Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku argues quantum supercomputers will crack standard digital security within years while life extension relies on mastering cellular telomerase.
## Background
This content was published on YouTube by The Diary Of A CEO on May 21, 2026. According to the page description, theoretical physicist Dr. Michio Kaku discusses the search for a unifying equation of reality, the existence of alien life, quantum computing capabilities, and the science behind human immortality.
## TL;DR
Dr. Michio Kaku explores fundamental questions about the cosmos, the multiverse, and the physical principles underlying the Big Bang and black holes. He examines the evolution of morality, human nature, and civilizational survival alongside technological advancements like quantum computing and artificial intelligence. Reflecting on his military service and personal experiments, Kaku highlights the value of scientific skepticism when evaluating claims about UAPs, supernatural phenomena, and the long-term future of humanity.
## Atmosphere & style
The conversation carries an intellectually curious and contemplative mood, balancing high-level theoretical physics with grounded philosophical reflection. Host Steven Bartlett and Dr. Michio Kaku engage in a thoughtful dialogue that transitions seamlessly between vast cosmic mysteries and deeply personal human experiences. The atmosphere feels accessible yet profound, encouraging listeners to ponder the broader implications of science on human identity and existence.
## Key takeaways
- [51:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3091s) The universe may have originated when a single subatomic quantum bubble within a higher-dimensional vacuum stabilized and expanded exponentially, forming the Big Bang.
- [52:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3148s) Evolutionary mechanics explain the linear development of life, while religious creation stories serve human-centric purposes to organize moral behavior and build community rather than explain physical reality.
- [58:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3483s) Military experience during the Vietnam War highlighted how deep ideological convictions drive conflict across all sides, showing that human survival relies on conscious moral choices over pure evolutionary instincts.
- [01:02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3769s) Human civilization has made exponential progress over recent decades, but the development of technologies like nuclear weapons, bioweapons, and AI means survival depends on deliberate choices made in upcoming decades.
- [01:05:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3923s) Interstellar travel to systems like Alpha Centauri remains centuries away with current technology, requiring speculative concepts like warp drives or new insights from a unified Theory of Everything.
- [01:08:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4133s) By 2100, humanity will likely establish bases on the Moon and Mars, deploy deep-space AI probes, and utilize advanced biotechnology to extend the human lifespan.
- [01:09:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4197s) Aging is governed by the shortening of telomeres, and while the enzyme telomerase can repair them to reverse cellular aging, its use in cancer cells poses a major challenge for longevity research.
- [01:11:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4303s) Quantum computers process information using individual atomic superpositions, enabling them to break standard digital encryption standards protecting bank accounts and cryptocurrencies.
- [01:21:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4879s) Higher dimensions in string theory do not validate supernatural phenomena; human electrical brain activity ceases at death, making ghosts and physical body auras implausible.
- [01:23:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4981s) Declassified U.P./UFO reports remain scientifically inconclusive, warranting a neutral stance until direct physical proof is provided.
- [01:28:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5327s) If extraterrestrial craft are visiting Earth, their extreme aerial maneuvers suggest robotic probes rather than biological organisms, aligning with concepts like the Zoo Hypothesis.
- [01:32:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5567s) Automation will target repetitive physical labor first, while fields requiring emotional intelligence, management, and strategic judgment will remain human-driven as humans eventually integrate with synthetic intelligence.
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=0s) Human Potential, Existential Risks, and the Theory of Everything
Theoretical physicist Dr. Michio Kaku introduces the tantalizing prospect of human immortality, pointing out that our bodies possess a biological clock governed by telomeres and telomerase. While telomerase can halt the aging clock, cancer cells exploit this same mechanism to become immortal, presenting science with the challenge of unlocking longevity without triggering cancer. Looking forward, Kaku notes how rapid progress may soon see humanity establishing a presence on the Moon and Mars, while artificial intelligence helps cure major diseases. However, for the first time in history, humanity also faces self-destruction from designer germs, nuclear weapons, and advanced artificial intelligence. In particular, quantum computers pose such immense computational power that organizations like the CIA worry they could compromise global digital security, effectively collapsing financial systems and bringing society to a halt. In light of humanoid robotics, Kaku suggests merging with technology to avoid conflict, emphasizing that humanity stands on a knife's edge where one wrong turn leads to destruction, while the other leads to abundance.
Transitioning to his life's work, Dr. Kaku explains his role in co-founding string field theory—a branch of string theory aiming to fulfill Albert Einstein's 30-year quest for the "Theory of Everything." This sought-after master framework consists of a single equation, perhaps no more than an inch long, capable of unifying all fundamental physical laws. By doing so, it would allow scientists to conceptually "read the mind of God" by describing the Big Bang, the birth of stars, galaxies, the Earth, and life itself. Kaku emphasizes that physics is not an abstract academic exercise for "eggheads" scribbling on blackboards, but the foundational bedrock from which chemistry, biology, technology, and our everyday existence emerge.
- The biological clock of aging is managed by telomeres and the enzyme telomerase.
- Quantum computers have the potential to crack all modern encryption, including banking networks and Bitcoin.
- The four fundamental forces of the universe that the Theory of Everything aims to unite are gravity, the electromagnetic force, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force.
[05:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=356s) Extraterrestrial Life, Space Warps, and UAPs
Addressing whether humanity is alone in the cosmos, Dr. Kaku states firmly that we are almost certainly not alone. The Milky Way galaxy alone contains roughly 100 billion stars, with approximately 10% harboring Earth-like planets. However, the vast distances of space create a severe travel barrier: using conventional chemical rockets like the Saturn V, reaching even the nearest star system would take 70,000 years. Consequently, any alien civilization capable of visiting Earth would be hundreds of thousands of years ahead of us technologically. Such a civilization would likely rely on space warps—bending space-time with extreme gravitational energy to travel faster than the speed of light, a concept rooted in general relativity.
```
SPACE-TIME WARPING CONCEPT
Normal Space: [ Earth ] --------------------> [ Star ]
(70,000 years)
Warped Space: [ Earth ]-)(-[ Star ]
(Shortened Distance via Gravity)
```
When evaluating Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs) and UFO sightings, Kaku categorizes encounters into three distinct types:
1. **Close encounters of the first kind:** Observing unexplained objects floating in the sky.
2. **Close encounters of the second kind:** Possessing physical, tangible evidence such as debris, hardware, or an engine.
3. **Close encounters of the third kind:** Direct contact or interaction with extraterrestrial beings.
Kaku stresses that current UAP observations remain strictly within the "first kind." While 95% of sightings can be explained by conventional phenomena or military tests (such as stealth aircraft development), 5% remain genuinely unexplained optical or physical anomalies. Without physical hardware or laboratory verification, mainstream physics cannot definitively confirm extraterrestrial visits, though declassified government documents are opening new avenues for scientific analysis.
- Distance to Alpha Centauri (the closest star system): ~4.5 light-years.
- Time for a Saturn V rocket to reach Alpha Centauri: 70,000 years.
- Percentage of UAP sightings explainable by known physics: 95% (with 5% remaining unexplained).
[11:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=713s) Anomaly of Tabby's Star and Dyson Swarms
Dr. Kaku highlights a specific astronomical mystery involving a star—commonly known as Tabby's Star (KIC 8462852)—that exhibits strange variations in light output. Unlike standard exoplanet transits (where a Jupiter-sized planet blocks only about 1% of a star's light), this star experiences sudden light drops of up to 20% over periods ranging from months to years.
To explain this drastic dimming, astrophysicists have proposed various hypotheses. One dramatic theory suggests an advanced alien megastructure, such as a partial Dyson sphere or an orbiting megastructure built to harness the star's immense energy output. As this massive energy-collecting structure orbits, it eclipses a significant portion of the star from Earth's vantage point.
> "A civilization that advanced would have tremendous energy needs. And the easiest way to get energy is by encircling the mother star with an envelope."
[14:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=844s) The Big Bang and String Theory Dimensions
Explaining the origin of the cosmos, Dr. Kaku describes the Big Bang as a massive cosmic expansion that occurred approximately 14 billion years ago. Rather than exploding into pre-existing empty space, the universe itself is expanding like a inflating balloon, causing galaxies and stars to move further away from one another over time. When asked what the universe is expanding into, Kaku introduces the concept of **hyperspace**.
While human perception is limited to a four-dimensional continuum (three spatial dimensions and one time dimension), string theory demonstrates that the true fabric of reality consists of 11 dimensions. Within this framework, fundamental subatomic particles—such as protons, neutrons, electrons, and neutrinos—are not zero-dimensional point particles. Instead, they are tiny, vibrating filaments of energy resembling musical strings. Just as a violin string produces different musical notes depending on its vibration frequency, a subatomic string vibrating at different frequencies manifests as different physical particles.
- Age of the universe: ~14 billion years.
- Dimensions in daily perception: 4 (3 space + 1 time).
- Total dimensions posited by String Theory / M-Theory: 11 dimensions.
Here is a detailed, faithful walkthrough of this section of the interview.
---
[16:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=990s) String Theory, Subatomic Particles, and Dark Matter
Dr. Michio Kaku explains that at the foundational level, all matter is made of tiny, vibrating strings. Rather than having hundreds of distinct, fundamental subatomic particles, everything is simply a different vibrational mode of a single string. When a string vibrates in one direction, it manifests as an electron; when it vibrates in another, it manifests as a proton. Kaku notes that historical physics assumed matter was made simply of electrons, protons, and neutrons. However, experiments with massive atom smashers—such as those outside Chicago (Fermilab) and outside Geneva (CERN's Large Hadron Collider)—revealed hundreds of exotic subatomic particles, including pi mesons, lambda particles, and omega particles. These machines smash atoms apart so physicists can analyze the debris, categorize the resulting vibrations, and form a coherent framework.
```
Subatomic Particle Landscape
├── Standard Model Particles (Lowest Octave)
│ ├── Electrons, Protons, Neutrons
│ └── Pi Mesons, Lambda Particles, Omega Particles
└── Dark Matter (Higher Octave)
└── Invisible particles that do not interact with light
```
While the Standard Model successfully categorizes these subatomic particles, it fails to account for gravity or the mysterious presence of **dark matter**. Kaku describes dark matter as an invisible form of matter surrounding the entire Milky Way galaxy. He proposes that dark matter may simply be the "next octave" or higher vibrational mode of the string. Because these higher-order vibrations do not interact with light, they remain invisible to our visual instruments.
* **Subatomic Particle Count:** Physicists have detected hundreds of subatomic particles through high-energy particle colliders.
* **The Large Hadron Collider (LHC):** Located in Geneva, it accelerates and smashes subatomic particles together to observe particle debris.
* **The Dark Matter Octave:** Dark matter is theorized to be a higher-frequency vibration of fundamental strings that remains invisible because it does not absorb or reflect electromagnetic radiation (light).
---
[19:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1171s) What Caused the Big Bang and the Multiverse
When addressing the origin of the Big Bang, Dr. Kaku points out that "Big Bang" is somewhat of a misnomer that obscures our fundamental ignorance of what actually caused the event. Standard cosmology tracks the universe expanding outward from a central point, implying that rewinding time leads back to a singular collapse. However, string theory offers a framework for what happened *before* the Big Bang, suggesting that the universe did not originate from nothingness; instead, it collapsed down to a tiny scale and "bounced."
> "The Big Bang in some sense is a misnomer because it disguises the fact that we're ignorant... String theory, there was no bang. That is, it did collapse... with a very small thing and then came out again. It bounced."
Kaku introduces the concept of a **bubble bath of universes** or a multiverse. While general relativity operates in four dimensions (three spatial dimensions plus time), string theory posits an 11-dimensional reality. Within this higher-dimensional space, our universe is merely one expanding soap bubble alongside countless other coexisting bubble universes.
* **Dimensionality of String Theory:** Operates in 11 dimensions rather than the traditional 4 spacetime dimensions.
* **Multiverse Concept:** Universes exist as expanding "bubbles" inside a higher-dimensional vacuum, popping into existence or bouncing off one another.
* **Cultural Footprint:** The term "multiverse" has crossed over from theoretical physics into mainstream popular culture and comic book franchises like *Spider-Man*.
---
[21:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1310s) General Relativity: Why Planets Orbit the Sun
Using physical props (marbles and a central sphere), Dr. Kaku demonstrates Albert Einstein's theory of General Relativity. Planets, asteroids, and moons orbit a central star like the Sun not because of a mysterious invisible force reaching through empty space, but because mass warps the fabric of space around it. The Sun creates a curved depression in space, and smaller bodies simply follow the natural curvature of that warped geometry.
```
Spacetime Curvature
[ Mass of the Sun ] ──> Warps Surrounding Space ──> Creates Curved Paths
│
Planets follow these natural curves
```
Kaku points out that space only *looks* flat to us locally, much like the Earth appears flat when standing on its surface. In reality, gravity is the direct byproduct of this spatial warping. This same phenomenon keeps humans grounded on Earth: as the planet spins, it warps the surrounding space, continually pushing objects down toward the floor rather than letting them flit away into outer space.
* **Escape Velocity of Earth:** Leaving Earth's gravitational pull requires reaching an escape velocity of approximately 7 miles per second (roughly 11.2 km/s), the speed achieved by the Apollo astronauts heading to the Moon.
* **Mechanism of Gravity:** Gravity is not an instantaneous pull across a void, but the physical pushing effect caused by warped spacetime geometry.
---
[24:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1448s) Black Holes and Wormhole Gateways
When a massive star collapses under its own immense gravity, it crushes matter down so tightly that it creates a **black hole**. Physicists now believe supermassive black holes sit at the center of almost every galaxy in the universe—including our own. Kaku instructs listeners to look toward the constellation Sagittarius in the night sky, which marks the center of the Milky Way where a supermassive black hole holds the galaxy together.
```
Black Hole Mechanics
├── Event Horizon: Boundary where escape velocity = Speed of Light
└── Singularity/Core: Theoretical gateway or shortcut (Wormhole)
```
Surrounding a black hole is a boundary called the **event horizon**. Because the mass of a black hole is compressed into such a tight region, its escape velocity reaches the speed of light. Passing beyond the event horizon creates a point of no return: escaping would require traveling faster than light, which is physically impossible. On the question of what lies inside, Kaku speculates that a black hole could act as an entrance or a gateway to a parallel universe—similar to a **wormhole**. Such shortcuts in spacetime would be necessary for interstellar travel, as traveling to our nearest star system, Alpha Centauri, using current Saturn V rocket technology would take 70,000 years.
* ** galactic Location:** The Milky Way's central supermassive black hole lies in the direction of the constellation Sagittarius (Sagittarius A*).
* **Travel Times:** Reaching Alpha Centauri (the nearest star system) with chemical rockets like the Saturn V would take approximately 70,000 years.
---
[28:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1737s) Finishing Einstein's Life's Work and Perspectives on God
Dr. Kaku shares the personal story of what drove him to become a theoretical physicist. At age eight, he read news reports about the death of Albert Einstein. The articles mentioned that Einstein had died leaving his ultimate goal unfinished: a unified "theory of everything." Inspired by the idea of completing Einstein's dream, Kaku dedicated his life to studying physics and now spends his career working with Einstein's equations.
> "When I was 8 years old, a great scientist had just died... the newspaper said that he failed on his last try to create a theory of everything. So, I was fascinated by this idea... and at that point, I said to myself, 'That's for me. That's what I want to work on.'"
Reflecting on how 71 years of studying the universe shaped his views on God, Kaku notes his unique upbringing: his family was primarily Buddhist from Japan, but his father placed him in Christian Sunday school. As an adult physicist, he considers himself agnostic. He emphasizes that physicists must follow the evidence wherever it leads, even into mysterious or uncomfortable territory. While string theory can mathematically explain the universe back to the Big Bang and beyond, it leaves open the ultimate question of where string theory itself originated.
* **Age of Inspiration:** Dr. Kaku began his pursuit of theoretical physics at age 8 following Albert Einstein's death in 1955.
* **Philosophical Stance:** Views scientific inquiry through an agnostic lens, using physics equations to test reality rather than adhering to rigid theological assumptions.
---
[30:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1859s) Debunking Simulation Theory
The conversation turns to Simulation Theory—the idea that our perceived universe is a hyperrealistic computer simulation run by an advanced intelligence. Dr. Kaku dismisses the theory as "fairy tales," explaining that it directly contradicts the fundamental laws of quantum mechanics. Reality is not a pre-programmed script running on a server; it operates on probabilistic outcomes that can be calculated with extreme precision.
```
Nick Bostrom's Trilemma vs. Physicist Perspective
├── Possibility 1: Civilizations self-destruct before building simulations.
├── Possibility 2: Advanced civilizations have no interest in ancestral simulations.
├── Possibility 3: We are living inside a computer simulation.
└── Option 4 (Kaku's View): Simulation theory is false; universe runs on quantum probabilities.
```
The host brings up Nick Bostrom's famous trilemma, which argues that either civilizations extinct themselves before attaining simulation technology, lose interest in running ancestral simulations, or we are almost certainly living in one of millions of simulated realities. Kaku counters with an "Option Four": there is no simulation at all. The universe is governed by quantum probabilities—such as the probability of uranium decaying to power nuclear reactions or hydrogen nuclei fusing to ignite stars—rather than digital code.
* **Quantum Mechanics vs. Simulation:** Quantum theory relies on precise probability distributions of atomic and chemical events rather than a deterministic, scripted simulation.
* **Stellar Energy:** Star light and heat are governed by the physical probability of hydrogen fusion, not a programmed rendering engine.
---
[33:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2008s) The Fragility of Perceived Reality
The host raises a question about the nature of human perception, citing the effects of psychedelic substances like DMT (dimethyltryptamine). Inhaling a single dose of DMT can radically alter a person's sensory processing, leading users to report encounters with seemingly intelligent, non-human entities. The host questions whether our everyday reality is genuine, given how easily human perception can be completely rewritten by a simple chemical compound.
* **Perceptual Shift:** Psychedelic compounds like DMT show how rapidly human consciousness can construct entirely different perceptual environments.
* **The Reality Question:** The ease with which human neurochemistry can be altered challenges our confidence in whether our waking senses represent objective reality.
<ElicitationsGroup message="Explore further topics from this interview:">
<Elicitation label="Explore String Theory & 11 Dimensions" query="Explain the 11 dimensions of string theory mentioned by Michio Kaku in simple terms."/>
<Elicitation label="Analyze Multiverse Theories" query="What are the main scientific arguments for and against the multiverse theory?"/>
</ElicitationsGroup>
[34:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2052s) The Illusion of Human Perception
The discussion opens with the host considering how easily human consciousness can be altered, asking whether a single inhalation of smoke disrupting brain function proves that our perceived reality is merely a fragile projection of aligned particles. Dr. Michio Kaku agrees, asserting that what we consider reality is a "partial fiction." Human senses are strictly limited to a tiny fraction of what actually exists in the universe. We cannot natively perceive the vast majority of the electromagnetic spectrum—including ultraviolet radiation, infrared, X-rays, or cosmic rays—meaning the room around us is constantly filled with unseen phenomena.
Dr. Kaku describes our experience as living in a double-layered illusion: "a fantasy on top of a fantasy." The primary fantasy is believing that what we see encompasses total reality, while evolutionary adaptations layer further interpretations on top of it. He uses the evolutionary example of hearing a rustling in the forest and assuming a tiger is lurking. Nine times out of ten, no predator is present, but overactive senses were naturally selected because jumping at shadows occasionally saves a life.
* Our senses evolved purely for biological survival rather than for revealing objective cosmic truth.
* Higher sensory inputs (like seeing radio waves or ultraviolet light) were unnecessary for ancestral survival and were thus omitted.
* Other species inhabit vastly different perceptual realities tailored to their survival needs, such as bats using sonar or dogs navigating through vastly superior olfactory nerves.
[37:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2224s) The Meaning of Life and Why Survival Matters
When asked what function life serves in the broader universe, Dr. Kaku explains that there is no universal, overarching meaning bestowed upon existence; rather, individuals must construct their own purpose. However, survival itself plays a critical role in the cosmic timeline because "survival writes history." Without living observers to create memories and tell stories, the universe would be nothing more than a lifeless vacuum of space.
The host points out how humans seem uniquely burdened with a "God-shaped hole"—an inherent drive to search for origin stories, moral structures, and ultimate meaning. Dr. Kaku attributes this psychological trait directly to evolutionary mechanisms that preserved social cohesion as human intelligence evolved.
* **The Evolution of Religion:** In primitive animal groups, order is enforced by an alpha individual. As early humans gained intelligence, they began bickering and challenging leadership, threatening to fracture tribes.
* **God as Social Glue:** Religion emerged as a necessary social mechanism. A leader asserting authority via a higher power ("God will strike you down if you disobey") created an unchallengeable framework that held intelligent, contentious beings together.
* **Translational Authority:** Religious figures maintain order by positioning themselves as messengers or offspring of unseen higher powers to preserve group stability.
> "God is a glue that holds sentient beings together when there's no reason to hold them together anymore and they bicker and the tribe falls apart."
[40:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2450s) Consciousness and the Prefrontal "Time Machine"
Dr. Kaku defines consciousness fundamentally as awareness—the unique cognitive ability to assign meaning to our surroundings and project ideas into the future. While animals are anchored entirely in the present moment and focused strictly on immediate survival, the human brain functions differently due to the development of the prefrontal cortex.
He describes the human cerebral cortex as a mental "time machine." Unlike a dog—which lives strictly in the present and cares only about its immediate meal—humans are evolutionary outliers who cannot stop pondering what will happen tomorrow, next year, or centuries from now. Because early humans lacked sharp claws, long fangs, massive muscles, or flight, survival depended entirely on simulating future scenarios to anticipate threats and opportunities.
```
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS MATRIX |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| ANIMAL COGNITION | HUMAN PREFRONTAL CORTEX |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Bound to the present moment | • Functions as a mental "time |
| • Driven strictly by immediate | machine" |
| survival (food, shelter) | • Obsessed with future scenario |
| • Lacks interest in history or | planning |
| long-term planning | • Driven to explore new frontiers |
| • Relies on physical traits | • Compensates for physical |
| (claws, speed, camouflage) | weakness with abstract thought |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
```
* Human self-awareness manifests as an instinctive urge to continuously explore new territories and concepts.
* Abstract questions about origin, purpose, and existence are a direct byproduct of a brain hardwired to constantly evaluate the future.
[43:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2588s) The Reality of AI vs. True Human Creativity
Addressing modern developments in artificial intelligence, Dr. Kaku offers a grounded perspective that contrasts with common hype. While contemporary AI models use neural networks inspired by biological brains, he argues that current robots possess an operational intelligence roughly equivalent to that of a bug or insect—executing narrow instructions well, but lacking higher-level planning or genuine articulation. Over coming decades, AI may progressively reach the cognitive complexity of a mouse, rabbit, dog, and eventually a monkey, at which point safety concerns will become far more pressing.
Responding to the host's point that modern Large Language Models operate at a PhD level, Dr. Kaku clarifies that AI is currently imitative rather than original. It rearranges pre-existing data based on pattern matching rather than generating ground-breaking paradigms out of nothing.
* **Recombination vs. Originality:** AI aggregates existing data to build outputs (like generating a novel picture based on millions of training images), whereas true human breakthroughs often represent total paradigm shifts.
* **The Historical Benchmark:** Isaac Newton did not merely re-arrange existing physics; he formulated calculus and the inverse-square law to solve questions that had never been answered.
* **The Future of Scientific AI:** AI will likely accelerate scientific discoveries by recombining complex known physical laws in novel ways, acting as a powerful tool guided by human foundational breakthroughs.
> "True creativity comes from almost nothing and it's like a supernova. Creativity of a robot is imitative."
[47:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2876s) The Dual-Edged Sword of Technology and Autonomous Weapons
Dr. Kaku emphasizes that every major technological breakthrough throughout human history acts as a double-edged sword, capable of being harnessed for both creation and destruction. The invention of the bow and arrow provided a reliable way to hunt for food, but it was simultaneously used for warfare against neighboring tribes. While modern AI applications primarily focus on lowering labor costs, driving economic growth, and streamlining operations, military integration represents an immediate danger.
He highlights current warfare developments—such as autonomous aerial weapons deployed in active conflicts like the war in Ukraine—where wire-guided or AI-assisted drones lock onto targets automatically and bypass traditional electronic countermeasures.
* Advanced military systems are increasingly leveraging AI for real-time target acquisition and battlefield navigation.
* The primary threat of AI in the near term lies not in sci-fi sentient takeover, but in the rapid proliferation of autonomous weapon systems.
* Sponsorship intermission begins at, featuring promotional discussions for sales CRM tool Pipedrive and personal branding AI platform Stanto (Stanley).
Here is a detailed walkthrough of this portion of the conversation between host Steven Bartlett and theoretical physicist Dr. Michio Kaku.
---
[051:31] The "Bubble Bath" Theory of the Big Bang
Revisiting the fundamental question of cosmic origins, Steven asks Michio where he personally lands regarding what actually triggered the Big Bang. Specifically, he asks if Michio leans toward the "bubble bath" theory—the concept that the cosmos consists of countless universes expanding and contracting in a broader continuum.
Michio confirms that he probably does land on this hypothesis. He explains that modern physics no longer views empty space as a static void; instead, pure vacuum is "frothing with little bubbles" that constantly pop into existence, annihilate, and plunge back into nothingness. Even absolute nothingness is full of microscopic quantum activity. Michio posits that one day, eons ago, one of these subatomic bubbles failed to collapse back into the vacuum and kept expanding, giving rise to our Big Bang. In this dynamic worldview, universes are continuously being born.
- **Empty space quantum dynamics:** Space is not empty; virtual particle-like bubbles continually bubble up and self-annihilate.
- **Cosmic origin hypothesis:** The Big Bang occurred when a single quantum bubble stabilized and expanded exponentially rather than collapsing back into the vacuum.
---
[052:28] Genesis, Creation Myths, and the True Function of Religion
Steven shifts the conversation from cosmic bubbles to biblical accounts, asking if Michio believes the literal story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Michio points out that life developed through a clear linear progression via evolutionary mechanics—from single-celled to multi-celled organisms, to nervous systems in fish, to land-dwelling creatures.
When asked directly if he considers the Genesis story of God creating the world in six days to be "stuff" he dismisses, Michio calls it a "compelling fairy tale." He notes that even modern religious scholars understand it as a metaphor rather than literal 24-hour days, since a "day" is an Earth-centric metric that varies across different worlds.
Rather than explaining scientific reality, Michio argues that the true purpose of religion is human-centric: it provides a digestible narrative structure to unify people around a shared framework, instilling guidance so individuals do not terrorize each other.
- **Evolutionary timeline:** Life evolved sequentially from single-celled entities to complex terrestrial organisms.
- **Role of religious texts:** Genesis serves as a metaphor to organize moral behavior, build community, and give people a *reason* for existence, not to explain the mechanics of creation.
---
[053:45] Morality, the Vietnam War, and Questioning Absolute Right and Wrong
When Steven asks whether he identifies as an atheist, Michio corrects him: "No, I'm agnostic." He believes religion provides social "glue" and practical guidelines on how to treat one's neighbor, even if it does not answer the underlying physical meaning of existence.
Steven then probes into where Michio's personal sense of morality originates. Michio shares a deeply personal, formative story from his two years serving in the United States Army during the height of the Vietnam War. At the time, roughly 500 American GIs were dying every week. He recalls opening *Life* magazine each week to see pages filled solely with photos of the young men who had died—printed without commentary or "I told you so" editorials. Facing his own draft number and the prospect of death on the battlefield forced him to confront the nature of conflict and human morality.
Michio recalls marching at 4:00 AM every morning singing military cadence songs like "I want to go to Vietnam, I want to kill a Charlie Cong." Yet, being inside the military made him realize that the enemy possessed their own deep moral convictions and willingness to sacrifice for their freedom.
He illustrates this realization with an anecdote about a sergeant training him on hand grenade safety. The sergeant had massive, deep shrapnel scars across his neck and face. When asked about them, the sergeant explained that during his tour, a young Vietnamese boy approached him asking, "Candy, candy. You want candy?" When the sergeant rebuffed him, the boy revealed a hand grenade hidden in his palm and threw it. The sergeant immediately dove flat to the ground; the resulting explosion peppered half his body with shrapnel.
Reflecting on why a young boy would commit such an act, Michio realized the child was driven by a deep belief in a cause. This experience forced Michio to question whether his side was truly on the "right side of the wrong side," prompting a lifelong philosophical realization that humans are capable of both immense good and profound evil, and that moral truths require questioning dogmatic groupthink.
- **Military context:** Drafted into the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War when casualties reached ~500 GIs per week.
- **Media memory:** *Life* magazine publishing weekly photo galleries of fallen soldiers with zero commentary.
- **Defining incident:** A sergeant survived a grenade attack by a Vietnamese child offering "candy," illustrating how ideological conviction drives human action on all sides of a conflict.
---
[058:03] Is Warfare Hardwired into Human Nature?
Steven connects Michio's war reflections to modern geopolitical conflicts, asking if humanity is trapped in an endless cycle of ideological division and violence. Michio acknowledges that competitive warfare has been an integral driver throughout evolutionary history, pointing out that animals routinely fight over resources and territory.
However, Michio retains hope because humans possess a cerebral cortex capable of moral reasoning. Unlike animals—whose interactions are dictated strictly by survival, dominance, and food access—humans can choose to transcend conflict through conscious thought and build a better society.
- **Evolutionary conflict:** Warfare is deeply rooted in human and animal evolutionary history.
- **Moral agency:** Humans differ from animals because they can make conscious, moral choices rather than relying purely on instinct and physical strength.
---
[059:09] The Multiverse, "Many-Worlds," and Infinite Possibilities
Steven brings up a popular physical theory he heard in his youth: if the universe is infinite, there must be another version of himself ("Steven Bartlett") somewhere out in space living an identical life, perhaps differing only by drinking lemonade instead of coffee.
Michio clarifies that while this resembles a pop-culture interpretation of the "many-worlds" concept, infinity does not automatically imply exact repetition. You can have an infinite series of non-repeating numbers or conditions without generating identical duplicates of our specific civilization. It is a possibility, but not a logical necessity.
When Steven describes looking up at the night sky during a desert star-gazing trip in Joshua Tree—feeling both deeply insignificant and strangely relieved of personal anxiety—he asks how we ought to feel about our place in a universe containing trillions of galaxies.
Michio offers a comforting perspective grounded in physics: across the Milky Way galaxy, an alien scientist is likely writing down the exact same mathematical equations of string theory that Michio writes, only using different symbols and notation. Because physical laws are universal, Michio feels a profound sense of camaraderie and "oneness" across light-years. Despite vast distances, conscious beings share a collective quest to decode the nature of matter and energy.
- **Multiverse nuance:** Infinity does not require identical duplicates; infinite non-repeating variations are possible.
- **Cosmic scale:** Trillions of galaxies exist, each containing roughly 100 billion stars.
- **Universal physics:** Mathematical laws are identical across the cosmos, creating a shared "fellowship" among conscious beings seeking truth.
---
[01:02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3769s) Human Progress vs. The Threat of Self-Destruction
Steven raises a grim counterpoint: given the mathematical probabilities over time, won't humanity likely destroy itself through nuclear weapons or AI before we ever make contact with alien civilizations or solve the cosmos?
Michio responds by offering a historical analytical tool: the decade. He argues that a decade is the smallest meaningful unit of human history because shorter timeframes are dominated by random noise and temporary setbacks. Analyzing history decade-by-decade reveals staggering, exponential human progress—moving from barbarians, to horse-and-buggy transportation, to modern space travel in an astonishingly short window.
However, Michio admits Steven's concern is real. For the first time in our species' history—specifically over the last 80 years—humanity possesses the technological means to self-annihilate using nuclear arsenals, designer pathogens, or rogue artificial intelligence. He compares humanity's position to standing on a "knife's edge": tilting one way leads to global destruction, while tilting the other leads to abundance, food, and prosperity for all.
- **Historical unit:** Decades filter out short-term noise to reveal true evolutionary and technological trajectories.
- **Existential threats:** Technologies created over the last 80 years (nuclear weapons, bioweapons, AI) mean humanity now has the power to extinguish itself.
- **The "Knife's Edge":** Civilizational survival depends on the deliberate choices made in the coming decades.
---
[01:05:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3923s) Star Travel and the Search for the "Equation of Everything"
Steven asks whether humans will successfully colonize other planets, referencing Elon Musk's vision of becoming a multi-planetary species. Michio feels confident that humanity will establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and that within a few generations, our descendants will travel throughout our solar system. However, colonizing interstellar space beyond our solar system presents a massive barrier: reaching the nearest star system, Alpha Centauri—which is 4.5 light-years away—would take centuries or millennia using conventional rocketry, requiring speculative technologies like warp drives to make realistic.
Bringing the discussion back to his life's work, Michio reflects on the single mystery of the universe he wants solved before he dies: finding the single "Theory of Everything" equation. He points out that humanity has already summarized electromagnetism into an equation half an inch long, and gravity into another half-inch equation. He remains convinced that the fundamental master equation uniting all forces will be equally simple—perhaps just an inch long—and believes theoretical physics is extremely close to discovering it.
- **Interstellar distance:** Alpha Centauri is 4.5 light-years away; visiting nearby stars without theoretical propulsion (like warp drives) takes centuries.
- **Simplicity of fundamental physics:** Major physical forces (electromagnetism, gravity) are described by concise, short equations, suggesting the final unified theory will also fit on a single line of text.
---
<ElicitationsGroup message="To explore these topics further:">
<Elicitation label="Explore String Theory and the Theory of Everything" query="Explain String Theory and how theoretical physicists are attempting to unify gravity with quantum mechanics."/>
<Elicitation label="Analyze Michio Kaku's view on Quantum Computing" query="Summarize Michio Kaku's predictions on how quantum computing will impact technology, security, and science."/>
</ElicitationsGroup>
Here is the detailed walkthrough covering Part 5 of the interview.
### [01:08:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4086s) The Brain vs. The Universe
When comparing the human brain to the rest of the natural world, Dr. Michio Kaku finds humanity’s cognitive ability to perceive order truly astonishing—especially when contrasted with the animal kingdom. While animals exist strictly in the immediate present, preoccupied with basic survival needs like finding their next meal, human beings can look out at the cosmos and discern hidden patterns, meaning, rhyme, and reason. However, despite the incredible complexity of the human brain, Kaku asserts that the universe itself remains far more fascinating. He notes that no matter how rapidly physics and mathematical techniques advance, pure mathematics will always offer something deeper and more profound.
### [01:08:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4133s) How Life Will Change by the Year 2100
Reflecting on his book *Physics of the Future: How Science Will Shape Human Destiny and Our Daily Lives by the Year 2100*, Kaku outlines what humanity can expect over the coming decades. By the end of this century, humans will likely have established a permanent presence on the Moon, made significant inroads toward Mars, and begun deploying artificial intelligence to send autonomous probes into deep space. While direct human travel to distant star systems remains a milestone several centuries away, mastering our own solar system is well within reach for the 21st century.
Alongside space exploration, rapid advances in artificial intelligence will converge with biotechnology to revolutionize medicine. AI will play a pivotal role in curing cancer and eradicating complex diseases, ultimately opening up new possibilities for extending the human lifespan and tackling the long-standing "immortality crisis."
- **Solar System Exploration:** Permanent bases on the Moon, initial missions to Mars, and AI-driven deep-space probes are expected within the century.
- **Interstellar Travel:** Direct human journeys to the stars remain a distant goal, likely a few hundred years in the future.
- **Biomedical Revolution:** AI integration will accelerate cancer treatments and disease eradication.
### [01:09:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4197s) Telomeres, Telomerase, and the Secret to Immortality
Addressing whether humans could eventually achieve an indefinite lifespan, Kaku explains that such longevity is entirely plausible within the fundamental laws of physics and biology. At the ends of human chromosomes lie telomeres, which act like a biological countdown clock. Every time a cell divides, its telomeres shorten; once they become too short, the DNA frays, the cell degrades, and the organism eventually dies. Science took a massive step forward with the discovery of **telomerase**, an enzyme capable of repairing telomeres and halting this cellular clock.
However, a major medical obstacle complicates this breakthrough: cancer cells also harness telomeres and telomerase to achieve biological immortality. Cancer's lethal nature stems directly from its ability to divide indefinitely without aging. The primary challenge currently facing medical researchers is finding a way to extend healthy human lifespans using telomeres without inadvertently activating cancer cells or triggering tumor growth.
- **Telomeres:** Chromosomal structures that shorten with each cell division, setting a hard biological limit on lifespan.
- **Telomerase:** An enzyme that stops and reverses the shortening of telomeres, offering a theoretical pathway to halting aging.
- **The Cancer Dilemma:** Cancer cells utilize telomerase to become functionally immortal, meaning anti-aging therapies must carefully target healthy cells without inducing oncogenesis.
### [01:11:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4303s) Quantum Computers vs. Digital Computing
Holding up a standard switch mechanism, Kaku visually demonstrates the fundamental difference between traditional digital computing and the upcoming quantum revolution. Digital computers operate using transistors—tiny switches that exist in a binary state of either "0" (off) or "1" (on). In contrast, quantum computers operate at the atomic scale, computing on individual atoms rather than silicon transistors.
Because an atom is the smallest stable unit of matter, it can exist in an infinite number of states between zero and one simultaneously through quantum superposition. This grants quantum computers exponentially greater processing capacity, enabling them to evaluate complex multidimensional problems instantly rather than sequentially.
- **Digital Transistors:** Binary units restricted to two absolute states (0 or 1, on or off).
- **Quantum Qubits (Atoms):** Atomic-scale processing units that leverage infinite intermediate states between 0 and 1.
- **Physical Scale:** Quantum computing operates at the absolute physical limit of stable matter.
### [01:13:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4425s) The Quantum Threat to Cybersecurity and Financial Systems
The vast processing power of quantum computing presents an existential threat to modern cryptography. Intelligence organizations like the CIA monitor quantum progress closely because a sufficiently advanced quantum computer could effortlessly crack every known digital encryption standard. Modern financial structures, individual bank accounts, and cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin rely entirely on complex mathematical equations that conventional computers cannot solve in a reasonable timeframe.
Tech giants like Google have already issued warnings to governments and financial institutions, establishing targets around 2029 for cybersecurity infrastructure to transition to quantum-resistant standards. Kaku warns that if a bad actor were to gain unrestricted quantum decryption capabilities today, private savings would vanish, capitalism could crumble, and widespread social chaos or civil unrest could follow. The world is essentially in a race to develop quantum-proof security before quantum codebreakers fully mature.
- **Decryption Capabilities:** Quantum processing can break standard digital codes that protect private bank accounts and global communications.
- **Impact on Cryptocurrency:** Networks like Bitcoin, which rely on cryptographic algorithms, face total vulnerability if quantum decryption matures without updated defenses.
- **2029 Cybersecurity Deadline:** Tech leaders and governments are actively working to deploy quantum-safe encryption protocols to prevent widespread systemic failure.
### [01:16:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4574s) Building an Atom Smasher in High School
Reflecting on his early youth, Kaku recounts how his 71-year journey in physics began with an unusually ambitious high school science project. Fascinated by Albert Einstein’s work and subatomic particles, he set out to photograph the tracks of antimatter—the opposite of ordinary matter that moves in reverse under a magnetic field. After winding hundreds of miles of copper wire to build a custom cloud chamber, he successfully photographed antimatter tracks, winning grand prize at the San Francisco Science Fair.
To top that achievement before graduating high school, Kaku designed and built a 2.3-million-electron-volt betatron particle accelerator directly in his mother's house. The homemade atom smasher drew 6 kilowatts of power—absorbing every bit of electricity the household electrical panel could supply—to generate a beam of antimatter. This intense hands-on experiment solidified his lifelong dedication to theoretical physics.
- **Early Antimatter Project:** Built a cloud chamber using miles of copper wire to track and photograph antimatter, winning top honors at the San Francisco Science Fair.
- **Home Atom Smasher:** Constructed a 2.3 MV betatron particle accelerator in his family home.
- **Power Consumption:** The particle accelerator drew 6 kilowatts, pulling the maximum power capacity of the entire house.
### [01:20:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4811s) How Military Service Shaped His Worldview
When asked if decades studying theoretical physics changed how he lives day-to-day or interacts with others, Kaku responds that physics itself did not alter his personal conduct. Instead, the single transformative event in his life was being drafted into the U.S. Army. Before his military service, he had been single-mindedly consumed by physics to the exclusion of everything else. Experiencing the reality of military training and seeing warfare up close shattered his narrow focus, instilling a broader perspective on life, humanity, and the world beyond abstract scientific equations.
### [01:21:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4879s) Dimensions, Ghosts, Energy, and the Afterlife
Responding to questions about higher dimensions, spiritual phenomena, and the possibility of an afterlife, Kaku remains firmly grounded in physical laws while maintaining a cautious scientific perspective. While string theory allows for the mathematical existence of higher dimensions—meaning humans only experience a narrow sliver of reality—he strongly dismisses popular notions of ghosts and spiritual "vibrations."
Thinking and consciousness require immense amounts of electrical energy within the brain. When a person dies, that internal electrical current ceases entirely. Because there is no detectable physical energy source capable of sustaining thought processes after death, Kaku finds the existence of ghosts or an ongoing spirit world scientifically implausible. Similarly, he views human "auras" or "vibes" as purely psychological reactions—tuning into another person's body language and behavior—rather than actual physical radiation.
- **Higher Dimensions:** Acknowledged as mathematically possible within physics, though restricted from serving as evidence for supernatural claims.
- **The Physics of Consciousness:** Thoughts rely on measurable electrical energy; once the brain's power source stops, cognitive activity ends.
- **Auras and Vibrations:** Reinterpreted as psychological perceptions of subtle human behavior rather than emitted physical energy fields.
### [01:23:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4981s) Unproven Beliefs, Personal Legacy, and Public Impact
Kaku approaches unproven phenomena—such as UFOs or life after death—with a neutral "maybe, maybe not" stance, emphasizing that true scientists require concrete, measurable evidence before making definitive claims. While he doubts the existence of ghosts or flying saucers, he avoids declaring absolute impossibilities without empirical proof, noting simply that no instrument has ever measured spiritual energy or confirmed extraterrestrial visits.
Regarding his own legacy, Kaku explains that he does not worry about how he will be remembered long after he is gone, noting with a light chuckle that "after I'm gone, there's nothing to feel." Instead, his focus is on living a meaningful life that he feels comfortable with today. Knowing that his best-selling books, public lectures, and television appearances have inspired everyday people and sparked curiosity about the cosmos gives him genuine fulfillment in the present.
[01:24:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5057s) Predictions, Declassified UFO Files, and the Logic of "Maybe"
Dr. Michio Kaku reflects on the personal gratification of knowing his work has inspired people to pursue physics, noting that impacting lives is a deeply rewarding way to view reality. When asked about his record on debunking and predictions, Dr. Kaku explains that while he naturally approaches outlandish claims with skepticism, his scientific forecasts have generally proven accurate over time, even if the exact timelines occasionally shift. When the conversation turns to declassified government information regarding UFOs (UAPs)—specifically the collection released during Donald Trump's presidency—Dr. Kaku notes that he reviewed the entire batch of roughly 160 sightings. He found them intriguing but unconvincing, as they mostly consist of two-dimensional camera recordings of lights moving in the sky without contextual commentary, making distance and velocity difficult to gauge accurately.
The discussion intensifies as host Steven Bartlett attempts to pin Dr. Kaku down to a definitive position on whether non-human intelligence has visited Earth. When asked where he would place his bet if everything he loved were on the line, Dr. Kaku steadfastly refuses to take a binary "yes" or "no" stance. He insists that as a scientist, the only intellectually honest answer is "maybe." He lightheartedly acknowledges Bartlett’s attempt to "corner the fox," pointing out that declaring a firm position without a definitive smoking gun or clear "aha moment" would be unscientific. Bartlett admits that while his own intuition leans toward "no" due to a lack of conclusive evidence, he respects Dr. Kaku's rigorous adherence to scientific neutrality.
- **Impact on Students:** Dr. Kaku notes that multiple people have approached him throughout his career to share that they became physicists because of his books and media appearances.
- **Declassified UFO Files:** Dr. Kaku personally reviewed the batch of roughly 160 declassified UFO/UAP reports released by the U.S. government.
- **Technical Limitations of UAP Footage:** He emphasizes that video clips flatten three-dimensional space into two dimensions, making it extremely difficult to determine real object size, speed, or distance without raw data.
---
[01:28:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5327s) Dealing with Failure, Advice to an 8-Year-Old Self, and Robotic Aliens
Answering the traditional closing question left by the previous guest, Dr. Kaku shares his philosophy on handling failure: the best strategy is simply to learn from the mistakes of the first attempt and try again with subtle adjustments. He then reflects on what advice he would give his eight-year-old self. Rather than offering warnings or shortcuts, he would simply say "carry on." He looks back positively on major life choices, including his military service during the Vietnam era. While he initially feared dying on an unnamed battlefield, he realized that surviving such intense experiences imparts profound personal wisdom and life lessons.
Returning to the topic of potential extraterrestrial visitations, Dr. Kaku offers a distinct scientific hypothesis: if alien probes are indeed visiting Earth, they are almost certainly robotic rather than biological organisms. He points out that observed UAP maneuvers—such as sudden high-speed zigzags, rapid drops from 70,000 feet, and transitions directly into the ocean—generate gravitational forces and vibrations that would instantly crush organic bones and destroy conventional Earth aircraft. Furthermore, he addresses the question of alien intent by noting that if an advanced civilization wanted to destroy humanity, they would have done so long ago. Instead, he likens Earth's situation to living in a high-tech zoo where an advanced intelligence quietly observes human development without needing to intervene or reveal itself.
- **Advice on Failure:** Dr. Kaku emphasizes that failure is an essential learning curve; success comes from iterative adjustments rather than immediate perfection.
- **Military Service:** Serving in the U.S. Army taught him that facing mortality and hardship builds lifelong wisdom and resilience.
- **Physical Demands of Extraterrestrial Craft:** The extreme accelerations and directional changes seen in recorded UAPs suggest uncrewed, synthetic probes capable of surviving high G-forces.
- **The Zoo Hypothesis:** Dr. Kaku references the biblical book of Ezekiel ("Ezekiel saw the wheel in the sky") as an example of historical sightings that some interpret as ancient UAP encounters, suggesting observations may have been occurring for millennia.
---
[01:32:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5567s) Humanoid Robots, Merging with AI, and the Future of Work
Bartlett brings up recent advancements in humanoid robotics, referencing live video streams of autonomous robots performing repetitive factory tasks for days without stopping. Dr. Kaku argues that as artificial intelligence and robotics advance over the next century, humanity will face a fundamental choice: either compete against increasingly powerful synthetic minds or physically merge with them. He foresees a future where humans integrate technology to gain superhuman abilities, linking their consciousness directly or remotely to advanced computational networks while maintaining their human form.
Addressing the immediate economic impacts of automation, Dr. Kaku predicts that menial, repetitive physical labor will be phased out first. However, he maintains that human workers will remain essential for roles requiring complex decision-making, emotional intelligence, leadership, and high-level strategy. When Bartlett points out that modern AI agents are already capable of executing multi-step plans and making decisions autonomously, Dr. Kaku clarifies the distinction between automated search routines and true human-level reasoning. He stresses that current AI tools still operate within programmed constraints and encyclopedic data lookups, meaning humans must remain the "masters of the tools" rather than being mastered by them.
- **Future Human-AI Integration:** Dr. Kaku envisions humans eventually using brain-computer interfaces or neural implants to merge with machine intelligence to stay competitive and expand human capability.
- **Job Displacement & Automation:** Repetitive manual jobs requiring basic physical motion will be automated first, pushing the human workforce toward management, creative planning, and interpersonal relations.
- **Current AI Limitations:** Dr. Kaku notes that while AI agents can execute basic internet tasks, true real-world adaptability—such as navigating unpredictable environment variables or performing complex unstructured errands—remains uniquely human for now.
- **Closing Tribute:** Bartlett thanks Dr. Kaku for his decades of scientific outreach, highlighting top audience comments praising his ability to spark curiosity and inspire hard work in STEM fields.
<ElicitationsGroup message="Explore related topics from Michio Kaku's interview:">
<Elicitation label="Explore String Field Theory and the Theory of Everything" query="Explain Michio Kaku's contributions to String Field Theory and how it attempts to unify general relativity and quantum mechanics."/>
<Elicitation label="Examine the physics and capabilities of quantum computing" query="How do quantum computers work according to Michio Kaku, and what threats do they pose to modern digital encryption?"/>
<Elicitation label="Analyze the Kardashev scale and future energy civilizations" query="Detail the Kardashev scale of technological civilizations (Type I, II, III) as explained by Michio Kaku."/>
</ElicitationsGroup>
## Notable quotes
> [58:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3483s) I want to go to Vietnam, I want to kill a Charlie Cong. — Michio Kaku
> [58:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3483s) Candy, candy. You want candy? — Vietnamese child
> [01:23:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5017s) after I'm gone, there's nothing to feel — Michio Kaku
> [01:24:17](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5057s) corner the fox — Michio Kaku
> [01:28:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5330s) carry on — Michio Kaku
> [01:31:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5460s) Ezekiel saw the wheel in the sky — Michio Kaku
## Mentioned
Michio Kaku, Steven Bartlett, Adam and Eve, God, United States Army, Life magazine, Alpha Centauri, Elon Musk, San Francisco Science Fair, CIA, Google, Bitcoin, Donald Trump, Book of Ezekiel, Physics of the Future: How Science Will Shape Human Destiny and Our Daily Lives by the Year 2100
Theoretical physicist Dr. Michio Kaku argues that modern physics is nearing a unified Theory of Everything while forcing humanity to confront deep existential risks and re-evaluate perceived reality. He balances rigorous scientific skepticism toward anomalies and simulation theories with forecasts of profound transformations driven by quantum mechanics, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence.
String Theory, Multiverses, and the Unified Equation (14:04)
Dr. Kaku positions string field theory as the mathematical heir to Albert Einstein’s quest to unify the four fundamental forces—gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force—into a master equation perhaps only an inch long. Within this 11-dimensional framework, subatomic particles are not point particles but distinct vibrational notes on tiny energy filaments. Kaku theorizes that dark matter, an invisible substance enveloping galaxies without interacting with light, may represent a higher vibrational octave of these fundamental strings.
This framework also reframes cosmic origins. Rather than an explosion originating from absolute nothingness, Kaku interprets the Big Bang as an expanding subatomic bubble that stabilized and bounced out of a fluctuating quantum vacuum. In this multiverse model, space froths with bubble universes continually expanding in hyperspace, governed by invariant mathematical laws shared across all conscious observers.
Evolutionary Perception, Simulation Theory, and Consciousness (34:12)
Kaku characterizes human perception as a biologically adapted partial fiction evolved for survival rather than objective truth. Human senses omit most of the electromagnetic spectrum, such as infrared and ultraviolet radiation, and naturally favor survival biases like mistaking wind for a predator. Similarly, Kaku views religion and moral codes as evolutionary social glue that preserved tribal stability when advancing human intelligence provoked internal dissent. Human consciousness, powered by the prefrontal cortex, functions as a mental time machine that simulates future scenarios to overcome physical vulnerability.
Addressing cosmological philosophies, Kaku rejects simulation theory as ungrounded fiction. He argues that the universe operates on precise, calculable quantum probabilities—such as hydrogen fusion powering stars or radioactive decay—rather than deterministic digital scripts. Furthermore, because consciousness relies on measurable electrical brain energy that ceases at death, Kaku finds claims of ghosts, spiritual auras, and an afterlife scientifically implausible.
Evaluating Extraterrestrial Life, Megastructures, and UAPs (5:56)
Given roughly 100 billion stars in the Milky Way with an estimated 10% hosting Earth-like planets, Kaku considers extraterrestrial life statistically probable. However, because reaching the nearest star system, Alpha Centauri (4.5 light-years away), would take 70,000 years using chemical rockets like the Saturn V, visiting civilizations would necessarily manipulate space-time using gravitational warps. Extreme astronomical anomalies, such as the 20% light drops observed at Tabby’s Star, remain theoretical candidates for alien energy-harvesting megastructures like partial Dyson spheres.
Regarding Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAPs), Kaku maintains scientific neutrality, refusing to adopt a binary stance without physical hardware or laboratory verification. While 95% of sightings stem from conventional phenomena, 5% remain unexplained. After reviewing approximately 160 declassified U.S. government files, he cautions that two-dimensional sensor video cannot reliably establish object speed or distance. Moreover, observed extreme accelerations would crush organic tissue, indicating that any genuine craft would be uncrewed robotic probes operating under an unobtrusive zoo hypothesis.
Longevity, Quantum Cryptography, and the AI Horizon (69:57)
Examining human biology, Kaku identifies telomeres and the enzyme telomerase as the molecular clock governing cellular aging. Extending lifespans poses a major medical hurdle, however, because cancer cells exploit telomerase to achieve unchecked division. By 2100, Kaku expects AI-driven biotechnology to assist in tackling cancer and disease, accompanied by lunar bases and Martian missions, while deep interstellar travel remains centuries away.
Concurrently, technological breakthroughs introduce severe existential risks. Operating on atomic superposition, quantum computers possess the processing power to crack modern cryptography, threatening banking networks and Bitcoin. Kaku highlights cybersecurity targets around 2029 to deploy quantum-resistant encryption before systems become vulnerable. Regarding artificial intelligence, Kaku distinguishes current imitative recombination from human creative breakthroughs, warning that near-term dangers stem from autonomous lethal weapons, while long-term labor disruption may lead humans to merge with machine intelligence via neural interfaces.
While Dr. Kaku remains confident that theoretical physics is close to drafting a unified master equation, he warns that humanity's immediate survival rests on a knife's edge. Over coming decades, humanity must deliberately manage existential hazards—nuclear arsenals, quantum decryption, autonomous weapons, and designer pathogens—to realize civilizational abundance rather than self-annihilation.
## Background
该视频由 YouTube 频道 The Diary Of A CEO（主持人 Steven Bartlett）于 2026 年 5 月 21 日发布。视频内容是著名理论物理学家、弦场论联合奠基人加来道雄（Michio Kaku）博士的深度专访。节目简介指出，加来道雄分享了他 70 余年来对解释宇宙存在的终极方程的追寻，并探讨了地外生命存在的压倒性概率、量子计算对现有密码体制的颠覆性冲击，以及人类攻克衰老与迈向永生的潜在机制。
## TL;DR
加来道雄围绕“万物理论”（弦理论）展开，系统阐释了从宏观宇宙膨胀、大爆炸与多重宇宙泡泡浴，到微观黑洞与时空弯曲的物理本质。他结合统计概率与物理定律分析了地外生命与 UAP 现象，指出具备星际跨越能力的访客更可能是硅基机器智能而非肉身，并驳斥了将现实视作确定性脚本的模拟假说。面对前沿技术冲击，他预警了量子计算对现有金融与加密体系的毁灭性威胁以及 AI 走向战争机器的风险，提出人类未来应通过与机器人共生融合迈向超人类演化。整场对话同时穿插了他服役越战直面生死、童年自制粒子加速器的心路历程，反思了人类演化中的道德、战争本能与意识创造意义的终极价值。
## Atmosphere & style
对谈在深邃壮阔的宇宙探索与冷峻现实的技术反思之间张弛有度，交织着硬核理论物理与深厚人文关怀。主持人 Steven Bartlett 提问步步紧逼、直探形而上学与存在焦虑，加来道雄则展现出老牌科学家的严谨、智识诚实与通俗比喻的举重若轻，屡次在神秘论调前坚守概率与证据底线。从直面越战残酷伤疤到仰望星空推导同一道方程式，整场对话弥漫着一种既敬畏宇宙之宏大、又对人类文明站在毁灭与繁荣刀刃上的脆弱性深感戒惧的史诗感。
## Bulletin
- [05:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=356s) 理论物理学家加来道雄指出，银河系约千亿颗恒星中约10%拥有类地行星，地外生命存在概率极高；但受制于物理法则，常规飞船飞往最近恒星需7万年，星际造访必须依赖时空扭曲与纯机器智能形态。
- [01:13:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4423s) 量子计算通过操控原子连续叠加态实现算力跃升，加来道雄警告若无法在量子破解成熟前完成防御算法升级，全球银行与数字加密体系将面临瓦解危机。
- [30:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1859s) 加来道雄基于量子力学微观概率特性否定了“模拟假说”，强调宇宙由真实物理概率驱动而非预设脚本，所谓虚拟现实论断更接近现代童话。
- [01:32:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5567s) 面对人形机器人和人工智能的指数级迭代，人类未来的生存策略应是通过脑机接口实现人机共生融合，以此避免人机对抗风险并跃升为超人类物种。
## Key takeaways
- [02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=169s) 加来道雄毕生深耕的弦理论旨在统一引力、电磁力及强弱核力，推导出一个一英寸长的万物理论方程来阐明宇宙的全部根本法则。
- [07:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=436s) 大众对UAP（不明空中现象）的狂热大多属于第一类目击接触，科学界只有获得可供实验室化验的飞船残骸或生物硬件样本才能跨入第二类接触。
- [11:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=713s) 塔比星（KIC 8462852）高达20%的异常光度骤降远超普通行星凌日，科学界由此提出了戴森球或人造轨道巨型结构遮蔽等激进假说。
- [14:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=844s) 弦理论将粒子视作微观振动弦，不同振动模式表现为不同基本粒子，而暗物质被推测为是弦振动的下一个更高八度音阶。
- [19:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1181s) 量子真空并非虚无而是剧烈沸腾的量子泡沫，大爆炸可能是某个气泡未坍缩而持续膨胀的结果，多元宇宙中每时每刻都有新宇宙诞生。
- [26:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1572s) 黑洞逃逸速度等于光速，全宇宙绝大多数星系核心都存在超大质量黑洞，其内部在极端扭曲的时空结构下可能是通往另一个宇宙的通道。
- [33:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2008s) 人类感知仅截取了极窄的电磁波切片，日常所谓的现实是演化中为了捕食避险而保留的生存幻觉，不同物种体验着截然不同的客观世界。
- [38:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2330s) 宗教在演化上充当了智人社会的超然黏合剂，当群体个体智力均等并引发内耗质疑时，以神圣教条与信仰重塑了大规模协作秩序。
- [41:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2470s) 人脑前额叶皮层本质上是一台预测未来的时光机，人类对未来的强迫性谋划与终极追问正是与动物只关注即时生存的本质分野。
- [43:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2588s) 当前大模型AI主要是在既定规则语料下进行模仿与信息重组，缺乏自发的超新星式科学原创突破，其军用自主化正在带来紧迫现实威胁。
- [54:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3277s) 服兵役与越战惨烈现实重塑了加来道雄的道德观，认识到战争双方皆坚信自身正义，而人类拥有超越丛林法则做出道德决断的理性能力。
- [01:02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3769s) 人类正处于掌握核武、基因工程与AI等自我毁灭力量的刀刃期，以十年为步阶观察人类进步可发现文明正经历爆发式演变与关键考验。
- [01:08:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4133s) 细胞端粒磨损是寿命上限的生物时钟，端粒酶具备逆转潜能，但安全长寿的核心难题在于如何防止其同时诱发或滋生癌细胞的不死增殖。
- [01:21:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4870s) 鬼魂等超自然概念在物理学上缺乏能量供应机制来支持思维运转，而所谓气场共鸣更多源于心理层面对微表情与行为举止的捕捉。
- [01:30:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5422s) 观测到的UAP极端机动过载会瞬间碾碎一切碳基骨骼并撕裂常规金属结构，若为外星造物则必然是纯粹的硅基机器智能而非肉身宇航员。
- [01:31:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5494s) 动物园假说推论外星高等文明若想毁灭人类数千年前即可执行，未加干预的现状更符合冷眼旁观、无感知记录人类演化的生态观察模式。
- [01:35:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5731s) 机器人将逐步替代无认知介入的机械体力劳动，催生以战略构想与人际协作为核心的高级岗位，但全域物理交互与常识判断仍是机器的短期瓶颈。
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=0s) 人类命运的十字路口：永生、量子危机与终极追问
对谈在一连串极具冲击力的科学设想中拉开序幕。加来道雄（Michio Kaku）指出，从物理学与生物学定律来看，人类距离“永生”其实触手可及。人体细胞内存在着记录寿命的生物时钟——端粒（telomere），而端粒酶（telomerase）具有让这个时钟停止走动的能力，这意味着理论上细胞可以无限分裂。然而，这一机制最大的隐患在于癌细胞同样利用端粒酶实现无限增殖与永生；因此，现代科学的核心挑战在于如何在不唤醒体内休眠癌症的前提下，将端粒酶技术安全应用于人体。
加来道雄回顾了自己70余年探索物理与人类未来的历程。尽管人类在未来数十年内极可能重返月球、踏足火星，并借助人工智能治愈癌症等绝症，但人类历史上首次拥有了彻底摧毁自身文明的能力——无论是人造致命病原体、核武器，还是失控的人工智能。与此同时，新一代量子计算机正带来前所未有的安全震荡：其恐怖的算力足以破解现存的一切加密算法，甚至引起了美国中央情报局（CIA）的极度担忧。一旦银行系统乃至比特币被攻破，现行的资本主义经济秩序将面临崩溃。面对未来人形机器人的崛起，加来道雄甚至认真建议考虑人机融合，以避免爆发人机内战。整个人类文明正处于刀刃的平衡点上，“往一边倾斜是世界大战，往另一边倾斜则是人人富足，选择权完全在我们手中”。主持人斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）顺势抛出了全片最核心的哲学之问：我们究竟从何而来？我们是否活在一个虚拟的模拟世界中？仰望星空，是否有非人类智能生命正在注视着我们？
随后，主持人短暂插入了一段面向常客观众的真诚呼吁：后台数据显示许多长期观众会被系统意外取消订阅，而在频道即将迎来重大订阅里程碑之际，唯一能帮助团队持续免费制作高质量内容的方式，就是请大家检查并点击订阅按钮。作为交换，他承诺团队会竭尽全力邀请更多顶级学者，呈现最具深度的对话。
---
### [02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=169s) 追寻万物理论：爱因斯坦未竟的“上帝心智”方程
进入正式访谈后，主持人请加来道雄向尚不熟悉其学术成就的公众介绍自己的研究领域。加来道雄表示，自己毕生深耕于“弦理论”（String Theory），这项理论正是阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦（Albert Einstein）在生命最后三十年中苦苦追寻却未能完成的“万物理论”（Theory of Everything）。这一理论的目标是解释宇宙的一切根本法则——从宇宙大爆炸的起源、恒星与星系的诞生，再到地球的形成与生命的繁衍。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 科学还原主义与四大基本力统一
accDescr: 展示从物理学四大基本力向化学、生物及宇宙万物层层推演的层次结构。
subgraph Forces ["自然界四大基本力"]
F1["引力 (维持时空结构)"]
F2["电磁力 (光与电磁现象)"]
F3["强核力 (原子核结合)"]
F4["弱核力 (放射性衰变)"]
end
subgraph Hierarchy ["科学还原体系"]
TOE["万物理论 / 弦理论"] --> Phys["物理学底层规律"]
Phys --> Chem["化学相互作用"]
Chem --> Bio["生物生命系统"]
Bio --> Cosmos["宏观宇宙与人类文明"]
end
Forces -.-> TOE
```
对于缺乏深厚物理学背景的普通大众而言，“万物理论”常被误以为只是解释物理现象的抽象方程。加来道雄澄清道，它解释的是“存在的一切”：因为物理学是化学的底层基石，化学构成了生物学，而生物学演化出了我们今天所见的整个世界。爱因斯坦曾用充满诗意的语言形容它是一个“长度不超过一英寸、却能让人窥见上帝心智的方程”。该理论的核心诉求，是将宇宙中四种截然不同的基本作用力融为一体：
- 束缚天体运行、将我们固定在地表的**引力**；
- 点亮现代世界与信息文明的**电磁力**；
- 维系微观物质核心的**强核力**与**弱核力**。
---
### [04:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=258s) 物理学不是象牙塔里的算式：科学如何解答存在的意义
谈及公众阅读其科普畅销书或观看其讲座时的心态，加来道雄敏锐地指出，大众内心深处最核心的诉求其实非常朴素：“这对我到底意味着什么？”（What does it mean for me?）。普通人往往觉得前沿物理学高不可攀，甚至带着某种刻板印象，认为物理只是“象牙塔里的书呆子在黑板上写满与生活脱节的复杂算式”。
加来道雄纠正了这一重大误解：事实上，物理学家正是未来的塑造者，正是物理学界定着现实世界中什么是绝不可能的、什么是可能的、什么是具有潜在前景的。人类现代生活中的电网、磁力应用、核能、自动化工业以及所有前沿科技，本质上都是物理学的副产品。更深层次的是，当人们带着哲学或宗教情结探寻“我从何而来”、“宇宙归向何处”以及人生存在的意义时，物理学正是回答这些终极命题的唯一硬核科学基石。至于地外文明探索，同样是物理学家探究宇宙法则过程中的必然衍生物。
---
### [05:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=356s) 我们在宇宙中孤独吗？光年尺度与空间弯曲的挑战
针对近来美国政坛与媒体热炒的前总统特朗普签署解密 UFO 档案的事件，主持人直奔主题：在浩瀚的宇宙中，人类到底是不是孤独的？加来道雄给出了斩钉截铁的回答：人类绝非孤身一人。他列举了清晰的天文学数据：仅银河系就拥有超过 1000 亿颗恒星，其中至少约 10% 的恒星拥有类似地球环境的系外行星。在如此庞大的基数下，地外生命的存在具有压倒性的统计概率。
然而，地外生命存在与“它们能否造访地球”是两个完全不同维度的物理问题。以人类目前最强大的阿波罗登月载人火箭“土星5号”（Saturn V）为例，即便只是飞向离太阳系最近的一颗恒星（比邻星，约4.2光年），也需要耗费整整 70,000 年的时间。这意味着，任何能够横跨星际直接抵达地球的外星文明，其掌握的科技水平必然超越人类数千甚至数十万年。在现代理论物理框架下，唯一能克服这种星际距离障碍的方式是“空间扭曲”（Space warp）——即利用极端引力场弯曲时空，从而实现等效超光速的星际跃迁。虽然广义相对论证实了引力能够弯曲空间，但外星智慧是否已经掌握了足以制造虫洞或曲速泡的工程技术，目前在科学界依然是一个巨大的问号。
---
### [07:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=436s) UAP目击与三种外星接触：科学界为何需要“第二类接触”
面对各类播客与媒体上关于不明空中现象（UAP）的狂热讨论，许多人坚信那些异常光球与飞行物目击报告就是外星人到访的铁证。加来道雄以严谨的科学方法论对此进行了冷峻的剖析。他引用了著名的近距离接触分类法：
- **第一类接触（Close encounters of the first kind）**：仅在天空中目击到异常物体，无实体证据；
- **第二类接触（Close encounters of the second kind）**：获得确凿的物理证据，如坠毁的飞船残骸、发动机硬件甚至地外生物遗骸；
- **第三类接触（Close encounters of the third kind）**：人类与外星智慧生命进行面对面的直接互动或接触。
加来道雄强调，目前人类所经历的一切轰动性报道，本质上都仅仅停留在“第一类接触”。许多目击者坚称自己“亲眼看到了不可思议的东西”，但在物理学界，没有任何可以被送入实验室化验的飞船残片或外星生物样本。在缺乏可重复检验的实物前提下，耸人听闻的断言毫无科学意义。
就目前的统计数据而言：
- 约 **95%** 的目击报告可以通过已知的物理定律、光学折射、大气现象或人造飞行器得到完全合理的解释；
- 剩下 **5%** 的不可解释事件中，可能混杂着极端光学幻象，但科学界同样“不能完全排除外星探访的可能性”。
加来道雄总结道，即便美国政府近期解密了包含 160 多起异常相遇记录的大量文件，人类依然没有跨越到“第二类接触”。真正的转折点只有在实验室科学家亲手拿到外星硬件、将其钉在证据之墙上的那一刻才会到来。对话在此处切入了关于世界各国政府是否刻意对公众隐瞒外星人真相的经典阴谋论叙事。
### [09:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=583s) 政府保密、UAP 与地外生命的物理学概率
关于政府为何长期对外掩盖不明飞行现象（UAP）的真相，主持人询问这是否是因为“人类社会还没准备好接受真相”。加来道雄（Michio Kaku）指出，这只是官方传统上拿来推托的借口；更深层的真实原因在于，很多所谓不明飞行物事件实际上是军方的掩护项目（cover）。军方需要借此隐瞒隐形轰炸机（stealth bomber）以及各种在空气动力学上极其新颖的实验性飞行器，因此军方不仅严守秘密，甚至曾为此公然撒谎。然而，如今这一局面正在被打破，美国国会和总统都在推动相关目击事件的解密，而理论物理学家们也终于能拿到真实数据，从科学角度分析这些现象的真伪。
谈到银河系中是否存在地外生命时，加来道雄坦言，目前人类还没有确凿的实质证据，但从统计学和天文学角度来看其概率极高。例如，距离地球最近的半人马座阿尔法星（Alpha Centauri）系统仅有 4.5 光年之遥，其中包含可能孕育生命的红矮星。整个银河系拥有大约 1,000 亿颗恒星，在这浩瀚基数之下，存在地外生命的概率“几乎是 100%”。真正的瓶颈不在于生命是否存在，而在于它们能否跨越星际距离来到地球——这取决于文明能否掌握扭曲空间（space warp）的技术以突破光速障碍。加来道雄强调，尽管这需要天文数字级别的能量支撑，但从物理定律来看，“空间扭曲”在理论上完全是可行的，《星际迷航》（Star Trek）中的曲速概念本身就直接源自真实的理论物理学。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 星际旅行与地外生命存在的物理逻辑
accDescr: 展示从恒星基数到技术跨越的推导过程，涵盖生命概率与空间扭曲的物理可行性。
subgraph Stars["银河系基数与生命概率"]
A["银河系拥有 1000 亿颗恒星"] --> B["最近星系：半人马座阿尔法星 (4.5光年)"]
B --> C["地外生命存在的概率接近 100%"]
end
subgraph Transit["跨星系访问的技术瓶颈"]
C --> D{"能否跨越光年尺度访问地球？"}
D -->|常规推进过慢| E["需突破光速壁垒"]
E --> F["物理学允许：空间扭曲 (Space Warp)"]
F --> G["技术前提：驾驭极庞大的能量"]
end
```
---
### [11:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=713s) 亮度神秘骤降 20% 的奇异步星与巨型结构猜想
主持人提到加来道雄此前在 Joe Rogan 播客中谈及的一颗异常恒星（塔比星 / KIC 8462852），其光度会出现高达 20% 的剧烈周期性跌落。加来道雄解释说，这种光度下降极不寻常且周期短暂，几月到几年内就会发生一次，在目前人类观测到的所有恒星中绝无仅有。若只是普通行星过境，即便像木星这样庞大的气态巨行星掠过太阳表面，造成的遮挡也仅仅只有约 1% 到 2% 的光度减弱，根本无法解释高达 20% 的巨幅遮蔽。
针对这一极端天文现象，科学界提出过多种假说，其中之一便涉及戴森球（Dyson sphere）或更先进的外星巨型结构。一个极端发达的高等文明必然面临庞大的能源需求，捕获恒星能量最直接的手段就是在母星周围建造外壳进行遮蔽与吸收（科幻剧集《星际迷航》中就曾描绘过被金属外壳彻底包裹的古老恒星）。加来道雄澄清，对于这颗恒星而言，更合理的假说并非是完整封闭的球壳，而是一个极其巨大的轨道构型或球体，在环绕母星公转时将其周期性遮挡，从而在地球的观测视线中造成了巨大的光变波谷。
- **光度跌落幅度**：高达 20%，远超正常行星凌日（如木星掩星仅约 1% - 2%）。
- **光变周期**：无需等待数个世纪，变化在数月至数年之内频繁发生。
- **假说结构形态**：可能是采集恒星能量的巨型环绕球体或部分外壳，并在公转时形成食（eclipse）。
---
### [14:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=844s) 宇宙膨胀、大爆炸与弦场论的微观图景
谈及宇宙与生命的起源，加来道雄指出，现代物理学普遍认为宇宙诞生自大约 140 亿年前的大爆炸（Big Bang）。我们之所以确信大爆炸发生过，是因为观测到了确凿的膨胀证据：宇宙中的星系并非彼此靠拢，而是如同一颗表面布满光点的膨胀气球，所有恒星与星系都在相互远离。当主持人追问宇宙正在“向何处膨胀”时，加来道雄给出了令人震撼的答案——“超空间”（hyperspace）。人类日常感知的是由三维空间与一维时间构成的四维时空，但在弦理论的数学框架下，宇宙实际上总共包含 11 个维度。
随后，作为弦场论（String Field Theory）联合奠基人的加来道雄深入剖析了弦理论的核心图景。以往的粒子物理学将质子、电子视为没有体积的“点状粒子”，但这无法解释为何自然界存在成百上千种让人眼花缭乱的亚原子粒子（如 π 介子、λ 粒子、Ω 粒子等）。弦理论揭示，万物的基石在放大到极致后其实是细小的“振动弦”：
- **振动的模式决定物质**：琴弦以某种方式振动表现为电子，换一种模式振动则表现为质子、中子或中微子。自然界并没有成百上千种不同的微观本质，只有这一种基本的弦。
- **大型粒子对撞机的作用**：在芝加哥（费米实验室）或日内瓦（欧洲核子研究中心 CERN 的大型强子对撞机 LHC），物理学家建造巨大的粒子对撞机撞碎原子，正是为了从碎片中捕捉并分类这些不同的振动模式，进而构建统一电磁力、弱力与强力的“标准模型”。
---
### [18:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1105s) 弦的“更高八度”与暗物质的未解之谜
加来道雄将标准模型所包含的基本粒子形象地比作弦振动的“最低八度音阶”（lowest octave）。然而，当物理学家通过数学方程推导弦的高阶振动时，发现了一片全新的物理图景——高八度振动（higher octaves）。这些处于更高振动频率的粒子极有可能不与光（电磁辐射）发生任何相互作用，因此在视觉和常规电磁探测手段下完全是隐形的。
这恰恰为现代天文学最大的谜团——暗物质（Dark Matter）提供了完美的理论解释。暗物质无形地笼罩着整个银河系及其他星系，提供了维持星系旋转不散开的关键引力，但至今无人知晓其实质。加来道雄表示，虽然目前尚未被实验最终证实，但物理学界推测暗物质本质上就是超弦振动体系中的“下一个八度音阶”。谁能最终破解暗物质的真实面目，谁就将毫无悬念地摘得诺贝尔物理学奖的桂冠。这也进一步将微观的粒子物理学与宏观的宇宙演化、大爆炸奇点再次紧密地联系在了一起。
### [19:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1181s) 什么是大爆炸的起因？“泡泡浴”多重宇宙
当主持人提出如果将时间倒流，一切似乎都会回溯到一个爆发点，并追问“究竟是什么引发了大爆炸”时，加来道雄（Michio Kaku）坦率地表示人类目前并无定论，但物理学界存在前沿理论。他指出，弦理论（String Theory）甚至研究大爆炸发生之前的事态，它是一种“万物之理”（Theory of Everything）。在某种意义上，“大爆炸”（Big Bang）这个名称其实是个误称（misnomer），它掩盖了人类对爆炸起因的无知。在弦理论的图景中，并不存在传统意义上的爆炸——相反，时间倒流时宇宙坍缩为一个极微小的点，随后反弹（bounce）扩张。
加来道雄随后引入了“泡泡浴宇宙”（bubble bath of universes）的设想：我们所处的宇宙就像一个正在不断膨胀的肥皂泡，这与大爆炸观测数据完全吻合；但真空中可能漂浮着无数其他泡泡。弦理论认为我们并非仅生活在四维时空中，而是置身于一个十一维（11-dimensional）的世界。尽管人类无法直接看到那些多余维度，但我们的宇宙很可能与其他宇宙并存。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 弦理论视角下的多重宇宙演化
accDescr: 展示宇宙坍缩反弹与高维泡泡浴多重宇宙并存的物理图像
subgraph Expansion["宇宙动态演变"]
A["坍缩到极微小状态"] --> B["反弹 (Bounce)"]
B --> C["膨胀的宇宙泡泡"]
end
subgraph Multiverse["十一维真空泡泡浴"]
C --- D["其他平行宇宙泡泡"]
D --- E["高维时空 (11维)"]
end
```
- **弦理论时空维度**：认为现实世界存在 11 个维度，超出人类感官能够察觉的范围。
- **泡泡隐喻**：人类生活在一个巨大膨胀泡泡的表面（skin），周围可能漂浮着无数平行宇宙。
---
### [21:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1272s) 重力究竟是什么：弹珠比喻与爱因斯坦的弯曲时空
主持人拿出桌面上的弹珠作为道具，加来道雄随即借此展开了一场关于引力本质的生动演示。加来道雄让主持人把大弹珠视作太阳，周围的小弹珠则是行星与小行星。当主持人问及行星为何会围绕太阳公转时，加来道雄解释道：常识认为这是太阳施加的“引力”将它们拉住，但更根本的问题在于，引力究竟是什么？这绝不仅仅是一个名词。
爱因斯坦的伟大成就正是打破了“平直时空”的直觉直觉。地面在我们眼前看似平坦，地球实则是圆的；同样，宇宙看起来平坦，但其实是弯曲的。太阳由于质量巨大，扭曲了周围的时空，形成了一个类似凹陷的重力低谷。加来道雄追问主持人：“我们现在为什么能稳稳坐在椅子上，而不是被自转的地球甩飞到外太空？”答案就是弯曲时空——地球弯曲了周围的时空，将我们推向地面；行星之所以沿着曲线轨道绕日运行，正是因为它们在沿着被弯曲的时空轨迹行进。
---
### [23:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1401s) 从弯曲时空到黑洞：潜伏在银河系中心的巨兽
既然时空是弯曲的，且宇宙中存在数以千亿计的恒星和星系，这种弯曲便推导出了两种极端的物理实体：一是宏观上的多重宇宙（Multiverse），这个原本深奥的物理学概念如今已走入大众流行文化，例如《蜘蛛侠》等超级英雄漫画作品；另一个则是黑洞（Black Hole）。
加来道雄继续用弹珠解释黑洞的成因：当一颗恒星的质量变得极其巨大时，其引力强大到将周围的一切统统向内拉塌，最终形成黑洞。如今科学界相信，几乎每一个星系的中心都盘踞着一个超大质量黑洞。加来道雄提醒听众，甚至在我们自己的银河系后院也是如此——只要今晚抬头仰望人马座（Sagittarius）方向，那里就坐落着维系整个银河系运转的核心黑洞。关于黑洞与星系的诞生先后，目前尚无定论：究竟是气体先聚集形成黑洞、进而吸引周围恒星汇聚成星系，还是星系先凝聚成型，科学界仍在探索；但这些结构都起源于大约 140 亿年前的大爆炸物质凝聚。
- **黑洞普遍性**：全宇宙数万亿星系的核心几乎都存在黑洞。
- **银河系黑洞方位**：位于人马座（Sagittarius）方向。
- **大爆炸时间尺度**：宇宙与物质的诞生大约发生在 140 亿年前。
---
### [26:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1572s) 事件视界与逃逸速度：黑洞内部会是通向另一个宇宙的虫洞吗？
谈及黑洞的特性，主持人询问黑洞是否极度致密且会吞噬靠近的一切。加来道雄确认了这一点，并深入阐释了“事件视界”（Event Horizon）的原理。要脱离天体的引力束缚，必须达到“逃逸速度”：从地球发射火箭前往月球，阿波罗宇航员需要达到每秒 7 英里（约 11.2 公里/秒）的速度；而黑洞的逃逸速度则达到了光速。由于没有任何物质的速度能超越光速，一旦越过这道“无回头之路”的界线，便永远无法逃脱，这正是它被称为“黑”洞的原因。
当被问及“黑洞内部究竟有什么”时，加来道雄幽默地表示：“如果你能解答这个问题，你就能拿诺贝尔奖。”但他给出了自己的猜想：黑洞内部可能是通向另一个宇宙的通道。如果时空被极度扭曲，甚至可能在另一端穿出。加来道雄感叹，人类目前最强劲的土星 5 号（Saturn V）火箭若要飞往距离地球最近的恒星半人马座阿尔法星（Alpha Centauri），需要耗时整整 7 万年，这种星际航行在现实中极度不切实际。因此，想要跨越星际尺度，人类必须寻找时空捷径——那就是与黑洞高度相似但结构略有不同的“虫洞”（Wormhole）。
- **地球逃逸速度**：每秒 7 英里（7 miles per second）。
- **黑洞逃逸速度**：等于光速（Speed of light）。
- **飞往最近恒星耗时**：依靠土星 5 号等常规化学火箭前往半人马座阿尔法星约需 70,000 年。
---
### [28:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1737s) 八岁时的顿悟：继承爱因斯坦的未竟事业与对上帝的看法
加来道雄分享了他踏上物理学之路的起点：他从 8 岁起就开始探索宇宙，至今已有整整 71 个年头。那一年，一位世界瞩目的伟大科学家逝世，各大报纸铺天盖地报道他未能在生前完成关于“万物之理”的最终理论。8 岁的加来道雄被深深震撼了，他立志要继承这项未竟的事业，后来才知道那位科学家就是阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦（Albert Einstein）。从那时起，他便下定决心以此为生，毕生致力于研究爱因斯坦方程并完成这一伟大梦想。
主持人进一步提问，在研究宇宙 71 年之后，加来道雄对“上帝”的理解发生了怎样的转变。加来道雄坦言，他的家庭来自日本，大部分亲人都是佛教徒，而父亲则是基督徒并让他去上主日学，因此他幼年时便同时受到了两种宗教传统的影响。但作为一名物理学家，他如今秉持严格的不可知论（Agnostic）立场。物理学家不预设教条立场，而是追随物理定律与客观证据，即便这些证据将他们引向令人不安、晦涩或极其神秘的未知领域；而正是弦理论等科学工具，正带领着他们一步步逼近宇宙大爆炸那一瞬间的真相。
### [30:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1859s) 模拟假说与量子力学概率论的冲突
当主持人询问人类是否有可能生活在一个巨大的虚拟现实中时，加来道雄博士给出了非常明确的否定判断：“答案很可能是‘不’。”在加来道雄看来，所谓的“模拟假说”（Simulation Theory）本质上是在将宇宙比作一场提线木偶戏，认为存在着某个至高编剧在幕后操纵提线，而所有人不过是在照本宣科地演出预设剧本。这种假说的根本硬伤在于它直接违背了现代物理学的基石——量子理论（Quantum Theory）。量子力学证明宇宙的底层运转并非确定性的程序代码，而是由概率（Probabilities）支配的。从原子层面的跃迁、化学反应的发生，到铀元素衰变触发核裂变、氢原子聚变点亮恒星，人类都能以极高的精度计算其概率，宇宙正是由这些实实在在的几率法则驱动，而非写好的模拟程序。
针对加来道雄的反驳，主持人梳理了哲学家尼克·博斯特罗姆（Nick Bostrom）提出的经典“三难困境”（Trilemma）：逻辑上只有三种可能。第一，像人类这样的文明在掌握超逼真模拟技术之前，总是会走向自我毁灭（考虑到如今虚拟现实与视频游戏如果每年仅提升 1%，终有一天会与现实无法区分）；第二，先进文明确实存在，但它们对模拟自己的原始祖先（即我们）毫无兴趣；第三，先进文明生存了下来并且运行了数百万次祖先模拟，由于虚拟宇宙的数量远超唯一的“基础现实”（Base Reality），从数学概率上看，我们生活在模拟中的几率接近 100%。然而，加来道雄直接提出了未被包含的“第四种选项”：根本就不存在所谓的模拟，这类讨论无异于人类讲给小孩子听的童话故事。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 模拟假说的博斯特罗姆三难推论与加来道雄的物理反驳
accDescr: 对比哲学家博斯特罗姆提出的三种逻辑推论与物理学家加来道雄提出的第四选项
subgraph Bostrom["博斯特罗姆的三难推论"]
A1["可能一：文明在掌握超逼真模拟前自我毁灭"]
A2["可能二：高等文明对模拟祖先毫无兴趣"]
A3["可能三：高等文明运行海量模拟<br>数学概率证明我们身处模拟中"]
end
subgraph Kaku["加来道雄的反驳：第四选项"]
B["量子力学底层由概率驱动<br>原子衰变与核聚变并非预设剧本"]
C["结论：模拟假说违背量子理论<br>本质只是现代版的'童话故事'"]
end
A3 -.->|"理论冲突"| B
B --> C
```
- **三难推论的核心逻辑**：假定技术以微小百分比持续复利迭代，虚拟与真实的界限终将消失，导致虚拟现实数量在数学上呈指数级压倒基础现实。
- **物理学层面的证伪核心**：宇宙不是确定性脚本；铀裂变产生的核武器威力和恒星中的氢聚变，均建立在纯粹的微观概率之上，这与受控模拟的数据架构存在本质矛盾。
---
### [33:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2008s) 感知现实的脆弱性与演化赋予的生存幻觉
主持人从主观感知的脆弱性切入，探讨了现实本质的真伪。他提到人们在吸入迷幻剂（如二甲基色胺 DMT）时，仅吸入一口轻微的烟雾，眼前认知的一切便骤然巨变，甚至会真切地与“另一种维度的生命形式”产生互动。这种现象引出一个深层哲学与生理困惑：如果仅需几颗微小的分子颗粒侵入大脑神经，就能彻底粉碎现有的宇宙认知并将意识抛入全新场景，这难道不恰恰证明人们平时所谓的“现实”，仅仅是极少数量的微观粒子凑巧排列组合而投射出的一层脆弱幻影吗？
对此，加来道雄回应道，人类所谓的现实在物理学意义上确实是“局部的虚构”（a partial fiction）。人类的感知器官极其有限，仅能捕获外界物理信息中微乎其微的一小撮。这间屋子其实充斥着我们看不见的现实——整个电磁波谱中，人眼看不到紫外线、红外线、X射线，也感知不到宇宙射线或无线电波。人类自以为双眼所见即是全部，实则是“活在一场幻觉之中”。更进一步说，这是一种“幻觉之上的层叠幻觉”（a fantasy on top of a fantasy）：第一重幻觉是坚信所见即真实与全部，第二重幻觉则是大脑在这个狭窄切片上构建出的心理叙事。
加来道雄用演化生物学解释了人类感官为何如此局限且神经过敏：
- **丛林异响与生存赌注**：当远古祖先在森林里听到草丛窸窣作响时，九成情况下其实并没有猛兽；但人类演化出了捕风捉影的警觉机制，宁可将其误判为隐藏的猛虎。
- **过度敏感的演化红利**：哪怕误报了九次，只要在第十次真实遭遇老虎时及时逃跑，就能保住性命。正是因为“神经过敏”的感官机制有利于生存，人类才得以繁衍至今。
- **感知边界的取舍**：人类无法感知红外、紫外或宇宙射线的全貌，单纯是因为这些感知信号在漫长的自然选择中对人类物种的生存繁衍并无必要。
---
### [37:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2224s) 宇宙中的生命意义与各物种的现实版本
对话随即转向更为宏观的终极命题：既然物理现实如此浩瀚而人类认知如此渺小，生命在宇宙中究竟承担着怎样的功能与意义？加来道雄坦言，在宏观宇宙尺度下，客观的“宇宙级意义”或许根本就不存在，意义完全是由每个个体自主构建的。生存之所以对宇宙重要，是因为“生存书写了历史”——若没有生存的生命体，整个宇宙便只剩一片虚无的太空真空，既没有记忆，也没有可以流传的故事。
主持人引申指出，不同物种对现实的感知存在着物种壁垒。例如，蝙蝠依赖回声定位（声呐）构建周围的三维世界，鲸鱼在深海感知声波震颤，甚至家养宠物犬眼中的世界也完全不同于人类。加来道雄对此表示赞同，他指出犬类的嗅觉神经远比人类灵敏成百上千倍，它们所栖居的气味世界完全是另一种维度的客观现实。面对主持人“这一切究竟有何意义”的追问，加来道雄幽默地表示：“你问的是生命的意义，很抱歉对此我也没有标准答案。我甚至怀疑宇宙本身到底有没有目的。但我个人的态度是，我们创造属于自己的目标，我们在自己的世界里赋予其意义。这可能与别人的理解大相径庭，但对我而言已经足够了。”
---
### [38:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2330s) 宗教的演化根源：作为智人社会的“黏合剂”
针对人类为何普遍具有崇拜神明、在虚构叙事中寻求道德与意义归属的精神倾向（即所谓人心中“上帝形状的空洞”），加来道雄从人类学与群体动力学给出了纯粹的演化论解释。他指出，在动物界中维系种群秩序靠的是最强壮的“阿尔法首领”（Alpha Male）。然而随着数百万年间人类大脑智力均匀提升，这种简单的丛林法则开始失效——当群体中的每个成员都变得足够聪明时，人们便开始无休止地争吵、质疑当权者，人人都认为自己才应该是指挥官，这会导致部落迅速分崩离析。
为了阻止群体瓦解，智人社会迫切需要一种超然的“黏合剂”（Glue）。此时，宗教应运而生。某位领袖站出来不仅宣称自己比别人强壮，更宣称自己能与更高维度的无上力量——“上帝”或“神”直接对话，并警告违抗者将遭神罚。在这种演化机制下，神成为了维系高智力群体团结的关键纽带：
- **合法性转移**：神并不亲自现身，但“神的信使”或“神之子”降临人间，以神圣不可侵犯的教条发号施令，彻底压制了个体间的无休止内耗。
- **宗教的演化功能**：宗教并非不可解释的神秘现象，其在演化层面的明确功能就是充当社会黏合剂，让高智商、易内讧的有意识群体在复杂的自然竞争中维持整体协作。
---
### [40:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2450s) 意识的本质与意义的构建
在探讨了现实、生命与宗教信仰后，话题自然延伸到了万物中最难解的谜题——意识（Consciousness）究竟是什么。加来道雄提出了自己的物理学与认知假说，他认为意识的核心本质在于“觉知”（Awareness），以及更为关键的“概念与意义的创造能力”。意识赋予生命体一种独特的功能，即能够主动对周围客观发生的事物追问“为什么”，并赋予原本冷酷机械的物理实体以主观意义；如果抽离了意识的投射，宇宙中的万事万物都将沦为冰冷、空洞且毫无意义的粒子碰撞。加来道雄由此开始深入拆解意识在演化与物理图景中的底层逻辑。
### [41:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2470s) 人类大脑作为“时光机”：对未来的痴迷与探索本能
人类是否终有一天能够解开“我们从何而来”以及“存在的意义究竟为何”这类终极谜题？加来道雄（Michio Kaku）坦率地表示答案可能是否定的，但他指出，人类拥有一种刻在基因里的本能冲动去探索未知领域、追寻新思想，正是这种特质支撑着文明不断前进。相比之下，动物完全没有这种认知维度。加来道雄风趣地比喻道，你不可能对家里的狗说：“我们要搬去新房子了，你难道不兴奋吗？”狗只会冷漠地回答：“别废话，快把晚餐给我。”如果你晚上回家问狗昨天干了什么，它也只会汪汪叫几声，因为动物对昨天和明天毫无兴趣。
加来道雄指出，人类大脑的前额叶皮层（cerebral cortex）在本质上就是一台“时光机”。人类无时无刻不在被迫思考未来：明天晚饭吃什么、谁是朋友谁是敌人、明年要干什么、该去上哪所大学。人类对未来的这种执念，正是人与动物王国的根本区别。动物只关心当下的生存，而人类必须依赖预测未来才能生存。在漫长的演化史中，人类既没有锋利的獠牙和利爪，也没有庞大的肌肉力量，奔跑不如猎豹，也不会飞翔，人类唯一能依靠的就是前额叶大脑的预测能力。正因如此，人类被演化机制“编写了程序”，注定会不断追问关于存在与未来的终极命题。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 人类与动物在生存机制上的本质差异
accDescr: 对比人类凭借前额叶大脑进行未来预测与动物依赖生理优势及当下生存的演化路径
subgraph 动物生存机制
A["生理生理优势<br/>利爪 / 獠牙 / 肌肉 / 飞翔奔跑"] --> B["关注即时生存<br/>捕食与避险"]
B --> C["活在当下<br/>对过去与未来无概念"]
end
subgraph 人类演化机制
D["生理处于劣势<br/>无利爪獠牙 / 力量与速度不足"] --> E["演化出发达前额叶皮层<br/>将大脑当作'时光机'"]
E --> F["对未来的强迫性预测<br/>谋划生存 / 寻找盟友 / 探索未知"]
F --> G["提出终极哲学与科学之问<br/>'我们从何而来，将往何处去'"]
end
```
### [43:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2588s) 人工智能与人类智慧：从“昆虫级”到“猴级”危险
当谈到当今以神经网络为基础、模仿人类大脑推理方式而蓬勃发展的 AI（如 ChatGPT 等大型语言模型）时，主持人提出，随着这种新型智能不断加速科学发现，甚至有人预言人类将不再是地球上的主导智慧形态。加来道雄对此给出了极为冷静的评估。他指出，目前很多机器人的智能水平其实仅仅相当于“一只昆虫（bug）”——它们根本无法规划长远目标，也无法真正清晰表达思想，只是非常擅长执行既定指令。
然而，机器智能的演进是一个时间问题：它们会逐渐具备相当于老鼠的智力，接着是兔子、狗或猫，最终达到猴子的智能水平。加来道雄警告称，一旦 AI 进化到具备“猴子级别”的智力，它们就会产生潜在的严重危险。面对主持人提出“现有前沿 AI 模型在某些基准测试中已达到博士（PhD）水平”的观点，加来道雄给出了坚决的否定：
> "不，你根本无法和它们探讨博士级别的物理学。它们是被程序设定好以特定方式思考特定问题的，它们缺乏原创性。你不可能通过与机器人交谈就得出一个全新的物理学理论。"
加来道雄强调，现阶段的 AI 仅仅是吸收灌输给它们的数据并进行加工处理，要真正走向自发的创造力，人类社会可能还需要经历数十年的技术演进。
- **AI 智力演进阶段阶梯**：昆虫（当前主要机器人水平，仅能执行指令） $\rightarrow$ 老鼠 $\rightarrow$ 兔子 $\rightarrow$ 猫/狗 $\rightarrow$ 猴子（具备复杂行为与自我意图，开始对人类构成潜在威胁）。
- **当前大语言模型的局限**：本质上是基于已知规则与语料的模式映射，无法无中生有地提出推翻旧范式的新科学理论。
### [45:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2719s) 创造力的本质之争：信息重组模仿与“超新星”般的突破
主持人与加来道雄就“什么是创造力”展开了激烈的探讨。主持人反问，人类自身的思考难道不也是对已知信息的重新组合吗？AI 能够生成从未存在过的全新图片，这难道不算是创造？主持人还举了迈克尔·杰克逊（Michael Jackson）的例子：世人皆惊叹于他独创的舞蹈动作，但纪录片和历史影像表明，杰克逊极具标志性的舞姿其实也是受到早年某位舞者动作的启发，是在前人基础上的提炼与重组。
加来道雄回应道：“艺术的底层逻辑就是模仿（mimicry），关键在于你用独创的方式去组合事物，使其看起来焕然一新。”但他坚持认为，人类顶尖的科学原创与机器的组合重组有着本质区别。以牛顿（Isaac Newton）为例，在牛顿之前，真正的现代物理定律几乎是一片空白：
> "牛顿问了自己一个问题：为什么地球会绕着太阳转？然后他提出了一个与前人设想彻底不同的概念。他发明了微积分，推导出了反平方反比定律。真正的创造力几乎源于虚无，它就像一场超新星爆发（supernova）；而机器人的创造力只是模仿性的。"
加来道雄并不贬低模仿，他承认模仿艺术同样是艺术，也承认在科学领域，由于现存物理定律极其浩繁，AI 通过重组和重新梳理已知规律，确实有可能协助人类在未来实现新的科学突破，这种借由过往突破引导未来发现的路径本身非常合理。
### [47:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2876s) AI 的双刃剑效应：战场上的智能杀手与致命威胁
加来道雄表达了他对人工智能更深层、更长远的担忧：技术终将被用于作恶、杀戮与伤残人类。纵观人类历史，任何革命性发明都是一把双刃剑，从最古老的弓箭开始便是如此——弓箭既可以用来狩猎获取食物以维系部落生存，也可以被用来残杀隔壁的邻居。
虽然 AI 目前的主流应用集中在积极层面，如大幅降低劳动力成本、创造社会财富、让生产更快捷高效，但它的致命威胁已经在军事和战场上显现。加来道雄特别指出了俄乌冲突中展现的技术现实：交战双方已经开始部署由人工智能辅助制导的无人空中武器，部分武器甚至采用光纤线控技术进行锁定引导，这使得传统的电子干扰和防御手段完全无法将其拦截。自主杀人武器正在走出科幻，成为残酷现实。
- **双刃剑定律**：从原始弓箭到现代 AI，人类所有增强力量的工具都不可避免地同时服务于生产与毁灭。
- **现代化战场演变**：AI 视觉锁定与抗干扰制导（如光纤传输控制无人机）正在让防御变得极其困难，武器自主化趋势构成了当下最紧迫的科技伦理与安全危机。
### [49:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2963s) 赞助商插播：Pipedrive CRM 与 Stanley AI 创作工具
随后，主持人插入了商业赞助环节。他首先分享了自己作为企业创始人的角色转变：随着管理的团队与公司不断壮大，创始人的职责必须从“亲力亲为处理所有业务”转变为“为一切承担最终责任的人”，而实现这一转型的唯一方法是建立不需要个人介入即可自主运转的系统。他介绍了赞助商 Pipedrive——一款适用于销售团队的 CRM 工具，他自己的团队已经使用超过十年。通过单一仪表板，团队可以清晰追踪每笔交易进度与瓶颈，全球已有超过 10 万家企业采用该系统，当前提供 30 天免费试用（无需信用卡）。
紧接着，主持人探讨了很多人未能坚持产出内容或建立个人品牌的心理困境：内容创作耗时耗力，初学者往往会因为过度担忧外界眼光、怀疑自身内容价值而陷入心理瘫痪（paralysis）。作为投资人，他介绍了旗下公司 Stan 正在研发的 AI 工具 Stanley。该工具能分析用户现有的社交媒体主页、发帖历史与语气语调，帮助创作者打破内容产出的瓶颈。
### [51:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3091s) 宇宙大爆炸与“泡泡浴”假说
主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）将话题重新拉回宇宙的起源，询问加来道雄（Michio Kaku）：如果非要对导致大爆炸的原因做出一个推测，他个人是否会认同此前所提到的“泡泡浴”（Bubble Bath）理论——即宇宙其实就像泡泡浴一样，存在无数个正在膨胀或收缩的宇宙？
加来道雄给出了肯定的回答，表示自己很可能会选择这一理论。他解释道，根据现代物理学的观点，我们所认为的“真空”（Empty Space）其实并不是空无一物的，而是在不断地“沸腾翻滚”（Frothing），充斥着微小的量子泡沫（Bubbles）。这些泡泡不断凭空产生，随后又相互湮灭并重归于虚无。因此，即便是纯粹的虚无，其内部也充满了剧烈的量子涨落与动态活动。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 泡泡浴宇宙创生模型
accDescr: 展示从真空量子泡沫涨落到宇宙大爆炸演化的流程图
subgraph Vacuum["量子真空状态"]
A["真空沸腾涨落 (Frothing)"] --> B["微小量子气泡不断产生"]
B --> C["大部分气泡互相湮灭归于虚无"]
end
subgraph Creation["宇宙的诞生"]
B --> D["某个气泡未坍缩回真空"]
D --> E["持续暴胀与膨胀"]
E --> F["演化为我们的宇宙大爆炸 (Big Bang)"]
end
subgraph Multiverse["多元宇宙常态"]
F -.-> G["新的宇宙在任何时刻都在持续诞生"]
end
```
物理学家推测，在遥远的某一刻，其中一个小小的气泡在产生后并没有像其他气泡那样迅速缩回真空之中，而是“决定”不断向外膨胀、再膨胀，最终形成了我们所知的宇宙大爆炸。这一理论表明，整个宇宙是一个极具活力的动态系统，而在广袤的多元宇宙之中，新的宇宙其实每时每刻都在不断被孕育出来。
---
### [52:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3148s) 圣经故事是神话寓言，宗教赋予生命指引
面对关于大爆炸与生命起源的科学解释，主持人追问加来道雄如何看待《圣经》中亚当与夏娃偷吃禁果、上帝在七天之内创造世界等起源故事。加来道雄直言不讳地指出，生命的发展是一个线性的进化过程：从最初的单细胞生物演化为多细胞生物，再到鱼类等具备神经系统的生物，随后鱼类登上陆地演化为陆生生物，科学证据清晰地表明了进化的轨迹。
对于《圣经·创世记》中的创世故事，加来道雄将其定义为一个“极具吸引力的童话故事”（A very compelling fairy tale）。他指出，哪怕是宗教界的神职人员或神学教师，实际上也明白这些故事只是一种隐喻。例如，“上帝创世的一天”绝非地球自转意义上的 24 小时，因为在宇宙的其他世界里，一天的长度截然不同，完全不可能是《创世记》所描述的那样。
加来道雄进一步阐述了他对宗教本质的看法：
- **宗教的组织与传播功能**：创世故事是以一种通俗易懂、引人入胜的方式来组织宗教，让普通人易于吸收和产生共鸣。
- **构建共同体与道德规范**：宗教的真正意义在于触动人心，将人群凝聚为一个整体，引导人们过上有道德的生活，教育人们善待邻舍、不要残害他人。
- **意义与原因的区分**：宗教并不能在科学层面上解释“存在的客观意义”（The meaning of existence），但它能够为人们提供“存在的理由”（A reason for existence）与行事的指南。
当主持人问他是否自认为是一个无神论者（Atheist）时，加来道雄明确否认，称自己实际上是一名不可知论者（Agnostic）。他认为宗教体系中蕴含着许多真理与智慧，因为它指导了人类行为，充当着维系人类社会运转的社会粘合剂（Glue）。
---
### [54:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3277s) 越战经历：面对生死与道德相对性的觉醒
当主持人将话题延伸到宗教与道德的关联，询问加来道雄本人的道德观念究竟源自何处时，加来道雄分享了一段刻骨铭心的青年时代经历。在越南战争的高峰期，加来道雄应征入伍，在美国陆军服役了两年。当时战况极其惨烈，每周大约有 500 名美军士兵丧生。《生活》（Life）杂志每周都会刊登满满几页阵亡美军士兵的肖像照片，没有任何多余的评论或说教，只有那些死去的年轻面孔。当时他的征兵抽签号码被选中，必须亲自奔赴前线直面死亡与战争的残酷。
在部队训练期间，加来道雄开始对战争与道德产生深刻的质疑：
- **敌人的立场与牺牲**：他意识到美军在战场上对抗的敌人同样拥有自己的信仰、宗教和对善恶的判断标准，并且敌人也甘愿为了自己心中的自由与正义献出生命。这让他反思：宗教难道仅仅是把某一群人团结在一起对抗另一群人的工具吗？
- **手榴弹教官的面容伤疤**：在加来道雄学习投掷手榴弹时，负责训练的士官半张脸和脖子上留有巨大的伤疤。士官向他们讲述，在越南战场上，一名越南小男孩走近他喊着：“糖果，糖果，你要糖果吗？”士官警惕地让他走开，然而男孩展开手掌，露出的不是糖果，而是一枚拉开引信的手榴弹，并直接向他砸去。士官反应迅速扑倒在地，但半边身体仍被爆炸的手榴弹弹片重创。
- **阵营与善恶的反思**：加来道雄回忆道，在军营里他们每天凌晨 4 点起床，列队高唱着激昂的军歌：“我想去越南，我想杀越共”（"I want to go to Vietnam. I want to kill a Charlie Cong."）。然而，一个小男孩为了自己坚信的事业甚至不惜充当人肉炸弹，这深深震撼了他。一个人必须对某种理念坚信不疑才会做出此等举动。这促使他跳脱出简单的“我们是最棒的、我们必须打赢”的狂热口号，开始严肃地反思人类的良善与罪恶，并痛苦地自省：“我们究竟是在正义的一方，还是在错误的一方？或许我们才是非正义的一方。”
---
### [58:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3483s) 人性中的战争本能与道德理性
主持人感叹，当代世界的诸多流血冲突往往是因为人们被各自的宗教意识形态所绑架、彼此残害，并询问加来道雄：这种相互攻伐的惨状是否只是无法根除的“人类境况”（Human condition）的一部分？
加来道雄承认，回顾人类的演化史，战争确实始终是物种进化中不可分割的一部分。即使在整个动物界，群体之间也充斥着争夺地盘与生存资源的殊死搏杀。但他对人类的未来依然抱有希望：
- **人类与动物的本质区别**：加来道雄指出，人类与动物不同，我们拥有高度发达的大脑，能够做出“道德层面的决断”（Moral decisions）。
- **超越纯粹的丛林法则**：动物的生存竞争完全取决于谁更强壮、谁能夺得食物，它们不懂得道德决断的意义；但人类拥有超越这种原始冲突的能力，完全可以通过理性思考来创造一个更美好的世界。
---
### [59:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3549s) 平行宇宙与多世界理论的真相
主持人提到自己年轻时听过的一种基于物理学的说法：如果在浩瀚宇宙中存在无限多的世界，那么根据概率，是否必然存在另一个平行的自己，在某个遥远星系中过着几乎完全相同的人生（唯一的区别或许只是杯子里装的是柠檬水而不是咖啡）？
加来道雄纠正了这一常见的误解。他解释道，这其实是对“多世界理论”（Many-worlds Theory）或多元宇宙假说的一种延伸想象：
- **无限并不等同于必然重复**：多世界理论的核心在于，理论上可能存在无限多个相互独立的宇宙与世界，但这绝不意味着其中必然存在一个与我们完全相同的一模一样复制品。在数学和物理上，“无限”可以由完全不重复的事物组成。
- **文明重合的可能性**：在无限的宇宙中，理论上“可能”出现完全相同的文明，但绝非“必然”存在。
---
### [01:00:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3655s) 星空下的渺小感与存在焦虑
谈到宇宙的庞大规模，加来道雄指出，当我们仰望夜空时，往往会被其庄严与宏大彻底震撼。在浩瀚的银河系圆盘之中，地球以及整个人类文明所占据的空间连一粒微小的尘埃都算不上。而在可观测宇宙中，存在着数以万亿计的星系（Trillions of galaxies），每一个星系内部又各自包含着大约 1000 亿颗恒星。
主持人分享了自己几个月前在洛杉矶约书亚树国家公园（Joshua Tree）沙漠参加夜间观星之旅的深刻体验：
- **视角的转换**：向导用望远镜向他展示无数亿英里之外的星系，告诉他那些星系与银河系一样巨大甚至更为辽阔。
- **复杂的情感冲击**：这一景象让人在宇宙尺度上感到彻底的无足轻重（Cosmically irrelevant）。
- **焦虑的解脱与虚无感**：从某种角度来看，它能奇妙地抚平人在现实生活中的焦虑与紧绷——既然在宇宙面前人类如此微不足道，那么日常生活中的烦恼其实根本不算什么；但从另一方面而言，它也可能带来一种深刻的虚无感，让人觉得既然人类自我膨胀的自尊心在星系尺度前毫无立足之地，那么现实中的一切努力或许都没有意义。
### [01:01:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3699s) 宇宙共鸣：银河另一端的“同一道方程式”
当主持人提出一个充满存在主义虚无感的问题——“人类的存在对我们自己固然重要，但对冷漠广袤的宇宙而言真的有意义吗？”Dr. Michio Kaku（加来道雄）给出了一个浪漫而宏大的物理学视角。他遐想在银河系的另一侧，或许正存在着某种智慧外星生命，对方正使用着完全不同于人类的符号与语言体系，写下一模一样的物理方程式，同样在推导着弦理论（String Theory）。放眼浩瀚宇宙中数以千亿计的星系，可能都有智慧个体在同一时刻发出“天呐，我发现了宇宙的某种新规律”的感叹。
在加来道雄看来，物理定律是普适宇宙的绝对通用语言。数亿光年之外的外星生物推导出的宇宙本质，与他在黑板上写下的方程本质上完全相同。这种跨越时空的规律一致性赋予了他强烈的“归属感与同一感（oneness）”——宇宙中所有智慧生命实际上都是探索物质与能量本质的“远征同盟”，即便相隔无垠星空，彼此也同处于一条探索未知之河的船上。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 宇宙普遍物理规律与智慧生命的智力同盟
accDescr: 展示人类与外星文明如何通过不同的语言符号推导统一的弦理论物理定律，形成宇宙探索共同体。
subgraph Earth["地球文明"]
H1["人类物理学家<br/>(加来道雄)"] --> H2["人类数学符号/语言"]
end
subgraph Alien["外星文明 (数十亿光年外)"]
A1["外星智慧生命"] --> A2["异星语言/符号"]
end
subgraph Truth["统一物理法则"]
U1["终极宇宙定律<br/>(弦理论 / 物质与能量方程)"]
end
H2 --> U1
A2 --> U1
```
---
### [01:02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3769s) 自我毁灭的概率与“以十年为尺度”的人类进步史
面对主持人的悲观追问——随着人类造出核武器乃至人工智能等毁天灭地的科技，拥有核按钮的自大狂犯错的累积概率随时间推移越来越高，人类是否会在解开终极答案或接触到外星人之前就先把自己消灭？加来道雄提出了“以十年为历史最小单位（The decade as the smallest unit of history）”的分析框架。他指出，若以低于十年的尺度观察，人类社会充斥着随机波动、噪音和偶然事故；但若以十年为步阶回望人类史，就会惊叹于文明爆发式的发展：仅仅几十年前人类还在依赖马车，再往前是简单的铁犁农耕，更早之前还是茹毛饮血的原始状态。
加来道雄坦言，文明的狂飙突进也带来前所未有的危机。在过去长达数百万年的历史中，人类根本没有能力消灭自身；而仅仅在最近80年左右，人造基因病原体（designer germs）、核武器以及潜在的人工智能使人类首次具备了自我毁灭的能力。人类正站在锋利的“刀刃（knife's edge）”之上：稍向一侧倾斜便是毁灭性的世界大战，向另一侧倾斜则是全人类的丰足与繁荣。未来几十年的抉择，将决定文明能否平安度过这道技术险关。
---
### [01:05:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3923s) 迈向多行星物种：从火星殖民到曲率引擎的鸿沟
在谈到人类是否能成为类似伊隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）所设想的多行星物种（multi-planetary species）时，加来道雄表现出高度确信。他认为，人类不仅注定会重返月球，还会登陆火星，甚至在更远的未来探测更外层的太阳系天体。尽管这可能无法在我们这一代完全实现，但孙辈那一代极有可能见证人类在太阳系各行星间的自由穿梭。
然而，要跨出太阳系进行星际航行则是完全不同层级的挑战。距离地球最近的恒星系半人马座阿尔法星（Alpha Centauri）相距达4.5光年之遥。如果缺乏类似“曲率引擎（warp drive）”等颠覆性的空间跃迁技术，仅凭传统推进手段进行星际殖民将耗费数百年甚至上千年的漫长时光。
---
### [01:06:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3992s) 一英寸长的万物理论：为什么我们离终极方程非常接近？
当主持人问及若能解开宇宙的一个终极谜题会选什么时，加来道雄坚定地回答：这就是他毕生追寻的目标——找到那道能够解释全宇宙的“万物理论（Theory of Everything）”。他以物理学史上的极简之美进行了生动对比：
- 描述电磁力规律的麦克斯韦方程组，其现代数学形式仅有大约半英寸长；
- 爱因斯坦描述引力的广义相对论核心方程，同样仅有半英寸长；
- 因此，统一所有自然力的终极方程，极有可能也只有大约一英寸长。
加来道雄坚信人类已经极其接近这一终极方程。物理学定律的历史演进展现出一种“宛如魔法”般的规律：越深刻的理论，其数学形式反而越精妙、越简洁。牛顿运动定律与核力规律可以轻松写在同一张纸上，而一旦人类填补上量子引力的最后一块拼图，全宇宙的运转图景就将被凝聚于一纸之上。
---
### [01:07:51](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4071s) 人脑的模式识别 vs 浩瀚宇宙的纯粹数学
主持人提到人脑神经元网络与宇宙星系结构惊人的模式相似性，加来道雄对此有着独特的哲学见解。他指出，人类大脑最震撼之处在于其区别于其他动物的超凡模式识别能力——动物只关心“下一顿饭在哪”，而人类能够感知宇宙的深层结构、赋予万物意义、找寻秩序与韵律。
但当被问到“人脑是否如宇宙一样迷人”时，加来道雄毫不犹豫地将天平倒向了宇宙。他直言宇宙远比人脑更令人着迷：无论人类借助物理学与计算技术探索得有多快，宇宙背后纯粹数学（pure mathematics）所展现出的深刻与崇高，依然超乎人类大脑的想象极限。
---
### [01:08:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4133s) 2100年的人类图景与端粒酶的永生密码
结合其著作《物理学的未来》（*The Physics of the Future*），加来道雄展望了生活在公元2100年的人类日常生活与科学前沿：
- **深空探索**：人类在月球和火星建立永久基地，由人工智能自主驱动的无人深空探测器正向太阳系边缘及更遥远的宇宙进发；
- **AI与医疗革命**：人工智能与生物医学深度融合，人类不仅有望攻克癌症，还将系统性揭示衰老与长寿的奥秘。
在探讨人类能否在不久的将来实现无限寿命（indefinite lifespan）时，加来道雄从生物物理学机理切入，解释了长寿与永生背后的双刃剑效应：
- **端粒（Telomeres）的细胞倒计时**：每条染色体末端都存在类似生物钟的端粒结构，细胞每分裂一次端粒便缩短一截；当端粒缩短殆尽发生磨损破碎时，细胞便走向凋亡，构成了人体的生命上限。
- **端粒酶（Telomerase）的逆转潜能**：端粒酶的发现曾轰动科学界，因为它能阻止端粒缩短、暂停生物时钟，让人类看到了理论上永生的曙光。
- **癌症的致命阻碍**：令人震惊的是，癌细胞之所以具有不死性、能无限增殖夺人性命，正是因为它巧妙绑架并利用了端粒和端粒酶机制。人类实现安全长寿的真正关隘，在于如何在让人体正常细胞重获青春的同时，彻底阻断癌细胞借此机制失控的致命风险。
### [01:11:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4303s) 量子计算机的本质：从晶体管开关到原子层级的跃迁
主持人指着桌上的道具提到加来道雄在 2023 年出版的畅销著作《量子霸权》（*Quantum Supremacy*），并询问眼前展示的设备究竟代表着什么。加来道雄毫不犹豫地回答：“这就是未来，这是一台量子计算机。”他解释道，传统计算机依赖的是已显过时的晶体管，而量子计算机则直接在原子尺度上进行运算。原子是宇宙中能够用来计算且保持物质稳定的最终极限微粒。
为了形象地展示两者差异，加来道雄利用手中的开关模型进行演示。传统数字计算的核心是晶体管，它的运作模式极度单调而机械——只有“开”与“关”、“上”与“下”，也就是由 0 和 1 构成的二进制体系。然而，量子计算机代表了明天的革命，它的计算状态不仅限于单纯的 0 或 1，而是包含两者之间任意的叠加态。从原理上讲，0 与 1 之间存在着无穷无尽的连续状态，这使得量子计算能够同时在无数个维度上并行处理信息，释放出远超传统计算机维度的算力。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 传统数字计算机与量子计算机的计算模式对比
accDescr: 展示传统晶体管二进制离散状态与量子计算机基于原子的连续叠加态之间的核心差异。
subgraph Classical["传统数字计算机（当下）"]
A["晶体管开关"] --> B["二进制状态：非 0 即 1"]
B --> C["线性单向处理逻辑"]
end
subgraph Quantum["量子计算机（未来）"]
D["原子运算单元"] --> E["量子叠加态：0 到 1 之间无限状态"]
E --> F["多维全向并行处理"]
end
```
- **底层介质变革**：传统计算以硅基晶体管为核心，量子计算则直接操控单个原子进行编码和处理。
- **算力维度飞跃**：经典比特局限于 0 或 1 的离散二值，量子比特（qubit）在测量前可存在于 0 与 1 之间的任意无限可能状态。
- **情报机构的警惕**：加来道雄指出，美国中央情报局（CIA）长期高度紧盯量子计算的进展，因为这种算力未来足以轻易攻破人类目前已知的所有数字加密防线。
---
### [01:13:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4425s) 破译一切密码的威胁：谷歌的2029预警与全球秩序危机
主持人谈到谷歌曾向网络安全界发出警告，敦促全球政府、金融机构和科技巨头敲响警钟，并设定了 2029 年这一应对截止期限。因为一旦拥有足够强大的量子计算机，现代文明赖以生存的数字基础设施——包括银行结算系统乃至比特币等基于复杂数学方程加密的资产——都将面临被瞬间破解的灭顶之灾。加来道雄对此深表赞同，并指出如果安全防线失守，整个社会的经济秩序将瞬间荡然无存。
加来道雄直言不讳地勾勒了失去密码保护的灾难性图景：今天普通人之所以不必担心银行存款被轻易窃取，纯粹是因为窃贼没有你的数字密钥；倘若量子计算机让破译变得轻而易举，所有人的毕生积蓄都将在顷刻间化为乌有，资本主义体系将随之瓦解，社会停摆，甚至引发内战与全面混乱。密码学的本质是以密制密，目前全世界都在进行一场高风险豪赌——赌人类能否赶在量子计算机彻底攻破现有数字防火墙之前，研发出能够抵御量子解密的全新防御技术。
- **谷歌的 2029 预警**：设定 2029 年为关键时间节点，敦促金融与密码行业完成抗量子算法的升级转型。
- **加密货币的生存危机**：比特币等数字资产完全依附于特定密码学算法的安全假设，在成熟量子算力面前极度脆弱。
- **秩序崩溃风险**：一旦底层密码体系被瓦解，全球银行业、数字产权与商业信用将瞬间归零，带来无法承受的社会崩溃后果。
---
### [01:16:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4574s) 高中车库里的物理奇才：自制云室与230万电子伏特粒子加速器
谈到自己长达 70 余年的物理学探索生涯，加来道雄回顾了他在高中时期令人难以置信的动手经历。当时他深受爱因斯坦理论以及亚原子粒子研究的启发，对反物质（antimatter）产生了浓厚狂热。反物质具有与普通物质截然相反的物理特性，例如在磁场偏转中，如果普通物质顺时针旋转，反物质就会逆时针旋转；而一旦物质与反物质相遇，便会发生毁灭性的湮灭爆炸。为了亲眼记录这一微观奇迹，年轻的加来道雄搜集了数百英里的铜线自制了一个云室，成功拍摄到了反物质的运动轨迹，这项成果直接让他斩获了旧金山科学展（San Francisco Science Fair）的特等奖。
获得大奖后，加来道雄并没有止步，而是决定在高中毕业前完成更疯狂的挑战：他在母亲的车库里亲手建造了一台 230 万电子伏特（2.3 MeV）的电子感应粒子加速器（betatron）。这台庞然大物在运行时需要消耗整整 6 千瓦的功率，一旦启动就会抽干整栋房子的电力储备，导致全屋电灯瞬间熄灭。他的终极目标是凭借一己之力制造出一束属于自己的反物质射线。加来道雄感叹，正是这种极早期的大胆实验让他彻底笃定了自己一生的志向：“这就是我的归宿，这就是我终生想要从事的事业。”
- **反物质云室实验**：高中时期利用数百英里铜线缠绕电磁铁制造云室，记录反物质粒子的反向偏转轨迹，一举夺得旧金山科学展最高奖。
- **车库粒子加速器**：自主设计并制造 2.3 MeV 电子感应加速器，运行功率高达 6 kW，抽干家中所有供电只为产生反物质束流。
---
### [01:17:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4678s) 商业插播：Function Health与深度对话卡牌
随后节目插播了赞助商内容。主持人介绍了全方位健康检测平台 Function Health，强调健康知识不足是许多人生活中的痛点。通过单次抽血即可获取涵盖激素、心脏指标、炎症因子、压力水平及体内毒素等 160 多项化验结果，并配有 AI 助手即时答疑与执业医生专业解读。随后主持人分享了自己主持近 700 场深度专访的心得——“展现脆弱是建立深层连接的唯一大门”。制作团队将每位做客嘉宾亲笔写下的灵魂拷问制作成了《CEO日记》对话卡牌（The DOAC Conversation Cards），供伴侣、同事或家庭在现实生活中放下手机，通过有深度的问题找回人与人之间真实的温度。
---
### [01:20:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4811s) 走出纯粹物理的世界：军队服役与认知的重塑
插播结束后，主持人向加来道雄提出一个充满人文关怀的问题：漫长的一生专注于深奥的理论物理研究，是否在某种程度上改变了他日常待人接物的方式以及对生活本质的看法？加来道雄给出了出人意料的否定回答。他坦言，真正彻底扭转他人生态度和世界观的，并非抽象的物理学公式，而是在美国陆军服役的经历。
在入伍之前，加来道雄的生活完全被理论物理所占据，满脑子除了物理还是物理；然而，当在军队中近距离目睹了残酷的战争与生死后，他才猛然意识到，除了冰冷的方程与宇宙定律之外，世界上还有更为厚重、更为复杂的现实生活。主持人对此深有共鸣，并补充道，正如许多前沿物理学家所指出的人类感官其实极其局限、我们所见的现实仅仅是多维真实宇宙中微不足道的一个碎片一样，跳出固有认知框架去重新审视生命，本就是理解真实世界的必经之路。
- **陆军服役的人生转折**：军旅生涯粉碎了他对理论物理的单一沉迷，让他直面生命的脆弱与战争的残酷。
- **现实认知的局限性**：人类感官所能捕捉到的宏观物理世界只是高维宇宙中极窄的一部分，物理学与真实人生体验在此形成了微妙的互文。
### [01:21:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4870s) 超越三维感官：鬼魂、来世与能量来源的物理学反驳
谈话从人类感知与现实的脱节切入。人类感官只演化出了为了生存所必须看到的一小撮信息，我们所感知的“三维世界”仅仅是实际存在现实中极其微小的一块切片。主持人提到，意识到这一点后，自己对许多曾经认为是“阴谋论废话”的神秘现象保持开放态度，甚至开始思索鬼魂是否存在，或者是否存在一个能够窥视人类而人类无法察觉的高维空间。加来道雄（Michio Kaku）承认，从理论物理学来看，存在更高维度是完全有可能的，但这并不意味着鬼魂存在。
当被问及死亡之后究竟会发生什么、意识或灵魂是否会去往某处时，加来道雄给出了清醒的物理学解释。他指出，人类的大脑、个性和思维本质上都是电信号。人死亡时，这些电荷流动彻底停止，维持思考所需的能量来源随之关闭。思考是一个需要消耗巨大能量的物理过程，即使鬼魂真实存在，它们同样必须依赖某种能量来源来维持持续的意识和思维。由于在现实中根本找不到能驱动鬼魂运转的外部能量机制，加来道雄明确表示自己不相信鬼魂的存在。
紧接着，主持人探讨了灵性圈子中经常提及的概念，比如脉轮（chakras）、人类散发的“振动”（vibrations）以及气场（auras），询问人类相互感知彼此能量在物理学上是否有依据。加来道雄认为，一个人散发的气场或氛围（vibe）并不代表他们在物理层面上辐射出了某种电磁波或未知粒子。这种相互连接更多是心理学层面的，是人类大脑对他人特定性格模式、微动作和行为举止的微妙共鸣与心理捕捉，而非物理辐射现象。
对于那些“相信却尚未证实的事物”，加来道雄坦承有太多东西未被证明，科学家的严谨态度是保持“也许是，也许不是”（maybe, maybe not）。他不一概断言飞碟或鬼魂绝对不存在，但他强调，迄今为止没有任何能够测量到鬼魂振动的确凿物理证据，一切尚未超出可测量的现实边界。
---
### [01:23:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5016s) 传奇、声誉与科学预言的验证
谈到生命的终极价值与身后事，主持人询问加来道雄是否在乎个人遗产（legacy）以及希望被后人如何铭记。加来道雄平静地回答，他最在乎的是过好当下的生活，让自己感到坦然舒适。如果自己的科普著作、课堂讲座和公共演讲能够比肉体活得更久，那只是一种额外的馈赠。
这种馈赠的价值在于生前能够切实改变他人的轨迹。加来道雄分享道，走在街上时经常有陌生人走上前告诉他：“我在某个电视节目里看到过您”，甚至有人亲口说：“因为您的影响，我成了一名物理学家。”加来道雄坦言，死亡之后人失去了一切感知，自然不可能感受到任何虚荣；但在活着的时候，得知自己的想法触动了别人、改变了他人的人生，这本身就是对现实的一种极其美好的体验方式。
谈话转入预测与被打脸的经历。主持人追问，作为一名以“辟谣者”（debunker）自居、习惯对荒谬观点持怀疑态度的科学家，是否曾经误将某个真相判定为阴谋论。加来道雄表示，自己以往所做的大多数科学技术预测基本都被证实是准确的，即便时间表偶尔会有所提前或夸大，但在方向上未曾出现过被现实彻底推翻的重大失误。眼下他持续关注的核心预测包括：弦理论未来的演化、人类是否能真正推导出万物理论（Theory of Everything），以及随着大量机密档案解密，地外生命的搜寻是否能迎来实质突破。
---
### [01:25:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5132s) 解密 UFO 档案与“狐狸被逼入死角”的博弈
话题聚焦于美国官方近年来解密的不明飞行物档案。主持人提到特朗普任期内公开的大量报告，询问加来道雄是否仔细审查过这些资料。加来道雄表示，他完整审阅了公开的约 160 起目击报告，但从中并未发现任何决定性的核心证据。这些视频大多只记录了天空中有光点在做不规则运动，既缺乏权威详尽的科学旁白，而且拍摄器材都是普通摄像机。摄像机将三维空间压缩成了二维平面画面，在缺乏立体参考系的情况下，极难准确判定物体的实际大小和距离。
针对视频中那些高速俯冲、入海又重新升空的飞行器画面，主持人试图摸清加来道雄的深层直觉：这到底是外星地外文明的产物，还是仅仅源于拍摄错觉与认知误判？加来道雄坚持认为两者皆有可能，因为既没有证据证明这是地外飞船，也没有任何“灵光一闪的顿悟时刻”能铁证如山地证实它纯粹是光学倒影或视觉欺骗。
为了逼出底牌，主持人设置了一个极端的思想实验：
> “如果必须拿你所热爱和珍惜的一切作为赌注，押注在天平的某一端——地外智慧生命究竟有没有以某种形式与地球发生过接触？你押‘有’还是‘没有’？”
加来道雄起初回答“我不知道”，并坦白承认这听起来像是避重就轻的推脱（copout）。主持人继续逼问，表示在一切都压上的情况下必须在“是”与“否”之间选一边，并坦言自己大概会押“没有接触”。此时加来道雄做出了微妙的让步：
* **加来道雄的回答**：“如果非要选，我会说——也许接触过（maybe yes）。”
* **严正声明“Maybe”的立场**：“千万注意，‘也许’这两个字至关重要。我是一名科学家，不能给人断章取义的机会，让人在电视上指责我说‘加来道雄说了这是真的’。我说的是‘也许’，这意味着我为可能性敞开大门，绝不等于断定它事实发生。”
随后主持人调侃，如果有人拿枪顶着头逼他选出绝对的“YES”或“NO”，否则就开枪决定命运呢？加来道雄笑着反问：“那我还是只能回答‘Maybe’。”他看穿了主持人想要“把狐狸逼进死角”的意图，并强调在缺乏确凿结论证据之前，坚守“可能存在多种概率”是科学家唯一符合智识诚实（intellectually honest）的底线。
---
### [01:28:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5327s) 播客传统提问：应对失败的策略与给 8 岁自己的忠告
按照《CEO日记》节目的保留传统，上一位未透露姓名的嘉宾在笔记本上给加来道雄留下了一个问题：“应对失败的最佳策略是什么？”
加来道雄给出的策略极其直接而务实：**再试一次（try it again）**。他解释说，任何人初次尝试某件事情时都注定会犯错，因为学习曲线客观存在。失败的学习曲线本身就是最深刻的导师，它教会人们在下一次尝试时做出微调：
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 应对失败的微调反馈循环
accDescr: 展示从遭遇失败到微调参数并最终找到正确方向的迭代学习流程
subgraph Cycle["学习与纠错循环"]
A["首次尝试与遭遇失败"] --> B["汲取教训<br/>（理解学习曲线）"]
B --> C["做出微调并再次尝试"]
C --> D{"方向是否正确？"}
D -- "否" --> E["进行另一次参数微调"]
E --> C
D -- "是" --> F["步入正轨与取得突破"]
end
```
在随后的追问中，主持人纠正了原本预设的 7 岁年龄节点，向加来道雄发问：“如果能穿越回到你 8 岁刚迷上物理学的那一刻，你会对那个小男孩说些什么？”加来道雄给出的建议是：“**继续走下去（Carry on）**。”
加来道雄回顾了自己整个人生中的重大抉择，表示自己没有遗憾。他特别提到了当年应征入伍服兵役的岁月。在奔赴战场前夕，他曾经历过极度黑暗的思绪：“还有什么比在战场直面死亡更糟的呢？死在不知名国度的一座无名高地上。”然而在军旅生涯中，他逐渐领悟到人生的另一面：你可能会阵亡，但你同样有可能幸存下来，并从那段极度严酷的考验中学到常人无法获取的东西。生命的核心就在于学习与领悟，如果抱着学习的态度去经历一切，即便是在军队那样的极端环境中，人们也能淬炼出真正的智慧。最后，话题重新引回对于浩瀚宇宙地外文明与共情能力的讨论。
### [01:30:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5422s) 外星造访者为何大概率是机器而非肉身
对话围绕一个经典科幻设问展开：如果外星生命真的来到地球，它们会对人类抱有同理心，还是会像电影里那样展开侵略？加来道雄（Michio Kaku）给出了一个出人意料的推断：如果外星探测器确实存在，它们首先必然是“纯粹的机器人”，绝非任何有机碳基生命。因为观测到的不明空中现象（UAP）展现出了极其剧烈的机动性能，足以把人类已知任何生物的骨骼瞬间碾成碎屑。
这些不明飞行物能够实现急剧的“之”字形折角飞行，从 70,000 英尺的高空骤降至近地面，甚至无缝潜入水底。这类极端机动伴随的结构应力、张力与高频震动，足以将美军现役的任何尖端装备直接撕扯成两半。加来道雄指出，面对这些现象只有两种可能：要么全盘皆伪，要么就是货真价实的外星造物。正因其内部是纯粹的机器智能而非肉体，电影里那种走下飞船打招呼喊“你好，地球人”（"Hello, Earth man"）的桥段根本不可能在现实中发生。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Extraterrestrial Probe Nature Deduction
accDescr: 解释为何UAP更可能是机器智能而非肉体生命的推导逻辑
subgraph UAPManeuver["极端机动观测数据"]
A["70,000 英尺瞬间俯冲"]
B["极高过载之字折角变轨"]
C["高速跨介质入水飞行"]
end
subgraph PhysicalConstraint["物理限制推导"]
D["粉碎任何生物骨骼组织"]
E["撕裂人类已知所有装备结构"]
end
subgraph Conclusion["形态结论"]
F["纯机械 / 硅基机器智能"]
G["无肉身外星宇航员随行"]
end
UAPManeuver --> PhysicalConstraint
PhysicalConstraint --> Conclusion
```
### [01:31:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5494s) 动物园假说：外星人为何没有摧毁人类
谈及外星文明是否抱有同理心或毁灭地球的意图，加来道雄断言它们绝无毁灭人类的企图——理由非常直白：如果真有此意，它们在数千年前早就动手了，根本不必等到今天。他提到历史文献中的蛛丝马迹，甚至《圣经·以西结书》中描述的“天空中旋转的轮子”（the wheel in the sky），在不少飞碟研究者眼中就是古代目击 UAP 的记载。
加来道雄用“动物园假说”（Zoo Hypothesis）打了个生动的比方：就像人类建造了高度仿真的现代化动物园，栖息其中的动物甚至意识不到自己身处笼中；观察者可以在完全不惊扰、不显露自身存在的前提下平静地记录其习性。外星机器人探测器对待地球文明的态度大抵也是如此，并非为了围观嘲弄，而纯粹是冷眼静观的人类生态调查。
- 物理学家推论外星访客不具侵略意图的关键论据：若具备摧毁能力，历史上任意时期皆可执行，无需延宕至今。
- 观测模式类比：类似无感知沉浸式动物园，先进文明仅对地球生态及人类演化进行静默跟踪与长期观察。
### [01:32:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5567s) 人类向超人类演化：与机器人共生融合
主持人提到当下人形机器人产业的爆发式进展，并分享了一段令人震撼的实时直播：某人形机器人公司展示其产品在流水线上分拣包裹，已经不眠不休连续运转了 4 天；一旦电量耗尽，机器人会自动穿过办公室返回充电座，充饱后再度返回工位。按照电池密度提升与机械智能迭代的指数级轨迹外推，未来机器人将能自主设计并建造星际飞船飞入宇宙深处，直接承受碳基肉身无法抵御的太空机动过载。
面对这股浪潮，加来道雄给出了极具个人色彩的前瞻研判：人类最终的唯一出路是“与机器人深度融合”（merge with them）。当机器人变得愈发强大，在下个世纪很可能发展出真正的推理能力与未来推演逻辑，届时失控的机器将带来真正的灭顶之灾。为了应对这种挑战，人类不能坐以待毙，而应通过脑机接口等手段，将大脑与中央处理神经中枢相连，直接获得超强的运算力与体能，由内而外演进为具有超人力量的全新物种（superhuman）。
- 人形机器人实测现状：已能胜任连续 4 天无中断包裹流水线作业，具备自主寻路与返航补能循环能力。
- 人类生存演化策略：拒绝简单的敌对或淘汰关系，主张通过植入体或远程神经中枢连接，将肉身意识与机器算力结合，完成向超人类的跃升。
### [01:35:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5731s) AI 与机器人的边界：从体力工具到自主决策
随着人形机器人的普及，加来道雄认为人类劳动力市场必将经历结构性剧变：所有单调机械、单纯依赖肢体四肢的苦力工种将被迅速扫地出门；取而代之的是要求抽象思考、人际交往、组织协调以及领导力的全新岗位。他强调，现阶段的机器人本质上依然只是听命行事的重复作业执行者，就像锤子和凿子一样，人类是工具的绝对主宰，而非工具的奴隶。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Future Labor Division
accDescr: 人类劳动分工在机器人普及下的转型路径
subgraph PhasedOut["被淘汰的基础岗位"]
M1["简单肢体操作"]
M2["高度重复性流水线"]
M3["无认知介入的体力劳作"]
end
subgraph EmergingRoles["主导型高级岗位"]
H1["复杂谋划决策与战略构想"]
H2["人类情感沟通与团队协调"]
H3["对机器智能的训练与驾驭"]
end
PhasedOut -->|"技能转型与重塑"| EmergingRoles
```
主持人追问现存的“AI 代理”（AI Agent）是否已经突破了这一边界——比如给手机指令寻找遮阳伞，AI 能自主上网比价、评估规格并制定花费数小时的执行链。加来道雄对此持保守态度，指出这背后依然是程序化的检索行为（在互联网、百科与数据库中翻找参考源），算不上真正的自主意图。他抛出一个经典测试场景：“让机器人自己走到超市买回几枚鸡蛋”，目前尚无任何机器人能够独立达成这一复杂物理交互与常识判断任务。面对主持人提出洛杉矶街头已遍布外卖配送小车的反驳，加来道雄风趣地指出那仅仅是在人行道上爬行，人类真正擅长的全域应变能力远比此深奥得多。
### [01:38:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5888s) 物理学启迪人心与节目终章
访谈在主持人的诚挚致谢中走向尾声。主持人感慨加来道雄的科普传播深刻重塑了无数普通人看待现实世界的视角，许多人在节目留言中表示正是因为阅读或观看了他的作品，才决定在物理课堂上全力以赴。加来道雄对这种反馈感到欣慰，再次重申物理学是探寻万事万物运转规律的终极基石，对自然法则理解得越透彻，人类所能抵达的文明与生活境界就越辽阔。
### [01:39:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5949s) 节目收尾与视频推荐
在节目的最后，主持人向观众作简短的道别与收尾，热情地引导大家继续探索频道的其他精彩内容，并向观众自信地推荐另一期视频："看一看这个视频，我敢打赌你一定会喜欢它（this video out and I bet you you might love it）"，以此为本期对物理学、宇宙奥秘与人工智能等话题的深刻探讨画上了圆满的句号。
## Notable quotes
> [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=0s) 往一边倾斜是世界大战，往另一边倾斜则是人人富足，选择权完全在我们手中 — 加来道雄
> [02:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=169s) 长度不超过一英寸、却能让人窥见上帝心智的方程 — 加来道雄
> [04:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=258s) 这对我到底意味着什么？ — 加来道雄
> [26:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=1572s) 如果你能解答这个问题，你就能拿诺贝尔奖。 — 加来道雄
> [43:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2588s) 不，你根本无法和它们探讨博士级别的物理学。它们是被程序设定好以特定方式思考特定问题的，它们缺乏原创性。你不可能通过与机器人交谈就得出一个全新的物理学理论。 — 加来道雄
> [45:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=2719s) 牛顿问了自己一个问题：为什么地球会绕着太阳转？然后他提出了一个与前人设想彻底不同的概念。他发明了微积分，推导出了反平方反比定律。真正的创造力几乎源于虚无，它就像一场超新星爆发；而机器人的创造力只是模仿性的。 — 加来道雄
> [54:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=3277s) 我想去越南，我想杀越共 — 加来道雄
> [01:11:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=4303s) 这就是未来，这是一台量子计算机。 — 加来道雄
> [01:25:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5132s) 如果非要选，我会说——也许接触过。 — 加来道雄
> [01:28:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5327s) 再试一次 — 加来道雄
> [01:29:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5360s) 继续走下去 — 加来道雄
> [01:30:22](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA&t=5422s) 你好，地球人 — 加来道雄
## Mentioned
加来道雄 (Michio Kaku), 斯蒂芬·巴特利特 (Steven Bartlett), 阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦 (Albert Einstein), 艾萨克·牛顿 (Isaac Newton), 迈克尔·杰克逊 (Michael Jackson), 尼克·博斯特罗姆 (Nick Bostrom), 伊隆·马斯克 (Elon Musk), 唐纳德·特朗普 (Donald Trump), Joe Rogan, 万物理论 (Theory of Everything), 弦场论 (String Field Theory), 量子计算机 (Quantum Computer), 土星5号 (Saturn V), 欧洲核子研究中心 (CERN), 费米实验室 (Fermilab), 谷歌 (Google), 美国中央情报局 (CIA), ChatGPT, 塔比星 (KIC 8462852), 《星际迷航》 (Star Trek), 《量子霸权》 (Quantum Supremacy), 《物理学的未来》 (The Physics of the Future), Pipedrive, Stanley AI, Function Health, 《CEO日记》 (The Diary Of A CEO)
## Video description
Theoretical physicist Dr Michio Kaku has spent 70 years searching for the single equation that could explain everything in existence. He reveals why there’s almost certainly life beyond Earth, how quantum computers will soon crack every bank account and digital codes, and why the secret to human immortality already exists!
Dr Michio Kaku is a theoretical physicist, co-founder of String Field Theory, and Professor at the City College of New York. He is one of science's most prominent public communicators, and is also the author of bestselling books such as, 'Quantum Supremacy: How the Quantum Computer Revolution Will Change Everything’.
He explains:
◼️Why aliens almost certainly exist but will probably never reach us
◼️Why travelling to the nearest star would take 70,000 years, and the only way around it
◼️What 70 years studying the universe taught him about the meaning of life
◼️What caused the Big Bang and the theory that says new universes are being born right now
◼️What's inside a black hole and why it might be a doorway to another universe
00:00 Intro
03:23 What Is The Theory Of Everything?
04:18 What Viewers Really Want To Know About The Universe
05:14 Our Biggest Misunderstanding About Reality
05:56 Are We Alone In The Universe?
07:16 Are UAP Sightings Evidence Of Extraterrestrial Life?
09:35 Would Governments Hide Aliens From Us?
10:24 Could Life Exist On Planets Close To Earth?
11:22 Could Humans Ever Travel Across The Universe?
11:53 The Star Mysteriously Losing 20% Of Its Light
14:04 What Really Happened During The Big Bang?
15:39 What String Theory Could Reveal About Reality
19:31 What Caused The Big Bang?
21:50 Why Planets Orbit The Sun
23:21 Is There Any Evidence For The Multiverse?
24:08 What Black Holes Really Are
27:27 What Could Be Inside A Black Hole?
28:57 Why I Set Out To Finish This Man's Life's Work
29:49 A Physicist's Perspective On God
30:59 Could We Be Living In A Simulation?
33:28 Why Your Reality Is Only A Fraction Of Reality
37:04 Why Life Matters In An Infinite Universe
38:50 How Religion Could Be A Consequence Of Evolution
40:50 What Consciousness Reveals About Being Human
43:08 Why AI Is Not As Smart As You Think
47:29 Could AI Unlock New Scientific Discoveries?
47:56 Should We Be Worried About AI?
48:58 What Humans Can Do That AI Still Can't
49:23 Ads
51:31 Could The Big Bang Be A Bubble Bath?
52:28 Do The Stories In The Bible Hold Up?
54:37 Where Morality Really Comes From
58:03 Is Warfare Built Into Human Nature?
59:09 Are There Infinite Universes?
01:00:55 Why The Scale Of The Universe Makes Us Feel So Small
01:02:49 Will Humanity Destroy Itself Before Finding The Answers?
01:05:23 Will Humans Ever Travel To Other Planets?
01:06:32 The One Mystery Of The Universe Worth Solving
01:07:51 The Hidden Patterns Behind Nature
01:08:37 Is The Brain As Fascinating As The Universe?
01:08:53 How Life Could Change By The Year 2100
01:09:57 The Secret To Immortality
01:11:43 What Quantum Computers Could Change Forever
01:13:45 Google's Quantum Computer Warning
01:16:14 How He Built An Atom Smasher In High School
01:17:58 Ads
01:20:11 What Made Him More Open Minded About Reality
01:21:19 Do Ghosts Really Exist?
01:22:20 Are Energy And Auras Real?
01:23:01 The Belief He Has Not Proven Yet
01:23:35 Does Legacy Really Matter?
01:24:35 Do His Predictions Always Come True?
01:25:32 What The UFO Files Actually Revealed
01:26:36 Has Non-Human Life Visited Earth?
01:28:47 The Best Way To Deal With Failure
01:29:20 The Advice He Would Give His 8 Year Old Self
01:30:14 Would Aliens Have Empathy?
01:32:47 How Humanity Should Treat Alien Life
01:35:00 What Jobs Will AI Take First?
01:36:36 How AI Agents Execute A Plan
Follow Dr Michio:
X - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/fTQ1ze
Website - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/AkR5q8z
You can purchase Dr Michio’s book, ‘Quantum Supremacy: How the Quantum Computer Revolution Will Change Everything’, here: https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/Gi4eG6M
The Diary Of A CEO:
◼ Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/
◼ Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://smarturl.it/DOACbook
◼ The 1% Diary is back - limited time only: https://bit.ly/3YFbJbt
◼ The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards: https://linkly.link/2hm7r
◼ Get email updates - https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt
◼ Follow Steven - https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb
Sponsors:
Pipedrive - https://pipedrive.com/CEO
Stan - Visit https://coach.stan.store/?ref=stevenbartlett&utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=episode7
Function Health - https://Functionhealth.com/DOAC to sign up for $365 a year. One dollar a day for your health
[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opB7_JXL0LA)
[58:03] Michio Kaku: I want to go to Vietnam, I want to kill a Charlie Cong.
[58:03] Vietnamese child: Candy, candy. You want candy?
[83:37] Michio Kaku: after I'm gone, there's nothing to feel
[84:17] Michio Kaku: corner the fox
[88:50] Michio Kaku: carry on
[91:00] Michio Kaku: Ezekiel saw the wheel in the sky
Original transcript
[0:00] Immortality is tantalizing close
[0:02] >> and you think it's possible within the
[0:04] laws of physics and biology.
[0:05] >> Yeah. In fact, we know that there's a
[0:07] clock in our body called the tie that
[0:09] tracks how long we're going to live and
[0:11] there's something called talomeorase
[0:12] which stops the clock which means that
[0:15] we can live forever. That's the good
[0:16] news. But the bad news was we found out
[0:19] that cancer also uses tie and
[0:21] talomeorase to live forever. [music] And
[0:23] so the question is can we apply that to
[0:25] humans without wakening up the cancers?
[0:28] But this is not science fiction. This is
[0:30] the future.
[0:30] >> And for 71 years, you've been studying
[0:32] physics and how science will shape human
[0:34] destiny. So how is life likely to be
[0:36] different in the future?
[0:37] >> Well, decade by decade, we see the
[0:39] enormous progress that we humans have
[0:41] made. For example, we'll probably be on
[0:43] the moon, maybe Mars, and also the
[0:46] artificial intelligence will help us to
[0:47] cure cancer and many diseases. However,
[0:50] for the first time in human history, we
[0:52] have the potential of [music] destroying
[0:54] ourselves with designer germs, nuclear
[0:56] weapons, perhaps artificial
[0:58] intelligence. Like this is a quantum
[0:59] computer. This is so powerful that even
[1:02] the CIA is worried about the fact that
[1:04] these could break into any known
[1:07] computer,
[1:07] >> including banks, even Bitcoin.
[1:09] >> That's right. So, capitalism would
[1:11] vanish. Society would come to a halt.
[1:14] >> And what about humanoid robots? I would
[1:15] look seriously at the possibility of
[1:17] merging with them so that we don't have
[1:19] a civil war. Realize that we're at the
[1:21] edge of a knife. You tilt it the wrong
[1:23] way and there's worlds war. You tilt it
[1:25] the other way and there's food and
[1:27] luxury for everyone. And it's up to us
[1:30] to decide which way the knife will go.
[1:32] Dr. Moaku, I've waited a long time to
[1:35] ask someone these questions. Where do
[1:37] you believe we came from? Do you think
[1:39] it's plausible that in fact we are
[1:41] living in a simulation? And then is
[1:43] there any evidence when we look out at
[1:44] the stars that there is non-human life
[1:48] out there?
[1:49] >> Okay, so first of all,
[1:55] >> this is super interesting to me. My team
[1:56] given me this report to show me how many
[1:58] of you that watch this show subscribe
[1:59] and some of you have told us according
[2:01] to this that you are unsubscribed from
[2:03] the channel randomly. So favor to ask
[2:05] all of you, please could you check right
[2:06] now if you've hit the subscribe button
[2:08] if you are a regular viewer of the show
[2:09] and you like what we do here. We're
[2:11] approaching quite a significant landmark
[2:12] on this show in terms of a subscriber
[2:14] number. So, if there was one simple free
[2:17] thing that you could do to help us, my
[2:18] team, everyone here to keep this show
[2:20] free, to keep it improving year over
[2:22] year and week over week, it is just to
[2:24] hit that subscribe button and to double
[2:25] check if you've hit it. Only thing I'll
[2:27] ever ask of you, do we have a deal? If
[2:29] you do it, I'll tell you what I'll do.
[2:30] I'll make sure every single week, every
[2:33] single month, we fight harder and harder
[2:34] and harder and harder to bring you the
[2:35] guests and conversations that you want
[2:37] to hear. I've stayed true to that
[2:38] promise since the very beginning of the
[2:39] D ofio and I will not let you down.
[2:42] Please help us. Really appreciate it.
[2:44] Let's get on with the show. [music]
[2:49] Dr. Moaku,
[2:51] >> that's right.
[2:52] >> For anyone that isn't aware of you and
[2:54] your work and they're wondering whether
[2:56] they should listen to what you have to
[2:58] say today because they don't know your
[3:00] work and they've not gone through the
[3:01] the books and the interviews that you've
[3:03] done, how would you describe your
[3:05] experience? I work in something called
[3:07] string theory which we think is the
[3:09] theory that eluded Einstein for the last
[3:11] 30 years of his life. The theory of
[3:13] everything. The theory that explains the
[3:16] big bang, the formation of stars,
[3:18] galaxy, formation of the earth, life.
[3:21] I'm a physicist working in the theory of
[3:23] everything.
[3:23] >> What is the theory of everything?
[3:25] >> An equation perhaps no more than one
[3:26] inch long that will allow us to quote
[3:29] read the mind of God. These are
[3:31] Einstein's words. the theory of the big
[3:34] bang, the theory of creation itself, the
[3:36] theory of of everything.
[3:38] >> I want to [clears throat] explain this
[3:39] in terms that even the most sort of
[3:41] novice viewer could understand. The
[3:43] theory of everything is is an equation
[3:45] that explains
[3:46] >> everything.
[3:47] >> Physics.
[3:48] >> No, no, no. Everything. Because from
[3:50] physics comes chemistry, comes
[3:53] chemistry, comes biology,
[3:55] >> and from that comes our universe.
[3:57] >> Is it things like gravity and space and
[3:59] time? gravity, uh, light, the nuclear
[4:03] force. Uh, there are four fundamental
[4:06] forces of the universe. There's the
[4:07] gravitational force which keeps us here,
[4:10] the electromagnetic force which lights
[4:12] up our our world, and the two nuclear
[4:14] forces. We want a theory that explains
[4:17] all four.
[4:18] >> You know, when people watch your
[4:20] interviews and they read your books,
[4:22] what do you think is the fundamental
[4:24] question that they're typically seeking
[4:26] to answer?
[4:28] What does it mean for me?
[4:31] >> What does what mean for me?
[4:32] >> The physics of the future. That is we
[4:35] physicists create the future. We're the
[4:36] ones who understand what is possible,
[4:38] what is not possible, and what is
[4:40] plausible. How does that affect the
[4:42] average person?
[4:43] >> And there's an element of of all of us
[4:45] that's just trying to figure out how we
[4:47] got here, where our place is in the
[4:50] universe.
[4:51] >> Yeah. If especially for people who are
[4:53] philosophical or religious, they want to
[4:55] know what does it all mean? I mean,
[4:57] where did I come from? Where's the
[4:59] universe going? They want to know the
[5:01] answer to the big questions, the
[5:03] question of meaning. And that's what we
[5:06] physicists do.
[5:07] >> And they want to know if we're alone in
[5:08] the universe.
[5:09] >> Oh yeah, that too. That's a byproduct of
[5:11] what we do is look for extraterrestrial
[5:13] intelligence.
[5:14] >> You've been doing this for many, many
[5:16] decades now. You've been studying the
[5:17] nature of the universe and physics. Is
[5:20] there a fundamental misunderstanding
[5:22] that you're aware of that the average
[5:24] person still believes? Yeah, people
[5:28] think that physics is for eggheheads,
[5:30] that it's just uh doing equations on a
[5:32] blackboard and totally divorced from the
[5:36] average person. They don't realize that
[5:39] everything about their life, about
[5:41] electricity, about magnetism, about the
[5:43] nuclear force, about industry,
[5:46] everything comes from physics. But the
[5:48] average person thinks that physics is
[5:50] for eggheheads. It's for equations you
[5:52] put on a blackboard in a cartoon. Nope.
[5:55] is everywhere.
[5:57] >> In the last couple of weeks, you've been
[5:59] asked to do lots of interviews because
[6:03] Trump has released the UFO files.
[6:05] >> That's right.
[6:06] >> Before we get into lots of other
[6:07] subjects and physics generally, probably
[6:09] start by just tackling this question
[6:11] head on. Do you think that we are alone
[6:16] in the universe? No, we are not alone
[6:18] because a galaxy has 100 billion stars
[6:21] of which maybe 10% have planets that are
[6:25] earthlike or are similar to Earth. But
[6:28] the question is, can they visit us? A
[6:31] Saturn 5 rocket would take 70,000 years
[6:34] just to reach the nearest star. Hop,
[6:37] skip, and a jump. 70,000 years. So a
[6:40] civilization that could reach the earth
[6:43] would be hundreds thousands of years
[6:45] more advanced than us. So I'm a
[6:48] physicist. We look at that space warps.
[6:51] Is it possible that a flying saucer race
[6:53] could create a space warp so they can
[6:55] visit us?
[6:56] >> Space warp.
[6:57] >> Bending space.
[6:58] >> Is that possible?
[7:00] >> Well, gravity bends space all the time.
[7:02] The question is, can you bend space
[7:04] enough so that you can go faster than
[7:06] the speed of light so you can visit the
[7:08] nearest star? That's a question mark. We
[7:11] physicists look at that, but we have no
[7:13] definite answer. But it's it's possible.
[7:16] So when these people say that, you know,
[7:18] I had a podcast uh recently where two
[7:21] people explained to me that there's been
[7:23] some very unusual sightings of UAPs.
[7:27] >> Mhm.
[7:27] >> And they use this as evidence to say
[7:29] that aliens exist.
[7:30] >> Mhm.
[7:31] Do you think those sightings are
[7:33] actually extraterrestrial life or do you
[7:35] think it's just uh people hallucinating
[7:38] and seeing I don't know light orbs and
[7:41] misunderstanding what they're looking
[7:42] at?
[7:43] >> Well, there are three types of
[7:44] observations. Close encounters of the
[7:46] first kind is when you see something in
[7:48] the sky. First kind. [snorts]
[7:51] >> Close encounters of the second kind is
[7:53] when you have something tangible, an
[7:55] engine, uh a body, a wreckage of a UAP.
[8:00] That's second kind. Close encounters of
[8:02] the third kind is when you actually
[8:05] encounter them and shake their hand.
[8:07] Now, where are we? We're at close
[8:09] encounters of the first kind where we
[8:11] see things floating in the sky, but we
[8:14] don't know what they are. We don't have
[8:15] anything tangible. Now, in science
[8:17] fiction, we've captured the flying
[8:19] saucer. We have the aliens in a case or
[8:22] so. That's the movies. We have yet to
[8:25] see an alien in in a laboratory. We have
[8:28] yet to see an alien ship. In other
[8:30] words, people say, "I saw something."
[8:33] Now, what does that mean? I'm a
[8:34] physicist. We go where the we go where
[8:37] the observation goes. And we have no
[8:40] observations to verify what you saw.
[8:44] Except, of course, sensationalists who
[8:45] say, "I've seen the bodies." Okay, show
[8:48] us.
[8:50] >> So, from that, I conclude that you don't
[8:52] believe alien life has arrived here on
[8:55] Earth. I don't I I I'm open to the
[8:57] possibility. 95% of the sightings we can
[9:00] we can uh explain using the known laws
[9:03] of physics. 5% are either optical
[9:06] illusions or they are evidence of
[9:09] visitation. You can't rule it out. So,
[9:11] I'm open to the idea that maybe they're
[9:13] here. Now, President Trump has released
[9:17] the first mountain load of 160 uh
[9:20] encounters of alien technology, we
[9:22] think, but we haven't yet seen a close
[9:25] encounter of the second kind. When that
[9:27] happens, that's a game changer. When we
[9:30] have a piece of UFO hardware, that would
[9:33] that would nail it to the wall right
[9:35] there. There's the a narrative that the
[9:37] US government or generally governments
[9:39] around the world wouldn't want the
[9:40] people to know about aliens because
[9:43] they're not ready for it. Do do you buy
[9:45] that?
[9:46] >> That's the traditional uh excuse for not
[9:49] revealing these things. But the other
[9:51] excuse is that it's a cover. It's a
[9:53] cover for the stealth bomber. It's a
[9:56] cover for the fact that the military
[9:57] does experiment with aerodynamically
[10:00] novel forms of transport. And so those
[10:04] are the reasons why the military keeps
[10:05] it a secret and actually lies about
[10:09] these things. But now the it's leaking
[10:12] out. Congress, the president of the
[10:14] United States, they're demanding these
[10:16] these u sightings to be declassified. So
[10:19] we physicists now are analyzing them to
[10:22] see whether or not they're really real
[10:23] or not. Is there any evidence when we
[10:25] look out at the stars that there is
[10:29] nonhuman life out there? Is there
[10:31] anything that you've seen when you look
[10:33] at other planets and how they're
[10:36] operating that might suggest there's a
[10:38] different type of life there?
[10:40] >> Oh, yeah. But there's no tangible
[10:42] evidence for it yet, though.
[10:43] >> Give me one example.
[10:45] >> Well, uh, for example, take a look at
[10:46] Alpha Centauri, the closest star system
[10:48] to the planet Earth, right?
[10:50] >> How far away is that?
[10:51] >> Four and a half light years. And if you
[10:53] take a look at the Alpha Centauri
[10:55] system, the closest system to the Earth,
[10:57] you have uh red red stars that could
[11:01] could have life on them. We're not sure.
[11:04] They're not super hot, super large, in
[11:07] which case it would be very difficult to
[11:08] get life forms off the ground. But the
[11:10] point I'm raising is that the Milky Way
[11:12] galaxy, our backyard, has 100 billion
[11:15] stars. And the probability of life
[11:18] existing among those stars is almost
[11:21] 100%. The question is can they reach us?
[11:24] That means is it possible to create a
[11:25] space warp such that you can break the
[11:27] light barrier so that you can travel
[11:31] across the galaxy and visit the earth.
[11:33] >> And did you say that was theoretically
[11:36] possible?
[11:36] >> It's theoretically possible. Yeah. But
[11:38] of course you need energy, fantastic
[11:40] amounts of energy. But the laws of
[11:42] physics do allow for the possibility of
[11:44] space warps. I mean, you've seen space
[11:47] warps on Star Trek, but where does Star
[11:49] Trek get the word space warps? It comes
[11:52] from physics.
[11:53] >> I also heard you telling um I think it
[11:55] was Joe Rogan, you were telling a story
[11:57] of one particular
[11:59] star that reduces [clears throat] in its
[12:02] intensity by 20%.
[12:05] >> Yeah, there is a star that that
[12:06] oscillates.
[12:07] >> What does that mean?
[12:08] >> So, it drops by about 20%. So it's it's
[12:11] it's reducing its light
[12:14] >> output
[12:15] >> by 20%.
[12:16] >> That's right.
[12:16] >> How often?
[12:17] >> You don't have to wait for centuries.
[12:19] It's within a matter of months to years.
[12:21] >> A star that reduces frequently reduces
[12:24] its light output by 20%.
[12:26] >> Yeah. Which is very unusual. It's the
[12:28] only one we saw we've seen so far.
[12:30] >> You explained one of the theories, I
[12:32] think, when you first talked about this
[12:34] was that a civilization might have built
[12:36] something around that star.
[12:38] >> Oh, yeah. That's one of several theories
[12:40] that a civilization that advanced would
[12:42] have tremendous energy needs.
[12:43] >> Mhm.
[12:44] >> And the easiest way to get energy is by
[12:47] encircling the mother star with an
[12:50] envelope. And the envelope then would
[12:52] absorb most of the energy. In fact, that
[12:55] was an episode of Star Trek. They meet a
[12:57] star that is totally enveloped by a
[12:59] metal shell. The aliens left it
[13:03] centuries ago, but you know, it can't be
[13:05] ruled out. The theory goes that an
[13:08] advanced civilization will surround it
[13:09] with like a metal sphere to capture its
[13:11] energy.
[13:12] >> Yeah.
[13:13] >> And that would explain why we see a 20%
[13:16] reduction in the light output.
[13:19] >> No, they think that it's probably an
[13:21] orbiting an orbiting globe that eclipses
[13:24] the mother star.
[13:26] >> Ah,
[13:26] >> rather than envelops the mother star, it
[13:29] simply goes around the mother star and
[13:31] eclipses it. Um, so it'd be like a big
[13:34] ball that that circles the star
[13:36] extracting
[13:36] >> and that would cause a dip. It would
[13:38] cause a dip in the intensity of light.
[13:40] >> As far as we see it,
[13:41] >> as far as we see it, right?
[13:42] >> Because this big [clears throat] ball is
[13:43] sometimes moving in front of it.
[13:45] >> That's right. Exactly.
[13:46] >> Why couldn't it just be a planet?
[13:48] >> Planets are not that big. Planets are
[13:50] about about 1% like Jupiter is about 1%
[13:52] the size of the sun. So the sunlight
[13:55] would drop by about 1 or 2% if Jupiter
[13:58] goes in front of our sun.
[14:00] >> Oh, I've got you. So this is much
[14:02] bigger. It's huge.
[14:05] >> You've um [clears throat] you've written
[14:08] a lot of books
[14:10] >> about the universe and physics and
[14:13] everything in between. I've waited a
[14:15] long time to ask someone this question
[14:17] and it's a very broad question and the
[14:18] question is where do you believe that we
[14:21] came from?
[14:23] Where do you believe that life came
[14:25] from? Where do you believe this universe
[14:27] came from?
[14:28] >> Well, the universe came from the big
[14:30] bang. The question is where did the big
[14:31] bang come from? Right.
[14:34] >> Okay. So, what is the big bang?
[14:36] >> The big bang is a cosmic explosion that
[14:38] took place around 14 or so billion years
[14:40] ago that uh created the expanding
[14:45] universe.
[14:46] >> How do we know that happened?
[14:48] >> Because we have evidence of this
[14:51] expansion that took place, you know, 14
[14:53] or so billion years ago. We see the
[14:55] stars moving away from us. So, think of
[14:58] a big balloon. the big balloon with uh
[15:01] points of light on the balloon and the
[15:03] balloon is expanding and the stars are
[15:06] moving away from each other.
[15:07] >> That's what we see today. Not moving
[15:09] toward each other. All the stars are
[15:11] moving away from each other like the
[15:12] sphere is expanding. And so we believe
[15:15] in the in the uh the big bang theory and
[15:18] we believe that the universe is
[15:19] expanding rather than contracting.
[15:22] >> Expanding into what?
[15:24] >> Hyperspace.
[15:26] >> What's that? Uh well we live in a
[15:28] four-dimensional universe. Three
[15:29] dimensions of space, one dimension of
[15:32] time. We live in a in a four-dimensional
[15:34] universe. But in string theory, we
[15:36] believe that there are 11 dimensions
[15:38] altogether.
[15:39] >> String theory is something that you came
[15:42] up with.
[15:43] >> I came up with string field theory,
[15:44] which is one of the branches of string
[15:46] theory. Right.
[15:47] >> And what is string theory?
[15:49] >> String theory
[15:52] says that what is a proton? What is an
[15:54] electron? They're nothing but vibrations
[15:57] of a string.
[16:00] So from a distance, this looks like a
[16:03] point particle. From a distance, this is
[16:04] an electron. But if you could magnify
[16:07] that, we find out it's not really a
[16:10] point at all. It's really a vibrating
[16:12] string. And each vibration corresponds
[16:14] to a node. So this would be a proton.
[16:19] This would be an electron. This would be
[16:21] a neutron. This would be a neutrino.
[16:24] That's why we have so many subatomic
[16:25] particles.
[16:26] >> Okay. So to to simplify this in a way
[16:28] that I understand, you're saying that at
[16:30] the very base layer, particles are the
[16:34] same, but they're just strings that are
[16:36] basically vibrating differently.
[16:38] >> That's right.
[16:38] >> And that would be the the sort of
[16:40] foundational matter of everything.
[16:41] >> That's right. Everything is basically a
[16:44] vibrating string. So when the string
[16:46] vibrates in this direction, we call it
[16:48] an electron. If it vibrates in this way,
[16:51] we call it a proton. So, why do we have
[16:54] so many subatomic particles? How many of
[16:56] them are there? Hundreds. We've seen
[16:59] hundreds of subatomic particles. And how
[17:02] could mother nature be so malicious to
[17:05] create a universe at the fundamental
[17:07] level based on hundreds of different
[17:09] kinds of of strings vibrating in
[17:12] different directions? Well, it's really
[17:14] just one string. One string that can
[17:17] vibrate in different modes. Each mode is
[17:20] called a particle.
[17:21] >> Why does it need to be a string?
[17:23] We don't know why things are. We just
[17:25] I'm a physicist. We just try to figure
[17:27] out the way things really are. But it
[17:29] would explain why there's so many
[17:31] particles.
[17:32] We used to think there was an electron,
[17:34] a proton, and neutron. And that's it.
[17:36] That's it. Period. Nope. We've seen
[17:40] pimezones. We've seen lambda particles,
[17:42] omega particles, hundreds of subatomic
[17:44] particles. Why do we build atom smashers
[17:47] outside Chicago, outside Geneva? huge
[17:50] gigantic atom smashers smashing atoms
[17:52] apart. Why? Because then from the debris
[17:56] we begin to figure out these vibrations
[17:58] are particles.
[18:00] We can categorize them. We can give them
[18:02] names and that gives us a quote a theory
[18:05] of everything.
[18:07] So we have what is called the standard
[18:09] model which explains all the subatomic
[18:11] particles other than gravity. And it and
[18:15] we create these particles with their
[18:16] atom smashers
[18:18] >> which is the big machines where they
[18:19] fire atoms at each other in in Geneva
[18:21] and so on around the world to figure out
[18:23] >> that's the large hon collider right but
[18:25] now we realize that there's another
[18:27] octave there's another layer even beyond
[18:29] what we see with the large hron collider
[18:32] dark matter
[18:34] dark matter is invisible matter that
[18:36] surrounds the Milky Way galaxy and we
[18:39] don't know what it is there's a Nobel
[18:40] Prize waiting for somebody who could
[18:43] figure about what dark matter is. It's
[18:45] invisible matter. Invisible matter that
[18:48] surrounds the entire Milky Way galaxy.
[18:50] We think that we cannot yet prove that
[18:53] it's nothing but the next octave.
[18:54] >> What do you mean by octave?
[18:56] >> Vibration. In other words, this would be
[18:58] the lowest vibration which is
[19:00] corresponds to an electron. But their
[19:02] other vibration is much bigger and they
[19:04] they would correspond to a higher
[19:06] octave.
[19:06] >> How do we know it's there if it's
[19:07] invisible?
[19:08] >> Well, this a guess. But it turns out
[19:10] that when you do the math and you look
[19:12] at the vibration of a string and you
[19:14] look at the higher vibrations, some of
[19:16] them are invisible. In other words, they
[19:18] don't interact with light. Now, we know
[19:21] that this interacts with light.
[19:22] Therefore, we can see it.
[19:24] >> But these are the lowest vibrations.
[19:26] Some of the higher vibrations are
[19:27] invisible. And so, we think that's what
[19:30] dark matter is.
[19:31] >> I guess this all comes back to the
[19:32] question we're talking about the big
[19:33] bang.
[19:35] You know scientists tend to agree that
[19:37] there was some kind of big bang because
[19:38] when you look at the universe it's
[19:39] expanding outwards. So one would if you
[19:41] rewind time at some point there was a
[19:44] central
[19:46] point where something where a big an
[19:49] explosion occurred if you reverse time.
[19:54] I mean it begs the question
[19:57] [clears throat] what caused the big
[19:58] bang.
[20:00] >> Well we don't know but there are
[20:02] theories. String theory is a theory even
[20:04] before the big bang. It's a theory of
[20:07] everything. The big bang in some sense
[20:09] is a misnomer because it disguise the
[20:12] fact that we're ignorant. We're ignorant
[20:14] of what caused the thing to bang. String
[20:17] theory, there was no bang. That is it
[20:20] did collapse. If you go backwards in
[20:22] time, it did collapse with a very small
[20:24] thing and then came out again. It
[20:25] bounced. Oh,
[20:27] >> okay.
[20:28] >> So, we think that there could be a
[20:30] bubble bath of universes. What do you
[20:32] mean by a bubble bath of universes?
[20:34] >> Our universe is a bubble of some sort
[20:36] and the bubble is expanding and that's
[20:38] called the big bang theory which fits
[20:39] all the data. But we think there are
[20:41] other bubbles out there. In other words,
[20:44] string theory [snorts] says that we live
[20:47] not just in a four-dimensional world but
[20:49] in a 11dimensional world. These other
[20:52] dimensions we cannot see but we think
[20:55] that the universe coexists with other
[20:57] universes. There's a bubble bath. Think
[21:01] of bubbles, soap bubbles floating in in
[21:03] the vacuum.
[21:04] >> What about marbles? So, when you're
[21:06] talking about bubbles, you know,
[21:10] could you mean like kind of like this?
[21:12] >> Right. Okay. Give me the big one.
[21:15] >> All of them.
[21:17] >> All right. Okay. So, let's say this is
[21:19] the sun.
[21:20] >> Yeah.
[21:21] >> And these are planets, asteroids,
[21:24] whatever. And they're going around
[21:27] they're going around the sun.
[21:28] >> Mhm. Why? Why are they going around the
[21:31] sun like that? Okay, it's because this
[21:34] exerts gravitational force [snorts] that
[21:37] is pulling these things toward toward
[21:40] the sun.
[21:41] >> The [clears throat] Earth is just one.
[21:43] Asteroids are none of the other. Saturn
[21:45] and Jupiter, they're nothing but planets
[21:48] going around the mother star. And so
[21:51] then the next question is why? Why is it
[21:54] that planets are going around the sun?
[21:56] It's because the sun is warping the
[21:59] space around it. Is creating a shallow
[22:03] depression.
[22:04] Space is not flat. This is Einstein's
[22:06] achievement. You go in this direction,
[22:09] seems flat. You go in this direction,
[22:11] everything seems to be flat, right? But
[22:13] no, the earth for example is round, but
[22:15] it looks flat, but it's not. The
[22:18] universe looks flat, but it's not. It's
[22:21] curved. And that's why planets go around
[22:24] the mother star because gravity is the
[22:28] byproduct of the warping of space. And
[22:31] that's why we are sitting on this chair
[22:34] right now. Why are we here? How come
[22:37] we're not flying in outer space? The
[22:39] earth is spinning, right?
[22:41] >> The earth is spinning. We should be
[22:42] flung out into outer space. So how come
[22:45] we're here?
[22:45] >> Gravity.
[22:46] >> Gra. What is gravity, though? That's
[22:48] just a word, right? Right? Just because
[22:50] the mass of the earth is so much greater
[22:52] than us that it pulls us in.
[22:54] >> Okay. Well, why is it pulling us in?
[22:56] Einstein says that the reason why the
[22:58] earth is pulling us in is because the
[23:01] earth warps the space around us and is
[23:04] pushing us into the floor. That's why
[23:08] the solar system works the way it does
[23:09] because the sun grabs the planets and
[23:12] forces the planets to move in a curved
[23:15] line because it's curved space that is
[23:19] causing it to move this way.
[23:21] >> And going back to what you were saying
[23:22] about the bubble bath idea,
[23:25] >> right? Then the question is, are there
[23:27] other stars? Yes. Are there other
[23:29] galaxies? There billions and billions of
[23:31] planets out there. We think that the
[23:33] whole shebang is curved. We're nothing
[23:35] but inhabitants of the skin of this
[23:37] gigantic bubble. Now we're saying that
[23:41] maybe there are other bubbles out there.
[23:44] A multiverse. A multiverse of universes,
[23:47] parallel universes. In fact, word
[23:50] multiverse has gotten into the
[23:52] literature. Comic books now refer to the
[23:54] multiverse, Spider-Man and things like
[23:56] that. So it's even part of the
[23:58] vernacular the the common language of
[24:01] the average person that we believe in
[24:03] parallel universes. So yeah these
[24:05] parallel universes come from physics
[24:10] >> and the other thing that comes from
[24:11] physics is black holes.
[24:13] >> That's right. If this star becomes so
[24:17] massive that its gravity is so great
[24:20] that it pulls the entire shebang in
[24:25] like this. Mhm.
[24:27] >> And then that would be a black hole.
[24:30] And we now believe that at the center of
[24:32] almost every galaxy we see, and there
[24:35] are trillions of galaxies, we think that
[24:37] at the center of these galaxies, there's
[24:39] a black hole.
[24:40] >> Even our galaxy, the milk,
[24:42] >> even our galaxy, right? If you look at
[24:44] the direction of Sagittarius, the
[24:45] constellation Sagittarius, there's a
[24:47] black hole there. So tonight, go
[24:50] outside, look for the constellation
[24:52] Sagittarius, and there's a black hole at
[24:54] the center of our own backyard that
[24:57] holds the Milky Way galaxy together.
[25:01] >> So, how did it get there?
[25:02] >> Well, we think that it's a remnant of
[25:04] the Big Bang that when the Big Bang
[25:06] exploded,
[25:07] clusters of matter begin to contract
[25:10] other clusters of matter.
[25:11] >> And this is where the galaxies and the
[25:13] planets come from. The condensation of
[25:16] the matter ejected out of the big bang
[25:18] gives you the galaxies, the solar
[25:21] systems and the planets.
[25:23] >> So if I use this as an example, there
[25:26] was the big bang and all the pieces flew
[25:29] everywhere
[25:30] >> and then because of gravity the pieces
[25:33] came together and they got so
[25:36] so uh so big so much mass that they
[25:38] collapsed inwards.
[25:40] >> [snorts]
[25:40] >> We're not sure about exactly which came
[25:42] first, the galaxy came first or the
[25:44] black hole came first. But let's assume
[25:46] for the moment that the black hole came
[25:49] first. Gas concentrated into a small
[25:52] area called the black hole and then it
[25:54] drew all the other stars and galaxy
[25:58] around it to create the Milky Way
[26:00] galaxy. We're not sure, but that's one
[26:02] possibility of where it came from. And
[26:05] where did that come from? That in turn
[26:07] came from the explosion that created the
[26:09] universe roughly 14 billion years ago.
[26:12] >> Am I right in thinking black holes they
[26:15] are extremely dense like areas of matter
[26:18] and they if you were to go near one
[26:20] everything that goes near it gets sucked
[26:21] in.
[26:21] >> That's right. And you never get out
[26:22] again. If this is a a black hole, there
[26:25] is a ring or a sphere surrounding it. A
[26:29] point of no return. You go towards the
[26:32] black hole and you pass this this ring
[26:35] and then you go into the black hole
[26:37] never to be seen again. It's a point of
[26:39] no return.
[26:40] >> How do we know that?
[26:41] >> Well, we've never seen it happen, but we
[26:43] can calculate the escape velocity. In
[26:46] other words, if you want to leave the
[26:47] Earth, how fast do you have to move to
[26:49] leave the Earth? 7 miles per second. Our
[26:52] astronauts travel 7 miles per second to
[26:55] reach the moon. Okay, that's called
[26:58] escape velocity. So every gravitating
[27:01] piece of matter has an escape velocity
[27:03] for the Earth is 7 miles per second.
[27:06] What about the escape velocity of a
[27:09] black hole? It's the speed of light.
[27:13] That's why if you fall through the event
[27:16] horizon of a black hole, you never come
[27:18] out because otherwise you would have to
[27:19] go faster than the speed of light, which
[27:21] is not possible. So you go in, but you
[27:24] never come out. That's why it's called
[27:26] black holes.
[27:27] >> What's in there?
[27:30] If you knew, you'd win a Nobel Prize.
[27:33] >> This area has loads and loads of mass
[27:36] inside it. It's sucking things into it.
[27:38] So, one would assume that there was a
[27:39] lot inside there, but it's tiny, right?
[27:42] Black holes are tiny.
[27:43] >> We don't know how big they are. We think
[27:45] at the very center it could be very
[27:47] small. We're not sure. No one's ever
[27:49] been there because if you go past the
[27:51] event horizon, you never come out again.
[27:53] >> What do people think is inside a black
[27:55] hole? I'm thinking of it's just this
[27:57] area in space that looks black on a when
[27:59] you look at it and think it can suck in
[28:03] planets,
[28:04] anything.
[28:06] >> If I were to take a guess, I would say
[28:08] that it's an entrance. It's a gateway
[28:12] perhaps to another universe.
[28:16] We think for example if I have a warp
[28:18] space and you fall into warp space if if
[28:22] the warp space is powerful enough it may
[28:25] come out again on the other side. So
[28:28] there may be another universe on the
[28:30] other side of a black hole. We're not
[28:32] we're not sure. Of course, if you want
[28:34] to go to Alpha Centauri with a Saturn 5
[28:37] rocket, it would take 70,000 years to
[28:41] reach the nearest star with our most
[28:44] powerful rocket. Very impractical. You
[28:48] need a shortcut and that's uh that's the
[28:51] gateway called a wormhole which is very
[28:54] similar to a black hole. A little bit
[28:56] different but very similar.
[28:57] >> How long have you been studying physics
[28:59] in the universe now?
[29:01] Since I was 8 years old, I've been
[29:04] studying the universe.
[29:06] >> 71 years.
[29:07] >> Yeah. When I was 8 years old, a great
[29:11] scientist had just died. It was in all
[29:13] the newspapers and the newspaper said
[29:16] that he failed on his last try to create
[29:21] a theory of everything. So, I was
[29:24] fascinated by this idea that this man
[29:27] was attempting to find the final theory.
[29:29] You're talking about Einstein.
[29:30] >> That's right. Later, I found out the
[29:32] man's name was Albert Einstein. And at
[29:34] that point, I said to myself, that's for
[29:37] me. That's what I want to work on. I
[29:39] want to be part of this great journey to
[29:42] complete Einstein's dream of a theory of
[29:45] everything. And that's what I do for a
[29:47] living. I work with Einstein's
[29:48] equations.
[29:50] >> So, for 71 years, you've been trying to
[29:52] understand the universe and create this
[29:54] theory for everything. In that time, how
[29:57] is your perspective on
[30:00] God
[30:02] developed?
[30:04] >> Yes. Most of my family were Buddhists.
[30:07] >> Mhm.
[30:08] >> Coming from Japan,
[30:10] but my father was a Christian
[30:13] >> and put me in Sunday school. So, I had
[30:17] the benefit of two religions as a child.
[30:21] Now, I'm a physicist.
[30:23] And physicists are quote agnostic. They
[30:25] don't take a position. They simply go
[30:28] where the physics takes them into areas
[30:31] that are distasteful, mysterious,
[30:34] whatever. You go where the evidence
[30:36] goes. And that's what I am today. In
[30:39] other words, we have the laws of
[30:41] physics. We have string theory which
[30:43] takes us to the instant of the big bang
[30:45] and even before even before the creation
[30:47] of the universe. But then the next
[30:49] question is where does string theory
[30:51] come from? Okay, at that point we have
[30:54] to say that that's where our ignorance
[30:56] takes over. We simply don't know.
[30:59] >> What about simulation theory?
[31:03] >> Do you think it's plausible that in fact
[31:05] we are living in a simulation?
[31:07] [clears throat]
[31:08] >> I would say the answer is probably no.
[31:10] >> Probably no.
[31:11] >> That's right. Simulation theory is
[31:14] basically
[31:15] saying that the universe is a puppet
[31:17] show and there's a script. We're we're
[31:20] living out the script because somebody
[31:22] is pulling our strings. First of all,
[31:25] that violates quantum theory. Quantum
[31:27] theory believes in probabilities.
[31:30] Probabilities that I'm sitting here
[31:32] today, probabilities that maybe one day
[31:34] I'll go into outer space. We can
[31:37] calculate the probabilities of atomic
[31:38] events, chemical events with accuracy
[31:41] that is incredible.
[31:43] But simulation theory is not one of
[31:45] them. The theory which was um proposed
[31:49] by philosopher Nick Bostonramm says that
[31:52] there's three possibilities logically.
[31:54] Either number one that um humanlike
[31:57] civilizations always destroy themselves
[32:00] before they get to the point where they
[32:01] can do advanced hyperrealistic
[32:04] simulations. And if you think about
[32:06] things like I know virtual reality at
[32:08] the moment or video games and you
[32:09] imagine them on a spectrum, if they just
[32:11] get 1% better a year, at some point they
[32:14] are indistinguishable from this reality
[32:16] that we're experiencing now. So theory
[32:18] one, we wipe ourselves out before we get
[32:20] to the point where we're advanced enough
[32:22] in hyperrealistic simulations. Theory
[32:24] number two, or possibility number two,
[32:26] is that advanced civilizations do exist,
[32:30] but they have zero interest in
[32:31] simulating their ancestors, which would
[32:33] be us. Or theory number three is that we
[32:35] are a simulation and civilizations do
[32:37] survive and they do run millions of
[32:39] simulations because there would be
[32:42] millions of fake universes and only one
[32:44] can be base reality in this scenario and
[32:46] the mathematical odds are incredibly
[32:48] high that we are currently living inside
[32:49] one of those simulations and not in base
[32:51] reality. Well, my personal point of view
[32:54] is there there's option four that you
[32:57] don't mention and option four is that
[33:00] there is no simulation at all that all
[33:02] this talk is nothing but fairy tales.
[33:05] Fairy tales that we tell our children to
[33:07] amaze them about the universe. But you
[33:10] see the universe is based on
[33:11] probabilities. Probabilities that
[33:14] uranium will fire for example which
[33:17] gives us nuclear weapons. probability
[33:19] that hydrogen can fuse and that gives us
[33:21] stars. So the universe is based on
[33:25] probabilities not on simulations.
[33:28] Do you think what we're seeing? This is
[33:30] a strange question to ask because again
[33:32] there's so many def definitions within
[33:34] it but do you think what we're seeing is
[33:36] real? Like do you think this is you know
[33:38] cuz people do psychedelic drugs and I
[33:40] hear about things like DMT. You inhale a
[33:43] little bit of smoke and suddenly
[33:44] everything you see is different. And you
[33:47] meet people talk about how they've met
[33:49] other types of life when they've taken
[33:51] an an inhale of DMT, they've interacted
[33:54] with some type of other life form. So I
[33:57] guess all this is to say that if our
[33:59] perceived reality is that fragile where
[34:01] we inhale one of smoke and suddenly
[34:04] we're amongst a different life form,
[34:07] then it makes us question whether this
[34:10] is real at all.
[34:12] And also like just to extend it a little
[34:14] bit further. If one inhalation of smoke
[34:17] and I guess you could think about that
[34:18] as a bunch of small particles can
[34:21] interrupt something in my brain that
[34:23] causes me to believe that I'm in a
[34:25] different universe. Then doesn't that
[34:28] prove that my reality is just the
[34:32] projection of a very fragile small
[34:34] amount of particles that are right now
[34:36] lined up so that I see you and this.
[34:40] Well, I think the answer to that is that
[34:42] what you consider to be reality
[34:46] is really a partial fiction
[34:49] that your senses are limited by what
[34:52] your senses can retrieve from the
[34:54] outside world. But it's only a teeny
[34:56] weeny little fraction of what actually
[34:58] exists. Look at the electromagnetic
[35:01] spectrum of light for example. You can't
[35:03] see all the ultraviolet radiation, the
[35:06] infrared, x-rays. This room is full of
[35:10] realities that you can't see. Most of
[35:12] what you see is a fragment, a teeny
[35:16] insyweensy little fragment of reality.
[35:19] You can't see cosmic rays. You can't see
[35:21] ultraviolet radiation. So, what I'm
[35:23] trying to tell you is that you live in
[35:26] an illusion. It's a good illusion for
[35:28] survival. But in terms of being able to
[35:30] see the full spectrum of reality as it
[35:33] exists, no. There's no way. So you think
[35:38] reality is everything. Nope. It's only a
[35:41] tiny tiny insyweensy little fragment of
[35:44] reality. And then talking about this
[35:46] reality, that's a fantasy on top of a
[35:50] fantasy. The first fantasy is that you
[35:53] think that what you see is real and
[35:54] everything. That's the first fantasy.
[35:57] The second fantasy is there's a fantasy
[35:59] within the first fantasy. So you're
[36:02] you're going layer upon layer of
[36:04] fantasies. Now, let me give you another
[36:06] example. Let's say you hear rustling in
[36:08] the forest. You think it's a tiger
[36:10] there. Nine times out of 10, there's no
[36:14] tiger there. But how come your senses
[36:17] are constantly alerting you to the
[36:19] tiger? And that is evolution.
[36:22] Evolution gives you the ability to see
[36:25] things that are not really there at all
[36:27] because it's good for survival. One time
[36:30] there is a tiger and it saves your butt.
[36:34] In other words, why are we here today?
[36:36] We're here today because our senses are
[36:38] overactive. Our senses think there's a
[36:41] lion. There's a tiger there. Well,
[36:42] there's no lion or tiger there at all.
[36:44] But it was good for our survival. Okay?
[36:47] So, our senses are only necessary for
[36:50] our survival. That's why we cannot see
[36:52] infrared. We cannot see ultraviolet. We
[36:55] cannot see the whole spectrum of
[36:57] reality, radio, everything. saying we
[36:59] can't see it all because it was not
[37:01] necessary for our survival.
[37:04] >> Why does life matter in the universe?
[37:07] Like what what function does life have
[37:09] in the universe?
[37:10] >> I think we create our own meaning
[37:12] individually.
[37:14] >> I think there's no universal meaning for
[37:16] life in general, but I think each of us
[37:19] create our own meaning. I was saying
[37:21] this because you were talking about, you
[37:23] know, survival and I was just wondering
[37:24] if there was some universal reason why
[37:26] survival is so important to the
[37:29] universe. But and
[37:31] >> survival is important for the universe
[37:32] cuz we survival writes history. If
[37:35] there's no survival, there's nothing to
[37:37] write. There's no memories. There's no
[37:40] uh stories to tell. Nothing. There's
[37:42] just a vacuum of space.
[37:44] >> I was also asking that, I guess, because
[37:46] you were saying how we only see one
[37:49] version of reality. Mhm.
[37:51] >> And so one would assume therefore that
[37:52] there's another version of reality that
[37:53] we can't even see. I mean I've heard
[37:54] this before from physicists, you know,
[37:56] and if you just think about different
[37:58] animals, the bat sees a different
[38:01] version of reality to the whale.
[38:03] >> Like sonar for example.
[38:04] >> Sonar for example. Even my dog, my dog
[38:07] seems to see a completely different
[38:08] version of reality than the one I see.
[38:10] >> It smells much better than you. Alactory
[38:12] nerves of a dog are infinitely better
[38:14] than our alactory nerves in our nose.
[38:17] They have a different reality. I guess
[38:19] it begs the question like what is all of
[38:20] this then?
[38:22] >> Well, you're talking about the meaning
[38:23] of life for which I have no answer.
[38:25] Sorry about that.
[38:27] >> I guess that was what I was asking but I
[38:28] wasn't asking that wasn't what I was
[38:30] intent on asking. But that's the base
[38:31] question which is what's the point.
[38:34] >> I'm not even sure if the universe has a
[38:36] point. But my personal attitude is we
[38:38] create our own point. We create our own
[38:41] world and meaning within that world. It
[38:44] could be different from another person's
[38:46] meaning and understanding of the world,
[38:48] but it's good enough for me.
[38:50] >> What do you think of the um human sort
[38:52] of proclivity to imagine a god and to
[38:55] assign meaning and morality to that god
[38:57] and say, well, you know, cuz we do have
[39:00] this we do live with this kind of
[39:01] god-shaped hole in our lives where we
[39:03] don't really know where we came from. We
[39:05] don't know what the point is. So, I
[39:06] understand why it's tempting to say this
[39:09] book that someone wrote once upon a time
[39:11] that says this person, this thing
[39:14] created us and these are the rules and
[39:16] this is what good is, this is what bad
[39:18] is, this is what we get if we follow the
[39:20] rules. You know, as humans, we want
[39:22] that.
[39:23] >> Yes. And I think there's a reason for
[39:24] that. And the answer is evolution. What
[39:27] holds animals together? The alpha male,
[39:30] the top dog. As humans became more
[39:33] intelligent over millions of years,
[39:36] humans bicker, we argue, we challenge
[39:40] the leader and then tribes would fall
[39:42] apart because you need some glue. You
[39:46] need some glue to hold it together. And
[39:49] if everyone becomes intelligent
[39:50] uniformly, there's no glue anymore.
[39:53] Everyone bickers, I'm the leader. No,
[39:55] I'm the leader. So on and so forth. So
[39:57] what happens is one person comes up and
[39:59] says, I'm stronger than you. and I talk
[40:01] to somebody even stronger than me, God.
[40:05] And if you disobey me, then God will
[40:08] strike you down. In other words, God is
[40:10] a glue. God is a glue that holds
[40:13] sensient beings together when there's no
[40:17] reason to hold them together anymore and
[40:19] they bicker and they the tribe falls
[40:21] apart. What holds the tribe together?
[40:25] God. Who is God? Well, God is not here,
[40:28] but the son of God is here. And the son
[40:32] of God says, "You got to do this, you
[40:33] got to do this, you got to do this, and
[40:35] you got to obey me." Why? Because I'm
[40:37] the messenger. I'm the son of God. So, I
[40:40] think religion has a definite purpose.
[40:44] The purpose of religion is a glue to
[40:46] hold sensient, intelligent beings
[40:48] together.
[40:50] >> What What do you think consciousness is?
[40:52] >> Consciousness, I think, is a question of
[40:54] awareness. the ability to create ideas
[40:58] about you know why I mean what does it
[41:01] mean meaning to give meaning to things
[41:04] otherwise things become meaningless
[41:06] [snorts] so I think that's the purpose
[41:08] of consciousness is to give us an
[41:10] awareness of meaning do you think um
[41:13] these big questions will ever be
[41:15] answered around like where we came from
[41:17] what the point is do you think we'll
[41:18] ever have answers to these things
[41:20] >> probably not however we have this
[41:22] instinctive urge to to explore,
[41:27] >> to look for new territories and new
[41:29] ideas. And that is what I think keeps us
[41:32] going. Animals do not have that. You
[41:35] can't tell a dog, aren't you thrilled
[41:37] that we're going to this new new house,
[41:39] this new whatever, right? And dog says,
[41:41] "No, just give me my my dinner." So, I
[41:44] think that humans are different. The
[41:47] purpose of the front part of our brain,
[41:49] the cerebral cortex that holds us
[41:51] together, it's a time machine.
[41:54] It asked the question, "What's going to
[41:56] happen in the future?" If you don't
[41:58] believe me, go to your dog tonight and
[42:00] ask your dog, uh, what did he do last
[42:03] night? Uh,
[42:05] and the dog will just bark.
[42:08] No interest in what's happened
[42:10] yesterday, what's happened tomorrow. We
[42:13] constantly think about the future. We
[42:15] can't help it. We are constantly
[42:18] thinking about what's for dinner
[42:19] tomorrow, who's my friend, who's my
[42:20] enemy, what's going to what am I going
[42:22] to do next year, what college am I going
[42:24] to go to. We are obsessed with the
[42:27] future.
[42:28] That's what separates us from the animal
[42:31] kingdom. Animals do not care about the
[42:34] future. They just care about survival.
[42:37] We, on the other hand, are obsessed with
[42:39] the future because that's where our
[42:41] survival lies. And why is that? Because
[42:44] we don't have claws, we don't have
[42:47] fangs, we don't have huge muscles, we
[42:50] can't run very fast, we can't fly. We're
[42:53] not like the animals. We are dependent
[42:55] upon the front part of our brain. And
[42:59] that's why we ask these questions that
[43:01] you just asked. Why are you asking these
[43:04] questions? Because you're programmed to
[43:06] ask these questions. Animals are not.
[43:09] I mean on the subject of intelligence
[43:12] there is now new types of intelligence
[43:14] amongst us. One of them um is referred
[43:16] to as artificial intelligence
[43:19] which is actually modeled on how the
[43:20] brain works. You know I've sat here with
[43:22] some of the experts in AI and they've
[43:24] told me that they learned a lot about
[43:25] the human brain um and how it reasons
[43:29] and um how it processes information with
[43:32] these neural nets as they call it which
[43:34] is um a concept that that has been
[43:37] inspired by the brain. And with that
[43:39] they've started to build these very
[43:40] intelligent machines which a lot of
[43:42] people are now using in terms of large
[43:44] language models like chatbt but but
[43:46] we're going further and further into the
[43:48] world of artificial intelligence. So I
[43:50] mean one's going to one would reason
[43:51] that the future looks very very very
[43:53] different because of this new type of
[43:55] intelligence and that it's going to
[43:56] accelerate maybe a lot of the
[43:57] discoveries and you know that we've
[43:59] we've pondered about today but also that
[44:02] it's going to change life as we know it.
[44:03] And I mean some people even think that
[44:04] human life won't be the dominant form of
[44:07] intelligence in such a world.
[44:10] What do you think?
[44:11] >> Yes, I think that is a definite problem.
[44:13] Right now I think a lot of our robots
[44:16] have the intelligence of a bug,
[44:19] >> an insect. They don't plan, they can't
[44:22] articulate their thoughts and so so
[44:24] forth. But they carry out orders very
[44:26] well. But eventually it's only a matter
[44:29] of time before they become as smart as a
[44:31] mouse. then as smart as a rabbit, then
[44:34] as smart as a dog or a cat, and finally
[44:37] as smart as a monkey. At that point,
[44:40] they are potentially dangerous.
[44:43] >> The AI models though that are available
[44:45] now are PhD level in terms of
[44:49] intelligence.
[44:50] >> No, you cannot talk PhD physics with
[44:53] them. uh they're programmed they're
[44:56] programmed to have certain ways of
[44:59] thinking about certain things, but
[45:01] they're not original. You can't come up
[45:03] with a new theory of physics talking to
[45:05] a robot. They basically take what is
[45:08] programmed into them and work with that.
[45:11] Now, eventually they may become
[45:13] creative. Okay. But I think that's going
[45:15] to take several decades before we are at
[45:17] that point.
[45:19] >> When you say creative, what's your
[45:21] definition of creative in that context?
[45:23] Robots right now take what is available
[45:25] to them and rearrange things like
[45:27] writing a book.
[45:28] >> Isn't that what humans do? Don't we take
[45:30] information and rearrange it?
[45:31] >> Oh yeah, but we come up with new ideas
[45:33] >> based on that information. The AIS can
[45:36] make a photo that has never existed
[45:37] before.
[45:38] >> So isn't that by definition
[45:40] >> on the basis of what did exist before?
[45:42] In other words, something new,
[45:44] >> but basically a rearrangement of
[45:46] something that already existed. So, I'm
[45:48] saying, you know, the Michael Jackson
[45:49] documentaries just come out recently,
[45:51] and you see Michael Jackson, the way he
[45:53] moves, and you look at it and go, "Wow."
[45:55] Like, no one's ever moved like that
[45:56] before. And then [snorts] my friend sent
[45:58] me this video um which was what Michael
[46:01] Jackson was actually inspired by, and
[46:04] it's this um I'll throw it up on the
[46:05] screen so other people can see, but it
[46:07] was something that came before Michael
[46:09] Jackson, and it was this guy who moved
[46:11] in this very interesting way. And when I
[46:12] watched this guy, I saw Michael Jackson.
[46:14] Mhm.
[46:14] >> And so you look up someone like Michael
[46:16] Jackson and you go, "Oh my god, an
[46:17] unbelievable creative genius artist."
[46:18] But even he was inspired by by See if I
[46:21] can get it to play. Even you see, even
[46:23] he was inspired
[46:25] >> by this individual. And then if I if I
[46:27] play it forward, I mean, this is how
[46:29] Michael Jackson moved,
[46:30] >> right? Well, art, the bottom line of art
[46:33] is mimicry. That's the bottom line of
[46:36] art, except you arrange things in an
[46:37] original way so it looks fresh. Am I
[46:40] right in thinking that with Newton he
[46:44] took the existing laws of physics and he
[46:48] >> which were negligible
[46:50] >> and he proposed
[46:51] >> there were no laws of physics before
[46:52] Newton
[46:53] >> and he proposed a question.
[46:55] >> Mhm.
[46:55] >> And then he tested that question and
[46:58] found an answer.
[46:59] >> He asked himself a question. How come
[47:01] the earth goes around the sun? and he
[47:04] came up with an idea that was totally
[47:07] different from what people had had
[47:08] thought about before. He came up with
[47:10] calculus. He came up with the inverse
[47:12] square law. So what I'm saying is true
[47:15] creativity comes from almost nothing and
[47:17] it's like a supernova. Well, creativity
[47:20] of a robot is imitative. Now there's
[47:23] nothing wrong with that because of
[47:25] course imitative artwork is still
[47:27] artwork but it's imitative. Do you
[47:30] believe people like uh like the big um
[47:32] AI CEOs and Elon Musk when they say that
[47:35] AI will lead to new discoveries in
[47:37] science?
[47:38] >> That's possible because there's so many
[47:40] laws of physics that are known that many
[47:43] of the new laws of physics are imitative
[47:45] and you rearrange them and combine them
[47:47] in different ways. So it's possible that
[47:50] [snorts] the big breakthroughs of the
[47:52] future will be guided by breakthroughs
[47:54] of the past. There's nothing wrong with
[47:56] that. H [clears throat] are you
[47:58] concerned about AI at all?
[47:59] >> I'm concerned about AI in the larger
[48:01] perspective
[48:03] that one day they can learn to do things
[48:07] that are bad, learn to kill, learn to
[48:11] maim to harm people. Realize that every
[48:15] invention that we've made in the past
[48:17] like the bow and arrow could be used for
[48:19] good and bad. Everything. Okay? that the
[48:23] bow and arrow could be good for game,
[48:25] for food, for eating, but a bow and
[48:29] arrow could be good for slaughtering
[48:30] your your next door neighbor. Any new
[48:33] invention has a double-edged sword to
[48:35] it. And so, I think that so far most of
[48:38] the applications of artificial
[48:41] intelligence have been positive. We're
[48:43] talking about labor costs. We're talking
[48:45] about creating wealth. We're talking
[48:46] about making things faster, cheaper,
[48:49] better. That's all great, but you can
[48:52] also create artificial intelligent
[48:54] weapons as well. And the battlefield is
[48:57] where it's happening. And if you take a
[48:59] look at what's happening in the Ukraine
[49:01] and uh Russia already, we're talking
[49:05] about aerial weapons that can use wires
[49:11] to lock onto their target.
[49:14] [clears throat]
[49:14] >> And they use artificial intelligence to
[49:17] guide them with this wire.
[49:19] and they cannot be stopped using the
[49:22] usual techniques. For every founder,
[49:24] there comes a point in building a
[49:25] company where your job shifts from being
[49:27] the person inside your business
[49:28] actioning everything to the person
[49:30] responsible for absolutely everything.
[49:32] The only way I've been able to make this
[49:33] shift across the different companies and
[49:35] teams I'm responsible for is by knowing
[49:37] that the right systems are in place to
[49:39] manage everything. Systems that don't
[49:40] need me in order for them to work. Our
[49:43] sponsor, Pipe Drive, is one of those
[49:44] systems, an easytouse, intelligent CRM
[49:47] tool for growing sales teams. My teams
[49:49] use it and have for the last decade
[49:51] because it's genuinely the most
[49:52] effective way to run a sales operation.
[49:54] Through one dashboard, you get every
[49:56] deal visible and every stage of the
[49:58] sales process is clear. And what needs
[50:00] to happen next is all there in real
[50:03] time. When a system like this works, you
[50:05] don't need to be in every conversation
[50:07] to know exactly if your business is
[50:09] moving forward, where, and what the
[50:11] blockers are. Over a 100,000 companies
[50:13] are already running their sales on it.
[50:15] So, if you'd like to join them, sign up
[50:17] at piperive.com/ceeo,
[50:20] where you'll get an exclusive 30-day
[50:23] free trial instead of the usual 14 days.
[50:26] No credit card is needed. That's
[50:27] piperive.com/ceo.
[50:30] Much of the reason most people haven't
[50:32] posted content or built their personal
[50:34] brand is because it's hard and it's
[50:36] timeconuming and we're all very, very
[50:37] busy. And if you've never posted
[50:39] something before, there's so many
[50:42] factors in your psychology that stop you
[50:44] wanting to post. What people will think
[50:46] of you. Am I doing this right? Is the
[50:48] thing I'm saying absolutely stupid. All
[50:50] of these result in paralysis, which
[50:52] means you don't post and your feed goes
[50:55] bare. I'm an investor in a company
[50:57] called Stanto, which you've probably
[50:58] heard me talk about. And what they've
[51:00] been building is this new tool called
[51:01] Stanley that uses AI, looks at your
[51:03] feed, looks at your tone of voice, looks
[51:05] at your history, looks at your best
[51:06] performing posts, and tells you what you
[51:08] should post, makes those posts for you.
[51:10] You can also just use it for
[51:12] inspiration. And sometimes what we need
[51:14] when we're thinking about doing a post
[51:15] for our social media channels is
[51:17] inspiration. Building an audience has
[51:19] fundamentally changed my life, and I
[51:21] think it could change yours, too. So,
[51:23] I'm inviting you to give this new tool a
[51:25] shot and let me know what you think. All
[51:27] you have to do is search coach.stand
[51:29] stand.store now to get started.
[51:31] Going back to this this this question of
[51:33] the the Big Bang and where we all came
[51:35] from,
[51:36] [snorts] if you had to posit a guess as
[51:39] to what caused the Big Bang, would you
[51:41] land on this bubble bath theory that you
[51:44] talked about where there's just lots and
[51:45] lots of universes, some of them are
[51:47] contracting and expanding. Is that where
[51:49] you would personally land?
[51:51] >> Probably. If you take a look at empty
[51:53] space, we now believe that empty space
[51:56] is frothing. frothing with little
[51:58] bubbles. Bubbles that pop into existence
[52:01] and then annihilate and go back into
[52:03] nothingness again. So even pure
[52:06] nothingness is chalk full of activity.
[52:10] And one day we think one day one of
[52:12] these tiny little bubbles decided not to
[52:15] go back into the vacuum but to keep on
[52:18] expanding and expanding and that became
[52:21] the big bang. And so that theory says
[52:24] that the universe is dynamic and that
[52:26] universes are being created all the
[52:28] time.
[52:28] >> What about Adam and Eve? And this
[52:32] >> what about Adam and Eve?
[52:33] >> Do you don't think the story is true
[52:34] that there was a a garden, Adam and Eve,
[52:36] Adam the apple, put your clothes on,
[52:38] behave yourself and then you know we all
[52:42] come from there. Well, I think there's
[52:44] evolution and evolution did create life
[52:47] forms that are single-sellled,
[52:49] multi-selled and then cells with a
[52:52] nervous system like fish and then fish
[52:55] became land moving uh organisms. So, I
[53:00] think there's a linear progression.
[53:02] >> But you don't believe the stories told
[53:04] in the first testament of the Bible
[53:05] around how humans came to be. God
[53:08] created the world in seven days. You
[53:09] don't believe that stuff?
[53:11] >> Well, I think it's a fairy tale. I think
[53:13] it's a very compelling fairy tale, but I
[53:16] think that even the people who teach
[53:18] religion realize it as a metaphor that
[53:21] we don't really mean 24 hours in a day
[53:24] because that deals with the earth in the
[53:26] universe. There could be other worlds
[53:29] where a day is not 24 hours. A day does
[53:32] not look like what the Bible says in
[53:34] Genesis. So I think it's a um it's a way
[53:37] to organize your religion into a way
[53:40] that is digestible and and people can
[53:42] understand it and it touches people
[53:45] which is a which is the purpose of
[53:47] religion. The purpose of religion is to
[53:49] touch people to bring them together into
[53:51] a commonality and that's what the story
[53:54] of Genesis does. Religion in some sense
[53:56] is a way to help people to show people
[54:00] guidance the good life so that you don't
[54:04] terrorize other people that you make
[54:06] life better for other people not that it
[54:09] explains the meaning of existence but it
[54:12] gives you a reason for existence
[54:15] >> and you would consider yourself to be an
[54:17] atheist
[54:18] >> no uh I'm agnostic I believe that
[54:21] there's a lot of truth because it's a
[54:22] way of behaving it's a way of learning
[54:26] how to be good to your neighbor is a
[54:28] glue that holds things together. Not
[54:31] that it gives meaning for life, but it
[54:33] shows the way.
[54:35] >> It shows the way. And and the subject of
[54:38] morality is often so intrinsically
[54:40] linked to religion, which is what is
[54:41] good and what is bad. Where does your
[54:43] morality come from, doctor? Well, I was
[54:46] in the United States Army for two years
[54:51] and at that point I had to face death
[54:55] and I had to face war. It was the height
[54:58] of the Vietnam War. There were 500 GIS
[55:02] dying every week. Every week, Life
[55:06] magazine published an issue where they
[55:09] had the pictures, just the pictures with
[55:11] no commentary of all the GIS that died
[55:14] that week with no commentary. No, I told
[55:18] you so. Just the pictures of those
[55:21] people that died. And then I realized
[55:24] that I would have to put my life on the
[55:26] line because my number was up and people
[55:30] were going into the military
[55:33] and people were realizing well war is
[55:36] the way people you know work out their
[55:39] differences.
[55:40] But then I began to realize being in the
[55:43] military
[55:44] that there is a morality there. I began
[55:48] to realize that the people that we were
[55:50] fighting had their own religion. They
[55:54] had their own way of looking at good and
[55:56] evil and whatever. And they were willing
[55:59] to sacrifice their life for their own
[56:02] freedom. I began to question religion at
[56:05] that point. Is it just a glue that holds
[56:08] people together? Is there a deeper
[56:10] meaning to the whole thing? So, one day
[56:13] I was learning how to throw hand
[56:14] grenades and our our sergeant who was
[56:18] explaining to us how to throw hand
[56:20] grenade had scars on one side of his
[56:23] face, big scars on his neck. And we
[56:27] asked him why.
[56:29] And he said, "Well, one day a little
[56:32] Vietnamese boy came up to him and the
[56:35] Vietnamese boy says, "Candy, candy. You
[56:38] want candy?" And the GI says, "No, no,
[56:41] no. Get away from me. I don't want
[56:42] candy. Well, the little boy showed what
[56:45] was in his hand. It was a hand grenade.
[56:48] It was not candy at all. And the little
[56:51] boy threw the hand grenade at the
[56:53] sergeant. Well, the sergeant immediately
[56:55] saw what the danger was and he hit the
[56:58] ground as soon as he could flat on the
[57:00] ground. The grenade exploded and one
[57:03] half of his body got saturated with
[57:06] shrapnel. And then you have to ask
[57:08] yourself a question. Why would a young
[57:11] boy do something like this? It's because
[57:13] he believed in something. And I think
[57:16] there was a real big lesson for me. And
[57:18] that is you have to believe in
[57:20] something. You have to believe in the
[57:23] goodness of men and also the fact that
[57:25] men can do evil. And you have to fight
[57:28] for what you think is right. And
[57:31] therefore, it's not just a question of
[57:34] we're number one. We're going to win
[57:35] this war.
[57:37] I used to sing a song in the morning. I
[57:39] want to go to Vietnam. I want to kill a
[57:41] Charlie Kong. I used to sing that every
[57:44] morning at 4:00 in the morning. And then
[57:47] I asked myself now why were we on the
[57:50] right side of the wrong side? And then
[57:52] at that point you begin to question what
[57:54] is right and what is wrong? And then you
[57:57] realize maybe I'm on the wrong side.
[58:03] >> Maybe I'm on the wrong side. I mean, it
[58:05] goes back to all the conflict happening
[58:06] at the moment because we're
[58:08] ideologically captured by whatever our
[58:10] own religious beliefs are and that's
[58:12] causing us to turn against each other
[58:13] each other and cause so much pain and
[58:15] suffering in the world. Do you think
[58:17] there's any chance that this could at
[58:19] all change or is this just part of the
[58:22] human condition? Well, if you take a
[58:25] look at the human condition, you realize
[58:27] that [laughter]
[58:28] warfare has been an integral part of our
[58:32] evolution as a species. Even in the
[58:35] animal kingdom, animals will fight
[58:38] against other animals. And so my hope,
[58:41] however, is that we're different from
[58:43] the animals. We have a brain. We can
[58:46] make moral decisions. Animals do not
[58:49] understand the meaning of a moral
[58:50] decision. animals is survival is who's
[58:54] stronger, who has the food. We don't
[58:57] necessarily have to engage in that
[58:59] conflict. And so I would hope that we
[59:02] use the brain that we have to think
[59:04] through and create a better world. One
[59:08] of the things I heard when I was very
[59:10] young about the universe, and I guess
[59:12] this was inspired by some theory within
[59:14] physics, was that there are infinite
[59:16] amounts of worlds out there. And I heard
[59:18] this I heard someone say if the world is
[59:20] infinite that means that there's a
[59:22] someone like me a Steven Bartlett who
[59:24] has an identical life to me up there
[59:26] somewhere out in the stars who's living
[59:29] a identical life to mine maybe other
[59:32] than instead of in this cup there's
[59:35] lemonade instead of coffee. This is what
[59:37] they call is it called the many worlds
[59:39] theory where they think there's
[59:40] theoretically
[59:41] >> it's a version of the many worlds theory
[59:43] but most many worlds theory simply says
[59:46] that there's an infinite number of
[59:47] universes and worlds out there none of
[59:50] them necessarily identical to ours but
[59:54] independent of us that that is a
[59:56] distinct possibility
[59:57] >> but if there's infinite numbers that
[59:59] means there's one just like this
[60:01] identical to this
[60:02] >> not necessarily you can have an infinite
[60:04] number of things that don't repeat so in
[60:06] other words
[60:06] >> you necessarily have to have another
[60:09] civilization that is exactly like ours.
[60:12] You could, but it's not necessary. If
[60:15] you believe in an infinite universe,
[60:17] >> it's true, I guess. Do you think that's
[60:19] plausible that there's an infinite
[60:21] number?
[60:21] >> It's possible. When you look at the when
[60:22] you look at the night sky, [laughter]
[60:25] you're overwhelmed by the majesty of the
[60:27] night sky and then you realize that
[60:30] we're nothing but a dot, a dot on this
[60:32] gigantic disc called the Milky Way
[60:34] galaxy. And if this is the Milky Way
[60:37] galaxy, then here we are thinking that
[60:40] this is the entire universe. This is
[60:42] nothing but a pinpoint on the Milky Way
[60:45] galaxy. And how many galaxies are there?
[60:48] We're talking about trillions of
[60:49] galaxies that are out there. Each one
[60:52] containing roughly 100 billion stars.
[60:55] How are we supposed to feel about this?
[60:56] I I did this um star tour um a couple of
[60:59] months ago in LA where all it was was a
[61:02] guy took me out to a field. not even a
[61:03] field. It was the desert in Joshua Tree
[61:05] at nighttime. And he just explained how
[61:07] far away all the stars are. And then I
[61:10] looked through a telescope and he was
[61:11] like, "Okay, this thing you're seeing
[61:12] here is a galaxy and it's a gazillion
[61:15] miles that way and this one is a galaxy
[61:16] as big as the Milky Way and it's a
[61:18] gazillion miles that way." It made me
[61:20] feel a lot of things. It made me feel
[61:21] one irrelevant from a cosmic
[61:24] perspective. It also relieves one's
[61:27] anxiety. If anyone's anxious about this
[61:29] life, you kind of feel like you're not
[61:31] you don't matter that much. But also, it
[61:33] can make you feel like it doesn't
[61:34] matter, like there's no point because I
[61:38] think there's a certain ego to humans
[61:39] where we want to think it really,
[61:41] really, really matters. Now, it might
[61:43] matter to us, but does it actually
[61:45] matter to the universe? That does our
[61:47] lives matter to the universe?
[61:49] >> Well, I like to think of it slightly
[61:51] differently. I think on the other side
[61:53] of the Milky Way galaxy, there's an
[61:55] alien
[61:56] >> who's [clears throat] writing the same
[61:57] equation that I'm writing down right now
[61:59] in different language, in different
[62:01] notations. But he's also discovering
[62:03] string theory. And there are a lot of
[62:05] galaxies out there, each one with an
[62:07] individual saying, "Gee, I think I
[62:09] discovered something new about the
[62:10] universe." And these laws are universal.
[62:15] The equations that I'm writing down
[62:17] right now are identical in different
[62:20] language with equations that they're
[62:22] writing down billions of light years
[62:24] from us. And that gives me a sense of
[62:27] oneness.
[62:28] It gives me a sense that wow, we're part
[62:31] of a a fellowship. We're part of a
[62:34] camaraderie. We're on the same quest, a
[62:37] quest to understand the nature of matter
[62:39] and energy. We're on the same boat. Even
[62:43] though we're speak different language,
[62:45] even though we're on different sides of
[62:46] the universe, we're all part of the same
[62:48] club. Don't you think it's plausible
[62:50] that we're going to destroy ourselves
[62:51] before we we ever figure that answer out
[62:54] or before we get to meet these aliens?
[62:57] Because the technology we've been able
[62:58] to create so far like nuclear weapons
[63:00] and even things like AI, [snorts] you
[63:03] play this forward just on, you know, you
[63:05] talked about probabilities being the
[63:06] most important thing. The probability
[63:09] that one of these egoomaniacs who has
[63:13] the launch codes for a nuclear weapon at
[63:15] some point decides that they're unhappy
[63:17] or they feel threatened is pretty high
[63:20] if you just extend time. I mean, the
[63:21] probability goes up theoretically with
[63:23] every year that passes that someone is
[63:26] going to do make a mistake that wipes us
[63:29] out. And the more advanced our science
[63:31] gets, presumably, I mean, again, I'm
[63:34] just theorizing, the higher the
[63:36] probability that we create something
[63:37] that can destroy ourselves.
[63:39] >> Well, I like to look at it slightly
[63:40] differently. I say to myself, what is
[63:43] the smallest unit of history?
[63:47] And I say it's the decade. Anything
[63:50] smaller than a decade, you get random
[63:52] fluctuations, noises, accidents taking
[63:54] place on a decade. But if you look at
[63:56] human history, decade by decade by
[63:59] decade, you realize that oh my god, just
[64:02] a few decades ago, it was horse and
[64:05] buggy. Before that, we we just uh had
[64:08] plows. Before that, we were barbarians.
[64:12] And you begin to realize that we've come
[64:14] a long ways. Not that we hit the end,
[64:17] but we've come a long ways just in the
[64:19] decade by decade analysis of the history
[64:22] of the human race.
[64:23] >> And we've got closer to being able to
[64:24] destroy ourselves.
[64:25] >> That that's true, too. Because before we
[64:27] couldn't destroy ourselves. Now, for the
[64:29] first time in human history, we have the
[64:32] potential of destroying ourselves with
[64:34] designer germs, with nuclear weapons,
[64:37] with perhaps artificial intelligence. We
[64:40] didn't have that capability before. And
[64:43] it's only been in the last 80 years or
[64:45] so as a consequence. So I think that
[64:48] first of all it means that every decade
[64:51] tremendous progress is made. There's no
[64:52] doubt about that. But second we're a
[64:55] knife's edge. You tilt it the wrong way
[64:58] and there's world war. You tilt it the
[65:00] other way and there's food and luxury
[65:04] for everyone. And it's up to us to
[65:07] decide which way the knife will go. But
[65:10] my point is decade by decade we see the
[65:14] enormous progress that we humans have
[65:17] made. The next question is what about
[65:19] the next few decades? That's a big
[65:22] question mark.
[65:23] >> Do you think humanity are going to be
[65:24] able to travel out there amongst the
[65:26] stars and become multilanetary like
[65:28] someone like Elon Musk is um planning?
[65:31] >> Well, I think it's for certain that
[65:33] we're going to go not just to the moon
[65:35] but to Mars and [snorts] maybe even
[65:38] beyond that. Then maybe not in our
[65:40] lifetime but in our grandchildren's
[65:43] lifetime we may break through and visit
[65:47] other planets within our our solar
[65:49] system. Now to go beyond that would
[65:52] require some sort of warp drive because
[65:55] of the fact that the nearest star is
[65:59] probably orbiting Alpha Centauri which
[66:02] is 4 and a half light years away from
[66:05] the planet Earth. So you realize it
[66:07] would take hundreds if not thousands of
[66:09] years to begin the colonization of the
[66:11] nearby star systems.
[66:14] There should be a button just down below
[66:16] here. And if it says subscribed, you're
[66:18] already subscribed. If it says
[66:20] subscriber, that means you're not yet.
[66:22] And if you're not subscribed, please
[66:23] could you do us a favor and hit that
[66:24] button? It helps the show more than you
[66:26] know. And according to the algorithm,
[66:28] you're someone that watches our show,
[66:29] but you haven't yet hit that button.
[66:31] Thank you so much. If you could answer
[66:33] any one mystery of the universe, you
[66:37] know, I just I had it down here, the
[66:39] answer. What What would you seek to
[66:41] answer? Well, it's what I'm seeking for
[66:43] my entire life. And that is we want that
[66:46] one equation which is the secret of the
[66:49] universe. We have the electromagnetic
[66:52] force equation that's like half an inch
[66:54] long. We have the equation for gravity
[66:58] that's also about half an inch long. So
[67:01] why not the theory of everything maybe
[67:03] an inch long? We're not there yet, but I
[67:06] think it does exist. And if we were to
[67:09] find it, that would give us an
[67:11] understanding of the entire universe.
[67:13] And I think we're very close.
[67:14] >> You think we're close?
[67:15] >> I think we're close.
[67:17] >> What makes you think we're close?
[67:19] >> Because so far the theories that we do
[67:21] have almost like magic. You look at the
[67:24] history of the equations of physics and
[67:26] you realize they get they get simpler
[67:28] and simpler and simpler with time. You
[67:31] can write down Newton's equation back
[67:33] equations the equation for the nuclear
[67:35] force on one sheet of paper. One sheet
[67:38] of paper. The force that governs gravity
[67:42] we don't have that yet. But we have the
[67:44] other forces and the equations are very
[67:46] simple. And that's why I think that the
[67:48] final equation will also be simple. One
[67:51] of the things that uh that sometimes
[67:53] inspires me is that when you look at
[67:54] nature or when you look at something
[67:56] like the human brain, you see the same
[67:58] patterns as you see when you look up out
[68:00] at the stars. And one of the I mean I'm
[68:02] so fascinated by the nature of the human
[68:04] brain because it seems to be so so
[68:06] powerful. And it also seems to have
[68:09] patterns we see in the wider universe.
[68:12] Do you ever think about this about the
[68:14] brain and how astonishing it is as a as
[68:16] a thing? Well, when I look at the
[68:18] animals, that makes me triply impressed.
[68:22] The fact that animals cannot share in
[68:24] that, that we see a universe that the
[68:27] animals cannot see. We see patterns. We
[68:30] see meaning. We give rhyme and reason to
[68:33] what we see. With animals, it's just
[68:36] where's my dinner?
[68:37] >> Do you think the brain is as fascinating
[68:39] as the universe is fascinating?
[68:41] >> I think the universe is more
[68:43] fascinating. No matter how fast we are
[68:45] with physics and the mathematics of
[68:47] physics, pure mathematics is still more
[68:52] more profound. You wrote this book
[68:54] called The Physics of the Future: How
[68:56] Science Will Shape Human Destiny and Our
[68:58] Daily Lives by the Year 2100?
[69:01] If I was alive in 2100, based on
[69:04] everything you know about physics, what
[69:06] am I likely to see, experience? How is
[69:08] life likely to be different in that
[69:09] future? Well, I think we'll probably be
[69:12] on the moon, maybe to Mars, and perhaps
[69:15] even dream about sending the first space
[69:17] probes. Even beyond that, we're talking
[69:19] about being able to
[69:23] use artificial intelligence to send
[69:25] probes out there. Of course, we're not
[69:27] going to go to the stars. That's that's
[69:30] a few hundred years into the future, but
[69:33] I think that we will begin to to
[69:34] understand the solar system within this
[69:36] century.
[69:38] And this also means that we'll have
[69:39] artificial intelligence,
[69:41] a cure for cancer, and maybe one will
[69:45] aid the other. Maybe artificial
[69:47] intelligence will help us to cure cancer
[69:49] and many diseases and longevity. Perhaps
[69:53] we'll begin the process of solving the
[69:56] immortality crisis.
[69:57] >> Do you think we will be able to live
[69:58] forever in the near future?
[70:00] >> I think there's a possibility that we
[70:01] may have an indefinite lifespan. I think
[70:04] that's a possibility. And you think it's
[70:07] possible within the laws of I guess
[70:09] physics and biology?
[70:11] >> Yes. Um at the end of our chromosomes of
[70:14] every cell, there's something called the
[70:15] tiemers. And the tieummers are like a
[70:18] clock. They get shorter every time a
[70:21] cell reproduces. And when the tiemer
[70:23] gets so short, it frays, falls apart,
[70:27] and you die. So we have a time limit.
[70:30] We've also discovered talomeorase, a
[70:33] chemical that stops the clock. This was
[70:36] incredible when it was first announced
[70:38] that if there's a clock in our body
[70:40] called the tie that tracks how long
[70:43] we're going to live and there's
[70:45] something called tomease which stops the
[70:48] clock then can we live forever? Well,
[70:51] that was the good news. Then the bad
[70:53] news was we found out that most of to
[70:56] our shock cancer also uses tieumirs and
[71:00] tomeorase to live forever. Why does
[71:03] cancer kill you? Because they are
[71:06] immortal in principle they could they
[71:08] could live forever. And so it means that
[71:12] the secret of immortality is tantalizing
[71:14] close. We do know that there are cells
[71:17] that make immortality possible but
[71:20] there's a price to pay. The price to pay
[71:22] is you don't want cancers to also follow
[71:25] you. So here's the trick of the game. We
[71:28] have a whole bunch of top people in the
[71:31] sciences and medicine looking for ways
[71:34] to extend the human lifespan with the
[71:36] tie without wakening up the cancers that
[71:41] make cancer possible. One of the uh
[71:44] things you wrote a book about two years
[71:45] ago in or three years ago now in 2023
[71:48] and that's when it was published. Um is
[71:50] this thing here?
[71:52] [snorts]
[71:53] That's right. What is this?
[71:56] This is
[71:57] the future. This is a quantum computer.
[72:01] It's a computer that computes not on
[72:03] transistors, which is oldfashioned. It
[72:05] computes on atoms. Think about that. The
[72:09] ultimate object beyond the transistors
[72:12] that you can compute with is the atom.
[72:15] And how do transistors work? Transistors
[72:18] can be up or down. Up or down. It's
[72:21] called digital.
[72:21] >> Can you demonstrate that on there? And
[72:23] this is your other
[72:24] >> Yeah. So, think of this as a cell. And
[72:27] the cell could either be switched on.
[72:29] >> Yeah.
[72:29] >> Or switched off. If you take a computer
[72:31] and open it up, what do you find?
[72:33] Switches like this. They're called
[72:34] transistors. transistors that tell you
[72:37] whether it's on or off.
[72:39] >> Now that's digital. This is the
[72:42] revolution of today. This is the
[72:45] revolution of tomorrow.
[72:47] Not just up or down of in between. How
[72:51] many states are there between zero and
[72:53] one in principle? An infinite number of
[72:56] states between zero and one. So this is
[73:00] the basis of a digital computer. Mhm.
[73:02] >> This is the basis of a quantum computer.
[73:06] Quantum computers are so powerful that
[73:08] even the CIA is worried that one day,
[73:11] perhaps in the future, they'll be so
[73:14] powerful they'll be able to break into
[73:16] any known digital code. So even the CIA
[73:20] is worried about the fact that these
[73:22] could become so powerful that they allow
[73:24] you to break into any known computer. So
[73:29] these are called quantum computers. Why
[73:31] are they powerful? Because they compute
[73:33] not on transistors. They compete on
[73:35] atoms. And you can't get much smaller
[73:38] than an atom and have stable matter. But
[73:41] that's what quantum computers can do.
[73:42] And they exist. This is not science
[73:44] fiction. They already exist. So just to
[73:46] simplify this in a way that I can
[73:48] understand it, normal computers are very
[73:51] very simple like this switch. They they
[73:52] kind of exist in a linear direction
[73:55] >> up or down on or off
[73:56] >> kind of binary yes or no.
[73:58] >> That's right. Whereas a quantum computer
[73:59] is more like this where it can it can
[74:02] process information in so many different
[74:04] directions at the same time so that it's
[74:06] going to be way more powerful
[74:08] >> way more powerful way down
[74:10] >> and I was looking recently and Google um
[74:14] did an announcement not actually this
[74:16] year where they basically set a deadline
[74:18] for the cyber security world and they
[74:20] started to warn governments and banks
[74:22] and other tech giants that because they
[74:25] have a quantum computer now that is very
[74:27] very powerful
[74:28] They're worried that it will be able to
[74:30] crack a lot of the digital worlds that
[74:32] we all rely on, including banks, even
[74:34] Bitcoin, which was quite interesting.
[74:36] And they've set 2029
[74:39] as the the deadline for everybody to get
[74:42] their together. This is a massive
[74:44] threat to things like Bitcoin, which is
[74:45] Bitcoin is essentially secured by a
[74:48] equation that they believe quantum
[74:51] computers are going to be able to very
[74:53] easily crack. And if they do that, then
[74:55] everyone's Bitcoin, for example, is um
[74:58] is at jeopardy. But beyond Bitcoin, what
[75:01] does the world look like in a world
[75:02] where we have these incredible
[75:03] computers? Well, first of all, who's
[75:06] doing this work? And it turns out the
[75:09] CIA is following this work very
[75:12] carefully because with this, you'll be
[75:14] able to crack any code. Why is it that a
[75:17] thief cannot steal your bank account
[75:19] today? is because that thief does not
[75:22] have your digital code. If a thief had
[75:25] your digital code, there goes your life
[75:27] savings out the window. Capitalism would
[75:29] vanish. Society would would come to a
[75:32] halt. There'd be civil war. It'd be all
[75:35] sorts of chaos taking place. But codes
[75:38] are there not to be broken. To break a
[75:41] code, you have to have another code. And
[75:44] so the CIA and other organizations
[75:46] create these very complicated codes that
[75:49] you have to master. Quantum computers
[75:53] can do it, but we're not there yet. But
[75:56] it's coming. I don't know when. Some
[75:59] people say in a few decades. Some people
[76:01] say sooner. I don't know. I just know
[76:04] that the world is gambling that we'll
[76:07] find a way to stop quantum computers
[76:11] from breaking into digital computers.
[76:14] >> You've been working on physics for the
[76:16] last what we said what 71 years as a
[76:20] kid. I I was reading about how you
[76:23] started making your own atom smasher. I
[76:26] guess you'd call it a particle collider
[76:28] machine.
[76:29] >> That's right. When I was in high school.
[76:31] That's a very strange thing for a high
[76:33] school kid to be doing.
[76:35] >> Well, I was fascinated by the work of
[76:37] Einstein and the work of people working
[76:40] on subatomic particles and I got
[76:42] interested in antimatter.
[76:44] >> Antimatter.
[76:45] >> Antimatter is the opposite of matter.
[76:47] When I combine matter and antimatter, I
[76:49] get a bomb. So, you have to be very
[76:51] careful that you don't marry matter with
[76:54] antimatter. And antimatter behaves the
[76:57] opposite of ordinary matter. If ordinary
[76:59] matter goes clockwise in magnetic field,
[77:02] antimatter goes counterclockwise in that
[77:05] same magnetic field. And so as a science
[77:07] project, I wanted to photograph the
[77:10] tracks of antimatter. So I got hundreds
[77:14] of miles of copper wire, built a cloud
[77:16] chamber, and I was able to prove that I
[77:19] could photograph the tracks of
[77:21] antimatter. And for that, I won grand
[77:24] prize at the San Francisco Science Fair.
[77:26] And that began my my career. Just before
[77:29] I graduated from high school, I decided
[77:32] to top that by creating an atom smasher
[77:35] at 2.3 million electron volt betatron
[77:38] particle accelerator.
[77:40] It consumed 6 kilowatts of power.
[77:43] Everything that my mother's house had,
[77:45] it would absorb. And that was the goal
[77:48] to build a machine that would create my
[77:50] own beam of antimatter. So I got started
[77:53] very early. And I said to myself, this
[77:56] is for me. This is what I want to do for
[77:58] a living.
[77:59] >> Every time I've tried to improve
[78:00] something in my life, like my
[78:01] businesses, my health, my relationships,
[78:03] I've noticed that the biggest shifts
[78:05] have come from being better informed.
[78:07] And when it comes to our health, most of
[78:08] us know very, very little. So when our
[78:10] team was approached about partnering
[78:12] with function health, it felt very much
[78:14] aligned. Their team has developed a way
[78:16] of giving you a full 360 degree view of
[78:18] your health, many of the things that are
[78:19] going on in your body in the form of
[78:21] different tests. You do one blood draw
[78:23] and it gives you access to over 160 lab
[78:26] results. Hormones, heart health,
[78:29] inflammation, stress, toxins, the whole
[78:31] picture. I use it and so have many of my
[78:33] team members.
[78:33] >> You sign up and you schedule your test
[78:35] and once you're done, you get a little
[78:36] report like the one I have here. I can
[78:38] see my inrange results, my out of range
[78:40] results, and there's a little AI
[78:42] function, too. So, if I have any
[78:43] questions about my out of range results,
[78:45] I can just go in there and ask it any
[78:47] question I want. And these tests are
[78:49] backed by doctors and thousands of hours
[78:50] of research. It's $365 for a yearly
[78:53] membership. Go to
[78:54] functionhealth.com/doac
[78:57] and use the code DOAC25
[78:59] for $25 off your membership. I've done
[79:03] almost 700 interviews with some of the
[79:05] most interesting people in the world.
[79:06] And one of the things you learn which is
[79:08] unexpected is that vulnerability is the
[79:10] doorway to connection. And after sitting
[79:12] here for 2 three hours with a guest, I
[79:14] feel a deep sense of connection to them.
[79:17] And as they leave, what I get them to do
[79:19] is to write a question in the diary of a
[79:22] CEO. We've taken all of the questions
[79:24] from the diary of a CEO. We have put the
[79:27] question here on this card with the name
[79:30] of the person that wrote it. So, you can
[79:32] sit at home as I do with my fiance and
[79:34] my colleagues at work and other people
[79:36] in my life. Whenever we get a minute, we
[79:38] play the diio conversation cards and it
[79:41] is incredible what happens. These are
[79:44] great if you're in a romantic
[79:45] relationship and you want to connect
[79:46] your partner more. These are also great
[79:47] if you're in a team and you want to bond
[79:49] your team together. And I have to say
[79:51] they're also great for families that
[79:52] want to learn more about each other and
[79:54] that need a good excuse to spend some
[79:56] time in a digital world in the analog
[79:59] environment connecting human to human.
[80:01] It is remarkable what the right question
[80:04] at the right time can do. Go to the
[80:06] diary.com
[80:08] and you can get these conversation cards
[80:10] right now. Is there anything you
[80:12] discovered through your work in physics
[80:14] that changed your daytoday behavior and
[80:17] life? How you treat people, how you show
[80:19] up, what you think matters?
[80:22] >> No, but the one thing that did change my
[80:25] attitude toward life, other people was
[80:28] being in the army. Yeah, that was a game
[80:30] changer that changed everything I knew
[80:32] or which I thought I knew. Before then,
[80:35] I was single-mindedly focused on
[80:37] physics. Just physics. do physics. Well,
[80:41] that was my life. But after seeing
[80:44] warfare up close, I began to realize
[80:46] there's more to life than warfare. I
[80:50] think I asked this in part because last
[80:51] time I spoke to a physicist and he
[80:52] talked to me about how the nature of
[80:54] reality is not what I think it is and
[80:57] that there's multiple, I guess,
[80:58] dimensions and that I'm only seeing a
[81:01] fraction of what is real. Um, which I
[81:04] think all physicists agree upon. It
[81:05] sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory or
[81:07] something, but actually logically it
[81:08] makes a lot of sense to only see what
[81:10] you need to see to survive. And
[81:12] actually,
[81:12] >> when you see your conception of the
[81:14] threedimensional world is only the
[81:16] tiniest sliver of actually exists.
[81:19] >> And when I heard that, it made me
[81:22] openminded to
[81:25] a lot of the things I thought were
[81:27] conspiracy nonsense. It made me
[81:29] open-minded to ghosts. Maybe ghosts are
[81:32] real.
[81:32] >> Well, I wouldn't go that far. Well, you
[81:34] know, maybe another dimension where
[81:36] there's another there's spirits that can
[81:38] see me, but I can't see them.
[81:40] >> Well, there could be other such
[81:42] dimensions. That's within the realm of
[81:44] possibility.
[81:44] >> What do you think happens when we die?
[81:46] Do you think do you think that's it? Or
[81:48] do you think there are there's a
[81:49] possibility that there's ghosts and that
[81:52] our spirit, our soul goes somewhere?
[81:54] >> I don't see it happening because your
[81:57] brain, your personality, your thoughts
[81:59] are electrical. And when you die, the
[82:02] electricity turns off. There's nothing
[82:05] propelling thinking anymore. Thinking
[82:07] requires a lot of energy. Even ghosts,
[82:10] if ghosts exist, they would still
[82:11] require a lot of energy to keep the
[82:13] thoughts going. But that's why I don't
[82:15] believe in ghosts because I don't see an
[82:17] energy source that propels the ghosts.
[82:20] People talk a lot about spirituality.
[82:22] They talk about, you know, things like
[82:24] chakras and a lot of spiritual people
[82:26] talk about vibrations. It's a phrase
[82:28] that I often hear in the spiritual
[82:30] communities. Do you believe in anything
[82:32] like that in terms of humans having
[82:35] energies and being able to feel each
[82:37] other's energies?
[82:39] >> Well, I think that if a person emanates
[82:41] a certain aura or a vibe, that doesn't
[82:45] necessarily mean they're radiating
[82:46] something.
[82:47] >> But is there any physics behind that
[82:48] idea?
[82:49] >> I think it's psychological that you are
[82:52] tuned tuned into a certain personality,
[82:55] a certain way of movement. I think it's
[82:58] psychological rather than physical.
[83:01] >> What is what is something you believe
[83:02] that you haven't proven?
[83:04] >> Well, there's a lot of things that
[83:05] haven't been proven. All I can say is
[83:07] maybe, maybe not. Like flying saucers. I
[83:10] don't say they don't exist or they
[83:11] exist. I say maybe. I just haven't seen
[83:14] concrete evidence for them. That's all.
[83:16] [snorts] So, there's a lot of things
[83:17] that I'm not going to definitely say no.
[83:19] Like ghosts. I don't think they are
[83:22] ghosts, but I can't prove it.
[83:24] Maybe there is some afterlife of some
[83:26] sort, but it does go against what is
[83:28] measurable. We've seen no measurement of
[83:32] somebody that has been able to pick up
[83:33] vibrations from a ghost.
[83:36] >> How would you like to be remembered
[83:39] someday long after you're gone? Do you
[83:41] care about being remembered? Do you care
[83:43] about legacy?
[83:44] >> Well, I care about leading a good life
[83:46] that I feel comfortable with.
[83:48] >> Mhm. [clears throat] And if you if your
[83:52] books and your teachings and your
[83:53] lectures, if they live on beyond you,
[83:56] that's a bonus. It means that you had an
[83:59] impact. It means you touched people. You
[84:02] touched people's lives with ideas. And
[84:04] when I go down the street, quite a few
[84:06] people come up to me and they say, "I
[84:08] saw you on this show. I saw you on that
[84:10] show." And that gives me a nice feeling.
[84:13] Of course, after I'm gone, there's no no
[84:15] nothing to feel. But while you're still
[84:17] alive, it gives you a nice feeling know
[84:19] that you've had an impact, knowing that
[84:21] you've changed somebody's life. Several
[84:24] people have come up to me and said, "I
[84:25] became a physicist because of you." So
[84:28] that's uh a nice nice way to view
[84:32] reality that you touch people.
[84:36] Is there is there anything that you used
[84:37] to think was a conspiracy theory that
[84:40] you now know to be true?
[84:42] >> Well, I like to debunk. So as soon as
[84:44] someone says something outlandish, I say
[84:46] to myself, sure, sure.
[84:48] >> But that's what I mean, like you've, you
[84:50] know, you're a debunker. So at some some
[84:52] stage in your life, you must have had
[84:54] the experience of thinking something
[84:56] can't be true and being proven wrong.
[84:58] >> Usually when I make predictions, they
[85:01] come out to be true. Maybe the timeline
[85:03] is a little bit exaggerated, but they
[85:06] turn out to be true. So I haven't made
[85:07] any predictions or observations that
[85:10] were later shown to be false. What
[85:12] predictions are you making now then
[85:13] about the the nature of reality in the
[85:15] future?
[85:16] >> Well, I talk about the nature of string
[85:18] theory in the future, whether or not we
[85:19] really will have a theory of everything.
[85:22] Flying saucers, I talk about the fact
[85:24] that even though we have no evidence
[85:26] today, you know, there's a mountain of
[85:28] these things being declassified. Now,
[85:30] maybe we'll pick up shreds of evidence.
[85:32] >> Did you look at the declassified
[85:34] information that Trump released on UFOs?
[85:35] >> Yeah, I've looked at the whole the whole
[85:37] batch 160 or so sightings. Was there
[85:40] anything in there that was compelling to
[85:42] you?
[85:42] >> No, just lights dancing in the sky
[85:44] without any commentary. So, you don't
[85:46] know what they are.
[85:48] >> But they could be extraterrestrial,
[85:50] but you see, these things are
[85:51] two-dimensional. They're taken by a
[85:54] camera, which is flattens the image.
[85:57] >> Therefore, to judge distance is very
[85:59] tricky.
[86:01] Do you believe that you're looking at
[86:04] extraterrestrial
[86:06] life forms when you watch these videos
[86:08] of your
[86:08] >> I'm open to the idea. I don't think
[86:10] there's any smoking gun yet. I'm open to
[86:13] the idea that these are
[86:14] extraterrestrial.
[86:14] >> You see some of them going up and then
[86:16] down and then into the ocean and coming
[86:17] back up again. Do when you watch that,
[86:19] do you think these are aliens or do you
[86:21] just think it's people that have
[86:22] misunderstood what they're looking at?
[86:24] >> I leave open the probability that it
[86:26] could be one or the other. There's no
[86:28] aha moment where I say that it's nothing
[86:31] but reflection. It's nothing but an
[86:33] optical illusion. There's no aha moment.
[86:36] If you had to bet everything you love
[86:39] and cherish on either side of the fence
[86:42] that non-human life had made contact
[86:45] with the earth at some point in some
[86:46] form or not, which side would you place
[86:50] everything you love and care about on?
[86:52] Yes, aliens have made contact with the
[86:54] earth in some form or no? Well, I would
[86:57] have to say I don't know
[86:58] >> if you but if you had to
[86:59] >> I know it's a copout. No,
[87:01] >> but you know as if everything on the was
[87:03] on the line, one would have to move yet
[87:06] to yes or no. And I would personally
[87:09] I would personally probably say
[87:13] probably no. If you made me bet
[87:15] everything,
[87:16] >> I'd say maybe yes.
[87:17] >> You'd say yes.
[87:18] >> But no, no, no, no. Maybe yes. Very
[87:20] important. The word maybe. I'm a I'm a
[87:22] scientist and somebody's going to use
[87:23] that against me by saying you said on
[87:26] television that this and this is true.
[87:28] No, I said maybe. That doesn't mean it
[87:31] actually is true. It just means I open
[87:33] the possibility that it's true. But if
[87:35] you were held at gunpoint, doctor, and
[87:37] at gunpoint they said right, you've got
[87:40] to say yes or no. And if you're right or
[87:43] wrong, that determines your fate.
[87:48] >> I would [snorts] have to say maybe.
[87:50] [laughter]
[87:50] I know what you're getting at. You want
[87:52] to like, you know, corner the fox,
[87:54] right?
[87:54] >> Yeah. Well, to some degree, yeah, I'm
[87:56] trying to corner the fox. Um, but I'm
[87:57] but I'm doing it to understand where
[88:00] your intuition or your your bias lands
[88:04] because
[88:05] >> I see there's not enough conclusive
[88:07] evidence. There's no aha moment. I just
[88:09] see a lot of may.
[88:11] >> A lot of may. H Yeah, I think I I mean,
[88:15] I think that's probably the
[88:16] intellectually honest answer is maybe.
[88:19] Um, but if I was forced to fall on one
[88:21] side of the fence, I'd I'd probably say
[88:24] no
[88:26] because I don't have enough conviction
[88:28] to say yes. I see no evidence to say yes
[88:30] other than, you know, some sightings of
[88:32] some things, but I'm open-minded. Maybe
[88:36] it'll change. Um, doctor, we have a
[88:38] closing tradition on this podcast where
[88:40] the last guest leaves a question for the
[88:41] next guest, not knowing who they're
[88:42] leaving it for. And the question left
[88:43] for you in my diary is,
[88:48] what is the best strategy to deal with
[88:52] failure?
[88:54] I think the best strategy to deal with
[88:56] failure is try it again.
[89:00] I think on the first try, you're bound
[89:02] to make mistakes because it's a learning
[89:03] curve. And that learning curve is is
[89:06] instructive. It teaches you. It teaches
[89:09] you to try it again, but make a slight
[89:11] change. make a slight change and hope
[89:14] that change is in the right direction.
[89:15] If not, make another change and see
[89:18] whether that puts you in the right
[89:19] direction.
[89:20] >> If you could um go back to when you were
[89:22] that seven-year-old kid that was just
[89:24] getting into physics and [clears throat]
[89:25] 8
[89:25] >> year old 8-year-old
[89:26] >> and give him any advice that would best
[89:29] serve him for the next 70 years. What
[89:31] advice would you have given him?
[89:34] >> I'd say carry on. I've made a lot of
[89:37] decisions that I feel good about,
[89:39] decisions that made me a better person.
[89:42] For example, when I went into the army,
[89:45] at that point, I thought, what could be
[89:46] worse than facing death on the
[89:48] battlefield to die on some unnamed hill
[89:52] in some unnamed land? And then I began
[89:54] to realize, well, yeah, that's a
[89:56] possibility, but there's another
[89:58] possibility that you may survive, that
[90:00] you may learn from that experience. If
[90:03] you're not here to learn, okay, so be
[90:05] it. [snorts] But if you are here to
[90:07] learn, you gain wisdom by being in the
[90:11] military. And that I think is a positive
[90:13] thing.
[90:14] >> We we were talking about UFOs and alien
[90:16] life. Um, at the start of this
[90:18] conversation, and one of the questions
[90:19] that's adjacent to it is if alien life
[90:22] were to come here at some point, do you
[90:25] think they would have empathy for us or
[90:27] do you think that's potentially a human
[90:30] trait? Do you think they, you know,
[90:30] because in the movies they attack us?
[90:32] >> Well, if I were to shoot in the dark,
[90:34] I'd say first of all, they're robotic.
[90:36] They're not organic at all.
[90:38] >> Really,
[90:39] >> because they exhibit maneuvers that
[90:41] would crush the bones of any any living
[90:44] creature that we know of. These flying
[90:47] saucers can zigzag. They can dive from
[90:49] 70,000 ft all the way down. They can
[90:52] dive underwater. These require skills
[90:56] and tensions and vibrations that would
[90:58] crack any known US device in half. And
[91:03] there they are executing these things.
[91:05] Either they're fake or they're
[91:07] extraterrestrial.
[91:09] So I think that they have a technology
[91:11] that we can only dream of.
[91:13] >> So when we're looking at these UAP
[91:15] images and videos, if they are to be
[91:17] real, then you're saying there's no life
[91:19] in them at all and it's actually just
[91:21] machine intelligence. That's right. In
[91:24] fact, that's probably one reason why
[91:25] they don't come out and greet us like in
[91:27] the movies. In the movies, they always
[91:29] come out and say, "Hello, Earth man."
[91:32] No, I personally think they're robotic.
[91:34] >> This question of empathy, do you posit
[91:36] that they might be empathetic? Do you do
[91:38] you posit they would want to destroy us?
[91:39] I mean, what would
[91:40] >> Will they destroy us or will they want
[91:42] to? The answer, I think, is no because
[91:44] they could have done it years ago. You
[91:46] realize that if you go back, even the
[91:48] Bible makes reference to a UFO. If you
[91:52] take a look at Ezekiel,
[91:54] Ezekiel saw the wheel in the sky. And
[91:57] some people say there was no wheel. That
[91:59] was a UFO.
[92:01] So, who knows for sure. But if the
[92:04] aliens really wanted to destroy us, they
[92:07] could have done it years ago. They don't
[92:10] have to wait. But if you go to a zoo,
[92:13] even if the zoo is lifelike to the point
[92:15] where the animals themselves don't even
[92:18] know they're in a zoo, it's peaceful
[92:20] that you can observe them without
[92:23] necessarily uh revealing your presence.
[92:26] And in that sense, it could be like
[92:28] living in a zoo. Not that they want to
[92:30] gawk at us and laugh at us, but just
[92:32] observe us.
[92:34] >> So you think that they will be they
[92:36] won't want to destroy us, which is
[92:38] comforting to hear. I think if they had
[92:40] the chance to destroy us and they wanted
[92:42] to, they could have done it decades ago,
[92:45] but here we are.
[92:47] >> It's an interesting idea when you talked
[92:50] about um this extraterrestrial life
[92:52] potentially being robotic. It does my It
[92:55] kind of makes sense to me because we're
[92:57] on a course to create humanoid robots
[92:59] and robots that um can I was actually
[93:02] watching this morning. There's a video
[93:03] that one of these humanoid robot
[93:05] companies is streaming and it's they're
[93:07] streaming a humanoid robot working on a
[93:09] production line for 4 hours straight so
[93:11] everybody can watch and all it's doing
[93:12] is sorting packages out but it's been
[93:14] going for 4 days straight and if you
[93:16] play this forward you go this robot can
[93:18] go walk across the office and it can
[93:20] charge itself back up once it runs out
[93:22] of battery and then they show it going
[93:24] back to work again [snorts] when I say
[93:26] play it forward I mean imagine this
[93:28] technology continues to improve on the
[93:29] trajectory it's on the battery
[93:31] technology gets better the intelligence
[93:32] gets But uh and then theoretically this
[93:35] robot will be able to build a spaceship
[93:37] theoretically and travel into the
[93:40] universe theoretically at some point if
[93:43] you imagine any rate of improvement. So
[93:44] it's the theoretical that okay humans
[93:47] might not be able to survive the
[93:48] crushing forces of that speed but a
[93:50] robot could.
[93:52] >> My personal attitude is that we should
[93:53] eventually merge with them.
[93:55] >> Merge with the robots.
[93:56] >> That's right. That's my personal feeling
[93:59] because people talk about whether
[94:00] they're good, whether they're bad. so on
[94:02] and so forth. Well, the bottom line is
[94:04] they're going to become more powerful.
[94:06] And not now, but who knows, maybe in the
[94:09] next century, they'll begin to make
[94:11] reasonable choices. They'll reason.
[94:14] They'll plot future histories. And at
[94:17] that point, they could be potentially
[94:18] dangerous.
[94:20] So, what do we do? Either we become
[94:23] super powerful and meet the challenge or
[94:26] we merge with them.
[94:27] >> When you say merge with them, what do
[94:30] you mean?
[94:31] >> Become like that. become part robotic
[94:33] oursel, become superhuman.
[94:34] >> As in when we're born as kids, maybe we
[94:37] have an implant and it makes us turns us
[94:39] into a robot or
[94:40] >> Yeah. In other words, we are still
[94:43] looking the same except we have
[94:45] superhuman abilities and our brain is
[94:47] connected either directly or by remote
[94:49] control to a central nervous system that
[94:52] does the calculations and performs these
[94:55] calculations much better than we can and
[94:59] um we become superhuman. This is the uh
[95:01] the video that I'm talking about. This
[95:02] is actually a live video. So, this is
[95:04] live as we're watching.
[95:06] >> What they've got is they've got a human
[95:08] being here who's sorting the packages
[95:11] and they've [clears throat] got they've
[95:12] got the humanoid robot here
[95:15] >> and they're just counting how many
[95:17] packages each of them can sort.
[95:19] >> Mhm.
[95:20] >> And this robot has been doing this for 4
[95:22] days straight.
[95:23] >> Yeah.
[95:24] Anyway, you play this forward and it
[95:27] asks a big question about the future of
[95:28] humanity when there's humanoid robots
[95:31] that
[95:31] >> Well, I think menial jobs will go out
[95:34] the window like this. Jobs that are
[95:36] repetitive, jobs that just require your
[95:39] arms and legs, those jobs will be
[95:41] gradually phased out and new jobs will
[95:45] open up.
[95:46] New jobs that require thinking, human
[95:49] relations, organizing, directing other
[95:52] people. Robots can't do any of that
[95:54] stuff. Robots simply do what they're
[95:56] told to do repetitively. Okay? We make
[96:00] decisions. We know how to interface with
[96:02] other things. We plot. We plan. Robots
[96:06] can't do that. Now, that doesn't mean
[96:08] they can't eventually, but it just means
[96:10] that the next step beyond this will be
[96:12] robots that can do a little bit of
[96:14] mental work. And it means that we have
[96:16] to retrain the workforce so that they
[96:19] can become uh masters of the robots.
[96:22] In [snorts] other words, we are masters
[96:24] of tools, hammers, saws, whatever. We're
[96:27] the master of them. They're not the
[96:28] master of us. Okay? We tell the hammer
[96:32] and the and the chisel what to do
[96:34] because we lord over them.
[96:36] >> Have you used AI agents before?
[96:38] >> I've used AI before, but not necessarily
[96:40] which which agent are you talking about?
[96:42] >> So, I've got like on my phone, I can
[96:43] say, I need a new umbrella for my patio
[96:46] outside my house.
[96:47] >> Yeah.
[96:48] >> And it will go on the internet. It will
[96:49] look at the prices. It will look at
[96:50] everything. It
[96:51] >> Yeah. Well, I can just type on the
[96:52] computer screen a question
[96:54] >> and the computer will come up with an
[96:56] answer.
[96:57] >> But you you were talking about planning
[96:58] there. So, I was saying that the agent
[97:00] basically makes a plan and then it
[97:02] spends a couple of it could spend an
[97:03] hour executing that plan.
[97:05] >> Oh, you mean not just coming up with the
[97:07] plan, but actually executing the plan.
[97:09] >> It can do both. But I'm just saying you
[97:10] were talking about how um humans have
[97:12] this, you know, this ability to make
[97:15] decisions. I'm saying that the AI agent
[97:17] is making decisions like a human would.
[97:19] No, you tell them what to do. The
[97:21] computer is probably programmed to look
[97:23] for a reference like an encyclopedia, a
[97:26] handbook, the internet. In other words,
[97:28] if you say, "I want to know the best
[97:30] car," it'll carry that out by looking at
[97:33] the internet going through different
[97:35] cars, it doesn't need you to tell it
[97:38] that. But if you were to ask something
[97:40] more complicated, go to the supermarket
[97:42] and buy me some eggs. No robot can do
[97:45] that.
[97:45] >> Have you been to LA? Cuz if you're in
[97:47] LA, there's all these robots strolling
[97:49] around the streets delivering food. They
[97:51] deliver food in LA.
[97:52] >> Oh, yeah. But that's just crawling on a
[97:54] sidewalk.
[97:55] >> That's what That's what humans do.
[97:56] >> I thought you meant driving a car.
[97:58] Driving a car and going up the stairs
[98:00] and whatever. That's just going on a
[98:03] sidewalk,
[98:03] >> which is what human does. [laughter]
[98:06] >> Yeah, but humans can do a lot more.
[98:08] >> Okay. Thank you so much, doctor. I
[98:10] appreciate your time today. And I've
[98:11] learned so much about all of these
[98:13] fascinating things. And as always when I
[98:15] listen to your content, I find myself
[98:16] more curious about the nature of
[98:17] reality. And I realize how little we
[98:20] know, which makes me and I guess
[98:22] thousands of other people that have
[98:23] followed your work cuz I was going
[98:24] through your videos earlier on and so
[98:25] many of the top comments are people
[98:28] saying that you're the reason they
[98:30] worked harder in their physics classes.
[98:32] >> Oh, really?
[98:33] >> Yeah. I was on a couple of the podcasts
[98:35] that you've been on and so many of the
[98:36] top comments say exactly that. They say,
[98:37] "You're the reason I worked harder.
[98:39] You're the person that made me more
[98:40] curious." And I just think that's such a
[98:41] wonderful thing because as you said at
[98:42] the start, physics is the basis of
[98:44] everything.
[98:44] >> Yeah.
[98:45] >> And uh the more we understand, the
[98:48] better the lives we could live,
[98:49] >> right?
[98:51] >> Thank you so much.
[98:53] >> Okay. Well, thank you.
[98:54] >> YouTube have this new crazy algorithm
[98:56] where they know exactly what video you
[98:58] would like to watch next based on AI and
[99:00] all of your viewing behavior. And the
[99:02] algorithm says that this video is the
[99:05] perfect video for you. It's different
[99:07] for everybody looking right now. Check
[99:09] this video out and I bet you you might
[99:11] love it.
