Eric Weinstein: The State of American Science, Breakthrough Coverups, and the Danger of Physics

Key Takeaway

Create a small “high-beta” learning bet today: spend 30 minutes investigating one credible idea in your field that most people dismiss, then write down the strongest evidence for and against it. Do not confuse popularity with truth. By deliberately exposing yourself to informed dissent—and being willing to revise your view—you build the scientific habit the episode argues institutions too often suppress: curiosity before consensus.

Episode Overview

Eric Weinstein argues that American science has become overly cautious, consensus-driven, and poorly structured to reward unconventional researchers or long-horizon discovery. He calls for funding exceptional people rather than narrowly defined projects, preserving room for high-risk research, and confronting the governance and security implications of breakthroughs in physics and AI.

Full Transcript

Transcript of Eric Weinstein: The State of American Science, Breakthrough Coverups, and the Danger of Physics from All-In Podcast. Auto-generated from episode audio; may contain minor errors.

We have become a T-nation, when it comes to it to science. You were named marginal scientist. Keep saying. marginal. Yes. I completely disagree. with the narrative of this industry. I want to break through a giant a hole in the Law on civil rights. Stagnation in physics, possibly led to human survival kind. When will we do it? this jump, the world will become unrecognizable. I'm going all in. Or Did you notice? as far as become more difficult things when growing your wealth? Between investments, tax strategy and estate planning , managing all of this- This is a full-time job.

working day, about which you didn't ask. Creative Planning can help. Their coordinated team investment managers, CPAs and affiliated lawyers on issues inheritance can to perform a significant part of the heavy work so that you don't had to. Creative Planning, where wealth works together. Go to creativeplanning.com/allin. I'm going all in. Eric Weinstein, mathematician, physicist, economist, doctor philosophy with mathematical physics from Harvard, postdoc National scientific fund, ONR fellow in Harvard, published proposed mathematical basis in speculative single field theory under geometric name unity in 2021, officially with Thiel Capital, host and guest podcast.

Kind regards please come for an interview All-In. It's great to be here. AND now, where are the best friends? They refused to opportunities, because it advanced scientific a corner that... I can't believe that. Jason came back and escaped. No, we are with you, I have I mean, just for audience, we are with you now in Washington. So, we are in rented studio, we're giving this interview, but good time. What led you to Washington? Uh, a possibility. I very excited. I I am meeting with Ministry defense, hmm, and took advantage of opportunity to stay for a while days.

Spoke with Director Kratsios with OSTP and scientific White House advisor, fantastic meeting. Talked to Jay Bhattacharya, who is to an old friend, from the NIH. I'm going to talk. with Jim O'Neill, who I hope it will come. to NSF. Yes. And it's really simple. I am considering the first one. big offer regarding reform American science since the time of Vannevar Bush at the end World War II war. So, this cannot be to be more fascinating. Kratsios told you that I just took it from him. interview on this topic?

No. Good. Well, he said. Good. You are old colleagues, aren't you? wrong? Yes. Yes. Michael...Michael excellent. And here he is... he...it appeared. He said, you know, here I am in this new position, and Yes. I'm probably a little was worried that this report, you know, obviously, he fills huge positions. And I was worried that this will be a disaster. And I was stunned as much as he was good. I have on mind you, he wasn't ideal, but never and it doesn't happen. And then I I told you that.

Mmm. And you said that we are you talked, and what you reported to him many of these questions. It seems to me that he, hmm, really grew up in this role, trying to become a student American scientific project. AND I couldn't be happier, hearing from him things like: " We know that not We know everything. We only at the beginning. We "We're just getting started." So it looks like great plan. Guided science government, played fundamental role in the success of the republic, at least for the last 100 years, the last 50, 75 years.

Before that, in the book " Science in the Golden Age", published Kratsios, and others, could be put forward argument. I heard you. you claim that science in America really reached a dead end. Can you do this now? should we justify? Well, the question is, What kind of science has entered? in a dead end. Therefore, one of the wonderful things in Michael's words is that Science is great. place, and she doesn't used in one way. Therefore, what I really think the biggest if you Do you want to fly a little?

and give an idea of what is there under threat, it absolutely brave science that we can to afford as rich, strict individualistic a nation that no one the other one can't to allow And therefore, more or less when I I see how we are spending gradual research and we do things that incredibly careful with low dispersion and we call it perfection, I I get depressed because I feel that what we must take participation, these are bets that no one else can to afford Also this concerns, that our main geopolitical rival, China, has the problem with freedom.

And, honestly, Freedom is a weapon. It a serious advantage, which we can to afford look at yourself and to say that we are not we do everything perfectly, and we want to know truth. I want to know, Did Fauci kill 10? millions of people. I must have possibility investigate this as virologist, as epidemiologist. I must have opportunity to get answers and pass the process of justice. When we have situation when our scientists are limited because the conclusion is known in advance, we we limit our own ability use cowboy science to manage the rest world.

And, honestly, , we are losing our the greatest advantage, and exactly the middle finger. American the ability to say " "go to hell" to the leader who says you, what is true and what is not No. Young man should be able to say, "Hey, I think what is my industry moving in absolutely wrong direction, and I'm ready to put your money on it career. "Don't interfere." . It always has been. the biggest question for me: where is everyone skeptics? Where is everyone? scientists who must to question dogma during lockdowns, during COVID , during that pandemic?

And I spoke. about this with Kratios, when we spent interview. What if everyone in the room agree with something, it's probably wrong. Well, you know, it should be certain level skepticism. But especially because fundamental the basis of science is in order to put question, interrogate, generate evidence, generate data, and then do some conclusions and put next question. But it's almost like stop betting question. Where is this from? Did it work? It sounds like this, as if you're saying that this because people were limited. Socially? Was it economical?

? What happened, what didn't only during this pandemic, but also in general we see that this more is happening in these scientific fields where everyone unites around one thesis, one dogma; and you don't will receive financing, you have you won't have any friends there will be no colleagues for cooperation with you, you will be punished if you put others question or ask whether these are correct assumption? That's the question. AND let me just answer the him. We created scientific precariat. We created a world in which to whom the professors do not can allow to go against oneself consensus.

Now the problem in consensus. Because if everyone agree with something, you don't consensus is needed. No arithmetic consensus. Do we have arithmetic consensus that 2 + 3 = 5? No, it's just like that. When I hear the word consensus, I am very I'm nervous because the consensus usually artificial the agreement reached under pressure. Washington consensus is something like we all are we move in a certain direction, and if you don't move in this direction, you don't have there will be work. So, when you ask what happens, you know, my question is because Jay Bhattacharya– perfect example of what is to happen.

You have a boyfriend who has a doctorate philosophy with economics and doctorate medical sciences. And he went against this with By a great declaration Barrington. Now he heads the NIH. I knew Jay, when this loser Francis Collins called him marginal epidemiology. AND you know, his assistant , which is probably our biological weapon, this is Anthony Fauci. Now, if I I will say that Anthony Fauci was probably our biological a weapon that will strike all these people, especially institutional left, this is, well, talk about conspiracy theory.

Therefore, my question is because we signed several deals in the 70s years, Geneva convention and treaty about biological weapons. We have a mysterious system. Somehow the way we chose in in this case mysterious Ukrainian- British zoologist so that he receives huge sums money through charitable organization under called EcoHealth Alliance. Money, for example, from Ditra, Agencies with reduction of defense threats. All this the case has none meaning. So, if you you start doing something through secrets operations, problem is that scientists can see through the secret operations.

If you have great tools, you know, you can to say: "I wasn't there" "at the scene of the crime." It okay, but we have hair follicle, and I can almost certainly to say that you were on at the scene of the crime. Here how powerful science. So, now in you have another problem, which is that Washington has all these policies with an assessment " "four-minus", especially in secret community, not in reconnaissance community, and in secret society within intelligence communities that do not want cool ones independent scientists, because they tell stories and narratives, which are easy to refute So now we have the problem is not only with good science, we have problem with good journalism.

Right? They also must to adapt to gigantic corporation. That's right. So, there are cases when you you have to, you know, when the US started war, Roosevelt was in wheelchair with with these bandages on feet, and was general agreement that we we will not to report the status the president's health. Well, we had that. exactly with Biden. Biden suffered from of a certain shape dementia. Is anyone came to mind ask the host geriatric neurologist: " Look, inspect. his gait, examine his speech habits and tell us at what stage is it cognitive trajectory he, probably, is located?" So, if you try, you know, lie about that structurally important, You don't want that.

scientists have blown it up. When we were doing this, and I I don't argue with that. Well, we shouldn't have. to be honest about of what we did in school for boys in New Mexico from 1940 to 1945 year, because science created the most powerful weapon, which ever seen on the planet Earth. For those who don't know, this is Manhattan project. Absolutely. OK. OK. So, I'm trying. to say that now you Don't take those people. who spoke, and not do them presidents university or heads of departments .

You don't give them department. And I just gave a report about this at the conference Jordan Peterson's Arc . You did not return to small job the number of people who performed. You are not rewarded them. My question: where is mine third house because I performed? Hmm. Where is the opportunity to give my children, you know, I I want to have three children. to school? I want to take participation in security and prosperity that we we provide for everyone to others. And this is key. question.

He created American scientific precariat. This is one of the reasons why You know, you have these strange political connections where there is none balance in professorial case. Do you have this? incredibly dangerous situation, when we don't take participation in freedom. And I I will say, in particular, theoretical physics, theoretical physics– This is the only profession who lost her freedom words because of something that is called limited access to the data where I don't allowed to take pen to paper to record the physical equation, if it is somehow affects nuclear weapons.

Well, try it. to do really good physics like this in a way that it doesn't influenced, you know, the hadrons and nuclear weapons. This is impossible. So, you have this a threat, right? Something, hmm, law...I not even protected The First Amendment. But I want return to your thoughts about incentives. So when you say, I want to have a third one. home, you mean that I will just do Eric's translation Weinstein. But you you say that how I have a professor. to obey the rules to get a position, grant, chairmanship or any other the scholarship that I I am looking for.

If I don't I obey the rules, if I am marginal, if I speak nonconformist things, is this the right way to heterodox? Heterodox. If I decide simply to go against orthodoxy, right? I think it was, um, to clean up with madness the idea of ​​Wuhan institute virology with consideration of the issue of origin of COVID. Right. OK. Crazy. Right. Then this it was clear. AND when you said that, you were called marginal scientist, you were punished and called an outcast, and so you lost access, you have lost you lost your job income.

A lot of things left out the boundaries of the equation for you. Yes. Because you bet questions that were heterodox. I came up with a set equations with differential geometry in 1987, and I was treated incredibly bad. These equations filled my industry in 1994. And there was none attempts to return back and say: " Wait a minute, we just brutally beat someone who did everything right and very early." So, you know, it's the same very simple process. You are not allowed. to wish the best for of your life.

You must be modest, you know, or, well, real ones scientists don't care about money. Real scientists don't care about safety . The reward is the work. This, you know, blah-blah- blah blah. That's all. absolute nonsense. And on the right in that we we provide your safety. And I say " "third home" to to deliberately provoke . I said before " second home", and with that finished. You have dealing with the level prosperity in the world, in which the coefficients The genies are going crazy. It almost completely related to technologies that are derived from science, and scientists don't take participation.

So, you create collectivist thinking because we we cannot receive salary. We are not we can win. If we do everything right, we Let's fly out. When did this happen? change? Aren't we appreciated and not appreciated heterodoxy, criticism, strange ideas? The emergence of science, the emergence of large innovations in which America, perhaps is still world-class leader, arises from of what was originally seems heretical. It seems far-fetched, an unrealistic idea , which will not happen. But one is enough out of ten of these cases to become the truth, and in the end boundaries have been pushed forward, and we we find ourselves on a new boundaries.

Right. Science must to adhere to those the formulas themselves, as well as entrepreneurship in in the sense of technological industrial type entrepreneurship. About. About. Yes. But where is everything? changed and why? Or it's just natural move, you know, Ted Kaczynski, The Unabomber, wrote this manifesto, where talked about excessive socialization. Yes. Is this ultimately what What happened here? Or played their role social networks? Or it's just saturation social systems with sometimes? Yes, that's right. Were they intentional? external efforts? The only thing you don't mentioned in that list things you don't remembered, this is what I worked for Faculty of Physics probably in Jewish university, Massachusetts technological institute, where passed postdoctoral scholarship; but the most important thing is that I was co-chairman, co-leader of the project "Scientific- technical workforce » together with Richard Freeman in Harvard university at Faculty of Economics because I was worried that we, that we are losing it .

And there is a very clear answer to this respond. And between 1965 and Everything went wrong in 1975. not so. Right? AND this is essentially from beginning of acceptance Law on Medical insurance 1965 to the dispute about something called " Man: a course of study » 1975, which initiated expert assessment and CONTROL. But if you do you want exactly to determine, then this really 65, 69 and 71 years old especially cruel. AND what happened is that that physical faculty Massachusetts technological institute, I think, in the spring of 1969, came out on cue protest against the war in Vietnam, including people who took participation in Manhattan project.

And the government looked at it and said: "Okay, you You are staggering. We are not we can trust you. We have a very complex mysterious deal, in particular, with our physicists. You the most dangerous, the deadliest, the smartest, the most successful group, together with mathematicians. And we relied on you, and now we don't we can trust you, because you don't row, uh not in the same direction, in which the country is rowing with war, because you are you joining? protest movement. What happened is that Laboratory tools Massachusetts technological institute, through which, I think it was leaking.

many state money, immediately taken out of bounds university and turned into Draper Laboratories . And the amendment Mansfield 1969-1971 , named after Mike Mansfield from Montana, said: " Okay, military. can't anymore finance research blue sky inside our university system, if it is not has a direct military, uh, explicit military purpose." "It There was a disaster. For The military said: " Look, we want to so that you guys are thick and happy, spent research in the field of the blue sky, which, in your opinion, you must do.

We We trust you. We we just want to know, that you are there when we "This is necessary." So the military were our best friends. It was inconvenient, because, honestly saying, you have a huge number different ideas within high-energy, very dynamic scientific project. If you don't have communists and fascists in one tea drinking department together, something went wrong Yes. Because scientists very extreme. AND Ted Kaczynski, you know, wrote wonderful story, for example, under the name "Ship of Fools" about a bunch of people, overly concerned political correctness on ships, which then, you know, faces iceberg, because no one doesn't really pay attention to management by ship.

They have questions arise about... I didn't even know. this. Oh, yes. Yes, yes, yes. Everyone should do this. read. Of course, I'm not...I'm not pushing. people to...uh... "mass murderer." Uh, you know how, however, to confess heretically Ted Kaczynski... Well, but the point is that weird scientists. Or, at least a lot weird scientists. AND if you are not going to deal with really dangerous Um, I don't even I know why you are you getting ready for scientific game. So where did these go? minds, if they don't allowed or not allowed to enter institutions, establishment, the mechanism of science in America?

They still exist, or their brains just dulled, and they allowed to speak only certain things? We we take big ones scientists and reprogram them, and Are we losing all alpha? I mean, that... Yes, yes, you are losing. , you lose alpha. And it's funny that you must say that because of this it does his alpha male or alpha in theory investment, right? Yes. Both work. Yes, me...Me too I do freestyle. rap. Really? Yes, no. Well, sometimes. Good. We'll talk about it. later. Yes, cool. Um, well, mostly you sterilize and castrate yours the best minds.

Hmm. But another thing— look at Palmer Lucky. Okay, this one my boyfriend seems to be a scientist. He daring. He has crazy shirt. AND he creates things to to kill people. Yes. Right? If he worked for Faculty of Physics , he could hardly to be that kind of guy. But if you wanted to someone who is still is engaged in science and looks like to me great scientist, I would advised you to Nimu Arkani-Hamed. Incredible charismatic, bright as day long, absolutely uncompromising, not was fond of theory strings on the deep equal, although sympathizes with many its aspects.

You Do you know what? Is he there? And he the best of us currently, and he hasn't yet so old, Do you understand? Um, I have it feels like a gigantic thing happened decrease in our efficiency, and I I know why. When you kick Jim out Watson of Cold Spring -Harbor, what is it? built what you Are you doing? Do you know? that Mark Tashny, uh, He's over 80. Uh, boy. who wrote genetic switch in the lambda phase, and one of the most brilliant bold people.

You know, in some moment, I think sent to him journalist, and The journalist returned , with his tail up, and said: "This...This "The guy is crazy." . Hmm. Well, Eric Lander was scientific advisor The White House. Kratsios, well, I think it is the photo is not hanging on the wall because he such uncompromising, difficult to communicate boy. And I don't I want to say this, heavy feeling. Hmm. You know, if you ever- Have you ever seen the movie " Whiplash injury", hmm. I love him. One one of my favorites.

OK. Well, there's a reason, Why does this guy have the best band. He... you know, he doesn't give napkins. And I don't want to to be rude about it that I don't want brutal place, but these things are enough relentless. What is the solution for swamps, stagnation? What are we we do here to try to make up for lost time? What we are doing here to restructure? Does this apply? institutions? Is this concerns financing? Is this does it concern people? Or this is reprogramming ? I mean, how to exit completely programmed social circle?

Great question. I have I mean, really great question. Let's just we will provocative and Let's throw some things away. Refusal from national interests. I want to break through a giant a hole in the Law on civil rights, so that we have teams that do not are constantly afraid of HR. What does the Law on civil rights one that makes it difficult for people to do what what they need. Well, you know, you, you. You know, my the closest...Mine closest friend...uh ...from college, and...We have a group of three people, two Jews and Muslim.

Mhm. And a Muslim constantly teasing Jews, you know, Guys, do you have all banks and newspapers, and we, you know , we joke about it, that He is a terrorist. This is not the one. model that I can no one to explain. But we, you know, incredibly close to 1982. I claim, that you don't understand how high-ranking officials actually form close-knit social units. If you have a department of personnel, which says: " Eric, I understand that You are joking inappropriately. dumps. Get out. from here. Who are you and what are you?

you do in mine laboratories? Allow to call me security. Why me? a note for my mom and dad, so that I can do everything did?" I'm not saying that You were terrible. I I say that you you don't know enough about the culture of greatness, to be mine HR department. It about what I I say. That is, I just I am putting forward a provocative an idea which, by the way, I democrat. I would rather school democrat John F. Kennedy than I would...I don't think I would joined them...

I don't know who you are. were today. Well, I'm staying in parties. I am a Democrat, what a fan architecture. You know, architecture is that house, around which you are building shopping center, because the person doesn't want it sell. Yes. I'm not going to...I'm not I'm going to leave. parties, hmm, but mine The party has gone crazy. IN I have this feeling, what if we were the ones Who do we pretend to be? we would unite with Republicans, with whom I met, and they would say, "Let's let's continue and we are reforming the system together".

And if you Do you want to brag? the way you did America the Great Without us, you can go to damn. I have this. feeling that I would prefer to work with you, make America big, and then fight for credit. This is how it works on war, you understand? So my first recommendation- Throw out the Law on civil rights. No, don't throw it away. Look for holes in this. because you like it intention, exactly the letter contradicts the intention that creates collectivist thinking. Impossible to make a big one work without hyperindividualism and without hard hyperindividualism.

And that's why I feel that this is not an Ayn Rand thing, this is not a conservative thing. If the problem is that that I...I consider myself left-wing centrist, and there is no one else individualist than me . And that's why you need, so that I don't have to review. Reviewing is a fictional story that transformed into science. No, you can find it's in Google Ngrams. Insert quote space, reviewing space, close the quote and you notice that actually not about that mentioned before 1965 , and the reason for this is that Law on Medical insurance made government of the main payer of medical procedures.

The government said : "Well, why do we pay for all this?" Well, doctors said: "We are not we want you to controlled the process acceptance of our decisions. So, our colleagues, we will to evaluate each other." It started in the clinic in Utah. And then, only in 1975, fiscal and social conservatives attacked on NSF because of something under entitled "Man: A Course training" or MACOS. WITH for some reason NSF united anthropology into science. I think this is a mistake. . I think we should really need divide the exact science.

And I think that weaker scientists should create your own organizations and to stop to use our credit cards, because they are destroying our credit limit. These are social and soft sciences vs. exact sciences, where there is industrial end point. Well, that's not a question. industrial end points. I mean, that this is another thing that really spoiled, this that science has become synonymous biomedicine, what is it there is no Yes. And science became, er, in conservative understanding, something that the market may well do. When it's like: "Well, doesn't anyone took the course " Economics 101?

Because , you know, in the first your school day have to say that markets work very well okay if you don't belong to category, which called market failure. And if you missed this day, you said, "Well, markets perfect, and they can appreciate everything." But all that is inexhaustible and non-exclusive, which is precisely by definition science, it cannot be valued by the market if you will not create artificial market. So I I can't convey it. how much is it depressing, you know, if I was good to Republicans, here where I will be cruel.

You can't have idiots. who don't understand that markets cannot see everything. There is a reason, why do we pay taxes for the army, and this technical reason. We we don't think that this Well, if the market... if you can to raise an army exhaustive and exclusive, you don't will need to pay for it taxes. So, your tax funds should be used for things, which the market cannot to reach. Theory homotopy—wonderful example. When I say on homotopy theory in scientific discussion, people say, "Well, so what?" "Is this it?" And I say: "Well ", you don't know." It incredibly unimportant part of mathematics, pure mathematics.

I I don't know if she has some industrial application. But you you are doing theory homotopies, and you pull out a Jenga block from incredibly important ecosystem that you don't You understand. So, in my opinion I think I'm going to to contribute to this conversation doctor's point of view philosophy, because what doctors of philosophy are doing wrong, it's that they are expelled . Trump has for them fools. They are not They want Trump's fools. Yes. Therefore they are not appear. Yes. Now, okay, if they are not going explain to you why we need a theory homotopies, and we need to tax people and pay for it.

The administration doesn't listen what she needs hear, and people who should say this, do not appear before administration. This is true, and this absolutely non-functional, and, honestly, statistics that I led Kratsios, is that Nature conducted a survey in 2000 scientists, their readers , Nature is a scientific a magazine that is widely read scientifically community, and 6%... By the way, no reviewed until the 70s years. Right. And 6% readers surveyed voted for President Trump. 85% or something like that–Kamala Harris, and then there was a group that does not decided.

But I I think that says it all. about your point of view. For example, Trump they think so anti-scientific, Trump Institute consider anti-scientific, that don't even want to engagement. Let's assume that you hate trump Okay, let's assume that Do you think Trump the devil. I just met with Michael Kratsios. Great, I wanted this role. I ready to fight for this role. I didn't think so. that I will get it, because I don't was ready to swear on sufficient loyalty Donald Trump. Accidentally it received by Michael Kratsios.

I am very was nervous because he didn't has a doctorate degree. Which incredible growth on this position. Boy understand, I don't know all sorts of things. I am here, to learn. Tell me me, what about me need to know. AND if no one will appear to to conduct this training, you ask yourself, boy, do you You deserve it. for what I received, because I think that Michael is trying to do absolutely the right things. I I know Jim very well. O'Neill from the world Peter Thiel.

He comes to NSF. Jay Bhattacharya, the real one pearl. If you don't you can work with these people, this is their Is it your problem? problem? So, you can argue with this, and excuse me, please I just return to talking about markets, and I I will bring libertarian argument. If markets work well for stimulation economic value , and those who are good at it to do this, they will take meaningful participation in creating this values, then the wealthy will appear people, and these wealthy people will see the value of mathematics, net worth physics, value astrophysics and cosmology, and they will finance this.

Jim Simons, is that right? he did not finance a lot of research? Jim was a genius with detailed knowledge pure mathematics. Hmm. So, if you know, Yuri Milner is a guy who has experience in quantum chromodynamics. Hmm. If you have more such people, and they are. The point is, I am not trying. to argue with you about this, but my point is therefore, shouldn't market to work regardless of this? What will they see? the value of science, which you determine, they it will be determined, capital will flow to these research, they somehow will be funded.

There are many independent institutions, who receive capital. And whether this is enough for landscape, or not enough? And I I will also note how you you know, one of statistical data, which I brought along with Kratios, which he published in his book, is that, that over time we we observe significant decrease dollar efficiency aimed at scientific research in the USA. 80-fold decrease profitability every dollar, invested in government research . So I just want to express these two points. Isn't there? private market capital that will find way to solve these problems?

And doesn't it become government is getting worse over time capital allocation and providing profitability? And I, Maybe I'll give you a chance, ago... I think...Or...I I feel that I should have smoke cannabis, so that at all answer this question. I don't believe it. none of these first points. And I am quite knew Jim well Simons. Jim was with those who could do it make. But even he didn't understand. Under the time of my last conversations with Jim I am Simons. tried to explain to him, as a transgression Cherna-Simons, interpreted as action functionality, is the only competitor Einstein's theories- Gilbert.

And what is he actually reveals, if this continues research that Cherny's theory Simons and Einstein-Hilbert are on on equal terms as daughter of the ultimate theories. He doesn't. knew. So partly the problem is because in my field so hard to understand, what is happening in adjacent. I just spoke in phone before podcast with your a good friend by Edward Frankel, who is engaged in, hmm, algebraic geometry, while I would be engaged differential geometry. We are very difficult to communicate, even if these industries adjacent to each other.

So yes, if you have algebraic geometer , who is a billionaire, and theorist presentations, another one , who, um, is interested in, hmm, I don't know which one category theory, you could do this so. But this complete madness. OK. So, the government must finance state science, which will be the main sponsor of these things. Next part this... We need the right people who represent decision about where we are should finance, what should we do finance. Right. And that's exactly it. we did before, in We had something on.

kind of temporary financing. And very good people had money. Uh, someone many years ago I was at a conference in Beersheba, hmm, with physics. And people talked about where they are going get yours next job. And to This one suits us. the old man says : "I'm just sorry all of you." It was American. And I said: "In-in which "meaning?" He said: " You know that I never never served in life job application? Sorry? What do you have? mean? He says: " If you were even a little good for you too work was needed, you spoke to someone from the people who were high-ranking officials in this industry, and they called, and before that time they put the phone, you had work where you want "it had to be." Hmm.

And therefore I assert that when they come to you administrators like " Key indicators "Efficiency". Uh, we need to move it's data-driven. I data-driven. I I want to know what it will be. translation ". Do you know What are you anyway? profitability investment? Is this just what you Can you measure? Yes. And therefore I assert that much of what you What you want is for these people to were on advance payment terms . So every time you you have a real problem, you are you calling Jason, and they filled the most terrible intellects that one can only imagine, and we can take on for work and decide your problems.

But if you say, "Well, why my money taxpayers, you know, you should do what you want Does it seem interesting? "Well, if I can do it what I think interesting, and when you Call me, I will. I will be very kindly to relate to to help yourself to one's own country, to one's own own nation. I will positive about this treat. If you Tell me what you think. should work on this, because this is the the thing moves profitability investment, I have it feels like you you just don't understand science?

Can you imagine that? your technological way of thinking the same as mine scientific? Do you want to receive money I I mean, I spent a lot of time in Silicon Valley. I am not interested. so much new McLaren, How much is that, is it mine? name will discuss in 10,000 years, if people will still live. And I I say this because, you know, Jim Watson just died. My good friends Isidore Singer, Raoul Bot, already died. These are people whose contribution will discuss in 10,000 years. Hmm.

Or can you say that about almost anyone, Who do you know who? is engaged in software providing as service? Well, it's hard. say. You know how I am once said, uh, what difference between Grisha Perlman and Ron Perlman? And therefore in modern era the question is because who is Grisha? Perlman? And, you know, in 1000 years the question is who That's Ron Perlman. Hmm. So, I feel that in we have our own toys, that we care about . We care about our history. We we care about different things.

Not without reason want to live in the country, to be able to register in Four Seasons hotels and fly business class, but we don't need it corporate jet. As if it's none of your business. So treat yourself scientists as before rock- stars, what are they must be and will be . Otherwise you will you will lose. You will lose this talent. You lose that moment. I'm going all in. Nature protection is often are called anti-growth. Stock nature conservation is not I agree. They believe that the protection of the earth, wildlife and access to nature goes hand in hand with economic opportunities.

For 40 years they moved with the market speed to to protect the lands that are under threat, at the same time supporting local communities. Having 9 millions of acres that protected in all 50 states, the Defense Fund nature proves that he provides long-term results that are beneficial communities and nature. Learn more at conservationfund.org. I'm going all in. When you are you talking about funding from small companies, then in the modern era financing process it works exactly like this grants. You are submitting grant application from very specific a set of goals, and that's it for this will be capital used.

And to yours previous opinion, grants usually are approved if they have a lower beta coefficient, which means more intended result. We adapt modern portfolio theory to science. To science. Yes. Well, I mean that's exactly how it is worked–this is mine argument. Or not? And whether doesn't lose it opportunity to do insanely high beta rates, not just to bet on idea, but on a person. So, insanely high beta rates. Yes. Let's take a look example. Yes. Imagine I have 1% chance to cure all cancer. Right. Or you deserve me to hire?

Well, 99% of failures –it is quite expensive, but the benefit of destruction of treatment all types of cancer…um, the government is incredible rich. And when you incredibly rich, you you can allow to do different things for yourself bets to maximize your results. Problem in that the government co-invested through things that are poorer for him. Hmm. So every department says, you know, we don't can we afford this allow, we don't have so much appointments. So we let's choose someone who has a very high probability of success with very modest result, and then let's start lying about the extent to which it importantly.

You will notice, what if you ask people, how are things going? your industry? All they say they never there were better times, to be a theorist particles. Well, this terrible time to to be a theorist particles. Right? AND we can't do this say. And that's funny, because again, in portfolio theory, if you have balanced briefcase, and part it starts to flourish, and part fails, you usually take money from that flourishes, and invest them in what fails, therefore what else are you you get too much a lot of concentration in the briefcase.

No one never thought about it. So you have people, which are not even understand modern portfolio theory and not understand how to design things on based on market failures. Very it is important to know the basics market theories. Hmm. And we don't know. Yes. So, if we do this Let's fix it, shall we? we finance individuals, not ideas? You know, this is different. view... Tell me more. So, the whole story...I gave this example Cratios. Stuart Butterfield worked on this project several years. He left with 3 millions of dollars.

All venture capital capitalists invested money, started almost unsuccessfully. And he called them. He called Ben Horowitz. He recently told this story. He said, "Hey, should I Should I get my money back? This project is not worked. But, to things, we developed tool intra-corporate communications for our team engineers, maybe I could go to this. He says, "Yes." , leave the money, do it. I to you I trust. "Yes. He turned it over, turned into Slack, sold for 30 billion dollars. The idea is in that you support the person, and not the idea that big people, big entrepreneurs constantly developing, constantly being built, are constantly changing.

I mean, here it is. you and Zuk, who is again and rethinks again this company. And if you find promising beginners, is there a way find people who appear in their industry? Oh, yes, but you finance them during a certain period period of time and you say , is this a theory again briefcase where you you say: "Some bets are made on an idea, some—on people, and, you know, bets on people should be long-term and fully funded." « Good. I will give you the magic formula that will give you an idea about how much it is difficult and how much you need to be cunning be.

Tell me, any of the recognized industry leaders will block, but not sell short. Fund this a guy. Mhm. Finance it this guy. Because if you don't want to, that is if you wish, I I will say this with my own, uh, main theory. If you ready to sell on shorts or geometric marginalism, or what more importantly, geometric unity, I want to be with you. dance. Mhm. Because I want to take your house. I want to take yours. pension. I would be absolutely happy destroy you in the market.

Mhm. But not so. is happening. It's like: " Well, we want it. block, but we we know that he is a lot What does he know? Yes. And we know that we actually it is not read. And you know, there is something about how someone says: "Look, you are on 99.99999% fail." And I I say: "Do you want formalize it? Mhm. You know, come on, come on, come on. Well, I'm fighting about $100 bet, until next year you will not get full recognition from physics. That's not what you said.

. You said you were ready. to offer yours house to win I have a dollar. And I want do it in large scale. You know, that's why I have this feeling, baby. That would be fun. AND Allow me something. to tell you. You you also listen to things that no one knows wants to talk. I I officially say that the smartest person in the world today—this Edward Witten. Bright. Mhm. Incredible. This The guy drove away. theoretical physics with roads and from the cliff 42 years ago.

Mhm. Nobody wants more to say this. Mhm. So, the question is, who was the only one who noticed, that no one goes to Stockholm, which standard model not changed. Recent theory conference strings, supposedly the only one game in the city fundamental physics. Go to the Strings 2026 website. There is list of all reports. There is a search engine system. Enter the following words: electron, hadron, Higgs, lepton. There is none here. physics. They are not they talk about nothing, that can cause harm enemy. They are not are talking about physical world.

I was in , perhaps leading physics institute world. And I asked: " Who is the smartest here? people?" And they gave me three name. Two of them were pure theorists. I am deeply talked to both of them. When I got to the point where promote standard the model that is ours ideas about all particles that you you see in this room, they both said: "I'm not interested." the physical world." And I said, "Well, you two leading professors in our main, the broadest institute theoretical physics, and none of you interested in physics world.

Simply open "express yourself." It madness. And, you know, I give lectures on physics departments, and I started to give up. from cooperation with departments that asked me to come and perform, but technically I am denied reports. For example, I spoke with report in Texas university in Austin, but I can't. to say that the report took place on Faculty of Physics . Really? Yes. I spoke with report in Perimeter Institute in the examination room sky. This is not a report. Eric answers question. I spoke. with a report in Chicago university in...

This is because your report and yours person is considered marginal and strange, and they say that she marginal. Yes. I absolutely do not agree with the narrative of this industry. Hmm. I'm just saying straight up, what if physics in 1983 year made sense, then in In 1984, it was not there. It was very sharp, and it it was similar to how three in one night people, Leonard Susskind, David Gross and Edward Witten, directed this industry in a completely different way direction. And now achieving this is not advanced in our knowledge about physical world, but that was it, that no one knew that perhaps.

You take the industry in which Edward Teller, J. Robert Oppenheimer, Richard Feynman and Stanislav Ulam created the most terrible weapon of calibration theories SU3 cross-U1 and you're done it is safe. Now to do safely physics with their own geopolitical rivals. You you can invite your friends from China to arrive and become postgraduate students at your faculty, and you will be to fill their heads with things about ADS/ CFTs that cannot harm and must, because in They have no physics. So, the question is, did this happen...Did this happen?

secret program? Let's go back to 1983 year. We...So, we went off the cliff in 1983 year. And the question is that , did someone say, "Hey , let's eat this from a cliff? " Well, it happened... Well, you...Do you think that there is some a subgroup of the community, asset set, set projects that are happening somewhere on The lands that make progress in physics, and do this during the last 50 years? Great, the US has put this is a question. This would be madness, isn't it?

David? Imagine, if there were any a secret place that would achieved success in some branch of physics, and people who studied physics beyond that place, would be Driven into a dead end. It would be difficult for me, if it were kept in secrets. Good. What happened in 1940 year? This is what you are talking about. never heard that is called reference committee , which was created in National research council. So, when a neutron was first nominated in 1911 by Rutherford , it was opened in the early 1930s.

A woman named Lisa Meitner put forward the concept of chain reaction, which then proved by Fermi in Chicago university for with the help of something under called "Chicago" pile 1". Thereafter a guy named Braith, uh, BRIGHT, created something called reference committee in National research council, so that if you submitted physics article chain reaction to the magazine, she got to National research council, and they returned it to you with the words: "Unfortunately, you know, these results is actually previous ones. Um, we we don't think that this only applies to magazine.

Please, recycle etc., etc. . "Okay, now you resubmitted, and it still doesn't work. You don't know what this is. The thing exists. This is how people outside the limits Manhattan project, outside the white icons, treated their own colleagues who are not allowed to Manhattan project. So let's at least let's agree that existed from 1940 to 1945 review process, which destroyed opportunity to earn for life if you studied physics chain reaction and you were not invited to secret group. Yes. OK. Yes. The question is not whether Is this madness?

This is clearly not madness, because I I know this is real. existed and happened. The question is whether this did it happen once or more than once? If this happened more than once, the question is which one school analogue for boys in New Mexico? What is the analogue? white icons? Which reference analogue committee? And do you have a theory? Yes. OK. If this happens, I said that leading candidate will Renaissance Technologies be on Long Island. I heard you say that, Yes. But, of course, there is ...

Let's see. on the cover. Good. The cover would be like this: you know, we so good we trade, that even we don't invite people, who are known in the market , to our company. We we only hire people, which directly are engaged in physics, for example, theorists elementary particles, differential geometers, experts from machine learning. And we have a very strange thing: we have a very close relationship with Brookhaven national laboratory. And, to things, there are nearby mediocre university, which historically there is absolutely worldly class in those subjects that would be relevant for physics next equal.

OK? Therefore, you are reusable medalist, and US News&World Report never considers this is one of ours the best institutions. Even if you look at the people, who have been trained in the State University of New York York at Stony Brook, This is incredible. Yes, to me it looks like Fort Meade. When not yet there was such a thing agencies that collected too much number theorists. But Eric, people left this place, from this working places. I know one. or two of them. And such there is no...story.

IN at some point you could imagine that some number of them, some small percentage of them, some will leak information or some set of facts, if this is true about some advanced physical research, that are being held. Or, probably from this will be received countless results than, maybe it was. I'm not saying I know that. This is true. My opinion consisted in the fact that I I try to be careful. If you said, "Eric, this sounds absurd, because, honestly, concept of Los Alamosa, which was published in 1944 year as a journalist at the name Jack the Ripper in Cleveland newspaper , he revealed this history.

“Hmm. Nothing happened because what he said, It was madness. He said there was a secret with the mayor, who is supposedly the next Einstein working on weapons judgment day, and the city so secret, that no one knows that is happening inside it. Therefore , I claim that I I am doing my job. Jack the Ripper, and you you are doing what happened to Jack A rapper? Well, it is obvious what it says only one person, and She is crazy. Well, in both cases I could appear and start betting question, interrogate and see if I can to find something.

Yes, I'm not saying that Renaissance Technologies is exactly that it. I say you have safe campus with a story that has no meaning. Yes. You know the markets. Or Do you have any idea? How much does the Fund cost? medallions? Oh, yes, yes, I know. For again, my friends who were there, they can leave there's your money, and then profits continued... They can leave there is no money there what is happening. Good. They closed the fund for all except internal funds. Yes, yes. Here's what I have.

in mind. You..." Do you know another one? interesting story: "But if you leave companies, your capital can stay in Medallion Fund. So I argue that in Jeffrey Epstein there was a story about what he was taking a billion dollars or more, invested him, only if you gave him power of attorney. These things, usually have a specific reason why no one from outside has no money and no can bet question, right? So, Jeffrey Epstein did not manage the hedge- fund. He said me who was in charge multi-strategic hedge fund FX and what he needs a 727, so that he has a trade hall, and it filled his students yeshivas, because they were the only ones who can trust.

He was extremely specific about using following trend, return to medium value and transfer as three strategies. I think he didn't say that said no did not do any gamma trading, uh, you know, or trade options. It was many. It was the story of deception that burned, and then he became disgraced financier, and then he became a tax collector expert Jeffrey Epstein. You look at fake world with stories of deception that will fail. If you remember the old phrase "Be "smart", right? Believe me, uh, you know, a thousand special agents are going come here, I It's very difficult.

believe. Uh, a hundred police officers. Yes, no not true, miss Maxwell Smart. Two Boy Scouts from slingshot. This is fake. And I I claim that I don't know, what is happening in Renaissance, but Jim Simons—absolute genius. It is unlikely that he this distinguishes it. IN There are many of us. And I don't I know no one who would ever approached these results. I am not I know none. information about what this thing is real did, is doing, that claims. Yes. And I say she has very close ties with a pool of talent, Stony Brook, which is not is recognized, and then with our national laboratory.

Let's go back to 83, 84 -th. Yes. And let's assume that we don't went into this quantum universe, which we left. That quantum one quantum universe gravity. Quantum universe gravity. Right. And we are in another universe where we have feelings. As this physics looks like today? If we we will develop physics , help audience, which is general audience , to understand a little that it means. what if physics did not stop ...Before I do this , let me just put such a question. Some can claim that physics played important role, and, maybe she is not fundamental, and you could do it, to answer this development issues such things as technology production semiconductors, advanced lithography, materials science.

We have achieved tremendous progress in our ability stimulate calculations, and this led to this moment today, when we have these the tools that we we call it artificial intellect. Right. And all the main achievements in chemistry, materials science, physics led us to at this moment today, and we have made progress, and it was applied, and that would be one argument. So, maybe tell me why is that not gets to the point, and then we can do a little to talk about how what the world would look like today, if we hadn't went astray in 1983-84 years.

Excellent question. Let me try answer this, and then don't be shy redirect me, if I don't answer to the question. IN the theory we have, I will call her boundary model, which combines the general the theory of relativity and standard model particle theory. We we know certain things... which we cannot use. We discovered that inside each proton and each neutron is three valence quarks, and no one ever pulled out the valence a quark from a proton or neutrons separately. Something is called infrared slavery. Oh, and to hell with it those who didn't say that we cannot pronounce the word slavery.

Infrared bondage , come to terms with it, guys. Um, you have a situation where there is no industrial application. We we have known about this since 1968 year. So sometimes you don't can you to use something during extremely long period time. But what will happen if some achievement...maybe we will never be able to pull a quark out of proton. Maybe this impossible. What if there is other things that we could do if physics really advanced? For example, in the middle 1970s two gentlemen by name Abdus Salam, and I forgot Pati's name, nominated Pati-Salam model.

I I think that the model Pati-Salama will turn out to be correct a large association first order above the place where we We are now. The problem is that she has...something under called SU4, not SU3. And SU3 generates a force that is not gives all these protons to run away from each other one inside kernels, because, obviously, of the same name charges will strive to push away. Here why were we able to destroy two Japanese cities in 1945, so what did we get control over the strong by force, and this allowed we use electromagnetic force for generation completely destructive neutron energy, but she did not destroy protons and neutrons.

What happens when you have SU4, so this is it, what do you see, what electron and neutrino- this is the fourth color, which we associate with the top quark and bottom quark, with which consist of protons and neutrons. You could have a weapon, which rotates the upper and bottom quarks into lighter ones leptons, which decompose matter. You could have a dark one chemistry. Dark is wrong concept. This is actually disjointed matter. Dark matter is disjointed matter. A neutrino is, in essence, dark matter. Their barely detectable.

In fact, they are not interact. Well, they interact. But very, very, very weakly. Very, very weak. Only because gravitational and the weak force, which is two incredibly weak, and gravity is so weak, that's not about it It's worth talking about. With sufficient quantity concentrated neutrino you can... Well, but here's another one... Here is an opportunity. If you rotate neutrino in some charged particle, you can send her through the Earth. Just explain that you mean, when you say "rotate" ". What does this mean? So, these neutrinos are these subatomic particles, they really don't very good interact.

But what does it mean to rotate them? Well, let's take... And...and I think that many energy that produced on The sun is a neutrino, which...yes...really are coming out. For example, if you really... But here...you and me we are irradiated neutrino... billions of neutrinos. The only reason why we are not dead, it is in that, you know, this ...Imagine that... They do not interact with our atoms. Well, they almost don't interact. Once for...a blue moon they interact. So, you know, at night The sun penetrates the Earth.

It passes through her. Yes. But when it reaches us, it continues move. You know, you you can shoot him through what I I forget, this is a light year of lead, and, you know, you very rarely interact. That which happens with rotation, is in in the inner sense. So it's kind of metaphor of turning into this abstract place. What leads to the neutron. If I I'll put a neutron on table, and we just we sit there and we observe, with period half-life about 17 minutes, I I forget.

He will turn into proton. And this is called beta- collapse, because it turned out that people saw how an electron breaks out of neutron. And therefore neutral particle became positive, because in the electron The negativity disappeared. So, to be clear for audience, neutron can turn into on the proton and release an electron simultaneously. Yes. But it turned out wrong model, because in fact inside it was three quarks and one...of bottom quarks, therefore the neutron is located down, down, up. So, the bottom quark released something under called W minus, which is a particle of force, not a particle of matter.

AND then this thing fell apart electron and something else. The only reason why we have determined that something else is happening, a bit like accounting . If you have really good system accounting, and you you notice that the envelope from the cash register a little light, you say, "Okay, according to the principles saving, someone manipulated money at the cash register." "And this It turned out to be a neutrino. So, neutrinos and electrons have the same ligaments, like the upper and bottom quarks, and you can transmute them with the help of these particles W, ee, W.

The danger of this is that when you have more particles of force than we we know now, things, which are now stable, can not be stable in this new regime. So, you can potentially decompose mountain, if present SU5, uh. SU4 more stable than SU5. Yes, I don't think SU5 It matters. But I I mean, if Are you thinking about physics? , think boom, vroom and zoom like a pro simple way track why this is our most terrible and the most amazing subject. Boom—it is weapon. Vroom is energy, and focus is movement , calculations and all those cool things that we we can do.

So, if you want think about it, you was refused, let's say, because Standard model was finally formed approximately 50-53 years ago. For 53 How old were you? denied new boom, vrmi and zoom. AND potentially, stagnation in physics could lead to survival of the human species, therefore that boom is so terrible . I can't say. you, is it true or not. But this means that in there is no room for you and zoom from new things, which could happen. AND so we must be honest. I want, I I want the zoom.

We probably could to claim that no one on Earth achieved this, and all united around distracting aspiration for indifference because of this absolute risk. Because if someone really achieved progress and could access to more boom... Yes. That would be the end of it. games. I mean that there is no such thing, as more absolute power that would give person or group possibility of certain in a way use this for your own infinite will, and I don't...I don't at all I agree with this. Okay, okay. So, I spent two years in a room where I was being followed.

to get me vaccinated because four amino acids were spliced ​​into spike protein coronavirus. Now, I think that's enough. easy, right? Or Is that so? Think about it. You need 12 nucleotides, so that encode four amino acids in exactly the right place spike protein. And that's enough, to turn off the Earth. This...This is science from high level influence. And I claim, that before we let's decide what we want return to massacres and recordings names, let's at least let's pause and let's say that most people don't know, how much strength inherently small scientific knowledge.

IN" To go ashore is a wonderful scene where the main character on Heisenberg takes the name what it looks like crystal meth, and throws him, uh, into the office a psychopath named Tuco. And Tuco says, "Well, What the hell is this? was what caused this massive explosion? ""I forgot if it was azide lead, or fulminate mercury, or one of these extremely volatile compounds. Do you have idea of ​​how easy it is make black powder? I, I, ask the modern audience. Nobody knows that he consists of 75% nitrates, 10% sulfur and 15% charcoal.

Cookbook the anarchist came out of- under control. Power science, its influence so huge that we should at least to ask the question: " What if you had nuclear weapons that are not would need centrifuges? ""What if there were simple things, which could do high school students? Do you remember the boy? who collected americium in smoke detectors, to build working reactor, I think it's in Brooklyn. Yes. OK. Nobody thought: collect 218 smoke detectors, and in You may be working. nuclear reactor. Yes. So, I argue that if you want to consider Voltaire White as a paradigm, you need return to something called " United States against Progressive magazine" , in which there was proposed design Teller-Ulam for thermonuclear weapons.

AND the government said, "No, no, this is limited data. To us prior approval is required injunction. It most dangerous element of geometry. It the work of Stan Ulam." "And the whole idea is to because if you are you going to use separation device, chemical shell compresses subcritical fissile material to create detonator from a nuclear power plant bombs, how will you make is to compress the rod or something in thermonuclear device? The only thing that can achieve this tertiary stage pretty quickly, that's light. You must to figure out geometry, because the detonator will tear everything apart construction, if not will reach her.

Now this secret was made public. And the only one the reason why the government doesn't pursued, hmm, Howard, what is this? Howard Moreland, is that we stupidly declassified all sorts of pieces and fragments of this, and he went to the library Los Alamos and collected this is all together. So, I I argue that if you you don't know history John Aristotle Phillips, poor quality, hmm, physics, which one to his doctorate dissertations in Princeton, as Princeton mascot, said: "Listen, I am not very good. Freeman Dyson. I want to use the fact that that I'm not very good, to do something amazing." Tell me me, will you allow me I need to develop a plan.

atomic bomb? Freeman Dyson said, "I'll give you I won't help, but "I'll tell you if it works." So, this poor guy the physicist composed this and submitted his younger dissertation. I forgot, is this page 24, but of this dissertation not in the library, but the government removed page with the plan. The fact is that this material easily accessible. And we never seen atomic weapons since 1945 year, mostly if we don't we use this strength. But if it turns out that this easy to do, and, to things if the US fail with Iran, you will see the spread of countries that receive nuclear weapons because we trusted the US, like you got this.

You- world policeman. Petrodollars are not petrodollars. It dollars of violence. The US should have had violence, necessary for oil supply, and oil provides these money. We watching the collapse of this mode in mode real time, while The US is going through its Suez period. Good. You know, regardless of whether was it worth it Donald Trump to intervene in Iran, or no, and I think he is was brave and did what we would have made in 1981 or 82 , or somewhere like that. We must win.

Because if you have the world that decides what there is no one in the world policeman, each wants to have his own nuclear weapons. And you you can come back to the song by Tom Lehrer entitled "Who next", and you you will see that more- You will have less of a world, in which you will not be able to understand the theory games, because she is no longer dyadic , it is multipolar. Imagine the world outside nuclear weapons. Of course. What does it look like? this world?

So what else is there? beyond what is on at the moment there are almost 80-year-old technology? Of course. And again I return. to the history of the year 83. We are making progress. Or we stopped doing progress? And is anyone else ...Is China going to make this progress? And what does it look like? It what is unidentified aerial phenomena (AP)? Because you recently commented that they were a deep skeptic regarding the NPQ, but now in you have an opinion that, maybe there's something there... No, there is definitely something.

Yes. There is something there. By the way, maybe China. It it could be us. It may be invented history. But there There is definitely something. Based on the video and stories from first person... This is not a video. I never didn't care about the video. I talked to too much many intelligent, sober people. Too much similar stories. Of course, there are programs special access , which are dedicated to this. The only thing I learned from that works for keeping secrets, it compartmentalization. And that's why we are so separated, which is almost no one can make up story together.

Perhaps the so-called " "The tube of time" consists of because we can't to understand what we know because we can't to talk to one another one. If you want to know what is possible, I might scare you, and that would be super cool and super scary, but One thing I'm worried about long-term opponents. Time travel. Hmm, time travel. Times. Everyone is talking about time travel, because think that time can to be only one-dimensional, but imagine, for example, that you bet giant cannon on a railway carriage.

Railcar can only move in in one dimension. Now someone puts giant cannon for something like tank, and you go to Bonneville Salt Flats. Now you are moving in in two dimensions. Now you bet it on A-10 Warthog, and you can move in threes. It all spatial measurements. What do you think? why does the arrow exist time? This is because you Do you think time can to be only one-dimensional. I am not I think it's time. one-dimensional. And if you will meet an opponent who has access to long-term flight, it's like to try to compete with him using the A-10 Warthog, and your only one the gun is located on the track, only with time, not with space.

I could to sneak up on you behind in time, knowing your intentions. I have on I mean, for me it's terribly. Me too I would like it higher. for ours opponents. But I I don't want to meet. no one who knows how to do such things, not on equal terms. Let me to say one more thing. The solar system is a way to escape. And Elon focused on Marcy. I said that Mars is diversionary maneuver , it's a MacGuffin. Today's conversation focused on Moons. He is ours.

the only adult, as much as I can to judge, uh, crazy and angry, even though he there are. And he uses this is to motivate engineers, because Mars is barely fit for life. These are the only ones breeds that potentially suitable for life. Not enough diversity, if we have one power and these several areas, for with which we could create atmosphere. So let's assume that you could create atmospheres on Mars and on the moon, and you could to move between them with the help of chemical missiles.

You have there would be three places that it would be possible spoil. To us dozens needed thousands, if not millions of places, first than we will understand how to civilize oneself. So we must get out of here. Leave the Sunny system too dear. So I I claim that in Einsteinian You have never seen this in the world. You won't do it. If Leave Einstein alone. strength, speed too much light cruel. So, you fly to Alpha Centaur, for 4 light years away from us , you are returning, you do it almost with the speed of light.

All ahead by 8 years when you You are returning home. Nobody wants this. do. And this is only the first star. I I claim that we too long we are in Einstein's prison. General theory relativity actually begins in 1913 . This is actually thanks to Grossman and Einstein, not only Einstein. I don't know, Why do we say that? Em , that's not quite Einstein. Gilbert actually there is Einstein- Grossman. But more -less since 1915-1917 the equations did not move. They will break. because of the fact that takes place in Southern Arizona.

IN Kitt Peak has this facility called DESI, spectroscopic darkroom device energy. And I think, that he will show that cosmological constant multiplied by on the metric, that is, that how we code dark energy in the equation, will break because it is not a constant. The only reason why in you have lambda, multiplied by the metric, that is, this member, -this product rule if you take the derivative, which is called divergence. You need to take lambda derivative, multiplied by the metric, plus lambda, multiplied by the derivative metrics.

Derivative metrics has to return to zero. This term is unique. possible term, which can get there, because of the fact that is called a theorem Lovelock, if you are within range general theory relativity and trying to do it's geometric. I I claim that this will happen. We will get there. to 5 sigma, if we still It's not there. I didn't follow. for the news. And then we will understand that dark energy, the most important, usually is 60, 70, 80% of our Universe. IN us wrong formula for this.

We don't think twice. over what it is. Well, I...I'm focused. on saying, that I have a formula- candidate, and I think that everyone who has it, must speak. We must conduct conference and to say who will win ? Who has the best idea? ? We can't just allow Ed Witten to pat patting himself on the back, saying: "Well, string theory—" "the only game in town." It 42 years later? Well then for. This...This is absurd. Returning to politicians, give me a little money and get rid of these people.

I don't want that. they were looking at what What am I doing? Find me someone competent, with whom Can we talk? So, excuse me. Let me just come back. Dark measurement energy that we eventually we will get from very high accuracy, tells us that general theory relativity and equations related to her, wrong through the connection that we we see between matter, rotation and movement. AND so there's something wrong with this yes, and what... We know that general theory relativity not the last one. We know that general theory relativity wrong.

This is a look. This is a derivative- it a map, not a territory. This is wonderful, wonderful. model. The one who will come next, must restore it. But no initial singularity through Big bang, and also no singularities in the center of a black hole, which is called singularity Schwarzschild. Here and ours is manifested ignorance. We have two singularities, from which we cannot get rid of inside theories, so you will have to go out for its limits. But the thing is, that it is so perfect...Yes, that no one can understand, you know, approximately in the first 4 seconds of lecture from physics you say: " Let X13 be spatiotemporal "multispecies".

Well, OK. It's all over. Yes. This is a sarcophagus, and you are already in Einstein's system of thinking. AND so we know that this is wrong, and no one can't understand how to do it wrong. And exactly this keeps us here in burdens. Approximately in 2003 TED Talk a wonderful event took place demonstration where the guy showed surface, and he has there was some kind of display, and he was doing this, and suddenly everything was increasing, and then he did this, and everything was decreasing. It beginning of gesture multi-sensory touch called " "finger zoom" which we all we use.

I I claim that we are not we realize that " "finger zoom" probably built-in into that thing that we we confuse with space- sometimes. So we don't we know how to do it. And when you do that, you change distances, so you don't need to to break the speed limit light. So, again yes, you ask someone who can't to get to physical establishment, who is in physics...I am in physical establishment. We we live in some crazy world, where people from radical ideas cannot implement radical ideas within institutions .

Radical idea is that male and female gender mostly are determined by SRY- complex on Y- chromosome. If I do this I will say, I cannot be at the meeting, because I fanatic. OK? I am not I can be on Faculty of Physics , because I don't...I think that it wouldn't reduce the industry to abyss. Nobody said that no one else doesn't say that. It is obvious that the person who says this must be wrong. Yes. All the thing is that in I have the first one, uh, the first article, I think, about the danger that constitute mortgage securities.

Yes, I am. I think I was the only one. a person who is loud said it was unknown, will biden live to November. And I think, what I said out loud, which, in my opinion, is 4 years of dementia, dementia. When people Are they saying something else? Are you forcing them? come back to this consensus? Well, that's it, what do small ones do nation. And we became nation when it comes to comes down to science. Let's talk about China. Yes. From what you know, Does China think differently?

about physics? Or China is trying change paths? Or China is trying invite innovative ideas to of his scientific community? Or others, I I mean, It seems that the West, probably, grouped together. Is it different? China? Or Is there anything different? Yes. Let's...Let's go Let's talk about it. On- first, France historically there is the largest mathematical country world. China, us always taught, you know, so afraid of the Chinese in mathematics that we don't could buy none basic hit until recently. Now they are looking at us from ours absolutely meaningless collectivist fiction.

And they sneaking up on our best people and say: "You sure that not Do you want to be free? Are you sure you don't? want to receive money? Come to China, feel it freedom, get it money, have fun." Right. And our people there are leaving. American scientists going to China? American scientists, Russian scientists, all sorts of scientists are leaving to China for prestige, money and freedom. And we we are gathering them teach, and they will be frightening good until then the moment when this freedom will embrace Tibet, area Tiananmen and Taiwan.

Are they going? rethink some from these thoughts on the way, which one are we going to physics? Will there be they fundamental in because they rethink things? Let me tell you what I am I actually believe in about this. Yes. Artificial intelligence will change soon. Now Artificial intelligence is learned on the body, which grants privileges to such things like Cell, Nature and Science, as prestigious biology journals. Or in mathematics it is would be inventionis, owls and Journal of the American Math Society. Stored here narratives of the fields.

OK? Trash can —this is also a corpus. Take all the ideas, who were deceived and which were laughed at. AND call it a body garbage cans. TC body. Artificial intelligence will begin read everything from which ours laughed leading physicists. Be careful. That's where it will happen. opening and rethinking. IN China will be private model, and they they will say: let's assume, that completely failure, the most unsuccessful theory in history modern physics, string theory, and something called M-theory and quantum gravity, Let's assume for a moment, what is this distracting maneuver called distract us.

This is not our leading theory. She wasn't ours. leading theory for 42 years. Not it may be that the dog can't hunt. What is missing? to hinder us see? And AI will get there. And when AI gets there will get, we have Everyone who has AI, who can do it. Again, I say absolutely radical things, because, honestly, , that's exactly what we should do do. We have be John's characters von Neumann, Richard Feynman, Paul Dirac and, um, um, all of these, and We don't have them.

So I I'm trying to say how this sounds. You all You are wrong, but I have radio. And don't say me, that I Am I arrogant or what? arrogant or something real scientists modest, or what if you you understand something, then Can you explain this? a five-year-old child. This is all nonsense. I I'm trying to say that string theory was not our leading theory for 42 years. She never was the only one opportunity. And so just like Jeffrey Epstein was never hedge manager fund. We don't is this allowed speak.

I don't know Why. I want to know whether Is there anyone in the CIA in science management and technologies, who wanted would hold this conversation? Is there anyone in Ministry energy, who was would be interested in so that this conversation didn't go? Now we are with We are talking to you. our friends, Chinese, North Koreans and Russians. Why do we do this? are we doing? You are so I am sure that I I am wrong. considering this obviously huge the amount of knowledge about which most people never heard of?

Well, I think the question is is whether really possible distinguish and whether really possible shut down AI? I have on mind, after all, Tell me more. So, if the pace progress of AI such that ubiquity of access and the body, on your opinion, knowledge and ignorance obvious for everyone, AI can control from anywhere places. And this is probably conversation about how looks like humanity. And I I think this is a conversation with humanity, not from national states as such. Well, I think that's it, to what am I trying to do to reach, this is what my The AI ​​model consists of because this is madness –pull out AI as commercial product.

This is just ridiculous. Let me imagine a scene from a movie "Silence". These are just matrices and linear algebra. Well, yes, it's simple domestic products. Hmm. In the film "Silence" "Lambs" is a scene where Hannibal Lecter being taken out on a gurney straitjacket with crazy mask. AND so much around people because he is like that dangerous, but he very, very smart. I I think that's it. makes Anthropic. Here is yours. new employee, Hannibal Lecter. He consultant. You hired Hannibal Lecter from temporary agencies. And the belts security that have keep you from getting injured , —this is all people around him, a mask and a straitjacket.

AND we just decided that this soldier research project —this is what you need needed at home. It's like tell people: " Look, Friend. correction is simple speaks of law to store and carry weapons. We have this thing, which we do not used, which called Davey Crockett, personal nuclear weapons, which launches a soldier. Why it's not in Kmart with waiting period? » Yes. Well, for now this is the moment distilled. I am not I know, is it still current issue, because the models were distilled, or model development became commercialized, and it was released in publicly available, and now she is there.

Therefore, There are models. Models are here . Yes. And to your point of view, maybe these models aimed at the path opening a new physics, consideration strange texts and ideas and rethinking them. This is going to be hell. travel. Yes. I just want to hear. your only assessment, because I-I wonder if this glimmer. What, in your opinion? opinion, represent UAP? Today. Is this really the first window in because of what is happening , if there is anything there? Question for you is that, on in your opinion, represent What is UAP today?

Let's answer the this is a question. But I want to invite you, let's do it in debuggers, and we consider this line by the line of code under the time of its execution. I I'm looking at you, I'm looking at podcasts. My first thought—I know what I'm taking risks. If I I will say what I think. I can tell you, which colleagues do not will open in front I'm the door. No, I don't. I'm kidding. Of course. When I got a job work to Peter Thiel , imagine that there are only about 125 people, with which I can to talk about your work.

I would say that 30% of the doors are for me closed. Simply because I work with Peter Thiel, and I don't I think he's the devil. And he is a close friend. Now you ask me, how many doors, what's left, you would like to close, Eric? It's not easy. question. I know how these people think, and I know , how scared they are. Let's do it anyway Let's answer it. If the general theory relativity—this really the last one word, I think these UAP UFO stuff—it experimental weapon system nation states.

I think it happened. a certain breakthrough, especially in the 1970s. No, sorry, in the 60s. There is a document Australian intelligence in 1971, in to whom Australia, which was a test a polygon for nuclear weapons, and Great Britain started seeing all these UAP near their nuclear tests, just as we see theirs near ours. AND Australians revealed that all our best people, not all of us the best people, many our best people and many of our leading institutions conducted research antigravity, technically gravitational screening. AND was a cover golden age general theory relativity, when suddenly general relativity became hot with early 50s to late 60s -x, early 70s.

The statement that document of the year 71 like this: "No, no, the only one the reason why everyone turned to gravity, consists in because they were interested in gravitational shielding, antigravity, etc.» . I don't believe that. general theory relativity—this the last word. I I believe that there is scaling by by means of construction fingers. There is one more. gesture multi-sensory touch, which is called the shift for slope, and this means, that we can leave our solar system. OK? This is wonderful. news because it is means that we can survive.

Conclusion like this: if we can leave, then everyone else can come. AND considering the size The universe, the probability that we are the most developed life form, funny. There's no point in this. worry about. So, if we can go, I I think they are here. And I I think we can. leave. And I think that the scenario about which is it worth worrying about Northern Sentinel island where everyone who lives in the North Sentinel island, it is considered a citizen of India. AND they don't know the words India.

They are a people, with whom not contacted, which is not knows what they are part of something more than that watching them, that does not allow people land. But if they started to send radio signals, and then they started launch nuclear weapons missiles on this tiny island, India should not have such paternalistic attitude towards oneself primitive tribe. So what worries me is that when will we launch nuclear bomb in 1945 year, or when Italy will be very good at quantum theory with Fermi, and I forgot how atomic names guys, and there was this one purple incident by Mussolini, UAP somehow very nuclear-related weapons.

And I think that nuclear weapons are a sign that you became enough developed so that next thing you you will understand how to do is go and to go through with the help of engine. We still have this. we don't realize because never seen that This happened. But I claim that almost every civilization, before it starts use the game deep movement (which there are these gestures with several by touch), first launches a nuclear bomb. And what are we warned India in this analogy that we almost ready to go out, and we are so miserably undeveloped, that we pose a danger for any other civilization.

If in the following theory, as I think it's geometric. unity is next theory, there are so many forces, it will force a certain percentage your audience say, "Oh, that's easy "self-promotion." On unlike "no, no, No". This is what you must do. If you have a theory, you are about You are talking about her. Yes, I am. I think you can to do all sorts of things. I think there is multi-temporal movement. I I think there is a dark chemistry. I think that there is dark light.

I I think that's all that's left. open two more chiral family matter on light level. There is matter from spin of three halves. I believe that SU4 cross SU2 cross SU2—this is the next grand theory the association that we we will find. Still so a lot is needed to do that when we let's make this jump, the world will become unrecognizable. And I I believe that the universe has other forms of life, and that they can come, and they can visit, and I don't think so.

absurd. I think that We are a people with whom we do not there was none contact. In this regard, I I think we have something to talk about. to talk to future. It was truly unique, fascinating conversation, and I think that for many people in to our audience this an unusual conversation. But I just want to emphasize the importance of hear what you have to say because I I think it is very important, that even if something seems unobvious , especially when things surrender unlikely, or when things seem strange, or heretical, or what whatever you call it any other deadline, it is important realize.

It, certainly a lot something to think about about future paths. AND I would like to talk. more. I would like to do that. I would like to do this with your friends, and I I also just want to thank for that I was invited. It's time for America to take over leadership because there is no other country, whom I trust as much as I trust our to care for the people about this planet. We should as much as possible to unite more quickly with our rivals, because the danger transition to next level influence in the disputed situations are extremely high.

It is very important that we won in Persia the bay. Very important, so that scientific the community recognized that , despite their feelings about Donald Trump, There are four or five of us. persons with scientific portfolio, which much better than think doctors of science. And before you get out of this you will have a reason to wrinkle one's nose, think about it to do what you did me, namely to come to a few days before Washington, D.C Colombia, and pronounce dangerous words: " How can I help?

» I'm going for everything. I am going to all.

Go deeper

• All All-In Podcast episode guides