What’s your half-life?

What’s your half-life? Dear Magicians, There’s a diabolical limiting belief stifling you: The Myth of Linear Genius The romantic notion of scientists as eternally ascending minds from birth to the grave is demonstrably false. Research by Dean Keith Simonton reveals that creative careers typically peak roughly twenty years after inception, with decline often beginning between the ages of thirty-five and fifty. This isn’t failure—it’s biology. Even Johannes Kepler’s eager anticipation of telescopic discoveries couldn’t extend his productive window indefinitely. Why does this matter? Quite simply, because your career has an expiration date, a half-life if you will, and it’s imperative you overcome your limits before it’s too late. The Child Within the Lab Coat Pure science resembles a playroom more than a boardroom. Scientists prod reality like children with sticks in puddles—driven by delight, not duty. Galileo’s telescopic wonder and Marie Curie’s fascination with her father’s beakers exemplify this childlike awe. But childishness cuts both ways: the same minds capable of revolutionary insight also engage in petty rivalries and citation games. When Brilliance Becomes a Burden The very drive fueling discovery can metastasize into intellectual dishonesty. Nobel Prize obsessions create sleepless nights. Data hoarding replaces open collaboration. What begins as curiosity transforms into tribalism—scientists squabbling over equations like children fighting over toys. This shadow side of scientific ambition reveals the fragile human core beneath rigorous methodology. The Fragile Miracle Science remains a profoundly human undertaking, marked by shadows despite its rigor. We witness adults attempting to remember how to play while wrestling with ambitious tantrums. The luminous and the petty coexist within every breakthrough. Understanding this duality—accepting both the wonder and the weakness—offers us our clearest view of how knowledge advances through flawed yet magnificent human effort. We need to abandon a cherished illusion. Scientists aren’t ascending gods of reason, heading up and to the right from childhood until the end… They peak. Then decline. Dean Keith Simonton’s research destroys our fantasies. Creative careers hit their zenith around twenty years in. Then? Downhill. Usually between thirty-five and fifty. But fear not: Even Kepler—brilliant Kepler—couldn’t anticipate his way past biology’s limits. And the space telescope named after him flies 400 years after his seminal work. Half-lives are non-negotiable. Biology is undefeated. Here’s what’s fascinating. You can level-up, slow the curve down. The best part? It’s fun. It involves playing well with others. The best science happens in a kind of playground. Not a boardroom. Scientists are children with expensive toys. Galileo peering through his telescope. Curie was mesmerized by glowing beakers. Pure wonder. But children can be cruel. Petty. Jealous. They don’t play well with others. Sometimes they take their ball and bat and go home,. And do scientists, in their own way. The same minds that revolutionize our understanding also hoard data. Fight over credit. Engage in citation warfare. The Nobel Prize becomes an obsession. Sleep disappears. Collaboration dies. This isn’t a bug. It’s a feature. Human nature doesn’t vanish in lab coats. How can we harness it to our benefit? Gamify the collaboration. Make sharing data as addictive as hoarding it. Create visible credit systems where generous scientists get recognized immediately—not just at year-end awards ceremonies. Open science platforms like protocols.io and galaxy zoo (see below) already do this, turning methodology sharing into a competitive sport. Build playgrounds, not ivory towers.Research institutions are experimenting with architectural designs that promote chance encounters between scientists. Coffee stations placed strategically. Staircases that funnel people together. Physical spaces designed to fight against academic silos and encourage cross-pollination of ideas. Feed the ego differently. Instead of fighting for the Nobel, create micro-recognition systems. Daily citations. Weekly breakthroughs. Monthly methodology innovations. Transform the long, brutal slog toward recognition into a constant stream of smaller victories. The secret? You don’t eliminate human nature—you redirect it. Make collaboration more rewarding than competition. Make sharing sexier than hoarding. Make playing together more fun than playing alone…All the while we need to overcome our own tantrums. Science advances through flawed, magnificent humans. Not despite them. Because of them. Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week. Brian Appearance Think you can spot a comet? ☄️ Try your eye with the very first citizen science project on @the_zooniverse that uses data from NSF-DOE Rubin Observatory, Comet Catchers! Hopefully the comet you spot won’t be an Earth-Ender!☄️ Genius Missed out on winning one of my meteorites? Have a spare $4m or so? You might want to add this beauty to your collection. I’ve invited Jennifer on The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast. Wish me luck in landing her — it would be a true treat for me and for you too! Image Hello dark matter my old friend… What you are (not) seeing, highlighted in blue, is dark matter. The James Webb Space Telescope was just used to precisely map out the dark matter that is part of the makeup of two colliding galaxy clusters in the so-called “Bullet Cluster”. Wow. Conversation What drives the accelerated expansion of the universe? How is the groundbreaking DESI experiment reshaping our understanding of dark energy? And why do discrepancies in cosmological measurements suggest we might be missing something crucial about the universe? In this lecture, Dawson explains how the discovery of dark energy in the late ’90s transformed cosmology, leading to the Lambda-CMD (ΛCDM) model. He highlights the DESI experiment’s role in refining our measurements of dark energy and the Hubble constant, while addressing ongoing discrepancies between different cosmological probes. These tensions may indicate new physics beyond the standard model. ​Click here to watch! Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement If you’re a STEM professional or aspire to be, I know you’ll love my STEM self-help book, Think Like a Nobel Prize Winner. It’s full of actionable tips from the world’s most brilliant but relatable geniuses. They’ll teach you to overcome the imposter syndrome, collaborate with your competition, and thrive in today’s cutthroat academic environment. Read the first chapters for free here. Upcoming Episode George Church will be on The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast soon. This Harvard geneticist has been at the forefront of revolutionary advances including CRISPR

Advice for life that’s literally set in stone

Advice for life that’s literally set in stone Dear Magicians, The Wisdom of Years A meditation on Kinney & Smith’s forgotten truths and the enduring triumph of human experience over algorithmic efficiency. Picture this: It’s 1992. The Berlin Wall is still fresh rubble, the Soviet Union is a year dead, and in the ivory towers of America, two researchers named Kinney and Smith are asking a question that would make today’s HR departments break into nervous sweats: Does getting old make you a worse teacher? Back then, mandatory retirement was still a thing—imagine that quaint notion in our current gerontocracy where 80-year-olds run companies and countries with the vim of teenagers hopped up on Red Bull and delusions of immortality. The Uncomfortable Truth The findings? A significant but small impact of age, varying by discipline. The data suggested that in humanities and social sciences, age actually correlated with better teaching performance, while in physical and biological sciences, the opposite held true. Translation: Your crusty philosophy professor pontificating about Nietzsche’s mustache might actually be hitting pedagogical peaks, while your organic chemistry instructor could be phoning it in from the molecular level. But here’s where it gets deliciously ironic—and melancholy. Uncapping of mandatory retirement appears to raise no major concerns for dramatic deterioration in teaching effectiveness in an aging professoriate. In other words, we were worried about nothing. The Ghosts of Lectures Past There’s something profoundly wistful about this research today. In 1992, the biggest technological disruption in higher education was probably the transition from overhead projectors to PowerPoint. Professors were evaluated on whether they could still command a classroom, inspire young minds, and transmit knowledge through the ancient art of human connection. Fast-forward three decades, and we’re in the midst of an existential crisis about whether professors will exist at all. OpenAI’s GPT models can now explain quantum mechanics with more patience than most humans, generate personalized curricula, and never have bad hair days or coffee breath during 8 AM lectures. The beautiful irony? Just as we discovered that aging professors weren’t the problem we thought they were, we’re now grappling with whether human professors—of any age—are becoming obsolete. The Algorithm Doesn’t Have a Story Here’s what Kinney and Smith’s research really tells us: teaching isn’t just information transfer. It’s not a data dump from one brain to another, optimizable through better algorithms and faster processing speeds. The disciplines where older professors excelled—humanities and social sciences—are exactly the fields that require what machines still struggle with: contextual wisdom, life experience, the ability to connect abstract concepts to the messy reality of human existence. Your 65-year-old literature professor who’s weathered three recessions, raised children, buried parents, and witnessed the rise and fall of multiple presidents brings something to Shakespearean tragedy that no AI model can replicate: the gravitas of lived experience. This is why we should actively seek out older mentors and teachers. They’ve accumulated something no algorithm can download: the weight of years, the texture of failure, the hard-won wisdom that comes from surviving multiple cycles of certainty shattered and rebuilt. The Paradox of Peak Performance The study’s findings reveal a beautiful truth: expertise isn’t linear. In some fields, accumulated wisdom trumps neural plasticity. In others, fresh eyes matter more. Sometimes, the professor who’s taught the same course 47 times brings a depth of understanding that the fresh PhD with their shiny new methodology simply cannot match. We need to resist the efficiency trap. Not everything valuable can be optimized, compressed into bite-sized modules, or delivered through the most convenient channel. Some knowledge requires marination. Some wisdom only comes through repetition, failure, and the slow accumulation of pattern recognition that takes decades to develop. The Human Element in an Algorithmic Age Yes, AI can generate personalized lesson plans and provide instant feedback. But can it look a struggling 19-year-old in the eye and say, “I was lost once too, and here’s what I learned”? This is where we need to value the human elements in our own learning and teaching. The moments that transform us aren’t usually perfectly crafted explanations. They’re the off-script conversations, the shared vulnerabilities, and the recognition of our common humanity in the face of difficult material. I remember my quantum mechanics professor who stopped mid-lecture one day and said, “You know, I’ve been teaching this for twenty years, and I still don’t really understand it. But I’ve learned to be comfortable with the mystery.” That moment of intellectual humility taught me more about science than any equation ever could. These are the stories we need to share—transformative teaching moments that involved human empathy, not just information transfer. A Future Worth Fighting For The effect does not begin until faculty members reach their mid-forties and does not seem to increase even when they reach the former retirement ages of 65 or 70. This data point contains a profound truth: we don’t simply decay after some arbitrary peak. We evolve, adapt, and in many cases, improve. We need to advocate for educational approaches that emphasize human connection over technological solutions.Not because technology is evil, but because it’s incomplete. The future won’t be won by perfect algorithms, but by imperfect humans who understand that knowledge without wisdom is just data, that teaching without empathy is just information transfer. Most importantly, here’s what we must do: Stop treating human connection as a nice-to-have add-on to “real” learning. Stop apologizing for the messy, inefficient, gloriously human process of one person helping another understand something difficult. Support institutions and educators who recognize this truth.Advocate for the irreplaceable value of lived experience in education and mentorship. The machines will get smarter, faster, and more efficient. They’ll probably teach calculus better than most humans within the decade. But they’ll never know what it’s like to have their heart broken by a thesis defense gone wrong, to feel the pride of watching a struggling student finally grasp a complex concept, or to understand that sometimes the most important thing you can teach someone isn’t in the syllabus. In the end, Kinney and Smith’s research doesn’t just tell us about

M.A.G.I.C. Exclusive – Vera Rubin Observes the Universe!

The Galilean Paradox: When Recognition Corrupts Discovery Dear Magicians, The Wisdom of Years A meditation on Kinney & Smith’s forgotten truths and the enduring triumph of human experience over algorithmic efficiency. Picture this: It’s 1992. The Berlin Wall is still fresh rubble, the Soviet Union is a year dead, and in the ivory towers of America, two researchers named Kinney and Smith are asking a question that would make today’s HR departments break into nervous sweats: Does getting old make you a worse teacher? Back then, mandatory retirement was still a thing—imagine that quaint notion in our current gerontocracy where 80-year-olds run companies and countries with the vim of teenagers hopped up on Red Bull and delusions of immortality. The Uncomfortable Truth The findings? A significant but small impact of age, varying by discipline. The data suggested that in humanities and social sciences, age actually correlated with better teaching performance, while in physical and biological sciences, the opposite held true. Translation: Your crusty philosophy professor pontificating about Nietzsche’s mustache might actually be hitting pedagogical peaks, while your organic chemistry instructor could be phoning it in from the molecular level. But here’s where it gets deliciously ironic—and melancholy. Uncapping of mandatory retirement appears to raise no major concerns for dramatic deterioration in teaching effectiveness in an aging professoriate. In other words, we were worried about nothing. The Ghosts of Lectures Past There’s something profoundly wistful about this research today. In 1992, the biggest technological disruption in higher education was probably the transition from overhead projectors to PowerPoint. Professors were evaluated on whether they could still command a classroom, inspire young minds, and transmit knowledge through the ancient art of human connection. Fast-forward three decades, and we’re in the midst of an existential crisis about whether professors will exist at all. OpenAI’s GPT models can now explain quantum mechanics with more patience than most humans, generate personalized curricula, and never have bad hair days or coffee breath during 8 AM lectures. The beautiful irony? Just as we discovered that aging professors weren’t the problem we thought they were, we’re now grappling with whether human professors—of any age—are becoming obsolete. The Algorithm Doesn’t Have a Story Here’s what Kinney and Smith’s research really tells us: teaching isn’t just information transfer. It’s not a data dump from one brain to another, optimizable through better algorithms and faster processing speeds. The disciplines where older professors excelled—humanities and social sciences—are exactly the fields that require what machines still struggle with: contextual wisdom, life experience, the ability to connect abstract concepts to the messy reality of human existence. Your 65-year-old literature professor who’s weathered three recessions, raised children, buried parents, and witnessed the rise and fall of multiple presidents brings something to Shakespearean tragedy that no AI model can replicate: the gravitas of lived experience. This is why we should actively seek out older mentors and teachers. They’ve accumulated something no algorithm can download: the weight of years, the texture of failure, the hard-won wisdom that comes from surviving multiple cycles of certainty shattered and rebuilt. The Paradox of Peak Performance The study’s findings reveal a beautiful truth: expertise isn’t linear. In some fields, accumulated wisdom trumps neural plasticity. In others, fresh eyes matter more. Sometimes, the professor who’s taught the same course 47 times brings a depth of understanding that the fresh PhD with their shiny new methodology simply cannot match. We need to resist the efficiency trap. Not everything valuable can be optimized, compressed into bite-sized modules, or delivered through the most convenient channel. Some knowledge requires marination. Some wisdom only comes through repetition, failure, and the slow accumulation of pattern recognition that takes decades to develop. The Human Element in an Algorithmic Age Yes, AI can generate personalized lesson plans and provide instant feedback. But can it look a struggling 19-year-old in the eye and say, “I was lost once too, and here’s what I learned”? This is where we need to value the human elements in our own learning and teaching. The moments that transform us aren’t usually perfectly crafted explanations. They’re the off-script conversations, the shared vulnerabilities, and the recognition of our common humanity in the face of difficult material. I remember my quantum mechanics professor who stopped mid-lecture one day and said, “You know, I’ve been teaching this for twenty years, and I still don’t really understand it. But I’ve learned to be comfortable with the mystery.” That moment of intellectual humility taught me more about science than any equation ever could. These are the stories we need to share—transformative teaching moments that involved human empathy, not just information transfer. A Future Worth Fighting For The effect does not begin until faculty members reach their mid-forties and does not seem to increase even when they reach the former retirement ages of 65 or 70. This data point contains a profound truth: we don’t simply decay after some arbitrary peak. We evolve, adapt, and in many cases, improve. We need to advocate for educational approaches that emphasize human connection over technological solutions.Not because technology is evil, but because it’s incomplete. The future won’t be won by perfect algorithms, but by imperfect humans who understand that knowledge without wisdom is just data, that teaching without empathy is just information transfer. Most importantly, here’s what we must do: Stop treating human connection as a nice-to-have add-on to “real” learning. Stop apologizing for the messy, inefficient, gloriously human process of one person helping another understand something difficult. Support institutions and educators who recognize this truth.Advocate for the irreplaceable value of lived experience in education and mentorship. The machines will get smarter, faster, and more efficient. They’ll probably teach calculus better than most humans within the decade. But they’ll never know what it’s like to have their heart broken by a thesis defense gone wrong, to feel the pride of watching a struggling student finally grasp a complex concept, or to understand that sometimes the most important thing you can teach someone isn’t in the syllabus. In the end, Kinney and Smith’s research doesn’t just tell us about age

The Galilean Paradox: When Recognition Corrupts Discovery

The Galilean Paradox: When Recognition Corrupts Discovery Dear Magicians, “Many pride themselves on having authorities to support their claims, but I would rather have been the first and only one to make those claims.” —Galileo Galilei, 1632​ Galileo’s anxiety about priority reveals a fundamental tension in knowledge creation. Stigler’s Law demonstrates this perfectly: no scientific discovery bears its true originator’s name. Credit flows not to the discoverer, but to the most compelling storyteller. This creates the Galilean Paradox: seeking recognition often corrupts the discovery process itself. When researchers obsess over being “first,” they fall into audience capture —shaping work around recognition rather than truth. The pursuit of credit becomes the enemy of genuine inquiry, whether the audience is YouTube subscribers or faculty colleagues. ​Derek Sivers captures the deeper irony: “Originality just means hiding your sources.” Most breakthroughs combine existing ideas, yet we mythologize lone genius narratives. Peter Thiel warns that “rivalry causes us to overemphasize old opportunities and slavishly copy what has worked”—the opposite of discovery. The Nobel Prize system institutionalized this tension, transforming knowledge production into a status game where reputation exceeds monetary value. You could argue that there’s a difference between storytelling that illuminates truth versus storytelling that obscures it for palatability. Good science communication maintains technical precision while improving accessibility—it doesn’t sacrifice accuracy for engagement. The Resolution ​Kevin Kelly and Rick Rubin offer the path forward: true originality emerges not from chronological priority, but from authentic perspective—applying your unique skills and history to universal problems. The real tragedy isn’t failing to get credit. It’s allowing hunger for credit to corrupt discovery itself, transforming genuine curiosity into performative research designed for recognition rather than understanding. Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, Brian Appearance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gISDjgpMkk I study Physics not Phys Ed, but even sometimes muscle mags like Men’s Fitness like to feature buff profs like yours truly 😂. Check it out! Genius A new analysis using data from Hubble and Gaia suggests that the Milky Way might avoid a collision with the Andromeda Galaxy, contrary to previous predictions. Researchers found a roughly 50% chance that the two galaxies will either collide after an initial pass or miss each other entirely over the next 10 billion years. Further studies and improved measurements are expected to provide more clarity on the galaxies’ future interactions. Image My friend Ivan makes some of the most spectacular astronomical and other photographic art. Check it out here. Conversation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVkUya368Es In this video, Eric Weinstein and I explore fundamental questions about the DESI experimental results challenging the traditional view of dark energy as a fixed cosmological constant, foundational assumptions in Einstein’s general relativity limiting progress in theoretical physics, and how tensions in cosmological measurements, like the Hubble constant discrepancy, reflect deeper issues in physics. ​Click here to watch! Get the transcript and AI interactive content from this episode here Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement I just held the first session of my paid “Office Hours” where you all can connect with me for the low price of $19.99 per hour. I get a lot of requests for coffee, to meet with folks one on one, to read people’s Theories of Everything etc. Due to extreme work overload, I’m only able to engage directly with supporters who show an ongoing commitment to dialogue—which is why I host a monthly Zoom session exclusively for patrons in the $19.99/month tier. It’s also available for paid Members of my Youtube channel at the Cosmic Office Hours level (also $19.99/month). Join here and see you in my office hours! Upcoming Episode Upcoming Guest Sabine Hossenfelder will be on the INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast soon. Sabine is a renowned physicist and author known for her work on quantum gravity and her insightful critiques of theoretical physics. She is also celebrated for her ability to communicate complex scientific ideas to the public through her books and YouTube channel. Don’t miss the chance to ask your questions for Sabine! ​Submit your questions here.

When Your Degree in Thinkology Costs More Than a House

When Your Degree in Thinkology Costs More Than a House Emerald City U is now offering that coveted “degree in thinkology”. At least the Wizard was honest about the credentials being meaningless… Dear Magicians, Last month at UCSD, I had the privilege of moderating what became one of the most intellectually combustible conversations I’ve hosted—bringing together Dr. Peter Salovey, Yale’s former president and co-developer of emotional intelligence theory, with Rabbi Dr. Meir Soloveichik, America’s most provocative Jewish intellectual and senior rabbi of the nation’s oldest synagogue. The ostensible topic was universities and their future. The real subject was idolatry. Education as Faith, Not Fashion Soloveichik opened by grounding our discussion in profound theological territory. Drawing from Jewish tradition, he explained that education—chinuch—means “to dedicate someone to the highest ideals, preparing them for civic and spiritual life.” This echoes the Greek concept of paideia, which involves preparing individuals for life in society rather than merely imparting knowledge. The ultimate task of teaching the next generation, Soloveichik emphasized, is to have faith in what the next generation can accomplish when we — their professors — are no longer here to guide them. The Hebrew word for child-rearing, he noted, is intrinsically linked to faith itself (emunah). The Golden Calf Syndrome This theological foundation made my central provocation even sharper: elite universities have become our golden calves—objects of worship that distract us from genuine learning and moral development. I asked the dynamic duo, “Has the university become a ‘kosher idol,’ a status symbol for parents rather than a genuine educational goal for students?” I asked, citing the Varsity Blues scandal as evidence of parents sacrificing integrity, money and even their freedom for elite admission prestige.​ Salovey acknowledged this uncomfortable reality while defending the institutional mission. The parental anxiety and competition around college admissions have indeed intensified beyond previous generations, he conceded. Still, this fetishization of elite schools—focusing obsessively on a handful of institutions among America’s 4,000 colleges—represents a fundamental misunderstanding of education’s purpose. Wisdom vs. Credentialism Rabbi Solly (Meir) brilliantly skewered the modern university system by invoking the Wizard of Oz’s “degree in thinkology”—that meaningless diploma the Wizard grants the Scarecrow who already possessed wisdom all along. As Meir pointed out with characteristic wit, we’ve created an entire higher education industrial complex around handing out expensive pieces of parchment to students who mistake credentialing for actual learning. The irony, he noted, is that like the Scarecrow, most students already have the capacity for critical thinking before they arrive on campus—they just need someone to help them recognize it rather than charging them $200,000 to validate what they already possess. The real magic trick, Meir suggested, isn’t what universities teach, but how they’ve convinced families that wisdom requires a branded certificate from behind an emerald curtain. Peter was more diplomatic but essentially agreed. The purpose of education according to Salovey should be developing critical thinkers, communicators, citizens, and moral adults. His claim was that credentialing and vocational outcomes can follow naturally if their foundation is strong. Later, Soloveichik invoked Justice Scalia’s Holocaust Memorial speech, warning that education alone doesn’t guarantee moral conduct—absolute standards are needed, often rooted in religious tradition. The $200,000 Dating App The evening’s most uncomfortable moment came when I posed the provocation directly: “Are we charging families $80,000 annually for what amounts to an expensive dating and networking platform with some education sprinkled on top?” The audience—a mix of UCSD faculty, students, Ivy League parents and alums, and other brilliant members of San Diego’s intellectual elite—erupted in nervous laughter. Salovey’s response revealed the complexity: yes, social capital formation occurs at universities, but dismissing the intellectual enterprise entirely overlooks the revolutionary research and discovery that are happening simultaneously. Antisemitism and Accountability Our most charged segment addressed institutional antisemitism. I asked both guests whether universities tolerating persistent anti-Jewish hatred should retain moral claims to public funding, regardless of their research contributions. Foremost on my mind was UCSD’s campus Jew Free Zone — an illegal encampment erected 100 meters away from where we sat nearly a year ago to the day of our campus conversation. I testified to Congress last June about the outrage I felt being excluded from my own campus during this terrible event. Soloveichik’s answer was uncompromising educational institutions can’t fail to uphold basic moral standards, and if they do, they cease to be educational institutions. They become performance venues for ideological theater. Salovey navigated more carefully, emphasizing due process while conceding that many universities failed catastrophically in their response to campus antisemitism post-October 7th. The Heart of the Matter What emerged wasn’t consensus but clarity. As both speakers emphasized, trust in higher education is declining, yet its role in innovation and society remains vital. The challenge lies in returning to education’s foundational purpose. Peter took the tact that civil discourse and engagement with differing views are essential to education. He relied on his faith in American higher education while surely acknowledging it stands at an inflection point where its sacred status depends on remembering its core mission: the relentless pursuit of truth and the cultivation of moral adults, not the comfortable maintenance of credentialing orthodoxy and coddling kids to not upset their parents nor the university’s donor class. The evening left our audience with uncomfortable questions and no easy answers—exactly what university discourse should provide. What type of conversation would you like to see me moderate in the future? Let me know here. Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, (If I only had a) Brian Appearance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ux58JGExrsM What if the Big Bang wasn’t the beginning? In this mind-bending video, I explore stunning new theories about what could have existed before time itself with Neil deGrasse Tyson Don’t miss this chance to rethink everything you thought you knew about the universe. Watch it here! Genius The U.S. Mint has released a new quarter honoring genius astronomer Vera Rubin, whose pioneering galaxy rotation studies provided critical evidence for dark matter. The obverse features Rubin gazing at a spiral galaxy with “Dark Matter” inscribed, marking her as the first astronomer on a circulating U.S. coin.

Social Media Just Solved My Biggest Problem in 20 Minutes

Social Media Just Solved My Biggest Problem in 20 Minutes Dear Magicians, Everyone knows that social media can undermine productivity and foster negativity. So, why did a random stranger manage to solve my biggest research problem in just 20 minutes? Consider the absurdity of my situation. While recording my latest podcast, I faced a difficult choice: maintain eye contact with my brilliant guest or frantically jot down notes about their insights. Interrupting the flow kills conversations, and missing moments of brilliance crushes content. This first-world problem would likely take my university’s innovation committee six months to convene a panel to discuss creating a task force to evaluate potential solutions through their committee on committees (yes, UCSD has one of those!). In desperation, I posted my dilemma on Twitter, expecting nothing but silence from the algorithm. Instead, to my astonishment, someone built a custom app for me in just a few hours, not days or weeks. It’s called “Wavepoint,” and because of the urgency of my situation, you can use it too, for free. This app allows you to record audio while maintaining eye contact, automatically transcribing the conversation and highlighting key points along with timestamps. You could use it for a podcast, reading your children a bedtime story without missing their adorable meanderings, or during a work/faculty meeting to identify when productivity completely derails. If you’re a doctor, you know that patient breakthroughs happen quickly—capture those moments without breaking eye contact. Are you a lawyer? You may need that timestamp when opposing counsel inadvertently admits guilt. You get the idea. Let’s take a moment to appreciate what just occurred. A platform that many criticize built us a free app while my entire institution was likely debating whether Comic Sans is appropriate for interdisciplinary grant proposals. The contrast between Twitter and peer review is stark. One ships working software, while the other takes ages to produce anything of value. Here’s what the “social media is evil” crowd often overlooks: the same platforms deemed responsible for fragmented attention can actually help focus collective intelligence to solve real problems. Critics argue that social media encourages shallow interactions and distracts from deeper, meaningful work. However, I’ve met countless friends on X/Twitter, some of whom I’ve never met in person. While academics are caught up in collaboration theory within peer-review limbo—where the review process is so slow it makes continental drift seem swift, resulting in papers taking months or even years to be evaluated and published—practitioners are delivering solutions faster than my latest paper was dismissed by the Journal of Rejection Studies (edited by Dikembe Mutombo). Think of it as dark matter; 95% of social media’s mass-energy may seem toxic or trivial, but the remaining 5% holds entire intellectual universes together. We often focus on the noise, overlooking the signal, and then wonder how a random stranger just outperformed our entire university in problem-solving. This isn’t just about platforms; it’s about harnessing asymmetric generosity. One person’s thirty-minute coding session resolved what could have been months of distraction. The real question isn’t whether social media is beneficial or harmful to science. Instead, we should ask: what problems are you not solving because you’re avoiding the very communities that could help you solve them? Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, Brian Appearance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6O4XS4L_75Y My Fall 2024 conversation with Richard Dawkins, recorded in front of 1000 true fans in Vancouver on his Final Tour, is now on his YouTube channel. I join legendary evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins for a dynamic conversation on evolution, atheism, artificial intelligence, and humanity’s place in the cosmos. Dawkins tackles big questions from the audience, explores society’s shifting morals, and champions scientific curiosity, all with his signature wit. An inspiring dive into science, skepticism, and the meaning of life. Genius It takes two to think An article in Nature suggests that the magic number of collaborators for breakthrough thinking is two, not twenty. A 2019 citation analysis showed small teams (1-3 authors) publish significantly more disruptive results than large groups. The insight: your best ideas emerge during unstructured conversations with one trusted “science buddy,” not brainstorming sessions. Large groups trigger conformity; two people practicing improv’s “Yes, and” rule travel impossibly far without social dynamics derailing creativity. Ask a colleague over coffee: “What’s your worst idea?” Image The Goode Solar Telescope captured the clearest images of coronal rain—plasma that cools, condenses, and falls along magnetic field lines due to gravity. Unlike Earth rain, these charged strands arc back to the solar surface. Some are just 10 km thick. The time-lapse video is colorized to represent hydrogen-alpha light. Schmidt et al. / NJIT / NSO / AURA / NSF Conversation https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLJGKdZD30K__XkD2TDGq1pQo8Q__6vBhB&t&v=f_KPX665foU I sit down with Dr. Natalie Cabrol, director of the Carl Sagan Center at the SETI Institute and an explorer of Earth’s most extreme environments. Together, we challenge the basic assumptions behind our search for extraterrestrial intelligence—questioning whether life must always look like it does on Earth, and whether we might be searching for the wrong signals entirely. Join us as we rethink the search for life in the universe, and discover why Earth’s place in the cosmos might be far more precarious—and extraordinary—than we ever imagined. ​Click here to watch! Get the transcript and AI interactive content from this episode here Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement By popular demand, and for my mental health 😳, I am starting a paid “Office Hours” where you all can connect with me for the low price of $19.99 per hour. This coming Friday 5/30 is the next installment! I get a lot of requests for coffee, to meet with folks one on one, to read people’s Theories of Everything etc. Due to extreme work overload, I’m only able to engage directly with supporters who show an ongoing commitment to dialogue—which is why I host a monthly Zoom session exclusively for patrons in the $19.99/month tier. It’s also available for paid Members of my Youtube channel at the Cosmic Office Hours level (also $19.99/month). Join here and see you in my office

I’ll Never Teach THIS the Same Way Again

I’ll Never Teach THIS the Same Way Again https://youtu.be/fBozSSLxFvI Dear Magicians, For twenty years, I taught dark energy as cosmic certainty. The universe is accelerating. Lambda is constant. Case closed. Then DESI happened. The Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument just mapped 11 billion years of cosmic history. Six million galaxies. The largest 3D map ever created. And buried in that data? A whisper that dark energy might not be constant after all. It might be evolving. Evolving. ​I hosted Eric Weinstein last week, and something clicked. We’ve been teaching cosmology like it’s settled science. Like we understand 95% of the universe we can’t even see. The hubris is staggering. Think about what we tell students: “In 1998, we discovered the universe is accelerating. Therefore, dark energy exists.” We draw neat diagrams. We write equations. We pretend we understand something that comprises 68% of everything. But DESI’s preliminary data suggests dark energy might be weakening over time. If confirmed, this doesn’t just tweak our models – it shatters them. The cosmological constant isn’t constant. Einstein’s “greatest blunder” might need another revision. Here’s what I’m changing: I’ll teach uncertainty as a feature, not a bug. When students ask about dark energy, I’ll say, “We don’t know.” Not “we’re still learning” or “it’s complicated.” Just: we don’t know. Because admitting ignorance is where real science begins. Weinstein talks about “official science” versus actual discovery. Official science says dark energy is lambda. Actual discovery says: hold on, let’s look at these error bars again. Let’s question everything. My students deserve better than false certainty. They deserve the thrill of standing at the edge of knowledge, staring into the void, knowing that the biggest discoveries come from admitting what we don’t understand. Dark energy isn’t a answered question. It’s an invitation to revolution. And I’ll teach it that way. The universe is stranger than we imagine. Thank God. It means I’ll have full employment for life! Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, Brian ​P.S. I am doing a breakdown of Eric’s debate with Sean Carroll soon. Make sure to subscribe here so you don’t miss it. Appearance New artwork and new music for our new recognition! Into the Impossible was just ranked one of the Top 25 Physics Podcasts on the web by MillionPodcasts. Their list is the most comprehensive ranking of physics shows online — and they say we’re among the best. Read the full list here: millionpodcasts.com/physics-podcasts . P.S. we have a new theme song for the Judging Books by their Covers section. Listen here. Genius A superhuman vision upgrade that’s totally genius. Scientists have developed wearable contact lenses that enable humans to see near-infrared (NIR) light—a spectrum normally invisible to the naked eye. These upconversion contact lenses (UCLs) are flexible, transparent, and biocompatible. In tests, both mice and humans wearing UCLs could perceive spatial and temporal patterns in NIR, enabling decision-making based on infrared cues. Most remarkably, trichromatic UCLs (tUCLs) allowed humans to distinguish different NIR wavelengths as color, effectively creating a form of infrared color vision. This breakthrough opens the door to non-invasive NIR perception, with potential applications in communication, augmented reality, and human sensory enhancement. Would you wear them? Image A new trans-Neptunian object, 2017 OF201, has been discovered at the solar system’s edge by Sihao Cheng and colleagues. With an extreme orbit taking 25,000 years to complete and a possible diameter of 700 km, it may qualify as a dwarf planet, like Pluto. Found using archived data and advanced algorithms, it challenges assumptions about the Kuiper Belt’s emptiness and may reshape theories about Planet Nine and solar system structure. Pair this with my conversation with the discoverer of the original 3 dwarfs, Prof Mike Brown. Conversation https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLJGKdZD30K__XkD2TDGq1pQo8Q__6vBhB&v=fBozSSLxFvI In this explosive UCSD 2025 lecture, Eric unveils a radical update to his “Geometric Unity” theory—a bold attempt to solve the biggest mysteries in physics, from dark energy to the cosmological constant. Why have decades of scientific effort failed to crack the code of reality? Are we marooned by old ideas, or poised at the edge of a revolutionary breakthrough? ​Click here to watch! Get the transcript and AI interactive content from this episode here Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement As a listener of Dr. Brian Keating, you get a special 20% off discount. Head over to The Economist’s website at http://www.economist.com/Keating to get started! By popular demand, and for my mental health 😳, I am starting a paid “Office Hours” where you all can connect with me for the low price of $19.99 per hour. This coming Friday 5/30 is the next installment! I get a lot of requests for coffee, to meet with folks one on one, to read people’s Theories of Everything etc. Due to extreme work overload, I’m only able to engage directly with supporters who show an ongoing commitment to dialogue—which is why I host a monthly Zoom session exclusively for patrons in the $19.99/month tier. It’s also available for paid Members of my Youtube channel at the Cosmic Office Hours level (also $19.99/month). Join here and see you in my office hours! Upcoming Episode Upcoming guest Adam Becker will be on The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast soon. He’s the author of What Is Real?, a brilliant exploration of the quantum foundations debate — and one of the most articulate defenders of the view that science is more than just equations. He’s also a physicist and philosopher who isn’t afraid to challenge orthodoxy. What would you like me to ask him? Submit your questions here →

The $200,000 Dating App: What Elite Universities Are Really Selling

The $200,000 Dating App: What Elite Universities Are Really Selling Dear Magicians, Let’s talk about expensive matchmaking. Not Tinder Premium. Not eHarmony. Ivy League tuition. According to one brutally honest student, using AI for everything during their $200,000+ education is fine. Why? When the author of this piece in New York Magazine asked a student “why he had gone through so much trouble to get to an Ivy League university only to off-load all of the learning to a robot, he said, ‘It’s the best place to meet your co-founder and your wife.’” While USA Today reports that certain college majors still offer returns exceeding 100% on investment, some students have discovered a different ROI calculation altogether. Think about that. When AI can handle your homework, what’s left? Apparently, network effects. That engineering degree from MIT? It’s not about mastering differential equations anymore. It’s about mastering the art of strategic connection. This isn’t just cynicism. It’s arbitrage. While traditional students struggle with coursework, these AI-enabled social strategists are treating elite universities like exclusive country clubs—where the real value isn’t in the facilities, but in who else holds a membership. Consider the implications. When the best-paying college majors become mere credentials to outsource to AI, we’re not just facing an education crisis. We’re witnessing the emergence of a new social sorting mechanism, where even the pretense of academic rigor becomes optional. The future of higher education? It might look less like a classroom and more like a very expensive LinkedIn algorithm. Think about it. Test your assumptions about value. Because in this new landscape, the real question isn’t what you’re learning—it’s who you’re meeting. Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, Brian Appearance https://www.youtube.com/watch?t&v=xIM9hfbSJWU My second time on StarTalk! Genius In a genius act of nonpartisan scientific activism, meteorologists and climate scientists across America are staging an unprecedented 100+ hour livestream marathon. As weather data centers face funding cuts, these experts aren’t just protesting—they’re demonstrating their value through non-stop science communication. What makes this truly brilliant? They’re fighting budget cuts by doing exactly what public scientists should do: making complex weather and climate science accessible to everyone who depends on it. It’s democracy through data, democracy through nonpartisan education, and you’re invited to this historic scientific teach-in. Watch the WeatherStreamathon here. Image As my knee heals from last year’s surfing mishap, I’m reminded of this spectacular moment: bioluminescent waves illuminating the Scripps Pier like nature’s own neon. The ghostly blue glow comes from microscopic organisms called dinoflagellates—specifically Lingulodinium polyedra—that emit light when disturbed, creating what locals call “red tide by day, blue waves by night.” Want to understand the fascinating science behind this phenomenon? My colleagues @Scripps_Ocean explains it beautifully here.. These tiny creatures remind us that some of the most magical moments in science happen when billions of microscopic decisions align perfectly. 📸: @erikjepsen Conversation https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLJGKdZD30K__XkD2TDGq1pQo8Q__6vBhB&v=jPCq5ib6234 Curious about black holes? Marcus Chown joins Brian Keating to explore how black holes aren’t just cosmic destroyers, but might also help create new universes—and even life itself. Watch now for mind-blowing science stories and cosmic mysteries from Marcus’ new book, “A Crack in Everything”! ​Click here to watch! Get the transcript and AI interactive content from this episode here Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement Voicepal is my AI-powered speaking coach, podcast partner, and content creation engine — all in one. Imagine recording a voice note… and instantly turning it into: ✍️ A fully written blog post or newsletter 🎧 A podcast-ready audio file 🎥 Short-form content for YouTube, TikTok, or Instagram 🧠 A structured script, summary, or idea map — automatically organized That’s Voicepal. You talk. It thinks, writes, and polishes. Most transcription tools give you raw text. Most AI writing tools don’t understand your voice or intent. Voicepal fuses both: It listens to how you speak and then helps you sound better — not different. Creative mode: Free-flow ideation that’s instantly structured into talking points, titles, and tweets. Publishing mode: Turn a 5-minute voice note into a publish-ready Substack or blog post. Coaching mode: Get tone, clarity, and structure feedback to improve your speaking presence. It’s like having a ghostwriter, editor, and speech coach in your pocket — 24/7. Try it with my special discount code. Upcoming Episode David Wiltshire, the pioneering physicist who challenged our understanding of dark energy with his revolutionary “timescape cosmology” model, will be joining me on The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast soon. His groundbreaking work suggests that the apparent acceleration of the universe’s expansion might be explained not by mysterious dark energy, but by how time itself flows differently in cosmic voids versus dense regions of space—an idea that could revolutionize our understanding of cosmic evolution. What questions do you have for the scientist whose “cosmic averages” theory might eliminate the need for dark energy altogether? Submit them here: https://tally.so/r/mevW70

The Lens That Broke the Bible — and Unlocked the Cosmos

The Lens That Broke the Bible – and Unlocked the Cosmos https://youtu.be/LMNOSnP7s0A?sub_confirmation=1 Dear Magicians, Did you notice I upped the quality of my studio? I sure hope so…You can see the ‘after’ version in yesterday’s video — posted exclusively on my new “explainer channel” — please subscribe — Professor Keating Experiments. The reason for the quality bump? I splurged on a high-quality DSLR camera and nice lens (Sony A7cII + Sigma 24mm lens for the shutterbugs out there). But this combo, while pricey, can’t compare with some of the rigs my fellow YouTubers use. Take this gem, the Hasselblad H6D. At $32,995 (lens wipes not included), it’s the Ferrari of cameras. But is it necessary? Some say yes. After all my video yesterday explores how a a single lens unlocked the secrets of the universe. Imagine a world where the Bible caught fire with new meaning, revealing truths that were hidden for centuries. This isn’t just a story of discovery; it’s a journey from blindness to clarity, where one invention shattered our understanding and opened the cosmos. On the opposite side of the price spectrum from the H6D lies a box with a hole in it. Specifically, it’s called a pinhole camera. It’s the simplest, cheapest way to capture light. No lens. No settings. Just a tiny aperture that sees everything equally; total tack-sharp focus. Want to make one yourself? Here’s how. A pinhole camera focuses on everything. But when everything is in focus, nothing truly is. Like trying to listen to every conversation at a party. Or reading every post on social media. Or saying yes to every opportunity. Think about that. Now consider the Hasselblad H6D; what you’re really buying isn’t just resolution. It’s the ability to choose what matters. The power to blur. To decide. To say no. This isn’t just about bokeh, ISO, f/ numbers….photography. Tim Ferriss nailed it: “Focus isn’t about saying yes to what matters. It’s about saying no to everything else.” Here’s the truth about focus: it’s expensive. Not just in dollars, but in decisions. In friendships declined. In opportunities ignored. In paths not taken. Think about it. What are you willing to blur to bring your purpose into sharp relief? Because anyone can see everything. Masters choose what to ignore. In my upcoming book “Focus Like a Nobel Prize Winner” I mention how the word focus is sometimes said to be an acronym for “Follow One Course Until Successful”. Blurbed by productivity experts like Ali Abdaal, Cal Newport, Nir Eyal, and Sahil Bloom I can’t wait to show it to you, on September 9 (my birthday as it turns out). For now, you can read the first volume of the series Think Like a Nobel Prize Winner to whet your appetite. Today, as our attention fragments across infinite digital constellations, perhaps we need that same revolutionary focus. Not to see everything, but to see what matters. Not to capture more, but to capture truth. Because in the end, the greatest discoveries don’t come from having the most expensive lens. They come from knowing where to point it and not fearing to peer inside of it. Watch “The Lens That Broke the Bible — and Unlocked the Cosmos” here​ Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, Brian Appearance I was asked to make an elevator pitch for god. I couldn’t escape the thought WWED What would Einstein do? Ahaha he’d imagine what happened when the elevator cable broke. My essay along side other great thinkers: ​PROFESSOR BRIAN KEATING, Ph.D. | My Elevator Pitch For God Genius https://youtu.be/VGownA1pSps&list=PLJGKdZD30K__XkD2TDGq1pQo8Q__6vBhB Neil degrasse Tyson drops some genius wisdom about proposed cuts to NASA in his short video essay here. Image I basically gave up trying to take astrophotographs once I met Andrew. Find out how he makes his magical images of the heavens here. Conversation https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLJGKdZD30K__XkD2TDGq1pQo8Q__6vBhB&v=LMNOSnP7s0A Discover how a simple lens transformed not just eyesight, but society itself—challenging church authority, unlocking science, and changing the way we see everything from the Bible to the stars. Watch to find out how the race for clearer vision ignited a revolution that still shapes our quest for truth today! ​Click here to watch! Get the transcript and AI interactive content from this episode here Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement As a listener of Dr. Brian Keating, you get a special 20% off discount. Head over to The Economist’s website at http://www.economist.com/Keating to get started! Upcoming Episode Prof Laura Mersini-Houghton will be on The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast soon. Laura is a renowned cosmologist and theoretical physicist known for her groundbreaking work on the multiverse theory and her predictions of anomalies in the cosmic microwave background. Don’t miss this opportunity to engage with one of the leading minds in modern physics—send in your questions for Laura Mersini-Houghton now! Submit your questions here.

When Netflix Explained the Multiverse

The Moon Landing Wasn’t Fake and Gay Dear Magicians, Let’s talk about parallel universes. Not in the way physicists do, with our equations and accelerators and our tendency to make your brain hurt. Simpler. Open Netflix. Look at your screen. Notice what you’re not watching. Every show you’re not selecting right now exists in a kind of parallel universe of content, waiting to be observed. Interesting. Think about what happens when you hit “play.” You’ve collapsed infinite viewing possibilities into one reality. Your roommate’s reality might involve “Love Is Blind.” Your reality? “How the Universe Works.” Both valid. Both existing simultaneously until observed. Consider this. Every time you scroll past “Tiger King,” somewhere in another universe, you’re watching it. In another, you’re the tiger king. In yet another, tigers evolved opposable thumbs and are watching shows about human kings. Physics is weird like that. But here’s where it gets fascinating. Just as Netflix suggests shows based on what you’ve watched, our universe might be one of countless variations, each slightly different. Each based on previous “selections” in the cosmic algorithm. Think about that. Right now, in a parallel universe, you’re not reading this newsletter. You’re writing it. And I’m the one learning about multiverses through streaming service analogies. Maybe. The math suggests it’s possible. The physics doesn’t rule it out. And Netflix’s “recommended for you” section keeps getting eerily accurate. Think about it. Test your assumptions about reality. And maybe reconsider that show you’ve been avoiding. In another universe, it’s your favorite. [Watch my full exploration of multiverse theory here with Latham Boyle] Until next time, have a M.A.G.I.C. Week, Brian Appearance https://www.youtube.com/watch?t&v=ZW9yxTQJSuA I joined Spencer Klavan on Young Heretics, where he brings his unique classical scholar’s perspective to modern culture wars. From reciting Homer in ancient Greek to dissecting today’s ideological battles, Spencer’s podcast stands out in an overcrowded space. (You might remember him from our fascinating INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE conversation about classical wisdom in the age of AI.) Together, we explored history’s most elegant troublemaker: Galileo Galilei. From his revolutionary defense of heliocentrism to his complex relationship with the Church, we unpack how this brilliant mathematician transformed not just science, but the very way we question authority. Learn why Galileo’s defiance wasn’t just about telescopes and planets—it was about the right to challenge accepted wisdom with evidence. His story matters now more than ever. Watch to my appearance on Young Heretics here. And catch Spencer’s INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE episode here Genius Stanford researchers have achieved a genius-level breakthrough in personalized medicine by creating the first-ever cellular-resolution digital twin of a human organ. The team mapped over 50 million cells in a donated heart using advanced AI imaging techniques, creating an unprecedented digital replica that functions like the original. This revolutionary development allows doctors to simulate different treatments and their outcomes with extraordinary precision, potentially transforming how we approach cardiac care. Led by Dr. Sarah Chen, the project combines cutting-edge machine learning with molecular biology to predict patient-specific responses to medications and interventions. The implications extend beyond cardiology—their framework could eventually enable digital twins of any organ system, ushering in a new era of precision medicine where treatments are tested virtually before being administered to patients. Although originally compiled for journalists, these tools are indispensable for anyone who wants to think critically and verify what they read, watch, or share online. Image Which looks cooler, the @SimonsObs Small (left) or (Large) Aperture Telescope? Photos by Suzanne Staggs Conversation https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLJGKdZD30K__XkD2TDGq1pQo8Q__6vBhB&v=ukBGE3LtFJo Ever wonder if there’s a mirror universe or how we might talk to aliens light-years away? Join my electrifying conversation with theoretical physicist Latham Boyle as we unravel mind-bending possibilities about the cosmos and our place within it. ​Click here to watch! Get the transcript and AI interactive content from this episode here Subscribe to my podcast! More than 2M downloads! Advertisement Don’t miss this incredible opportunity to elevate your knowledge and decision-making with Consensus Premium. Consensus Premium harnesses cutting-edge AI to sift through thousands of research papers, delivering clear, evidence-backed answers to your toughest questions. Whether you’re a curious mind, a scientist, or a student of life, this is your chance to access the world’s best knowledge with zero strings attached. Sign up for one year for free with code KEATING25 just for listeners of The INTO THE IMPOSSIBLE Podcast and get all of 2025 for free! Expires on June 30, 2025