok though? What was the information? It's that bees have a sense of time. And most importantly, they can get jet lagged. If I focus really hard, I think I can recite the TikTok. I've just, it's just been so, no, no. In college, I'm like my favorite science story ever, which is. But yeah, we will link people back to the Tom Lumperson episode. Tom Lumperson episode and the TikTok in question. So everybody can get the whole backstory. That's incredible.

Well, and listeners, I asked Tom on because, like you said, you've been doing videos for Scientific American, where I'm doing a podcast, science quickly. And obviously all your videos are great. It's not like they've suddenly become great now that you're at Siam. But they've really been like hitting. They're like, they're good. I'm out of short form retirement almost because I just had been not doing it for a while and then have been doing it again. And I was like, oh, wait, yeah, this is fun. I do miss doing this.

And it's great to, yeah, I posted a little like when I started doing it video explaining how I felt about it. But yeah, it's just been great. So I'm glad. I'm glad it feels that way. Yeah. Well, awesome. We're excited to have you on officially for the second time. And we'll roll right into the show. So on the weirdest thing I learned this week, we start by offering up a little tease about some kind of fact or story that we found in the course of reading, writing, reporting, et cetera. And decide which one we just absolutely have to hear more about first. Then once we've all had time to spin our little science yarns, we reconvene and decide what the weirdest thing we learned this week actually was. Lauren, what's your tease?

Oh, okay. This might be a little wonky, but I'm sticking with it. My tease, Lamarck was right, just as for Lamarckian inheritance. Ooh. Drama. Yeah, bringing back some really old science beefs. I love that. Tom, what's your tease?

My tease, it's so long-winded. I wish I had like a real quiffy one. But my tease says, in a bunch of different ways, New York City rats are weirdly similar to New York City people. And we figured that out with some really cool tech. I mean, yeah, I'm excited to hear Osayans proved it, but I could have told you that. They're part of it. I did a short video on this for Siam, but there is a lot to dive into, and so I'm so glad I have the excuse to really, really dig deep, like a rat, into track, into all these details.

Awesome. Spiritually, I know that when I was living in New York and I would look a rat in the eyes, I felt a kinship there. I'm not surprised. My teas is that I'm going to talk about cosmic lattes. And that's it. Short, sweet, sweetened, oat milk? Yeah, there's probably a good amount of oat milk in the cosmic latte.

I think I know this on a pub trivia fun fact level, but I'm very curious. I've not dug any deeper, and so I'm very curious to learn more. To be a cosmic latte barista by the end of this whole point. Well, I can, I'll dive right in then. So this is the story of how we figured out the average color of the universe, depending on how you define that, which then had to be corrected to a decidedly less interesting color, but which is still very cool. We're still very happy that this happened. So back in 2002, a couple of astronomers, Ivan Baldry and Carl Glazebrook, presented their research on what they called the Cosmic Spectrum, which is not the Cosmic Latte, but is related. So they were analyzing data from the 2DF galaxy Redshift survey, which measured light from

more than 200,000 galaxies. It basically looked at two big old slices of the universe to a depth of like 2.5 billion light years. Wow. At the time, it was the world's largest Redshift survey, but it was overtaken in 2003 because people always be making bigger telescopes, but for that one year. It's like a Stanley Cup that got handed over to the next telescope. Yeah, it was actually the biggest survey from 1998 to 2003, so it had a little bit longer

over rain. But this data analysis came out in 2002. And basically they used all that data from the survey to construct what they called the cosmic spectrum, represented all the sum of all the energy in that part of the universe emitted at different optical wavelengths of light. So it kind of looks like a prism color spectrum. kind of thing, totally unintelligible, except that it's a rainbow unless you are these dudes doing this research.

And their primary motivation for doing this was actually to learn something about the history of star formation in the universe. Basically, if you know what you're looking at, when you look at the cosmic spectrum, it has these dark lines and bright bands throughout it, which correspond to the emission and absorption of different elements. And the strength of the dark lines is determined by the temperatures of the stars that are contributing to the cosmic spectrum. Older stars are cooler. So they produce a different set of lines compared to hot young stars. Hot young stars. The cool to hot spectrum. Yeah, exactly. And so by analyzing that spectrum, the idea was they could work out the relative proportions of young to old stars and sort of, yeah, infer what the star formation rate was in different eras of the universe.

Is the idea to find out the age of that part of the universe? I'm going to hold this question. Never mind. I know we talk about it all the time in astronomy, the age of things. Just every so often, when someone breaks it down, it's just, yeah, we just looked at a portion of the sky, did some math, and we know how we can, like, shoot a beam of age detection at stars. Was it like billions of light years away? Yeah, yeah. That's wild.

And their takeaway was that the majority of stars in the universe today formed more than five billion years ago, which is borne out by other research of this type, where the idea is, there was a time when the universe was making way more stars because there was more ambient gas and material around. But now with streaming and TikTok, you just don't have the star power anymore. It's true, yeah. Yeah, lots of influencers, very few stars. Yeah, exactly. But meanwhile, they decided to just have a little fun, just on a lark.

That's my favorite part because here's what I assume. And I apologize to interrupt because this all is like the very interesting data. But am I right that like it's just they were just sort of like, well, we have the data. If we just click some all just for fun. Okay. I love scientists so much. So yeah, they were like, on a lark. Let's just see what color the universe is.

What does that question even mean? How are we defining it? It doesn't matter. It's just a little footnote in our research. Big mistake, guys. Anyone on this recording right now could have told them that is obviously the part people are getting glomont. Glam on to.

Everyone's going to want to do a thing on. So, yeah, they decided they were going to estimate the average color of the universe. By that they meant if you could trap all that light that they were looking at in their spectrum in a box so that it was all just one color. And you could see it from the perspective of a human on Earth. And also the universe would have to stay still for a second because the expansion of the universe means galaxies are constantly shifting to be more red from our perspective. So there are a lot of caveats here. But they came up with this color that they said was right between medium aquamarine and pale turquoise. Are those not the same color?

Medium aquamarine and pale turquoise. A lukewarm blue green. Yeah, you're not wrong. I feel that these were scientists and not like design experts. They weren't like up on their pantone colors. Yeah, they were like, what hex code is it? Yeah, yeah. It's between these two.

And then we're like, this makes sense because turquoise is a very particular mixture of red and blue. And that kind of reflects the stage of the universe we're at. When the universe was really young, the cosmic color would have been more blue because there were a lot of young stars, which tend to shine blue. And then the universe is aged. So there are more old red stars. And so that's like making it greener. Wait, more red stars is making it greener? Yes.

What? It's, I'm gonna, we're coming around to a, to a plot twist. Okay, cool. But they were able to come up with a reason why the green was the right color. But it turned out it was the wrong color, spoiler alert. And yeah, another important factor. Is your lattes, are your lattes not aquamarine somewhere between mild aquamarine and, It's a very Star Wars latte.

Yeah. So the abzebzobo Grande, believe. And yeah, one important thing buried in there is that the color of the universe is going to change over time. At one point, it would have been very blue, and one day it will be very red. But it turned out they hadn't gotten the color quite right. Mark Fairchild, an expert in color science, who I learned is retiring sometime in 2026. So happy retirement, Mark, is credited with helping them correct the, I'm not sure if Mark is the only person who informed them of their mistake or if they got like a flood of emails from agitated color experts.

But he diagnosed the issue. And the long and short of it is that they had used a free software program to identify that greenish color. And it hadn't been calibrated correctly. The white point was off. The white point is the point at which light appears white to the human eye in different kinds of illumination. if you're not someone who's had to spend a lot of time in Photoshop. And Glazebrook was actually quoted as saying, this was all because they hadn't taken the color science seriously enough,

which made sense, given that this was meant to be a footnote in their serious Cosmic Spectrum paper. But like I said, as any of us could have told him, obviously when you presented this at a conference with that interesting, funny little footnote, that's what people were going to run with. And Glazebrook was quoted saying, It is embarrassing, but this is science.

We're not like politicians. If we make mistakes, we admit them. Damn. Yeah. So, yeah, Fairchild realized that this random piece of freeware was actually using like a slightly pinky color as white, which caused a huge green shift. And they were like, yeah, if you look at all the light in the universe from a room where the light is neon red, then it's going to look turquoise. They're like, that's what I meant. That's what I meant.

I have a lot of overlining in my apartment. That's why. That's why I just, yeah. But it's not a standard perspective. And when they corrected the white point, the color was actually on the slightly pinkish side of white, a slight beige color. In fact, if you look back at the researchers very 2002 explanatory webpage about their findings, they make a big deal out of the fact that this is so close to white. So you probably can't even tell the difference. I disagree, but it's certainly in the off-white family.

I don't know why they're still picking fights with color people. Didn't they learn their lesson? I still have a follow-up here, though. It's like the light they're mixing is still predominantly blue light and red light, and somehow they're coming out with white light. I guess it's they're like, I just have questions. What's going on? Yeah, fair.

I think it's a really kooky thought experiment. is the answer, and there are so many stars. We're mostly seeing blue-tinted stars because of how far away they are. There's more and more red in there. So apparently the mostly blue with some red is shifting us to a true white situation. Or at least a pinky beige. When you add colored light together, it's like more of that additive thing where you end up with the white spectrum. like printing colors.

Exactly. Yeah. And of course the exact shade it appeared as this white point issue, a hint, it would depend on what kind of light you were surrounded by. If we were standing in daylight, the color would be like a faint red. In indoor light, the color would be more blue. But they did their best to approximate it. Like, you're in a dark room staring into a box of universe, which I wish.

and they were like, yeah, it looks beige. This is actually a quote, it looks beige, I don't know what else to call it. I would welcome suggestions. I just imagine like CERN has created this imaginary device and like they've spent trillions of dollars creating this isolated room that averages all the light. And then they look in and they're like, I don't know, it's beige.

It's beige. It's beige. I don't know how that makes me feel about our universe as a whole though. It's like you average. all out. It's like we live in beige universe. Yeah, but not, you know, one day we'll live in red universe and then Yeah. I feel like that's less of a fun universe actually

is an exciting color. I want to keep the colors separated and continue to live in like my bisexual lighting universe. Yeah. I don't know the full cosmic spectrum. I decide. Everyone looks hot. Yeah, I think that's so right. I think that's correct. I will say.

That's the design perspective, not the astronomer perspective. I will say, and can I ask, do you know if the researchers came up with the name Cosmic Lottet? No, and that is my next point. Okay, because I was going to say, whoever did, that's great branding, because if you see this, this, this, yeah, a beige they might describe as, oh, somewhere between off-egshell and medium gray. It's like cosmic latte, and I feel like has had such good branding that most people don't know the goof up at this point. Yeah, totally. because they called the original turquoise color something like just like Cosmic Green or something.

But once beige was in play, they were like, we can't, you can't just call it Cosmic Beige. So they did put out a call for, this is so 2002. They just asked people to email them. If this happened today, it would be a huge competition and it would have been called like Beijy McBeige face. Sonic X. Shrek. Yeah. But so, yeah, the names that they solicited by email, so there weren't very many of them, there was Cosmic Latte from a guy named Peter Drum with six votes, Cosmic Capitino

Cosmico, also by Peter Drum, with 17 votes. Several people entered variations on Big Bang Buff, Big Bang Blush, or Big Bang beige, which collectively got 13 votes. They were voted on by the astronomers who were involved in the paper. Several people entered Cosmic Cream, which got eight votes. Someone entered Astronomer Green. I guess they hadn't gotten the memo. The new slouch.

Or it was like a diss. Like astronomers will think this is green. Or we find out it's like, Kevin, you are colorblind. Or they were in a red room. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. But eight people did vote. for that.

Astronomer Almond by Lisa Rose, got seven votes. Skyvery by Michael Howard. Oh, hold on. Now, hold on. Yeah. Skyvery, I think that slaps a little bit. That's like a Mormon mom's name. That's true.

And I thank you very much, Lord, for convincing me back. Kaylin and Skyvery. Univage with was sent in by several entrants, got six votes. Several. Several entrance. Cosmic khaki, that was an unknown submission with five votes. But also, who amongst us has not been in the coming up with a science pun name, you know,

Google Doc or you have a list of science words on one list of, yeah. That's the whole profession. And then the last one on the list is primordial clambed shouter. Oh. Okay. Now, hold on. Sky suit. Creamy SkySuit.

Cymorial clam chowder. And that was from an unknown entrant. If you're out there, please step forward. That was actually from the universe. Yeah. And it only got four votes, which I think is really unfair. People in the 2000s didn't have any sense of humor.

That's so true. So as you may have noticed, Capitino Cosmico really ran away with the vote, but they actually liked this guy Peter Drum's other suggestion, cosmic latte, because they were like, well, latte means milk in Italian, which is Galileo's native language. And Latayo means milky, like the milky way, which is via Lataya in Italian. Because it's named, we did this on our podcast, it's named after a believer, oh, God,

a myth of breast milk shooting across the sky because it looked milky in the sky, I believe. I believe that's true. Yeah, I think that does sound familiar. Sorry, is Cosmico Capacino? Capacino, Cosmico. Is Cosmico not legit Italian? Is that like an Italian brain rot meme? I think so. I think so. And

yeah, they also claim to be caffeine biased, so that's why they went with Cosmic Latte over some of the other suggestions that had gotten more votes. I'll wrap up just by saying that the researchers have sort of an FAQ on their, again, very 2002 web page explaining their findings.

It makes it very clear that some of their colleagues were like, absolutely not. This is nonsense. So one of the cues that was apparently frequently aid was, does not the universe consist mostly of transparent space, which is actually close to black. in color because it contains far more interstellar and intergalactic non-luminous gas, dust, and perhaps dark matter that absorb light, than it contains stars that radiate

life. Such a frequent cue. We're all asking that. The first thing I thought that was average color of the universe, that's black. That's no color. I think the question is valid. The phrasing makes me curious about who exactly was asking it. We all say

in unison, that exact sentence. And their answer was, black is the absence. of light. We were looking at the combination of all of the light colors. And when we see black, when we look up at the sky, it's just because our eyes aren't sensitive enough to see faint galaxies. So, yeah. And then the next question is, but still, the average color of the entire universe is probably close to black, isn't it? And their answer was, the extragalactic sky is black to the naked eye. However, black contains no information other than galaxy.

are too faint to see to the naked eye. The way we have defined the color, the hue, derived from the cosmic spectrum, is related to the history of star formation in the universe. It would not be interesting or informative to say the universe is black. Okay. But wait, wait, were they looking at only visible light, or were they also including, like, UV light in the spectrum that they were averaging? They were looking at the visible light spectrum.

Okay. So, yeah, I mean, I feel like you included all the light specifically. you might end up with something else. Yeah, I mean, like I said at the beginning. Sure and build another box. Like I said at the beginning, they created very specific constraints because there is no right answer to this question because you can always say, well, what do you mean by that? And that's science.

Yeah, and that's science. I think it does, it's a good, like we were joking, like this is a gold mine of a like fun fact. But I do think it does offer some genuinely good follow-up questions because I was like, oh, yeah, that is interesting. I guess, yeah, the blackness of space is the absence of information. And I also, God, I love the drama between the different factions throughout the story of the researchers and then the color science people and then the general public. Yeah. And whenever they addressed a question that amounted to like, why do this? what if there are so many caveats to what you mean by this being the average color of the universe like why did you do it and they were like because it was fun and nobody was supposed to notice

and you all hate fun basically well they they wanted it to be like a learning tool like a thing that made people curious and that then they got lots of follow-up information on and unfortunately most people just didn't care about the follow-up information but that science communication. Well, it worked on me because I have questions for these people. Well, I bet their inbox is still open. I bet they're still fielding all of those, all those cues today. I want to know what the Cosmic Latte would taste like. Oh, yeah, that's important. All right, we're going to take a quick break and then we'll be back with some more facts. Did you know that there's an online cannabis company that ships federally legal THC right

to your door. I'm talking about mood.com. They have an incredible line of cannabis gummies and a lot more. And you can get 20% off your first order at mood.com with promo code weirdest. I'm not a smoker myself, but I do love the occasional weed gummy to, you know, help me go off to Dreamland. And I can't have one right now because I have a new kit. And, you know, I definitely miss it a little bit. But maybe you can have a weed gummy. And you can get one at mood.com. So the reason that different cannabis strains can make you feel different ways, isn't just about the THC. It seems like it's also based on other components called terpenes. Turpines influence how a product tastes and smells, and it seems like they can also impact the way you feel. Mood partnered with dozens of small American farms

to custom cultivate flour with specific turpene profiles designed for specific moods. So you can choose your cannabis gummy, edible flour, or pre-roll based on how you want to feel. Just go to mood.com and click Shop by Mood. And yes, it is now 100% federal. legally legal to have really great bud shipped right to your door. It's third party lab tested and ships directly to you in a discreet box. Best of all, everything's backed by Mood's 100-day satisfaction guarantee, and like I said, you can get 20% off with code weirdest. I'm eyeing mood.com's Delta 9-THC buttercream caramels because in addition to not being able to have THC, I also can't have dairy right now. So the idea of having a caramel that also mellows me out and sends you to

Dreamland sounds very nice. And speaking of fun edibles, Moot.com has Delta 9th-C freezer pops. So if you're looking to try some new cannabis products, head on over to moot.com. Get 20% off your first order now with code Weirdest. That's code Weirdest for 20% off. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save?

Enough. Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your ocean front room. Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected.

When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Okay, we're back. And Lauren, speaking of beefs between scientists, what's up with Lamarck? Yeah, okay. So I'm not going to start with Lamarck or Darwin or Mendel or any of those guys.

I'm going to start with a question, which is hypothetical. Let's say you cut off your hands and reattach them wrong. So left on right, right on left. Then like years into your kind of like backwards handed life, you had kids. What would those kids' hands look like? I would think they would have right on right, left on left. I believe I took biology.

Yeah, yeah. So assuming all went well, their hands would not be backwards. But what if that's not always the case? I am here to talk about some wild, still unexplained, and under-explored experimental results from the 1960s that, like, have the potential to really complicate the way we think about genetics and evolution. But first, we need some background. We need to make sure everyone's on the same page. So basically, we all know mostly how inheritance works. Organisms have their genes, organized in DNA, which determine traits. Offspring inherit DNA from their parents over generations, lineages with more benefits. official traits went out, reproducing more, passing those traits along, yada, yada, yada, selection pressure, disease, the fight for resources, that all limits the spread of damaging mutations.

And then through time, the genetics of a population shift. This is what we know from the work of Charles Darwin, from Gregor Mendel, who's the monk with the pea plants that you probably heard about in high school biology class. But through the history of biological science, there have been all sorts of other ideas about inheritance and largely debunk proposals for how organisms can further traits. onto the next generation. So one of the classic flawed explanations for how we ended up with a planet full of biodiverse organisms all doing different things was Lamarckian inheritance.

Basically, this French zoologist, John Baptiste Lamarck had this idea that traits were determined by what was needed to survive in the world and that changes in courage during one's lifetime would be passed onto the next generation, had this idea that traits were determined by what was needed to survive in the world, and that changes incurred during an organism's life would be passed on to the next generation. He had these four primary pillars of evolution. We only really have to care about one for the purposes of this story. And that is, in his own words, quote, all that has been acquired, traced, or changed in the physiology of individuals during their life is conserved through the genesis reproduction and transmitted to new individuals who are

related to those who have undergone those changes. A lot of words to say, if you change something while an organism's alive, its offspring will have that same change. So if you cut off the hand, put it on backwards, the baby's going to have the backwards hand. That's what Lamarck thought. The classic example he gave to prove this idea was the giraffe. Yes. So the way that Lamarck explained giraffe's whole deal is that over generations, the animals were trying to reach taller and taller leaves on the trees.

They were stretching and strengthening their necks with each subsequent generation. All that effort paid off in the form of baby giraffes with longer and stronger. necks. This is like a completely unrelated aside, but I used to live a block away from a Pilates place in Brooklyn that had the tagline, quote, get leaner, stronger and longer, plastered across all its windows. I've always wondered if one, can Pilates make you taller? But two, I think Lamarck would have loved Pilates. Listen, okay. That's my favorite daft punk song also. Me is stronger, longer. Listen, as somebody who occasionally tortures myself with Pilates, a modality I love to hate and hate to love. It does, it's all about like spine alignment and like improving your core. So it does

definitely make you stand taller and can like alleviate some of that like cord compression that most of us have. Can you reach taller leaves on the tree? Well, you're offspring reach taller leaves. Lauren, I have to say two things. One is that the giraffe story is actually quite compelling because it, what it points to is the sort of like secondary and tertiary effects of evolution that like aren't as clear, where it's like the, these selective pressures are a little more indirect than, oh, you're better at a thing, therefore you know. And so in some ways I'm like, oh, I do get it. But the main thing I want to point out is the fact that you could have led with the draft story, but instead you, you pitched your new sitcom pilot, my backwards

hands life instead. Yeah. Well, I do think there should be an MTV show. Well, actually, is MTV going under? I think they're not going to exist next year or something. But the backwards hands thing, it's going to make a lot of sense in a minute. I promise. Wait, is it actually. Oh, oh, okay. It's going to be important. Lamarck is really just like a way to, we'll get to it. It's kind of a way to understand this crazy thing that happened in the 60s. Oh boy. Back to the giraffes. Like, we all like intuitively and clearly know this isn't how evolution works most of the time. You cannot get swole and then expect your kids to be born like automatic beefcakes. It doesn't unfortunately happen that way. But there is a little nuance here and a lot of it you probably already know about. Like epigenetics

has been this buzzword since 2010 in the year of our Lord 2025. You've likely heard about it. It's cool stuff. It adds some like spicy flavor to our ideas about genetic interinence. Basically it outlines a mechanism by which things happen to you in your life and those things can in fact influence the genes of the next generation. This happens because like major stressful events, for instance, can shift how DNA even in our sperm and egg cells. get expressed through this process called methylation. Still, though, epigenetic inheritance relies on DNA, organized in genes. And that's not what I'm here to talk about. If you want to know more about it, you should like 100% read about epigenetics. Again, it's very cool.

But I want to talk about something weirder. I want to talk about everything about epigenetics. If you all listen to that. But anyway, yeah, great resource. Listen to that. Not to this. This is something different. I'm here to talk about this guy, Tracy Sondborn, born and raised in Baltimore, so a hometown hero for me. And his paramecium experiments. So paramecium, they're these single-celled eukaryotic organisms. So they're eukaryotic. They're not bacteria.

They're like closer to animals. They have lots of... They have a nucleus, is that? Yes. Yes, they do. And they have lots of little appendages all over their bodies. You might think of them as like many little hands called cilia that help them move around and interface with the world.

And usually the cilia on a paramecium, they all move in concert in one direction to like make their movements efficient. So they have a kind of like handedness. Like all their paramecium on one side go this way. All at once on the other one side I go this way. They're kind of like, I'm doing something visually that is not going through on the microphone. I'm just starting to piece together. I'm like, is this where this is going? But yes, continue. But that's fascinating. I did not, that's wild. Yeah. Yeah. So little little paramecium cillium appendages. And paramecium critically, they have this like odd kind of hybrid motive reproduction. So they produce new offspring asexually,

basically just by photocopying themselves via DNA replication and cell division. But then they also exchange genetic information sexually by hooking up with other paramecium and swapping bits of DNA. This sexual process, it doesn't instantly lead to multiplying offspring, but it like down the line, if you do that enough, when you have offspring, they'll have like slightly different genes than you have. And it's a route for evolution via natural. selection to, it's a route for evolution via natural selection to occur. Basically,

paramisium aren't genetic dead ends. But in theory, they're just sort of like, hey, I have some spare DNA and you want. Yeah, I might use it in a little bit. Who knows? Yeah, they just meet up and swap stuff. They're just, they're like, a swap me. Yeah. It's like Facebook marketplace. So, so through this kind of like dual system, in theory, change from generation to generation with paramecium, it should happen, but it should be like slow and a little random. And most off. should just look like whatever the blueprint of their parents' DNA dictates. Enter Tracy Sombor.

He did like a whole bunch of foundational paramecium experiments, which led to these little single-celled guys becoming like a really critically important model organism. He discovered things like mating types and how to breed paramecium and lab, et cetera. He also did this thing, which I think is like very much in the spirit of those astronomers where he was like, let's just have some fun with it. Yeah. He like, yeah.

Let's do a silly one. He, like, collaged paramecium Frankenstein style. Oh. He would take this single cell. He would chop off part of it or some of it's silly it. And then he would just put it on backwards. He'd flip it around attached in the wrong direction. And then he'd just watch that paramecium, follow it, see what it did, see what it was up to, and see what its offspring would like.

An experiment that would be horrifying at a larger scale. But with protozoas, I think we can allow it. Yeah. Is that vegan, I think, at that point? Who could pop up? possibly say. I don't know what the ethics looked like for, I don't, I don't know if you have to do ethics, ethics for single cell examines. You've anthropomorphized them. You've built them. I love these little guys. They're little guys and they have so many hands. Imagine them with tiny gloves.

Anyway, yeah, he would chop off a part of the paramecium. He would just rotate it like 180 degrees. He would like, you know, I don't, you don't have to stitch it. You just put it back in the little cellular membrane. Just, oops. You made it really good. That was good Foley right there. That's that you made. And lo and behold, the offspring of the like kind of messed up copy paste paramecium cells, they had the same deformity. Despite no direct changes to DNA, if you flip a paramecium cillium, their, their offspring have that same weird backward cilia. Yeah, it's wild, right? I, okay, I studied evolutionary biology in college. This is my undergrad degree. And I had literally never heard about this. I learned this from from like a friend at a punk show. I like made a joke about

trying to reach something tall. And I was like, if I do it long enough, I'll go full mark. My, my kids are going to have the longest arms. And she was actually like, I've got something funny about that. Shout out Annette. Anyway, how, why does this happen? Why is it that if you flip a part of a paramecium, it just like photocopies itself like that, DNA aside. We still don't really know. It's unclear. Oh, do you have something? Do you know? Do you have a secret?

No, I was just really hoping for an answer. No, that's still a mystery. Yeah. That's probably why you didn't learn about it in college. Because it's like kind of inconvenient, right? They're like, don't confuse the undergrads with that. That's such a weird asterisk to include. And I mean, there just hasn't, there's been, so there have been like a couple follow-up

studies, some in the 70s from different scientists, some in the 90s. This wasn't just like this one guy's one-off. They've replicated the findings. Like this does happen. I say that just because like when I was first, when I first heard about this, when I first saw the study, I was like, this sonborn guy, he must just be like a real, a real whack-a-doodle. Are we really trusting the guy who is like, let's just put that thing down, flip it and reverse it for fun.

But, okay. Another fun fact about this guy is this is actually, he was the mentor to like James Watson, the person who went on to be like one of the co-discovers or tri-co-discovers of the shape. of the DNA double helix. So like legitimate scientists like very well respected in his field for a really long time, not just some wackadoodle despite his like inclinations to flip and reverse it. And there are like some vague ideas about what's happening here. So there might be some like post modification DNA transcription happening of these like little signal flags on the cell surface of paramecium. It might have something to do with little fragments of RNA that are in like

the cytoplasm of the paramecium. So when it splits up, when it's doing its, it's asexual reproduction, maybe bits of those RNA are then encoded. And when it's like regrowing its little cellular membrane, it's like, here's the new plan. But again, we really, we don't know. So please somebody do the science here and tell me what's happening. Because if I think about this any longer, it's going to unravel my entire understanding of biology. Okay, it's clear this doesn't happen in the same way in more complex organisms. But it's intuitive. It's a little more intuitive in a single cell.

Like I can imagine some mechanisms somewhere in the process of making one cell into two cells versus. Oh, this is what we are now. Yeah. We're somewhere in the chain of community. What's it? Developmental biologist is fascinating to me. I think it's so wild. And so in all the complexity there, I'm like, I can imagine there.

But yeah, of course, for a large animal, I don't imagine. But that's, yeah. Yeah, I still think even at the smallest scale, though, it's bonker. I mean, you can just slice and dice the paramecium and end up with, like, generations of the remix edit. And so those are single-celled organisms. But when you get into multicellular organisms, some studies in the 2010s of worms showed that you can still have like similar non-Mandillion inheritance patterns. So not necessarily just with like body plan. like they weren't, the head wasn't becoming the butt or whatever.

But what they did find is that immune proteins that weren't necessarily coded in the worms DNA, so like immune proteins to viruses introduced during a single worm's lifetime could actually end up being inherited for like up to 100 generations. And it wasn't epigenetics. It wasn't any of that. It was just, again, because you might have like cellular cytoplasm in the sexual cell lineage that ends up holding onto a little bit of that immune RNA and that when those cells then like divide and divide and divide

and eventually you get a new worm, they're still carrying that kind of trace and then that ends up getting replicated by all of the protein mechanisms that normally replicate RNA in the body. And then lo and behold, you inherited an immune function that was not coded in your DNA. It's so cool. And I feel like I've been having this change in my mental perspective

over the last handful of years, maybe more, that, right, DNA as like the code, like the immutable code versus DNA is something that physically exists, like in the cells in your body, where these oddities can happen is so fascinating. Yeah, it's not just, it's not like a computer program in a box. It's like a material that exists, like in your body in the world. And like things can happen to it that then happen to the future. Well, it's like a, it's like a computer. program in a physical computer that can get stuck. Sure. No, I'm not there. I can't think of computer that way. Sorry. I'm like, oh man, have you dealt with hardware? My God. No, and I actually think that that's the hardest part,

right? Like roboticists, they're always be trying to deal with hardware. But anyway, I just think between all this and epigenetics, I do think we got to retroactively give Lamarck some credit. I don't think he should exclusively be like a punchline among biologists and I will stop doing my like arm stretch giraffe Lamarck. joke maybe someday. Darwin may have won the unifying theory contest, but if you stretch science long enough, you might end up with a long confusing list of exceptions to the rule. Nice.

And that's my pun I'm ending on. That's my pun. Great. Perfect. I have, so throughout this, I have been mulling this over, and I think I actually do have, I figured it out. Incredible. La Missy, Le Misc demeanor, La Mark.

There we go. That's what we were thinking about, right? We were trying to come up with the perfect pun for when we were talking about flipping and reverse it. Sorry, I wasn't listening to anything else. I was just mulling that over. I think you've solved multiple mysteries at once with that. Okay, we're going to take one more quick break, and then we'll be back with one more fact. Your summer starts now with Memorial Day deals at the Home Depot.

It's time to fire up summer cookouts with the next grill, four-burner gas grill, on special buy for only $199. and entertain all season with the Hampton Bay West Grove seven-piece outdoor dining set for only $499. This Memorial Day get low prices guaranteed at the Home Depot. While supplies last, price invalid May 14th or May 27th

U.S. only exclusions apply, see Home Depot.com slash price match for details. Peak pollination season, and my business is scaling fast. To keep the nectar flowing, I need a phone plan with top priority data speeds. That's why I chose GoogleFi wireless. My connections stay strong even when the hive is

buzzin. Plus, unlimited plans start at $35 a month. Now that's a deal that doesn't stay. Explore GoogleFi Wireless plans today. Plus taxes and government fees. GoogleFi Wireless is not subject to data traffic deprioritization during times of high network usage. No one goes to Hank's for spreadsheets. They go for a darn good pizza. Lately though, shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks co-pilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales and costs. To help him see if he can afford it. Co-pilot shows Hank where the money's going

and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hanks has a line out the door. Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets. Learn more at M365 copilot.com slash work. Okay, we're back. And Tom, tell us why the rats do run this city. The rats do.

What's the, yeah. Yeah, it's like the rats don't run this city. We don't run this city. The rats do. The rats do. Well, so, okay, no, I'm not going to say that, but there are a lot of ways in which the rats have as much of a claim to the city as we do in a lot of ways. That's going to be one of the things we're going to talk about.

But I'll say all of this comes from a fantastic paper. Highly recommend the read. Great overview, great diagrams and figures that show all their work called Computational Urban Ecology of New York City Rats. And there's also a great article about this research from Deni, Elise Bischard for I am that interviewed the authors of the paper and got some great insights and quotes. But before I dive in, we mentioned it at the top, and this is just like a classic refrain we do on our podcast. But I was curious, what's y'all's familiarity with rats?

Love them, hate them? I mean, as someone who's lived in the New York City area for more than a decade at this point, I'm all right with rats. Do I want one to show up unexpectedly and not leave? No. But when I see them out and about, I'm like, you have as much a right to be here as I do. That's how I feel about them. I respect them.

I respect that their domain, they own this. They do own the streets, I think. And in the right context, they can be very cute. Well, okay. So I live in Baltimore now and not New York anymore. And we, Baltimore still has, we have many rats. And I'm growing a backyard garden. And we have lots of tomatoes.

And the rats have figured out how to eat the tomato. and I think we have plenty to share and I'm like happy to like sacrifice a few to the cause of like a rat getting a healthy meal but my my partner is less convinced that that's fine and so to try and convince him I keep showing him little videos of how cute it can be when like a YouTube like rat eating tomato cute

and then I'll just show it to me like look isn't this so nice? I like the idea that you're picturing it as a healthy alternative to pizza you're like it's not processed It eats the tomato or it eats the trash. Like, I, look, the backyard should not be food deserts for rats. I think there's a middle ground somewhere there between we are actively growing crops to feed rats and also we can't share. Okay, great.

This is great. I was hoping y'all would love rats. But I also personally, we've done many, many facts about how much we love rats on our podcast. We have an ongoing D&D series where we play rats that can ratatooey humans as they do a heist and stuff. like that. Wow. Love rats. And the story of rats and humans actually goes way, way back.

And here we are specifically talking about the brown rats, ratas norvegicas. This is your New York City subway rats, your pizza rats. But do y'all have any guess where they came from originally? Rattis Norwegicas. I know they're called Norway rats, but that's because they were like first discovered or named as a species, like at the ports in Norway or something. I think they're originally from East Asia or Central Asia. No?

You are absolutely correct. This is a classic science misnomer we are stuck with for the rest of our lives. Norvegicus does mean Norwegian, but we now believe that the brown rat came from Asia thousands of years ago, where they were already at that time commensal with humans, meaning like living alongside in this sort of like passive symbiosis. It's sort of like flies. Yes, yeah. like flies alongside like an alligator. It's, you know, the, the alligators don't really care,

but the flies might be able to benefit from like their leavings or stuff like that, right? Any food scraps, et cetera. Rat, the brown rats then expanded to Europe through trade before spreading across the whole world thanks to this extremely effective ecological mechanism known as colonialism, if you've heard of that. And that's how rats made their way to New York City. When the city itself was being built, was, yeah, was being built. so they have as much a right to your Bushwick apartment as you do.

But as much as I'm joking here, studying animals in urban environments is fascinating. I think we often hear stories about how like urbanization has harmed species and that is, of course, totally valid. But the full picture also includes many ways that animals show how robust they are and how they adapt to cities in fascinating and unique ways. and while that's not enough time evolutionarily for city rats to have become their own species, there are papers that there was a paper that came out a few years ago that showed that New York City rats are actually genetically different than the brown rats originally from Asia.

But just as interesting and actually much harder to figure out is the question of how they are different behaviorally and socially. And so I love this line from the paper that goes quote. Here we address the gap by performing field work in wild New York City, parentheses, NYC, rats, and introducing a computational toolkit for analysis of behavior and the environment. I love the, yes, you do need to clarify that that's what NYC stands for, I'm sure. But so yeah, on the one hand, observing rats, like you all said at the start, seems really simple. We do it all the time, right? Every New Yorker has done this before, has observed rats.

But the problem is that when we want to quantitatively analyze their behavior, that there is a ton that we take for granted that our eyes and our brains do that computers cannot. Right. Even in sterile laboratory setting, measuring animal movements can be extremely tricky, let alone in New York City at night. It is like maybe one of the noisiest worst conditions to try to collect data on the planet. I don't know if my microphone picked up construction, but like that's literally like what I'm talking about. And so being able to and so being able to parse the cacophony for what you're looking for is where that phrase computational ecology from the paper's title comes in. So first off they used thermal imaging and they show some examples in the paper comparing like a regular camera to a thermal camera. And it is wild.

It's putting on the glasses from they live. It's just like, oh, there's rats. Oh, there's rats in that picture, it turns out. I watched they live this past week, wild. There you go. That fight scene that goes like four minutes too long. I don't know why they did that. Anyway, continue.

Secondly, they used ultrasonic microphones, meaning above what our human ears can perceive. Because that's often the frequency that rats talk at or make noise at. They do occasionally speak in our range of hearing, of course. There's a line in the paper that describes, vocalizations that had power in the human audible range parentheses squeaks it's so great but more often than not they are making ranges in a they're making noises in a frequency we can't hear so that's why the need for the

ultrasonic microphones and the last key to this computational ecology is of course the use of computation to be able to clean and parse and measure all this comically noisy data. And they do this specifically with AI models, but the good kind, the good time. So for video, this means identifying and tagging the animals in these like countless hours of footage. Their movements, what is and isn't a rat. For the audio, this means being able to isolate their vocalizations separate from the guys blaring Empire State of Mind 24-7. It gets extra hard when the rats are singing along too. You're like, It's hard to, I can't tell which one's which.

And then another thing I totally didn't consider with video is that unlike, again, if you imagine, the sterile laboratory environment where maybe the cameras like top down, the room is perfectly square measured. Their cameras are often just mounted on a wall somewhere looking across an area. And so they had to try to derive the 3D position of the rat so that they could judge its size compared to other rats. right? Because if it obviously, if it's closer, it looks bigger, but they want it to be able to, yeah, compare sizes of rats. And that's just like a problem I didn't even consider is tricky in this situation. And so, yeah, there is so much we take for granted with perceiving the world that requires a ton of computing work. And they pulled out. Could they use the thermal camera redshift? Can they average all the colors of New York City's rat? What color is a is a New York City? It turns out it's Cosmic L latte.

No, they really, really pulled out all the stops for this. People in the computer vision or the VFX world might know this phrase, but they even used some Gaussian splatting to study the 3D environments. It is wild. It's really cool. And I just, I just, I'm so glad that AI is only being used for academic purposes and not for underpinning, not the underpinning of a financial bubble or a tool for oligarchy and propaganda or an accelerator for environmental destruction.

It's just, it's just only used for cool things, right? that people have been smart about AI. We love our contemporary reality. We're having such a good time in our utopian future. I'm always saying, guys, we live in the best timeline. I'm always saying that. Nothing has or will ever go wrong. I do think it's good to parse apart the extremely vague and broad buzzword of AI.

Totally, yeah. Because I think in saying it's 100% bad, you do also, we don't want to throw, there's no nuance in there. And yeah, it's as a guy who studied artificial intelligence and computers and stuff like that, years before ChatGBTGBT was even a thing. I have such a, just like, this isn't AI. AI can mean other things. So after all this analysis, what did they find? well, they noticed quite a few fun behaviors. So firstly, smaller and younger rats tend to go exploring in groups.

And when they do, they bumble around and move a lot more slowly. Roving teens! Roving teens! I was going to an astounding similarity to a human group known as NYU freshmen. Damn, so true. Whereas rats that went solo, tended to be much quicker. And yeah, it also turns out that rats do. talk a lot more than we thought in the ultrasonic range.

Like, they are constantly yapping. In groups alone, the paper describes some of the recordings they got as, quote, Affiliative social interaction between two rats in the subway tracks. Human audible vocalizations from an aggressive interaction between pairs of rats on the sidewalk and nearby trash cans. Long duration bout of calls recorded from a rat forging inside of a trash bag on the sidewalk. I love that one because it's just, in my mind, it's them just like hooting and hollering while they're like scrooge mcducking into garbage.

I was going to say this last one, human audible vocalizations from an aggressive interaction between a pair of rats in the park. Like who amongst us has not been in an argument with their partner in the park and made human audible vocalizations? Yeah, Prospect Park is everyone's living room. And that is the rats too. The best place to get into a public argument. My absolute favorite anecdote was that they had a recording between two rats while an ambulance passed by, and instead of running away or being quiet or hiding, the rats increased their volume, presumably to be heard over the siren.

And that's just, that's a New York man. That's beautiful. It's fascinating. They've adapted. Yeah, in many ways, yeah. Well, and so this is another interesting thing that they found is that typically rats in laboratory settings will make these very specific pitches of vocalizations when they're stressed out or in danger. It's at 22 kilohertz. But in the city, quote, 22 kilohertz vocalizations are used in diverse context, some of which are seemingly not aversive.

And the reason this is very New York to me is this is basically the equivalence of being like cars in labors. laboratory settings only honk their horns when they're in extreme distress. And then in New York cars honked their horns means the light has been green for five picose seconds. And as much as we're doing a lot of anthropomorphization, but this is something that has not been shown before in laboratory settings. There is this, this, this, this market difference in measurable behavior, which is really interesting. But of course they did find similarities between rats in laboratory settings. And I think that's also interesting because it points to things that are ingrained versus things that are not. You're sort of getting at the nature versus nurture, right?

And so just like in the lab, even city rats tend to avoid open spaces. And that's both fascinating, but also gets to a the gets to another bit of this study. Why the study is interesting is that it points to a way that we could learn to make sure that humans, and rats can avoid each other in peace. Because unlike what, like we've joked about, to start, some New York officials say, we don't need to go to war on rats. In fact, one New York exterminator was quoted in the Siam article, and they said, trying to kill rats in a building was basically just a waste of time, saying, quote,

it's like taking aspirin for a cancer. And so if we can, for example, like figure out which of these ultrasonic pitches works to scare off rats. we could make a rat deterrent that is completely invisible to us. We could make, have a recording that is the rat equivalent of a person on the corner asking you to sign a petition. And so the rats will just, I'll take it a long way. It's fine. I don't need to go around. Now, of course, the last thing I need to note here is I have been using phrases like language and communicating.

And I need to put a few quarters in the anthropomorphizing swear jar. I did after all frame this as rats are similar to humans. But of course, we don't know if we can use the phrase language here. That's a whole other can of worms I think we don't have time to get into. We do have some clues, though. So, for example, because of the physics of sounds, we know that ultrasonic vocalizations don't travel as far. Right. That's why, like, you can hear a thumping bass from a car down the block.

And so that might point to how those types of calls are used, possibly in communication, possibly not, but there's definitely what we can say is there's definitely a lot of noise going on. And as one of the authors of the paper told Siam quote, why would you vocalize if not to some end?

The fact that we don't understand that yet, this is one of the questions that really keeps me up. And so this paper is very much a starting point to hopefully further research into city rats. It shows that it is actually possible to study rats

in the greatest and noisiest city on earth. And to me, it's one of the most exciting kinds of papers because it opens up like a million follow-up questions that we hopefully may be able to answer. Are rats using language? Would city rat language be different? Can a young upstart country rat really make it in the big apple on Broadway with just a duffel bag and a dream?

Only future research can tell. Sex and the city rats. I want the full six seasons. We use the AI to categorize them into Miranda rats. Yeah, that's what I want the future of AI to be. Well, they are. I mean, there was like that whole thing about can this AI detection software translate whale speak into human language. I think like it wasn't 100% real.

But what if it was and what if we could understand what rats are screaming to each other in the dumpsters of New York City? Yeah, that would be cool. It's like when people are like, oh, I want and like AI caller that can translate. my dog's barks. You already know what your dog means. We have no idea what the rats mean. I think that means we have to welcome them into our homes and we have to live with them for centuries and develop a distinct into, we have to use our own AI, which is our brains, our own intelligence to figure out. Is that just I? Yeah, just I. I personally will live with the rats, study them and get back to you on what

they're saying. Okay, thank you. Wow. Great fact. Tom, thanks so much for coming on. This was great. Of course. This was so much fun. Would you remind our listeners where they can find you on the internet? Yes. This podcast, it's almost over. But there's another podcast you can listen to. It's called Let's Learn Everything. We have episodes on epigenetics on rats. Yeah. Episode 69 with Hank Green's one of my favorites that we've done. We have one with Tom Scott. But just search around for topics that interest you. And if you're in New York, depending on when this comes out. If not, well, I'll keep doing them. But keep an eye out on 1111. We have the next Our Findings Show, which is a science game show.

We have the wonderful Mike Rognetta, Taylor Moore, and Dr. Moia McTeer. It's going to be a great wonderful story time. It's wonderful. It's so great. I'm so excited to have all those things. Is that a caveat? Yes, yes. You can find that.

Thank you. I'm so bad at plugging this. You can find the info at our findings show.com. Perfect. The weirdest thing I learned this week is produced by all of our hosts, including me, Rachel Fultman, along with Jess Bodie, who also serves as our audio engineer and editor extraordinaire. Our theme music is by Billy Cadden. Our logo is by Katie Belloff. If you have questions, suggestions, or weird stories to share, tweet us at Weirdest underscore Thing. Thanks for listening, Weirdos. Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your own. goals because we're built for what you're building.

Fit for your ambition for citizens back. Relax and let Ralph's delivery handle your grocery shopping this week. We start with only the freshest items, then review your list and carefully choose each one. Then we pack it all up and deliver it in as little as 30 minutes so you can feel confident it's what you ordered. Fresh groceries, your way, with Ralph's delivery and pickup. And right now, you can save this. $20 on your first delivery or pickup order.

Ralph's, fresh for everyone.