Craig Venter: Did He Make Life In The Lab?
Craig Venter: Did He Make Life In The Lab? Transcript Speaker: The only junk DNA is in my colleagues’ brains. Brian Keating: Today, we’re featuring Craig Venter, a world renowned biotechnologist known for his groundbreaking contributions to genomics. He had a pivotal role in leading the 1st draft sequence of the human genome and assembling the pioneering team that achieved the transfection of a cell with a synthetic chromosome. Speaker: The cells are very dynamic, changing second to second. But one thing is fundamental to all life, And that’s the genetic code. Brian Keating: Later in life, he and his research team created the world’s 1st synthetic organism from scratch, demonstrating the potential of synthetic biology to engineer life at the molecular level. Speaker: Taking those gene pathways, putting them in The synthetic organisms will be able to create whole new chemical libraries. Brian Keating: Craig’s a leading figure. He’s hilarious, unfettered, unshackled, and unafraid. You’ll hear all of that in this episode and find out why he was among Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world, not once but twice, maybe on another planet where life already exists. So without further ado, we welcome a lively episode of the Into the Impossible podcast, my friend Craig Venter, live recorded at UCSD this past fall. Brian Keating: Welcome everybody to what promises to be an exciting and lively, emphasis on lively, Episode of the Into the Impossible podcast with none other than Craig Venter of many different theory, but we’re gonna talk about a couple of them in particular, including Mapping the human genome. Craig is local here in La Jolla. He has his institute named after him down the down the road from our campus, And he’s graciously agreed to spend some time with me. I’m gonna run out of time before I run out of questions, Craig. Thank you so much for visiting. Speaker: My pleasure to be here. Brian Keating: And you’re a proud alumni, Son of San Diego, UCSD. And we’re gonna talk a little bit about how the campus has changed a little bit. But sitting in that chair a couple months back bang, Kim Stanley Robinson, And who also goes by his middle name only as Stan. I don’t know what it is with you, famed super famous, brilliant, creative types. So today, we’re gonna talk about a variety of subjects, including your recent book, The Voyage of Sorcerer 2. We’re gonna talk about what happened to you on Sorcerer 1, Which is foreshadowing. But first, we’re gonna start with a very simple, easy question, Craig, and that is the one posed by Erwin Schrodinger in theory in a monograph, a very slim monograph. And that question was, what is life? Speaker: That’s a book I recommend that every scientist read at least Once. I’ve read it a few times. A few years back, I was asked to give, the only time someone was asked to give the Schrodinger lecture other than Schrodinger Sure. In the same, hall, under the same circumstance. It was it was really an amazing experience. And because we’ve designed the first Living cell, that didn’t happen in nature. People assume that I can answer that question. But, he tried I did define it in physical terms and, you know, thought about things about the genetic code bang before Watson and Crick. Speaker: And while everybody was sure that it was proteins, you know, he said it could be as simple as, Morse code. Brian Keating: Crystal And Speaker: I was talking to, Francis Crick about that. He goes, well, that was obvious to everybody. He was very dismissive of you know? That that was hardly a unique notion other than from protein chemists who, still refused to give Avery the Nobel Prize for proving that DNA was It’s the genetic material. The cells are very dynamic, changing second to second. But one thing is fundamental to all life, And that’s the genetic code. If you take the genetic code out of any cell, any species, the cell dies very rapidly. The Species dies. That’s why we’re so susceptible to radiation poisoning. Speaker: It basically blows apart Structure and you can’t continue to produce proteins and live. So some proteins have a half life of seconds, some minutes, some hours, But they’re not permanent structures. So every cell on our body is second to second constantly being rebuilt. Built. So the genetic code is being read, translated in proteins produced on a constant to bases. It’s even coded in the protein how long they’ll live and their degradation rate. So it’s a constant Synthesis degradation, taking out the garbage, and so without the fundamental information molecule, there is No life. That’s a good fundamental start. Speaker: Mhmm. Cells, you know, have to defy entropy. They have to keep existing by creating energy. They take things from the environment. We have, you know, hundreds of ways that different cells make energy and the forms of life vary from things that live at a 135 degrees centigrade down to subzero temperatures. History of biology is it got defined in a human centric point of view. So, you know, we were the Standard, so nothing could live out of 37 degrees, and we were the center of the universe. We’re not the center of biology. Speaker: We may Be the center of trying to understand and interpret biology, but we’re the minor species on the planet. So key proteins in the membrane pump nutrients and pump waste molecules out, but it’s a dynamic system that, In my view, kind of spontaneously happens. Mhmm. Brian Keating: Mhmm. Speaker: And we’re trying to see right now if we can get it to happen spontaneously. Usually, when we made the synthetic cell, we made a we wrote the genetic code and we Developed a transplantation system
EXCLUSIVE Craig Venter Q&A
EXCLUSIVE Craig Venter Q&A Transcript Brian Keating: Today, we’re featuring Craig Venter, a world renowned biotechnologist known for his groundbreaking contributions to genomics. He had a pivotal role in leading the 1st draft sequence of the human genome and assembling the pioneering team that achieved the transfection of a cell with a synthetic chromosome. Speaker: The cells are very dynamic, changing 2nd to 2nd. But one thing is fundamental to all life, and that’s the genetic code. Brian Keating: Later in life, He and his research team created the world’s 1st synthetic organism from scratch, demonstrating the potential of synthetic biology to engineer life at the molecular level. Speaker: Taking those gene pathways, putting them in synthetic organisms, we’ll Be able to create whole new chemical libraries. Brian Keating: Craig’s a leading figure. He’s hilarious, unfettered, unshackled, and unafraid. You’ll hear all of that in this episode and find out why he was among Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world, not once but twice, maybe on another planet where life already exists. So without further ado, we welcome a lively episode of the Into the Impossible podcast, my friend Craig Venter, live recorded at UCSD this past fall. Brian Keating: Welcome back to our extended session with none other than doctor Craig Venter, whose incredible intellect and influence on so many of us. And I wanted to solicit questions, and so I did take them on Twitter, x, and also on Instagram, and on my YouTube channel. Doctor Brian Keating is the handle for all those. So we’re gonna get some some wild and interesting stuff ranging from panspermia to UAPs to Life at other planets, but we’re gonna begin with a more, you know, close to home. Okay. So the first question. Hi, Brian. It may be and this is from doctor Thomas Dheeraj. Brian Keating: It may be interesting to talk about cancer and the somatic mutation theory. Any ideas where there has been so little to no advance in survival for most advanced Solid tumors despite our understanding of the human genome. Do you believe, Craig, that cancer is purely a genetic disease? Speaker: Well, it’s definitely a genetic disease, but that doesn’t mean its ultimate cause Radiation causes cancer by mutating, the genome. Mhmm. So it’s the radiation that causes the cancer. Same things Happened with chemical exposure, UV light. I’ve on my, I think, 12th for 14th round of Mohs surgery, the surgeon said, you know, have you been exposed to sunlight? And I said, for 77 years, You know? And and, you know, I was supposed to sunlight long before there was sunscreen, so I I have more than my share of skin cancer from UV light Exposure. My Brian Keating: father-in-law had acne treated using, X rays in Speaker: the back half in the sixties. Yeah. Yeah. And X rays are Definitely a a a carcinogen on their own. So but these things change the genetic code. So, Human longevity, we would sequence the individual’s genome and sequence the tumor’s genome, and you find All the genes that are mutated, and it turns out these can be very useful and a lot of therapies Clarke being developed on. The term we use is neoantigens because it’s a mutated protein. It actually changes the structure of the protein, and the immune system can recognize it. Speaker: And there’s been attempts to take these out and And see which T cells recognize them Mhmm. And then make more of that peptide to give it as a vaccine against The individual tumor. So it’s it’s a personalized vaccine approach, and it, has seen Some success. I think Steve Rosenberg was the 1st to do it with melanoma. It hasn’t been universal. You know, we haven’t worked out all the rules on it yet, but, yes, cancer is a, it’s based on changes in genetics. Brian Keating: Another question regarding genetics and modification comes from user x n n four w no. I’m not gonna read Although that was my choice for my, 2nd child’s name, x user x okay. He or she is asking, do GMOs, genetically modified organisms affect our DNA? If so, to what extent? Speaker: Only through the plasticity of your brain be infected by That notion that they do anything negative. Brian Keating: Okay. This is a a possibly contentious one. This comes from a man whose name is an aptronym, Gene, like, your friend who came with the algorithm that you mentioned, a suitable name for his job or her job, he or she is asking, why weren’t you able to create life? What’s the missing spark? The reason this is a good question is that I don’t know if he’d argue that he did or didn’t. So did you create life? If so, what was the missing Bark or if you did not, what what is the necessary lacunae that is missing? Speaker: So right now, all A life that we know comes from preexisting life. And even the synthetic cell we made, we Made a totally new species that never existed before, but we use an existing cell to transplant the genome into, and that genome Converted that cell into totally a new species. Brian Keating: Mhmm. So that’s a it’s prokaryotic. It was a cell wall. You used these existing theory. Yep. Speaker: And, micro Plasma, so there’s no cell wall. On the same day of our announcement, I got comments from president Obama and from the pope. Brian Keating: In 2010. Speaker: President Obama announced that he was forming his new bioethics commission, to review the ethics So Ron making synthetic life, the pope said doctor Venter did not create life. He just Change one of life’s motors. Mhmm. So there there are groups with the notion of trying to make it from a cell
Michael Turner Explains the Origins & Mysteries ofDark Energy!
Michael Turner Explains the Origins & Mysteries of Dark Energy! Transcript Brian Keating: Michael Turner is a theoretical cosmologist, emeritus professor at the University of Chicago, and former director of the Kavli Institute For Cosmological Physics. He’s a pioneer in exploring what he called the dark side of the universe. He actually coined the term dark energy, and his revolutionary ideas led to the cold dark matter theory of structure formation. Mike’s contributions to modern physics are truly invaluable, and I’m beyond thrilled to have him as a guest on my show. Join us in a deep dive into the dark side of our twisted universe. Welcome everybody to a very important, meaningful, and delightful episode of The Into the Impossible podcast with an impossibly brilliant guest who I’ve been, really, you know, in love with his mind since I was a wee lad, a graduate student, he’s a legend in the field, and it’s, professor Michael Turner, University Of Chicago, theoretical cosmologist who among many things is rumored to have coined the term dark energy. Michael, is that correct? Did you coin the term dark matter? Speaker: Guilt guilty as charged. Brian Keating: Who claimed that, I guess, Wiki coined the term dark matter in German. Correct? Speaker: That’s right. I can’t pronounce the German Dunkelmater or something like that. Brian Keating: Yeah. I think you’re you’re closer than I’ll ever get to it. Michael, where are you joining us from today? Speaker: I’m joining, from my office in Venice, California. Brian Keating: I really appreciate your time and whatever you’ll spare in person or online. But, Mike, we have a lot to talk about. We’ll run out of time before I run out of questions. Beg your forbearance as we go into the very first question I ask all my guests who honor me with, their presence on my humble podcast, And that is to judge a book by its cover. And in your case, your book with Rocky Kolb, your, colleague at the University of Chicago, has, really influenced generations of of cosmologists, of of theoretical particle physicists, astrophysicists, experimentalist like myself. And I want to do the following, if you will. To judge the book by its cover, I would like you to describe the cover art, The cover title and the subtitle. How did you and Rocky Kolb come up with it? Speaker: The original hardback version had a very boring cover. It was just white And the words early universe. And if my memory serves me correct, there was no subtitle. And, The paperback version which you may be referring to, has a wonderful story with it. The cover is a beautiful image of a galaxy, Actually, for its time. I mean, today, we get much better images from, JWST and and the Hubble. So the title, that was exceedingly easy. Rocky and I, were pioneers of studying the 1st microsecond. Speaker: And, I like to tell the joke by the time we got to cosmology, you know, everybody specializes. All that was left was the 1st microsecond. And that is the early universe, but we got there at a very good time because the early universe had just opened up. Shortly before we got there, you couldn’t talk about the early universe because it was just a mess. It was nuclei and protons and neutrons sitting on top of one another. And we were there when the doors opened when people realized that it was cork soup. And early universe, it you know, a good title’s gotta be simple. It’s gotta have cosmology, and, early Where it was at? Do you wanna hear the paperback version? Brian Keating: Yeah. Because we’re gonna springboard from the paperback to a discussion of these peculiar properties of galaxies, which in my mind, Michael, I’m not gonna teach I’m not gonna let the student teach the master, but a galaxy is not exactly, at least when I was a kid, An early universe phenomenon of the 1st microsecond. So, yes, how did that come to be? The Whirlpool Galaxy. Speaker: So that’s perfect. Our our our book did really, really well, And it was going into paperback, and I was in Aspen, Colorado, and they sent the artwork to me for the new cover. And it was this beautiful picture of a galaxy, and, I called up Rocky, And he said, well, you got the cover artwork. What do you think? And I said, it’s beautiful, but it has nothing to do with our book. And he said, we’ll take it. So our book is about the 1st microsecond, but that’s where the blueprint for the universe got laid out And that’s where galaxies can trace their origins to. So it’s not quite fair to say that, it was a bait and switch, that it’s not really about the Pretty Galaxies You See in the Sky, but the cover was chosen because oh my god. Well, the, I wish I had could easily get copies here. Speaker: It’s so funny. Rocky and I pioneered a lot of ground there. I think we were at book number 69, And David we we asked David to make some changes because he had a standard preface that talked about, You know, these are not to be designed to be polished, and, they’re typically from mimeograph notes. Yeah. And we said to David, David, what is a mimeograph machine? And, so we changed some of his, forward, but they had a standard. You know, that’s important when you have a brand. Frontiers in Physics was a brand, and it was very simple. It was white and blue. Speaker: But then when some other publishing company took it over and did the paperback, they made it really fancy. Brian Keating: It’s still in the top 200 of books in astrophysics even, you know, it’s, coming up on its 30th 30th anniversary, incredible, of the of the 2nd edition, I think. Speaker:
Cumrun Vafa: Is String Theory Actually Science?
Cumrum Vafa: Is String Theory Actually Science? Transcript Cumrun Vafa: There’s one thing to have a constructive critiscism of a theory, but to say, “Oh no, this is bad, this is bad” and so forth without any given alternative, I think is just disservice to Science. And to be frankly, frankly to get publicity for the sake of publicity to try to say something. And to me, controversial statement just to attract attention, I think, is unfortunate. Brian Keating: Welcome everybody to this edition of the Into the Impossible podcast, I am your fearful host, Brian Keating. And today, it is a great pleasure, a treat in fact, for me to welcome none other than Cumrun Vafa of Harvard University. How are you, Cumrun? Cumrun Vafa: Thank you very much, Brian, for having me your program. It’s a Great pleasure. I’m fine and, looking forward to our discussions. Brian Keating: Yes. I’ve been, just devouring your book, which we’re gonna Talk a lot about today, puzzles to unravel the universe. And I’ve been fascinated with puzzles my whole life, mostly my inability to solve them, but you are noted for having made tremendous contributions to the world of theoretical physics, and this is your1st popular science book as I understand it. And I always like to say there’s a piece of advice that you never should judge a book by its cover. But on this on this book, not only do you have a very mysterious and and puzzling imagery, but you also have endorsements in from none other than Edward Witten, Well, I’ve tried to get on the show unsuccessfully, but I’ll I’ll talk to you about that later. And also, Brian Green, another Brian. Actually, my kid’s Favorite Brianin astrophysics. But I wanna ask you, how did you come up with the name of the book, Puzzles to Unravel the Universe? And how did you come up with the artwork that so beautifully graces the cover of this book? Cumrun Vafa: The title, I think, was motivated by a course I’m Teaching, for Harvard’s freshman called physics, math, and puzzles. It’s a freshman seminar. And, so the book was Basically, the was drawn out of its course. And, so I decided I was thinking about what title to choose if I had Chosen physics, math, and puzzle sounded a little bit, maybe boring, so I thought maybe I should use some elements of it without Sounding too academic and a bit more kind of exciting in terms ofapplications to the real world and so on. So I thought that, which which involves actually the motivation behind the whole course, which is theconnections with the real world. So I thought unraveling, the universe through Puzzles, puzzles to unravel the universe does justice to what I wanted to convey, and, that’s why I chose that. As far as the cover, I got some help from some some people online, but, this whole design and all that happened duringthe pandemic. So I decided, during the pandemic, one thing I could do, is to finish this series of notes into a book, which I decided doing and the sub publisher just to go over, get it quickly out and get it done, so that it’s people who may wanna be looking at it could could have a chance to do it during the pandemic as well. Cumrun Vafa: So it was done in a bit of a speedy way at the end, but, so that’s that’s what it is. But I’m very happy with the with the the cover of the book as well as the way the book came out. Brian Keating: Yes. It’s very, intriguing, and it matches the subject matter as well. I wanna make a distinction between mysteries and puzzles, and wonder if you do that as well. To me, there’s a difference between a mystery and a puzzle, And I and I once discussed this with, Freeman Dyson, who I know you knew, the late great Freeman Dyson. And it was that, you know, a puzzle is something that could be solved. Maybe I can’t solve it because I’m not as smart as you, but, a mystery might not be solvable. And I wonder, do you make a distinction between mysteries versus puzzles? Cumrun Vafa: Well, in a sense, puzzles aspire to be mysteries. That’s a good puzzle. Aspire to be like mysteries. That’s not quite solvable, but gives you an creation to new ideas. So I view puzzles always like that. But I I I think for example, in the book I talk about the enigma of quantum mechanics, I still view it as a mysterious features that we encounter even though we think we understand quantum mechanics. You know, the features of experimentation within quantum mechanicsare serious still to me. And so with that in that sense, I agree we we haven’t solved it or it’s it’s not solvable at this point. Cumrun Vafa: It might continue to be mysterious or maybe it gets resolved in a different form. Some other things happen like black holes. We have similar enigmas about black hole and mysteries about black Cool. Puzzles are pieces which kind of, as I say, try to get some features of these mysteries In some little nuggets of truth, and you can kind of wrap your mind around it and kind of understand it at least. So there’s kind of There’s a distinction, but there’s this also this relation.They wanna reinforce each other that is you’re hoping that the mysteries become like puzzles that you can solve. That’s the way I look at it. Brian Keating: Yeah. I looked at, puzzles. I remember the most famous one perhaps is, Rubik’s cube as a puzzle that I became infatuated with as a kid And then early 19 eighties, I think it’s just about 40 years old and maybe a little bit older made by, I believe, a Hungarian named Rubik and became fabulously
David Chalmers:The Matrix is REAL!
David Chalmer: The Matrix is REAL! Transcript Speaker: The human brain is a big complex machine. It’s an amazing machine. It’s a creative machine, but it’s still made up of these neurons which are appear to be computational units hooked up in amazing ways. The imagination, as far as we can tell, is itself a kind of simulation when we imagine things. When Einstein was imagining things in free fall, he was running a kind of simulation himself running on this incredible computer, which is far more sophisticated than any computer that we ourselves have developed to date. But, you know, AI is moving fast. I can’t believe where it is now compared to where it was 10 years ago. I am Brian Keating: your fearful host, professor Brian Keating of the Arthur c Clark Center For Human Imagination, talking with a renowned Intellect. And this is a rear, a real treat. When I found out that his new book was coming out, I just had to get them. And it is none other than professor David Chalmers, who first formulated the problem of the hard problem of consciousness, which we’re gonna get to in a paper facing up to the problem Consciousness in way back in 1995, expanded upon it in his, wonderful book, the conscious mind 96, his works are provocative, influential And and, some of the greatest luminaries of all time, including past guest Steven Pinker have, called it, so praiseworthy and his acclaim and renown no no bounds. And so first, I wanna welcome you today, Dave. How are you doing today all the way in New York? Speaker: Thanks, Brian. Yeah. Great to great to be here. It’s kinda kinda rainy out here, but, I hope it’s hope it’s sunnier where you are. Brian Keating: Yeah. La Jolla, that’s a fair game. You know? I I usually say, you know, the hardest job in the world is being a San Diego sportscaster because we’ve never won a championship in any sport. But the easiest job is being San Diego’s meteorologist because 72 and sunny, 71a half and sun. You know, it’s it’s, it makes up for, its lack of of variance by its, a consistency of beauty. So, yes, it is quite lovely. But I am a native New Yorker. I’m a a born and bred in New York, so sometimes the accent will come out. Brian Keating: And, Dave, as I told you right before we started, my audience loves it when I play the game, which we call judging books by their covers and titles and subtitles. So this book has a butterfly, very provocative and beautiful butterfly, which is kind of the only character that makes its way through dream sequences throughout the book. The title’s reality plus. The subtitle’s virtual worlds and the problems of philosophy. Dave, explain to us what is the title, the meaning of the title, and that mischievous butterfly doing on it. Speaker: The title is, is reality plus. Actually, I started I had a working title for a long time that was reality 2.0 because this is about you know, the book is in large part about virtual an artificial realities. These could be the, the, the 2nd class of realities. 1st reality, physical reality. But then we start creating our own artificial realities. That’s reality 2 point o. Another idea is it could turn out that we ourselves might be in simulated artificial reality, so that our reality is reality 2.0. Now the only trouble is there’s a fatal flaw with this title, which has probably occurred to all of your listeners already, which is, you know, reality 2.0 suggests to people AOL 19 nineties, You’ve Got Mail. Brian Keating: Dial up. Speaker: Yeah. It’s it’s so retro that it sounds like it’s a step the step backwards rather than a step forwards. Was it yeah. Even our colleague Max Tegmark went to life 3.0 to avoid this problem. I thought reality 4.0, maybe not. But someone had the great idea of, yeah, well, reality plus. Mhmm. Because although putting a plus, on the, on the end of a title may be becoming a ubiquitous cliche too, at least in, at least in streaming services, you know, Disney plus Right. Speaker: Hulu. Apple TV plus, Paramount plus, and so on. At least, it’s a 20 twenties cliche and not a, and not a 19 nineties cliche. And it kinda suggests this idea. There’s more to reality than you think. There’s physical reality, there’s virtual reality, there’s simulated realities. And, yeah, if in the future somebody comes up with a reality streaming service, where you’re able to choose between the virtual realities and you wanna live in, then reality plus might be a, might be an appropriate name for it. So in the end, I thought, okay. Speaker: Gotta go with reality plus, gotta go with the plus sign. Brian Keating: And that gives a hint that the enhancement that we’re going to be, experiencing in the Maybe augmentation and supplementation, but maybe even full scale replacement of our notions of reality. And I’ve had on, as I said, Don Hoffman So it believes reality does not exist and that’s sort of a, an avatarish, scenario, desktop scenario, which is which is provocative, and you refer to him towards the end of the book, when we may get a chance to get into that. I neglected to mention that you are the codirector of NYU Center For mind and brain consciousness. So oh, no. Brain consciousness. You know, my mom named me, you know, Brian so that people would make that mistake, and it happens about 2 times a day. And you were elected a fellow of both the American Academy of arts and sciences, but in your native land down under of Australia, you were elected The Australian Academy of Humanities as well. And
Brian Greene: Does the MULTIVERSE Actually Exist?
Brian Greene: Does the MULTIVERSEActually Exist? Transcript Brian Keating: He’s known literally throughout the universe for his groundbreaking discoveries in the field of string theory. He co invented mirror symmetry, and he brought the notion of Calabi Yau manifolds to the mainstream. Meet the one and only Brian Greene. Brian’s a Professor of physics and math at Columbia University and the author of numerous best selling books. Join us on this It’s in person conversation held late at night at Columbia University as we uncover the hidden reality of our universe and delve into parallel universes and the deep mysteries of the fabric of reality. Let’s go. Here we are today with a man That needs no introduction. Fellow Brian. Brian Keating: Oh, my my mom at least claims she named me Brian, so people are confused with brain. I don’t know about you. But Yeah. Speaker: I haven’t heard that one directly, but, Brian Keating: Now they, we have the 2 of the 3 Brian’s. Of course, I’m I’m the least well known of them, but Brian Cox is, of course, the The ultimate also, another Brian who gets a lot of attention. Maybe he’ll come on someday, but so far, he’s ignored my messages unlike you, and, I wanna Express my gratitude. Last time I was in these luxurious offices here at Columbia University, I was beseeching you for an encomium On my book, Losing the Nobel Prize Speaker: Oh, I remember that. Yeah. Brian Keating: Which you graciously provided back in, 2016, and the book came out in 2018. So I wanna I appreciate you and, express gratitude for for all that you’ve done for me personally and for the field of astronomy and cosmology and science communication. Thank you very much, Brian, for joining us. Thank you. One of my most requested, if not the most requested guest, and I have a ton of stuff to talk about today. We’ll run out of, I’ll run out of, energy And adrenal system excretions before we run out of questions, I’m sure, but we’ll see how far we get. The first thing I wanna do is I since I’ll introduce you later, But I wanna ask, what is in your estimation? I call this the experimental minimum. I’ve had on Lenny Susskind before, and he’s written books, The Theoretical Minimum. Brian Keating: I I wanna ask you, what should a theoretical physicist, cosmologist, what should she or he know about experimental physics and why? Speaker: Well, look, none of what we develop theoretically has any real value if it doesn’t make contact ultimately with Experiment. And so my quick answer would be know as much experiment as you possibly can. Right? Because That is the way in which you can make contact between abstract mathematics and the actual physical world. But the reality, of course, is There’s a limited amount of time that any graduate student, any undergraduate, any faculty member has. And so you need to know the basics for cosmology, Micoid background radiation, evidence for expansion of the universe, evidence for the accelerated Expansion of the universe. You should know something about black holes. You should know the Observational evidence from motions of stars in the Milky Way galaxy to the Event Horizon Telescope’s actual images of black holes. If you don’t know about that Stuff people will look at you kinda weird. Speaker: And, you know, I think it’s also really good to know the basics of particle physics. Brian Keating: Right? Speaker: I mean, you should know the standard model of particle physics. You should understand the experiments that give rise to The gauge symmetry of the standard model, and you should understand that in 2012, we confirmed the Higgs particle. You should know that supersymmetry has not yet been confirmed. That’s an important experimental null result. And beyond that, you should understand That there is this mismatch between our calculations of Dark energy, which really comes from understanding the quantum physics of elementary particles and the observational evidence for dark energy. That I would call perhaps the minimum. No doubt there are other things that should be included, but that’s a good start. Brian Keating: Yeah. And this building have been renowned, and this campus have been renowned, purveyors of both theory and experiment. I’m thinking about Rabi and and, of course, CS Wu, and and, of course, you know, all the many great experimentalists and and theoreticians who have come through this building, and I see it as a as sort of and I believe Arnold Penzias was a student here. Wasn’t he? Speaker: I didn’t know that. Brian Keating: I think I think Speaker: he was. I’m not Brian Keating: I’m not sure. We’ll have the fact checks here. Speaker: But the students. Yeah. That could well be because that yeah. That would have been a long time ago. Yeah. Sure. Brian Keating: Many of them came through here. And I I think about kind of what do I want my graduate students to know as experimentalists? Yeah. For me, I say you shouldn’t have to do theory, But you should know a theory as well as an incoming graduate student. Otherwise and no offense to plumbers out there, Lenny Selskin, as you know, was a plumber. But you’re kinda just doing plumbing and microwave And then it’s very important and interesting stuff. But you’re a technician, and you can get paid a lot more in, you know, free industry. Actually, I was talking to Jim Simons recently, As the benefactor, of course, of the Simons, Observatory, and I believe he supports the w World Science Speaker: of the World. Yeah. Brian Keating: He and Marilyn are huge champions of all the great work you and Tracy do. But, but he was saying, you know, once he had to call a
Lawrence Krauss: The Mysterious Origins ofDark Energy
Lawrence Krauss: The Mysterious Origins of Dark Energy Transcript Brian Keating: Lawrence Krauss Brian Keating: is a world renowned theoretical physicist, a man who significantly changed our view and our understanding of the cosmos. He’s a fierce advocate for the public understanding of science and aims to bring it closer to the masses through the origins podcast. Recently, He’s also been pushing for much needed societal and cultural changes. Lawrence’s books have been pivotal in popularizing science and have profoundly impact in me since I first read them, and his latest book is no exception. Check out my episode from earlier this year right here. Join us as we embark on a captivating journey to the edge of knowledge recorded live in October 2023 at San Diego Air and Space Museum. Brian Keating: Lawrence, how are you doing? Speaker: It’s great to be here. I I I’m I’m really thankful for the museum and for Brian. When when the Origins Project Decided to do some events in California. When the last one we did was in Orange County a a few days ago, and I contacted Brian. I thought it’d be great to come down here. And, Brian, because he’s on the board, said, you know, I have a great place, and he arranged for this to happen. And and And so it’s it’s the 1st time I’ve been here, but it is truly an amazing place. And what a what a place to have this this joint podcast in the sense that we’re doing. Speaker: The Origins Project is is, does do public events every now and then, and this is just a A wonderful venue. So I wanna thank you and the museum. It’s been it’s been great. And, of course, Andy Ornan who who organized it and Helped set up the venue and and and and the the the VIP reception. It’s been a it’s been a great chance to meet many of you. So it’s fun to deal with Brian here, and and I hope we’ll disagree and then chat, about science. And since it’s his home turf, I’m gonna turn it back to him for the minute. Brian Keating: Yeah. One of the things I’m most excited to talk to you about tonight, in our signature kind of way where we debate things, I am a what I call a practicing agnostic Jew, which we can get into what actually that means. Lawrence is a devout bible beating Christian as you all know. Can’t get enough of it. We’ll talk about religion. We’ll talk about politics, all the stuff you’re not supposed to. But really, you stop science with a person who has had And, a considerable influence both on my career and my thought process, but on on generation of of young young people. And I want to start with something that, you know, you can deny paternity maybe, but, I want you to talk about this mysterious substance, which I’m told fills the universe, almost without par, and it’s called dark energy. Brian Keating: And it’s something that you and my friend mutual friend, Mike Turner, really invented, discovered. Let’s talk about the scientific process. How do you think of this creation and the fact that it will Someday rip all of our molecules apart. Speaker: How do you No. It won’t. It probably won’t do that. By by the way, I appreciate when you say, yeah, it was the news that you said, like, cast a long shadow on science because I thought that was Interesting way of putting it. But, so dark energy is the biggest mystery in, I think, in fundamental physics. It is the fact that when you take space and get rid of all the particles and all the radiation and everything and just have empty space there, it weighs something, And and we don’t know why. It is true that Mike and I had had proposed, that it existed. Mostly, I did anyway, and I think I convinced Mike that I I was being heretical, because At the time, the we looked at the data and all the data of cosmology didn’t agree with the Our picture of cosmology, the standard rule of cosmology, we knew we theorists knew way before the observers, and he’s an observer, and I’m an experiment he’s an experimentalist. Speaker: I’m a theorist. We’ll get into the difference, and there are differences. And but we, theorists, were Virtually certain that the universe was flat. That that means it’s the and I and the other day in Orange County, I don’t think I got to what flat was so I should explain here. It’s not flat like a pancake. It’s flat a flat universe is just 1 in which the x, y, and z axes point in the same direction throughout all of space. If you follow him up, they keep going in straight lines. A curved universe is one that you might imagine. Speaker: The x, y, and z axis point here, up there, but somewhere in the distant part of the universe is over here, over there, and over there. And in a in a in saying a closed universe, if you look far enough In that direction, you’ll see the back of your head. There are good theoretical reasons, and maybe we’ll get to them, why we thought the universe was flat, but but There was a big problem. The observers, being difficult people, did not Wasn’t weren’t finding the universe to be flat. That well, British and DeJean, they weren’t flying enough matter to make the universe flat because the geometry of the universe depends upon the stuff in it, And you have to have a certain amount of stuff to make a flat universe, and it wasn’t the right amount of stuff within a factor of 3. And then we looked at all sorts of other observations, and
David Brin: Your Privacy is Overrated. So is the Government’s
David Brin: Your Privacy is Overrated. So is the Government’s Transcript Brian Keating: David Brin is a world renowned astrophysicist and award winning science fiction author. He explores the widest array of topics imaginable, ranging from groundbreaking technology to futuristic humans, political intricacies, and extraterrestrial phenomena. He advises NASA and think tanks around the world. He’s spoken at Google. And best of all, he helped establish the Arthur c Clark Center For Human Imagination right here at UC San Diego, so you best believe he’s a personal hero of mine. David is a leading authority in technological currency and Internet security, and he’s extremely passionate about the prospects of AI and human augmentation. Join us on a fascinating journey through time as we explore the future of human civilization. Speaker: Hello out there in cyberspace, in the multiverse, Wherever you may be, I am joined today by one of my friends and a great mentor to 1,000,000 And a great thought leader to even beyond, maybe perhaps 1,000,000,000. And that’s doctor David Brin, proud graduate of UC San Diego and Caltech, 2 places I’ve spent a little time at, but having him back here for his 1st in person interview, 2nd time on the podcast. Brian Keating: Thank you, David, for coming. Brian Keating: Oh, of course. Anything for you, for you, Brian, and also for, those who really are interested Speaker: in our adventure that we’re having. Yes. You’ve been involved with the Arthur c Clark Center For Human Imagination since, you know, before it was a star in its parents’ Eyes, I don’t even know if it had parents, but back in 2011. Brian Keating: I helped write the, the proposal for UCSD to get the, Clark Center, and they’re doing, very interesting very interesting things. Speaker: It’s been a lot of fun. It’s been over a decade and, going strong. And we have our leader, doctor Eric Theory, who’s a great fan of of everything you do, as am I. And we have started a tradition since 2020 if you can believe it when you were last on. And that’s Every edition of the Into the Impossible podcast starts with something you’re never supposed to do. You’re forbidden to do it in Some circles judging a book by its cover. So today, you’ve graciously brought me one of your how many books have you read? Are you writing a book right now as we speak? Brian Keating: Oh, yeah. I’m usually Writing a couple. I guess I’ve had 20 books, but, at least 3 or 4 of them are nonfiction, like The Transparent Society talking about About the, importance of of light in an enlightenment civilization for holding each other They’re accountable, but the novels are what I’m best known for. I, my first novel, Sundiver, a murder History, set during visits to the sun, which by the way has a, a funded project named after it. That one, came out when I was at grad school and helped pay for my way for through through grad school here. Speaker: Really? Brian Keating: And heart of the comet, which I just gave you a copy of, That one, I was working on while I was finishing grad school here, and we got it out in Time for Halley’s comet’s last, last, fly through, and it, was filled with science about About comets, this one is Earth, and it’s a doorstop, book for grown ups. I mean, if you want a real sort Adult read. Earth and my later book, Existence, are set just 30 years in the future. No aliens, ray guns, or thing like that, but a lot of speculation about what’s to come. This one came out around 1991 and is on almost every list Of, top 10 prophetic novels, things that they had inside that came that came true. Speaker: Mhmm. Brian Keating: Web pages before there was a web, things like that. Speaker: Mhmm. And you and I were talking, just before I started recording in earnest About, these different phenomena that are kind of gripping the planet. And the 1st time we spoke for the podcast back in 2020, You expressed great derision at this notion of the 4th turning and, its its lack of realism, predictive power, and so forth. And yet And yet, I find us living in in times that I can only I can only relate back to when I used still listen to Art Bell. Remember Art Bell? Brian Keating: Art Bell, I was just on, coast to coast with his successor. Speaker: That’s George Noory. Right? Brian Keating: About, about 2 weeks ago. Speaker: Wow. Brian Keating: And, of course, the topic of UFOs and psychic phenomena and all that come Speaker: up, and I imagine they’ll come up here. They will. They will indeed. So Art Bell I used to talk about the quickening and the pace, which Ray Kurzweil, mutual friend, talks about the singularity. He’s coming on the podcast not too long from now. But tell me, David, are you more less optimistic? Dick, are you more nervous? Are you how have your views changed since COVID? You know, we really spoke April of 2020, and now we’re speaking again three and a half years later. Are you more optimistic, less optimistic? Do you wanna take back what you said about the 4th turning? Have you changed your mind at all? Brian Keating: Being willing to change one’s mind is the character fate, that we’re taught in science. The sacred catechism of science that we’re supposed to recite is I might be wrong, followed by the code of soul. Ain’t it cool? Let’s find out. And that’s a degree of courage and intellectual honesty that, most of those who are attacking science right now, have no comprehension of. I’m accused of being an
Exploring Curiosity with Nobel Prize Winner Barry Barish
Exploring Curiosity with Nobel Prize Winner Barry Barish Transcript Speaker: I think it’s innate. I think we’re all curious. Brian Keating: Mhmm. Speaker: So it’s hard for me to say that it’s something we have to teach. It’s something that we have to support and something that we have to let grow and thrive. And that’s why all kids, they they are adventurous. I really don’t think the big problem is somehow teaching kids how to be curious. I think it’s somehow stimulating them to be curious in an effective and positive way. Brian Keating: Barry Barish, Welcome back to the Into the Impossible podcast. It’s your 3rd time on the on the show. Thank you so much for doing this. Hi, Brian. Speaker: Go ahead. Brian Keating: You’re one of our, audience’s most favorite favorite guests for many reasons and Very special to me and, influence on my life and career. I’m actually the progenitor in some sense of my 2nd book called Into the Impossible. Think Like a Nobel Prize winner, which you did honor me by writing the, foreword to that book, the 2nd the 2nd book. And, since you’ve been on the show, the first time in 2020, when the kind of inciting incident that we’ll get to Led to the creation of this book. I’ve added a new feature to my to my episodes where I ask authors of books To help me and the audience judge their books by their covers, which Speaker: Oh, by their covers? Yeah. You’re never supposed to Brian Keating: do that. Right? You don’t judge a book by it. But else do you have to go on? Right? There’s there’s almost no information, especially if it’s somebody, you know, that’s a relatively unknown author. So an author spent a lot of time ruminating about, you know, what To call the book and and so forth. But, I thought we’d play, you know, we we play that same game even though you didn’t write this book, but your name is on the front. So when we talked first, it was actually the 2nd or 3rd time we had ever met. We we spoke about this notion that it’s very common in science called the imposter syndrome. And I remember, you know, clearly as day, and I told my wife that I just couldn’t believe that we closed out the interview when I asked you, as I asked all my guests as well, what advice you’d give to your former self. Brian Keating: And you basically said, you know, to kinda get over the imposter syndrome. And I often think I’m not good enough to have the imposter syndrome, but but I was blown away. And I said, Barry, you won the Nobel Prize, and you said you still have it. Maybe you could recount a little bit of that, that that, sentiment that you Expressed, originally. Speaker: Well, I think anybody, if they actually think about it, has it. I I happen to have a psychoanalyst for a wife, So I can’t avoid kind of the self reflection that that, makes it maybe more evident than than otherwise. But No matter what, you’re I think anybody is in company where people are, have more ability or whatever you’re talking about than you do. And I don’t remember what I said in the in the early one, but the The image that comes to my mind was actually at the office of the foundation for the Nobel Prize. Did did I talk about that? Brian Keating: Yeah. That’s what I’d like. Yeah. I’d like to reiterate that. Speaker: That was the so I’ll just repeat it in a few seconds. And that was it. You go and, you You know, there’s all this excitement, everything. It makes you feel like you’re 10 feet tall through a week of celebration for the Nobel Prize. And at the end, you go to collect your check and sign the book and get your, the portrait that they use. And, as the official portrait in the foundation offices, which aren’t very, like, yeah, you know, fancy or anything. It’s just a set of offices, in a nondescript building in Stockholm. And so you go and you go through all this stuff. Speaker: Take your picture and so forth. And eventually, they they say, oh, but you also have to sign this book. And they pull out this little book. It’s It’s nondescript. It’s more nondescript than yours. It doesn’t as I remember, it didn’t have much of a cover. Maybe it’s all leather coming down. Brian Keating: This Segment. Speaker: And they opened to a page that had nothing on it, because of the fact that, in Nobel’s will, physics is first. So physics is the first one to get it and probably the 1st one in the office. I my name starts with b, so I must have been the first one. They were they opened this book to a blank page, And the top said, 2017. They just said sign your name. It’s okay. I signed my name, and then I didn’t know what to do. So I page backwards. Speaker: And then you see the names of all the people you idolize in your life, you know, Einstein, Feynman, blah blah blah. And, if that isn’t a moment when you feel like you don’t belong, which is kind of the through dramatization of this syndrome. And then, you know, something’s wrong with you, I think. So so I think it’s a it’s a feature that we all have, and should just be aware of it. It shouldn’t stop you from anything. It’s true that you should be aware that you’re not uniquely, because nobody is better than everybody else in the world at everything in in the world. So the fact that you can do some
Bruce Partridge:What Happened AFTER the Big Bang?
Bruce Partridge: What Happened After the Big Bang? Transcript Brian Keating: Bruce Partridge, Emeritus professor of astronomy in the science department at Haverford College is a true pioneer and hero in the study of the cosmic microwave background. He’s one of the OGs. Speaker: But it sure helped establish the cosmic nature of the radiation that And Williamson found. Brian Keating: He was involved in the 1st measurements of the CMB spectrum to confirm its true cosmic origin. That result decimated the steady state theory. He was also one of the 1st scientists to look for the small scale temperature fluctuations which provided us with detailed insights into the distribution of matter in the early universe. He’s made major contributions in both theory and experiment, helping us understand the cosmos, turning cosmology into a precision science. Join us for an exciting episode as we explore the early universe. Brian Keating: Welcome everybody to another exciting episode of the Into the Impossible podcast featuring a friend, a colleague, a collaborator, And most importantly, a mentor in the space of education of my field, cosmologists, generations of them, And that’s Bruce Partridge, who’s an emeritus professor at Haverford College in Pennsylvania. How are Speaker: you today, Bruce? Doing well. They’re here to talk to you. Yes. It’s about Maybe even at you. Brian Keating: Yes. The Internet is quite is Quite amazing. It allows us to do these things. And I am talking to Bruce because of many things. First of all, he’s an incredible scientist and amazing, knowledge about the field, its its past, present, and maybe even its future, having been involved with some of the greatest experiments of all time, including, Perhaps, you know, one of the 1st or second experiments to really go after the detection of the CMB and its properties. And Bruce was involved with, with my grand advisor. So my grand advisor was David Wilkinson, and he advised Peter Timby. And I’m Philip Peter Timbe is soon to be hopefully collaborating closely with us on the Simons projects as well. Brian Keating: So as I talked to you earlier in the week, We always love to do a segment on this podcast that represents something you’re not allowed to do, you’re not supposed to do, which is to judge a book by its cover. And you have 2 wonderful books, one of which I read 30 years ago, which is called three k. So I’ve always been eager to ask you how you came up with the title, Speaker: and the cover design because it depicts the Horsehead Nebula, which to my knowledge has nothing to do with the 3 Kelvin background, but maybe it does. So Bruce, the clever title three k was mine. I figured a nice abbreviation. The damn cover was designed by Cambridge University Press. It’s part of a series, And they all show the Horsehead Nebula, which you’re right, has nothing to do with the micro background at all. Brian Keating: I was thinking we could talk about the nebulae just for a minute in that It’s often said that, I think it was McKellar, had detected properties of cyanide, in the interstellar medium, and that Supposedly, that was, you know, revelatory of a 3 Kelvin background. What do you make of that? Did you know about those measurements? What do you think about those measurements in the early days 1940? Speaker: The situation is following. These little cyanogen molecules, c n, that float around in space, But they appear to be excited as though they were bathed in a roughly 3 Kelvin field of radiation. They’re not at zero temperature, they’re 3 kelvins, 3 degrees above absolute zero, or roughly 5 degrees Fahrenheit above absolute zero. This is written down Back in the thirties and forties, and it was described by the discoverer as a being of some interest. But George Field, among other peoples, remembered reading that paper. And then when Enzys and Wilson found the 3 Kelvin radiation, he he recognized that that 3 k Three Kelvin radiation might be responsible for the excitation of cyanogen, and that gave us a measurement at a particular wavelength of 2.6 millimeters. Wasn’t very precise, but it sure helped establish the cosmic nature of the radiation that Enzius and Wilson found. Brian Keating: That’s right. Now I look at a lot of your research and you have, you have an h index. I think it’s the, you know, the cube of mine or something like that or Number of papers and citations that number close to a100000, which is which is just astounding. And I I’ve gone through many of them because they’re all treasures and little Diamonds, and they’re not so rough. Many of them are incredibly readable. But I want to ask you about when I think of the Bruce Partridge brand, I think very high quality theory, but always attached and never divorced from experiments from the very beginning. Can you talk about your philosophy as a scientist? To couple together theory and experiment is very hard to do, But you managed to do it. Can you give us tips to mortals like me? How did you manage to cultivate that? Is that, like, intention by intentionality? Experiments like Planck, ACT, Now the Simons Observatory. Brian Keating: What is that philosophy that says guided? Speaker: In in terms of the theory side, I was interested in a field that was interesting but fairly simple. And if you go back to the sixties, cosmology was simple. We we didn’t know anything, so it was a very simple subject to get into. And that extended also to my abilities and interest in in the experimental side. When I showed up at Princeton as a postdoc, there were 2 experiments Going on, one was the most famous one, namely looking at the microwave background and trying to