<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AWDJtUPe1U&t=0s">0:00</a>: the Joe Rogan experience. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AWDJtUPe1U&t=... by @youtube

00: the Joe Rogan experience.
02: >> Things are getting very wild.
04: >> Yeah, there is a lot of misinformation.
06: You know, some people said, "I invented
08: three eye atlas, this object, uh, in
11: order to distract attention from the
12: Epstein files."
13: >> Is that what people are saying?
15: >> Yeah. And I said, "Look, this object is
17: the size of Manhattan Island. It's at
20: four and a half times the Earth Sun
21: separation. Um, if I was able to put it
24: out there, you know, I would be more
27: powerful than the Pope." And because
29: we're talking about a giant object that
32: you can see from any place on Earth, you
34: know, you can buy online a telescope
38: that will allow you half a meter in size
40: that will allow you to see it. It's out
42: there. It cannot be faked.
44: >> Well, those people are fools. You can't
46: listen to those people.
47: >> I don't listen to those I I don't listen
49: to many people, you know. Uh initially a
52: lot of people were dismissing your
54: concerns and they were saying that this
56: object is nothing but a comet and it's
58: very normal. Uh but then as it got
02: closer and as we got more data, it seems
05: like you're correct.
06: >> Well,
07: >> this is a very unusual object.
09: >> There is something really important to
10: recognize here that usually when you
13: deal with scientific matters, they have
16: very little impact on the future of
18: humanity. Very little. You know if the
20: nutrino has a little bit of a mass
22: doesn't really matter. You know when we
24: discovered the Higs boson the biggest
26: impact was to confirm some idea we had
29: back in the 60s and you know obviously
32: that affected you know those people who
35: got the Nobel Prize but most of us
38: continued as if nothing happened.
41: However here if we ever encounter alien
45: technology everything will change. It
48: will affect the financial markets. It
49: will affect politics in a major way. So
52: my point is simple. This is different
54: than other scientific matters. And the
56: intelligence agencies know very well
59: that events with very small probability
01: have to be considered seriously because
05: they have they could have major
07: implications. Just think about October
09: 7th. The Israeli intelligence agencies
12: had a theory that the Hamas will do
15: nothing.
16: and they got data that indicated
20: something is going on out there but they
24: dismissed it because of their theory.
25: Now because as a result of their mistake
28: which was clearly a blunder a lot of
31: people died on both sides for that this
35: could have been avoided if they were to
37: consider a black swan event. an event
39: that you put a small probability for it
41: happening but you look at anomalies in
44: the data and say look the implications
46: are so huge we have to consider it and
48: you know this idea was already
51: considered by the philosopher
53: mathematician bless Pascal he talked
55: about god and he said look of course you
00: might think that god doesn't exist the
02: probability for that is small but the
04: implications if god exists the
06: implications are so huge that we have to
07: discuss
08: That was the argument, Pascal's wager.
11: And the intelligence agencies know that.
13: Believe me, the Israeli intelligence
15: agencies will not make that mistake
17: again. Now, here comes an object from
20: outside the solar system and it shows
22: anomalies.
24: The scientists would say we should be as
27: careful as possible at talking about
30: anything other than a rock.
32: Now they say that when they know that we
35: launched, humanity launched a lot of
37: space junk, you know, a lot of
39: technological objects to space and we
42: also know that there are 100 billion
45: stars like the sun in the Milky Way
46: galaxy alone. Most of them formed
49: billions of years before the sun and
51: there are billions of Earth sun
53: analoges. Now, we all believe that we
55: came out of a soup of chemicals. You
58: know, that's the scientific narrative of
00: how human intelligence came on this
03: earth. And so, it's quite likely that,
06: you know, we are not the first one.
08: Sorry to break the news. Uh Elon Musk
11: was probably not the most accomplished
12: space entrepreneur since the big bang
15: 13.8 billion years ago. And therefore,
18: we should consider the possibility that
20: things like us existed long before us.
24: And you can ask the question, how long
26: does it take our own technology, the
28: Voyager spacecraft that we launched out
30: of the solar system, how long does it
31: take it to move to the opposite side of
33: the Milky Way galaxy, you know,
36: thousands of light years away takes less
39: than a billion years. And that means
41: that all these civilizations that had
44: their history initiated billions of
47: years before ours could have done it.
50: And all we need to do as responsible
53: scientists is to check if among all the
58: rocks that come from outside of our
00: backyard are really rocks or maybe one
04: of these objects might be a tennis ball
06: that was thrown by a neighbor. And the
09: reason I say that is, you know, we live
10: at our home at our at the on earth next
14: to the sun. We look around us in the
17: cosmic street and we see a lot of houses
19: just like ours. There are billions of
21: them probably. Now my colleagues, those
27: scientists who think traditionally, they
30: say, well, you know, microbes came to
33: Earth very early, therefore they must be
36: everywhere. So, let's define our highest
39: priority, searching for microbes
42: on other houses in our cosmic street.
45: And I say, good. You can do that from
48: the vantage point of your home. You can
50: look through the window and search for
52: microbes in your neighbor's yards, but
54: you would need to put $10 billion to
56: develop a big enough instrument that
58: would be able to detect the chemical
00: fingerprints of microbes, you know, on
03: exoplanets.
05: uh and think about the possibility that
07: there was actually there is a resident
10: in one of those houses. You know, that
13: resident might show up in your front
14: door at some point or you might see
19: an object that arrives to your backyard
21: or your mailbox from that res.
24: >> Black swan event,
25: >> a black swan event. Or you might see
27: some construction project in from a
30: distance that might be easier to detect
32: than microbes. So we should hedge our
34: bets. You know, we should uh invest
38: billions of dollars on both fronts. At
41: the moment, the scientific community is
43: willing to allocate more than $10
45: billion to searching for microbes,
49: but no recommendation is made to
51: allocate any federal funding to the
53: search for intelligence. And I say that
54: that is an oversight.
56: >> Let's let's go back to I don't one more
59: time. Okay, I don't want to screw it up.
02: Um, how large was that?
05: >> That was was the size of a football
07: field.
09: >> Of all the 100 meters.
10: >> Small in comparison to three eyelas.
12: >> Oh yeah, that's my point that three eye
15: atlas is a million times more massive,
17: at least a million times more massive
18: than MUA. And I immediately as it was
21: discovered, you know, it was July 1st
24: and my wife asked me to go on vacation
26: to Aruba 2 days later. And uh as I was
30: going on the plane and as I arrived
32: there, I realized, wait, that doesn't
33: make sense cuz we should have seen
35: millions of uh omuamas before we saw
37: this one, you know, it's so big. And I
40: also realized there is not enough rocky
42: material per unit volume in interstellar
44: space to deliver such a giant rock into
48: the inner solar system within a period
50: of a decade. You would expect it at the
52: very optimistic scenario where you
55: package all the material into objects
57: that are 5 kilometer in diameter. You
59: would imagine once per 10,000 years. So
02: I wrote immediately a scientific paper.
04: My wife was not happy that you know on
06: our vacation I was sitting on my
08: computer but I just couldn't resist it.
10: And by the way this paper I submitted
13: for publication that was July 3rd or
16: something. Um and um then the editor
20: said, "Oh, the paper is fine, but you
23: have a concluding sentence at the end
26: where you say, well, unless the object
28: is smaller than estimated,
31: maybe it was targeting the inner
33: source." That was my solution to say you
36: know one way out of this dilemma of why
39: is it so big is if it was targeting the
42: inner solar system by design and indeed
44: the trajectory is aligned with the plane
46: of the planets around the sun to within
49: 5° the chance for that at random is one
52: in 500 okay and it's moving in a
55: retrograde trajectory opposite to the
57: motion of the planets which is ideal for
59: it to release mini probes that will get
01: into the planets it gets close to Mars
04: it gets close to Jupiter. It goes on the
06: opposite side of the sun uh relative to
09: Earth when it's closest to the sun. And
12: that's the time when a spacecraft could
14: do a maneuver to take advantage of the
16: sun's gravitational assist. You know,
18: all of these are interesting indications
20: that may imply that some intelligence
24: designed the trajectory. So I had one
26: sentence at the end of the paper saying
29: maybe the trajectory was designed and
32: the editor said no no no the paper will
34: not get published unless you remove that
36: sentence.
37: >> Wow.
38: >> So now when you when you listen to comet
41: experts that say well this claim or that
45: claim was never published in a
48: peer-review journal. Guess what? they
51: are the editors or the reviewers who are
54: blocking
55: the discussion on possibilities and I
59: think it's inappropriate especially in
00: the case of alien technology because
03: it's could be a black swan event. It
05: could be something that affects the
06: future of humanity and we if we behave
09: you know very conservatively we might
12: not last very long.
13: >> Well, it's also arrogant. It's it's
15: arrogant.
16: >> Yeah. This object is
19: how it shows that there's no iron.
21: >> Oh no. So yeah. So then the composition
24: of the plume of gas.
26: >> So this is this is before you knew about
28: the composition that you wrote this
30: paper.
30: >> Exactly.
31: >> So as time is going on, you are being
34: shown to be correct.
36: >> Well, we found more more anomalies.
37: >> More anomalies. So this is not a normal
39: thing.
40: >> Not a normal thing. So, for one thing,
42: uh there was a glow that looks like an
45: extended feature, and everyone said,
48: "Oh, that's a tail. That's the signature
51: of a comet." And I said, "Wait a minute.
53: It it's pointing towards the sun. It's
55: not pointing away from the sun."
56: Usually, cometary tails are made of dust
58: and gas, which is pushed back away from
01: the sun by the radiation and the solar
04: wind, you know. Um, and so this one was
08: pointed towards the sun, not away from
10: the sun. And the question is why? And um
13: actually I calculated that you know it
16: appeared very clearly in the sharpest
17: image we had from the Hubble Space
19: Telescope which showed an elongation by
22: a factor of two towards the sun but we
25: were looking at it like a cigar. We were
27: looking almost along the cigar long axis
31: uh within 10° of the object sun axis. So
34: we were looking almost edge on and I
37: calculated if you were to correct for
38: that this would be a feature that is 10
40: times longer than it is wide you know
43: and and that means it's like a jet so
46: the object was had a jet in front of it
49: towards the sun. The question is why?
51: And you know the comet experts ignored
55: it and just said well you know comets
57: are strange you know the who knows. Um
00: but my point is this is a blind date of
03: in interstellar proportions. And my
06: advice on blind dates is not to
09: speak or say what you think this is but
11: to observe the other side. You know the
14: best way to respond to a blind date is
16: to observe the other side. Don't speak.
18: Just observe the other side because it
21: may be different than what you think.
23: And maybe you know on one of the dates
25: you will have a serial killer on the
28: other side.
29: >> Oh boy. Now um explain if you could how
34: we know the composition of this thing.
37: So we can figure out composition of a
41: plume of gas uh by um taking a spectrum
46: of it which means you basically have
49: some kind of a prism that breaks you
51: know that a light with different
53: wavelengths is bent at different angles
56: and so you spread the light into the
58: different colors and if you do that you
02: you can find the uh fingerprints the
04: spectral fingerprints of specific atoms.
07: or molecules because each atom or
10: molecule has transitions. I I actually
13: teach I taught it just two days ago in a
17: class that I teach uh that is mandatory
20: obligatory at the Harvard astronomy
22: department where I was chair for a
24: decade you know like between 2011 2020.
27: So this is the mandatory class and I I
29: just taught how you know spectral lines
31: emitted by atoms and molecules just two
35: days ago. So this is a very well-known
37: thing and we know the the wavelengths of
40: those and and we use them to identify
43: the composition uh you know we know
45: which atoms produced these spectral
47: lines the fingerprints it's just like
49: fingerprints okay and and so what was
52: found you know and that's by multiple
54: teams there are three papers on that we
57: found
59: nickel a lot of nickel but no very
02: little iron at first no iron whatsoever
05: Now usually in all the comets in the
07: past from the solar system and also from
09: interstellar space there is one comet
11: Borisov that was found it's the second
13: interstellar object which looked just
15: like a familiar comet. I had nothing to
18: say about that one. It looked like a
19: comet behaved like a comet. It was a
22: comet but it had similar abundances of
25: nickel and iron. The only place where we
27: found before much more nickel than iron
30: is in alloys that we produce
32: industrially. For example, uh for
35: aerospace applications, uh nickel alloys
38: have a lot of nickel, no iron. So maybe
43: the skin of this object is is
45: industrially produced. That's that was
47: my suggestion. But what the authors of
49: these papers said is maybe nature is
52: capable of going through the same
55: chemical pathway of producing nickel
58: without iron as we do in our industries.
01: So they made the conjecture that this
03: carbonil pathway which is well known in
06: the industry world uh carbonil is the
08: pathway the name of the pathway they
10: said well maybe this carbon pathway
13: happens in nature uh we have never seen
16: it before but that is their explanation