📱

Get Our Mobile App

Take your business learning on the go!

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Michio Kaku on Black Holes, String Theory and Multiverse [INTERVIEW]

This Is The World1:09:44

Transcription

String theory is out there. It exists.

We can play with it. The universe is a

symphony of strings. That's my equation.

I'm the creator of string field theory.

Personally, I do believe that there are

intelligent life forms in the universe.

Can we visit them? You need the plunk

energy to do this. When we look at UFO

sightings, about 5% of them make the

hair on your head stand up, but it's

possible to attain digital immortality.

The other kind of immortality is much

more difficult and that is organic

immortality that your physical being

lives forever. Let's say I turn off

quantum mechanics. Let's say boom, by

magic, I make quantum mechanics

disappear. What happens? I disappear.

Big bangs happen all the time. Even as

we are speaking, universes are being

created. And so the only way to escape

the ultimate death of the

universe might be to leave the universe.

Chapter number one, string theory. Is

string theory correct? I don't know.

However, it's the only game in town.

There's no other rival theory that has

matched the sophistication of string

theory. And string theory very simply is

a theory of music. Think of music. How

many notes are there in a violin string?

A, B flat, C sharp. Just like subatomic

particles. So this, for example, would

be an electron. This would be a proton,

a neutron, nutrinos. They're nothing but

different vibrations of a tiny string.

And so what are subatomic particles?

Subatomic particles are basically notes

created by a vibrating string. Well,

what is physics? Physics is the laws of

harmony of these vibrating strings. What

is

chemistry? Chemistry is the theory of

interacting strings which create

molecules and and matter. What is the

universe? The universe is a symphony of

strings. And then what is the mind of

God that Albert Einstein wrote about

eloquently for the last 30 years of his

life? What would be the mind of God? The

mind of God would be cosmic music

resonating through 11dimensional

hyperspace. That would be the mind of

God. Chapter number two, Grand

Unification Theory. Many scientists

believe that the ultimate goal of

physics is

unification. To unite the left hand and

the right hand of the universe, to unite

quantum mechanics with relativity to

create a relativistic theory of quantum

mechanics. That is the ultimate goal. So

far the only theory the only theory

which has survived all challenges is

string theory. Now that doesn't mean

it's correct because we can't test the

theory because the theory talks about

particles that have energies far beyond

anything that we can create on the

planet earth. In other words, we are too

primitive to test string theory. String

theory is out there. It exists. We can

play with it. But we can't test it

because it talks about universes beyond

our everyday comprehension. So some

people say, "Well, maybe I don't like

string theory. Give me an

alternative." And the truth is there is

none. There is no alternative to string

theory. Many people have tried. The

greatest minds of science, people like

Heisenberg and Wolf Gang Py and

Schroinger, they all tried. They all

tried to unite quantum mechanics and

relativity, but they failed. String

theory is the only survivor. One of the

goals of physics is to find a unifying

principle, a principle which will allow

us to explain so many things. And for me

it was a question when I realized that

string theory is a theory of

music. What paradigm of human behavior

allows us to explain so many things

about the world? Music. Music captures

emotions. It captures feelings. It can

create new worlds.

And it is the only paradigm that we have

of everyday life that allows us to have

a unified understanding of the world

around us. The world of emotions, the

world of feelings, all of it

encapsulated in vibrating strings. And

so it was the realization that vibrating

strings is a paradigm. In fact, the only

paradigm that is rich enough to explain

the entire universe. Some people say,

"Well, string theory is nice, but so

what? I mean, what's in it for me?

What's in it for numero uno? Why should

I care about string theory?" And the

answer is that everything around us is a

byproduct of string theory, including

life, including the richness of our

world around us. Think of

photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is what

makes life possible. How do we get

carbon

dioxide, sunlight, and create oxygen and

food from it? This is an amazing feat of

nature. And yet what makes it possible?

Quantum

mechanics. Because without quantum

mechanics, atoms fly apart. Think of a

solar system for example. You have

planets going around the sun. And let's

say we have two solar systems that

collide. What happens? Boom. They fly in

all directions. Because the theory of

gravity does not give you stability. A

theory of gravity cannot create stable

matter. Solar systems will collide and

have collided and will basically throw

planets apart. In other words, classical

physics is

unstable. Newtonian physics is

inherently unstable. You cannot create a

universe out of Newton's theory.

However, gravity, which is quantum

mechanical, can create waves. and waves

of stability. All of a sudden you get

molecules. All of a sudden you get

tremendous molecules like DNA composing

of thousands of atoms. In a Newtonian

universe it would all disintegrate.

Photosynthesis is impossible. Life is

impossible in a classical world. In a

classical world where particles go

around other particles, what do they do

when they bump into each other? They fly

apart. In other words, quantum mechanics

gives you stability. It gives you stable

atoms. Atoms which give you life. Atoms

which give our body. Let's say I turn

off quantum mechanics. Let's say boom by

magic I make quantum mechanics

disappear. What happens? I

disappear. I dissolve. In other words,

we are byproducts of quantum mechanics.

Without quantum mechanics, we would

dissolve. Quantum mechanics is what

holds atoms together. Newtonian

mechanics of Isaac Newton is not

sufficient to create stable

matter. Look at solar systems. If solar

systems collide, they fling

partic. So in other words, why do we

need quantum mechanics? To create stable

matter. Without quantum mechanics, you

dissolve. You dissolve in an ocean of

mist. You dissolve in a mist of

subatomic particles. Do you feel you are

the father of some parts of string

theory? When I first worked on string

theory in

1968, it was a random bunch of

equations, marvelous equations. But what

relationship was there between all these

equations? There has to be a language

that unifies all these equations. And in

physics, the language is called field

theory. So I said to myself, there's got

to be a field theory of strings that

unifies all these equations of string

theory. That's my equation. I'm the

creator of string field theory which is

a way to unify all the equations that

make what what is called string theory.

So some people say well what is string

theory? It's an equation one inch long.

How do I know that? That's my equation.

Do you remember the time of this idea

that you invented this idea the moment

the time in the university or somewhere

you've been there?

I was teaching electromagnetism to

undergraduate students at the university

one day. The same experiment over and

over again with

electricity. But then I said to myself,

now wait a minute. The lines of force of

electricity is like

strings that there is a field theory of

electricity. Therefore, there should be

a field theory of strings. And so I said

to myself, the advantage of this is I

would have one equation, an equation no

more than one inch long that would give

all of string theory rather than

hundreds of disjointed equations and

rules of thumb. And so if that's my

contribution and that is to create a

unified theory of string theory, human

consciousness also could be born on the

quantum level. I don't know exactly how

the brain is put together. It's one of

the great mysteries of science. Some

people think that ordinary mechanics can

explain the brain using transistors and

circuits.

But maybe that's not rich enough. Maybe

quantum mechanics has a role to play. I

personally think that yes, quantum

mechanics probably does have a role to

play because of something called free

will. What is free will? Free will is

the ability for us to do creative things

on our own without somebody telling us,

without me being scripted ahead of time.

We have free will, but a robot does not.

A robot is mechanical, deterministic.

Once you turn it on, it just does what

it does, the same thing over and over

and over again. So, artificial

intelligence based on robots, okay, do

not have free will. We think we have

free will. Now, do I really have free

will? I don't know. I think I do. I

think I am responsible for my actions so

that free will does exist but I'm not

sure. So what is the missing ingredient?

Quantum mechanics. In other words, if my

brain is digital, I have no free will. I

am a robot. With quantum mechanics, I

have uncertainty and uncertainty makes

creativity, makes thinking,

consciousness possible. So in other

words, consciousness could be a

byproduct of quantum mechanics. Chapter

number three, quantum world versus

physical world. After 2,000 years of

investigating the nature of matter and

energy, we've come up with two great

formalisms. One is the theory of the

very big that is general relativity

which gives us the big bang and quazars

and all the wonders of the universe. The

theory of the very big then there's a

theory of the very small that is the

quantum theory. Now the problem is

mother nature has a left hand and a

right hand quantum mechanics and

relativity but these two theories are

incompatible. You put them together and

what happens? they explode and that is

the greatest problem in all of physics.

How to unify the theory of the very big

that is relativity with the theory of

the very small which is the quantum

theory. So at the present time the only

construct that we have coming from

mathematics that unites quantum

mechanics with relativity is string

theory. Very controversial. We don't

know whether it's correct or not because

we can't test the theory but so far is

the only game in town. You take a

classical theory, a theory of Einstein

and then you add quantum corrections to

it and the theory is finite. People have

tried to do this for decades and it

failed. Every time you take relativity

and try to add quantum mechanics to it,

the theory blows up. Now, Siraj Penrobes

would like to do the opposite. He would

like to uh gravitize quantum mechanics.

Now, I wish him well. I wish that he

becomes successful in this pursuit. But

we'll wait and see. The proof is in the

pudding. So far, the only theory which

allows you to unify these two great

branches is string theory. The greatest

challenge in all of physics is the

unification of the two great theories

quantum mechanics and relativity. The

only theory which can do this at the

present time is string theory. But

string theory has a challenge and that

is why do we have so many string

theories. It turns out that there's no

one solution of string theory similar to

Newton's laws of gravity. How many

solutions of Newton's laws of gravity

are there? Infinite number.

Cannonballs, rackets, tennis, swimming,

asteroids, suns, stars. They're all

solutions of Newton's theory. So, how

many solutions of Newton's theory are

there? An infinite number. Same thing

applies to string theory. String theory,

like Newton's theory, has an infinite

number of solutions. But the question is

which one is ours? That is the number

one question facing string theory. Of

all the strings that exist, they are

beautiful. They work. But which one

describes our universe? We don't know

because we don't know that much about

the big bang. Once we understand the

creation of the universe, then we can

test it against string theory. But right

now, we do not understand the big bang.

Chapter number four, Multiverse Theory.

I personally think, and this is just my

own feeling, that there is a multiverse

of universes. Think of a bubble. A

bubble can collide with other bubbles,

creating a bigger bubble. Or a bubble

can fision in half to create two smaller

bubbles. That's the big bang.

So in other words, the big bang is when

these bubbles bump into other bubbles or

collide. This is the multiverse theory.

The theory that there's not just one

universe, but an infinite collection of

these

universes. And that at the beginning of

time, one of these universes came out

and this bubble expanded to create our

universe. But there are other bubbles

out there, other bubbles that can also

expand in a multiverse of universes. And

that's why string theory has an infinite

number of solutions because these

solutions are different ways in which

you can have big bangs. So in other

words, big bangs happen all the time.

Even as we are speaking, universes are

being created. But there is no evidences

for multiverse stories. The weak part of

this whole theory is that it's all

simply a theory at the present time. We

want proof. We want concrete proof. And

that may come from something called dark

matter. You see, string theory is not

just a theory of electrons and protons

and neutrons. It's a theory of music

with higher notes. notes beyond the

electron, beyond the proton. And we

think that could be dark matter. Dark

matter makes up most of the matter of

the universe. We think that atoms make

up the universe. Right? Wrong. We

realize now that most of the universe is

dark. Most of the universe is not made

out of atoms. It's made out of a new

substance which we think is the next

octave of the string. How many octaves

does a string have? An infinite number.

So the number of universes, the number

of forms of matter could be infinite.

That could be dark matter. Dark matter

we investigate with our telescopes, our

instruments. This is not science

fiction. Most of the universe is made

out of dark matter. And string theory is

the only theory rich enough to explain

not just neutrons and protons but dark

matter as well. Some people say that

black holes look like a hole in space.

And if there's a hole in space then what

does it connect to? Well, the first

person to talk about this was Albert

Einstein. In

1935, Albert Einstein wrote the first

paper on a black hole being a gateway, a

gateway to another universe. So, think

of a funnel, a funnel that looks like

this that has a neck. And then Einstein

put two funnels together to create

another bubble. In other words, on the

other side of a black hole is another

black hole. Two black holes joined

together at the hip. a picture which was

introduced by Einstein himself. Today we

call them Einstein Rosen bridges or

bridges between universes. First of all,

some people say, "Isn't this science

fiction? A black hole being a gateway to

another universe." Well, of course,

we're dealing with science beyond what

is testable with our instruments today.

So, by definition, it's going to be

science fiction, but sometimes science

fiction becomes science fact. Now if

there are gateways to other universes,

then could this be a solution to the

ultimate death of the universe itself?

The universe is expanding. What is it

expanding into? How long will this

expansion take place? Some people think

that the expansion of the universe will

go on forever. Things will get colder

and colder with time and everything will

eventually freeze to death because

physics is not just a theory of the

beginning. It's also a theory of the

end. So for example, how will the earth

die? The earth will die about five

billion years from now when it is eaten

up by the sun. How will the sun die? The

sun will not die in fire. The sun will

die in ice. The sun will freeze over

billions of years from now. And then

what about the stars that we see

twinkling in the universe? They will

eventually exhaust their their nuclear

fire and they will also turn to ice. And

then the big question is will the

universe die in fire or will the

universe die in ice? I don't know the

answer to this. But if the multiverse

theory is correct, it means that our

universe will probably die in ice and we

will all freeze to death at some distant

point in the universe. And so the only

way to escape the ultimate death of the

universe might be to leave the

universe. To create an artificial

wormhole, a gateway to another universe,

a bubble, a

lifeboat to take intelligent life from a

dying old universe and to repopulate a

young rich universe where we can mess up

that universe as well. Have you ever

think about the simulation?

When people see the movie The Matrix,

people wonder, is it really just a movie

or maybe we are puppets? We are dancing

in a world where somebody is pulling the

strings and somebody hit the play button

and then the universe unfolds and then

you push the stop button and everything

stops. Is that a possibility?

Well, I think not because of the fact

that quantum mechanics gives us

different alternate alternate

universes and this multiverse theory

therefore is

untestable. You don't know for sure

whether or not quantum mechanics can

give you all these different kinds of

universes that are fictitious and they

were all scripted ahead of time. In

other words, it's an untestable theory.

So, I personally think that it probably

violates quantum mechanics. Also, it

violates the uncertainty

principle. The theory of the matrix is a

theory without quantum mechanics. is a

Newtonian type theory. So the universe

is not Newtonian. The universe is

quantum mechanical and therefore I think

that we do not live in a matrix. That

this conversation was not pre-ordained.

Chapter number six, UFO sightings. When

we look at UFO sightings, realize that

maybe 95% of them can be dismissed.

But about 5% of them make the hair on

your head stand up. About 5% of these

times we're dealing with sightings that

are done by multiple witnesses with

multiple

technologies. That's the gold standard.

The gold standard for looking for

intelligent life in the universe is not

looking just for flying saucers. No, you

want something more than that.

So what we have here is we have volumes

and volumes of

sightings but no tangible

proof. No one has been able to create to

find alien technology or to capture an

alien. This is something that does not

has not yet happened. And so some people

email me and say that they know the

aliens are here because they've been in

their flying saucers. They've been

kidnapped. They know that they're the

aliens are here. I tell them that the

next time they're kidnapped by an alien,

for God's sake, steal

something. I don't care whether it's an

alien chip, an alien hammer, an alien

transistor. Steal something because then

you will have tangible proof that you've

been in their flying saucer. So far, we

have no proof. We have not yet met the

gold standard. We do not have

reproducible evidence, multiple

sightings by multiple modes that give

you unquestioned access to a

civilization with an advanced

technology. At the present time, we do

not think that super liinal rocket ships

are

possible. Rocket ships that go faster

than the speed of light. However, warp

drive may be possible. And there are two

kinds of warp

drives. Let's say you want to walk

across a carpet.

One way to walk across a carpet is to

squeeze the

carpet so that you simply hop across.

Hop

across. So that is one way a shortcut

from point A to point B rather than

walking from point A to point B. The

other way is to get a scissors and to

create a hole, a hole, a shortcut that

allows you to go from A to B. The second

method is the wormhole method. That is

punching a hole in space and time. The

first is the Alabir drive. Alabir, an

acquaintance of mine, is a physicist who

found a new solution to Einstein's

equations.

We thought we had a handle on solutions

to Einstein's equations, but he found a

solution that allowed you to go faster

than the speed of light. Now, how's that

possible? By warping space and

time, and it is consistent with

Einstein's

theory. So, what's the catch? Why don't

we have warp drive by punching a hole

through space and time or by using the

alcoir

drive? And the answer is energy. You

need the plon energy to do this. And we

are far far from being able to harness

the plunk energy. Realize that with our

atom smashers, our atom smashers can

only get up to trillions of electron

volts. But the plank energy is 10 the 19

billion electron volts. That's one with

19 zeros after it. That is an energy

that is for a type three civilization.

Now a type three civilization may be

able to access this energy. You do the

math and you see that yes, they would

have the energy to to warp space and

time to perhaps even build a time

machine. Who knows? But it's not for us.

We are a type zero

civilization. We don't even rank on the

scale of

civilizations. The latest calculation

I've seen shows that we are perhaps

seven in terms of our technology. A type

one allows you to go across the across

the solar system. We are seven in terms

of our

technology. There was a statement made

just recently. Yeah.

uh by a person that has access to many

of these secret

files that not just us interacting with

flying saucers in the sky, but flying

saucers that have crashed and that

bodies that are being

examined. But then he was asked before

Congress for evidence, hard proof that

is alien technology, alien bodies. And

at that point, this person says, "I

don't have it. I talk to people who say

they've had it, but I have not

personally seen the evidence." And so my

personal point of view is let's keep an

open mind. May, maybe, maybe not. But

where's the beef? You want hard

evidence. It's not enough to simply say

that a type three civilization allows

you to conquer the the galaxy. It's not

enough. You want hard proof and we don't

have that

yet. That was a big disappointment.

Personally, I think there are aliens out

there. Personally, I do believe that

there are intelligent life forms in the

universe. That we're not the only game

in town. The question is, can we visit

them or have they visited us? That's the

question. And so that is no longer just

a question of I saw something in the

sky. Maybe you did, maybe you didn't.

You want to have proof. And if there was

something up there in the sky, then how

did they get here? You begin to realize

that a type one, even a type two

civilization would have difficulty

reaching the earth. So for them to reach

us, they would perhaps be type three. A

type three civilization would be about a

100,000 years more advanced than

civilization here on the earth. Growing

at an exponential rate, they would reach

the plank energy in on the order of a

100,000 years. At that point, we can

discuss therefore whether or not these

aliens actually exist. And then the next

question is, if they exist, how come

they don't visit us? Let's say you're

walking down a country road and you meet

a

deer and you try to talk to the deer.

The deer seems to be interested in you,

but eventually you get bored because the

deer doesn't talk back to you. It's just

a one-way conversation and the deer gets

eventually scared and and hops away. So,

I think that if we meet intelligent

beings from outer space, they may think

of us being rather boring. I mean, what

do we have to offer them? Gold,

silver, but realize that gold, silver

probably have no practical purpose in

their civilization.

So in other words, we have nothing to

offer them. And that's why I think that

if they ever do visit us, they would

consider us to be a curiosity. They

would study us. They would perhaps study

us, perhaps analyze us, but after a

while, they'd be rather bored because

there's nothing to be gained. I mean,

how often do you try to interact with

animals to learn the secrets of their

eating behavior, their secrets of their

mating behavior? I mean, do you spend a

lot of time studying

animals? We don't. So, why should they?

How many

dimensions we have? When I was a child,

I used to visit the Japanese tea garden

in San Francisco where there are fish

swimming in a shallow pond. And then I

imagined that there was a scientist fish

in that pond. The scientist fish would

say, "Ba humbug, there's no world beyond

the pond. The pond is the universe. We

are the only beings in the pond because

that's where life is possible. There's

nothing beyond the pond." And then I

said to myself, if I reached down and

grabbed the scientist fish, lifted the

scientist's fish into the third

dimension, what would he see? He would

see beings moving without

fins. A new law of physics, beings

moving and eating without the benefit of

water technology, a new law of

biology, and then I put the fish back in

the pond. What would the fish

say? The fish would say, "My god,

there's a whole universe, a universe

beyond the second dimension, a universe

in the third dimension with new laws of

physics, new laws of

biology." Well, today I think that we

are the fish are the fish. We spend all

our time not just in two dimensions but

in three

dimensions thinking that that's all

there is that you can move forward

backward left right up down but that's

all there is well today I think that we

are the fish because if string theory is

correct and who knows for sure if string

theory is correct there are 11

dimensions 11 dimensions in hyperspace

Well, so far uh string theory is stable

only in 10 and 11 dimensions. It's

unstable in 13, 14, 15 dimensions. So,

it is the only theory known to science

that selects out its own

dimensionality. Newton's laws can exist

in any dimension of space and time. You

can write Newton's laws in 15 dimensions

if you want. Okay? But we happen to live

in three. Why? We don't know. We just

know that the laws of physics that we've

devised so far are in three dimensions

because that's what we're familiar with.

No particular reason for that. It's just

that it's convenient to write equations

in three dimensions. But string theory

forces us to believe that the big bang

was a bang that took place in 11

dimensions. It was not just an ordinary

three-dimensional bang. It was a

11dimensional bang. And that our

universe is a bubble. one bubble that

came out of this bang that happened to

be in three dimensions. Chapter number

eight, vision of the future. Let's say

that one day you allowed to meet your

ancestor. Your ancestor who lived a few

hundred years from now and you were to

talk to your ancestor about airplanes,

about rockets, about computers, what

would your ancestor think? Your ancestor

would think you're crazy. What images

from the ether? What journeying to the

moon? What computers that can calculate

a million times faster than the human

brain? What are you talking about? So,

our ancestors would think that we live

in a world of science fiction. We live

in a world of trains and rockets and and

atomic bombs that our ancestors would

think is impossible. So if we were to

visit one of our children, our great

great great grandchildren a few hundred

years from now, what would we think of

them? You see, our answers would think

of us being wizards. Wizards that can

create images out of nowhere. Image

wizards that can communicate around the

world

instantaneously. That's what our

ancestor would think of us.

that we are wizards, what would we think

of our children's children's

children? We would think of them as

being

gods. And so, in other words, the world

of the future is a world similar to

mythology, a world of the gods.

So our great great great grandkids, they

will live in a world where we can

control life, where we can control

matter and energy, things that are

impossible today, but is the play thing

of God's uncontrolled reality. That's

our future. That could be it. That we

would be able to control reality,

control life, control matter. We would

think of that today as the world of

magicians and and voodoo artists. But

that could be the world of our great

great great grandkids. How this ordinary

day could look like a day when what time

period? In 20150. The question that is

often asked is okay if you're a

scientist then predict the future. Tell

me what the future is going to look

like. Well, first of all, I don't know

what the future's going to look like.

But what I can say is I think that we

can make educated guesses. Educated

guesses because we know the trajectory

of physics and chemistry. You see, our

ancestors lived in a world of magic, a

world of witchcraft. There were no

rules. There was no equations, no

principles to guide them. Today, we have

the principles. We have the equations.

We have the framework that doesn't mean

we can accurately predict the future but

we can make intelligent guesses. So for

example computers we would know that

computers will be quantum

mechanical and as a consequence they

would be millions of times more powerful

than what we have today. And therefore

artificial intelligence could become a

of a reality. In which case we may exist

in a world where artificial intelligence

is the norm. The digital world is

deterministic. The digital world is

Newtonian. But a quantum

computer exists in a world of quantum

mechanics. It exists in a world of

infinite states. And these already

exist. We have quantum

computers. They're not ready for prime

time yet. But the ones that we've built

so far are millions of times more

powerful than any digital computer

today. The problem is they can only work

on one problem at a time. They're not

allpurpose like a digital computer

today. Can add, subtract, do many things

simultaneously. A quantum computer can

only do one quantum mechanical operation

at a given time. But they are in

principle millions of times more

powerful than any digital computer. And

many people think that could be the

future. The future is when we have

quantum computers that are millions of

times more powerful than anything on

your desktop today. I think a 100 years

from now, our descendants will live like

the Greek gods of the ancient times.

They will be able to manipulate matter,

manipulate energy, manipulate life

itself in a way that we would consider

to be magic. We would be able to

manipulate our genome. Today, we can

manipulate our genome one gene at a

time. In the future, we'll be able to

manipulate our genome perhaps as an

entire quantity, not just one gene at a

time, and able therefore to alter the

course of life itself. So in other

words, instead of using this technology

to heal, to be able to cure diseases, we

may be able to alter

ourselves, to create ourselves, to

populate the universe. In other words,

we may ultimately change the destiny of

the human race itself. For example, if

we colonize

Mars, realize that Mars has a different

gravitational field, different

atmosphere, different

temperature. Instead of trying to

readapt Mars, why not readapt ourselves

to remodify ourselves so that we can

survive in these environments around the

universe? And so instead of looking at

planets with hostile environments, why

not alter ourselves so that we can

survive in these? This is science

fiction, but it's possible. One of the

great frontiers is the human brain.

Throughout history, the human brain was

basically a black box. And just

recently, we're beginning to understand

that there are mechanical analoges to

the thinking process.

And eventually we'll realize that the

brain is in part quantum mechanical and

this is where quantum computers come in.

Quantum computers already exist and they

in some sense compute somewhat similar

to what the human brain would compute if

it's quantum mechanical. And so we're

talking about a new era where we can

change

ourselves. Now this means that the

question of

immortality is on the table. There are

two kinds of

immortality. One is digital immortality

and one is organic

immortality. Digital immortality is when

you create a clone of yourself that is

mechanical that has basically many of

your memories, thought patterns and

looks like you. And the first generation

of these digital immortals has already

existed.

What we do is we create a a image of

yourself that moves and talks and you

talk to this image and this image is

accessed as a tape recorder that has

interviewed you and got your entire

biography. This was done with William

Shatner of Star Trek fame for several

days. He was interviewed about his life,

his ideas, his thoughts, his history and

it was put into an image of him that

will live forever. So this is digital

immortality. Something which is

attainable today in fact rather

primitive today. But it's possible to

attain digital immortality so that you

can have a conversation with your great

great great great great grandkids about

life in the 21st century. Digital

immortality is when you can keep your

secrets to yourself because what you do

is you speak in front of a tape recorder

that creates an image of you talking in

real time and people asking you

questions and you answering them. So

digital immortality is something that is

attainable today and it would make your

thoughts visible forever and you would

be able to have a conversation with your

great great great great great great

grandkids. Okay. But if you have secrets

you can keep your secrets to yourself.

So your secrets will die with you. The

other kind of immortality is much more

difficult and that is organic

immortality that your physical being

lives forever. And there have been

several proposals for this. One proposal

is to basically digitize the brain

itself. You take a brain of a mosquito

or a fly and you can clone it and you

can create a copy of it and dissect it.

This has been done already. The world's

record for for uh dissecting the brain

of an insect is 100,000. A 100,000

neurons will allow you to dissect neuron

for neuron the brain of an insect. Our

brain has a 100 billion neurons, not

just a 100,000 neurons. But it's only a

matter of time before we can digitize

the human brain itself.

Not just a 100,000 neurons, but a 100

billion neurons. That's one way to do

it. Another way to do it is to place

yourself on a

stretcher and sitting next to you is a

robot. Mhm. When the brain is then

exposed neuron for neuron, another

duplicate is created inside the robot.

And then these neurons are then hooked

up to each other one by one. Now of

course this is possible but not

practical with today's technology. We

cannot manipulate neuron for neuron the

architecture of the human brain. But

that's a technical problem. So we're

talking about putting the putting the

brain into a computer or a computer into

a brain and so the two become the same.

Basically, this is all possible and it's

been looked at. Of course, it would take

centuries for us to be able to do this

process, but it's possible. We can now

connect the human brain to a laptop

computer and have the laptop computer

execute many, many patterns that are

considered to be humanlike. This has

been done because there have been so

many GIS wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq

that the United States military has made

it a priority to have these heroes of

warfare

uh be able to control a computer so they

can walk, they can talk, they can they

can perform many human functions even

though they are functionally paralyzed.

And so this is this is progress today

that using computers is possible to

interface the human brain with the

laptop computer which in turn can

control your movements. This was done

for the Olympics. The Olympics that took

place in S. Paulo, Brazil a few years

ago was initiated by a man who was

totally paralyzed. Here was a man

totally paralyzed. He was put into a

skeleton, a digital skeleton that was

connected to his brain. Therefore, he

was able to stand up and walk. He was

totally paralyzed. But by thinking, he

was able to control the

exoskeleton which would allow him to

walk. And he initiated the World Cup

soccer games in S. Paulo, Brazil, even

though he was totally paralyzed. Now,

that's today. In the future, we could

become supermen or superw women. Well,

right now, we're at the early stages of

this. Uh, all we can do is take

paralyzed people and give them back the

gift of movement. That's today. In the

future, we may be able to give them

super movements. That is the ability to

create to move things that only a robot

could create. In other words, these

people would be superhuman.

And one possibility is that these

superhumans would then colonize Mars and

begin to colonize the universe because

they are superhuman in their physique.

Upgraded version of us. That's right.

Now this is possible I think within a

100 years or so. Now let's take it to a

thousand

years. How could we then explore the

universe a thousand years from now?

I think it's possible that at that point

we'll be able to digitize ourselves, put

our thinking process into

software, put the software into a rocket

and shoot the rocket throughout the

universe.

Once the rocket lands on the moon, it

then hooks up to an

exoskeleton and thereby allowing you to

control an

exoskeleton on the moon. You can also

shoot these exoskeletons throughout the

universe and therefore be able to

explore the universe mentally by

shooting your consciousness throughout

the universe. Now this of course is not

possible for a few hundred years living

forever.

U your biological body may have a finite

lifespan unless of course we can figure

out organic immortality in which case we

can replace organs as they wear out. So

organs as they wear out may be replaced

to give you organic

immortality. And this organic

immortality may allow you to control a

robot that could then be shot throughout

the

universe. And you could then begin to

colonize the

universe perhaps near near the speed of

light.

All of this is well within the laws of

physics, beyond our capabilities today,

but I think possible. Do you believe

that we can ever create a consciousness

machine? It depends on how you define

consciousness. There's no unified theory

of consciousness at the present time.

However, I do think it's possible to

create an object that can size up its

position, understand its location,

understand its position in the universe,

and initiate conversations with you. Is

that consciousness? I don't know.

There's no definition of consciousness

that is universally accepted. Get a

dictionary, look up the word

consciousness, and you realize that

there's no uniform agreement as to what

it is. But I think in the future, it may

be possible to create a machine that is

aware, aware of itself, aware of its

surroundings, aware of who is out there

and communicate, ask questions, interact

with other beings. I think that is

possible. You predict that in future we

can create a second civilization. third

civilization. What is the second

civilization?

Well, physicists have looked at outer

space for guidance as to what alien

technologies and civilizations may be

like. One theory ranks them in terms of

type one, type two, type three. Yeah. A

type one civilization is a civilization

that harnesses all planetary energy.

Anything planetary they control. They

mine all the light that comes from the

sun. They control earthquakes,

volcanoes, anything on the planet earth

they control. That is type one. Type two

exhaust the power of a planet and they

exhaust now the power of the sun. They

just don't get a suntan. They control

the sun. The entire output of the sun is

used in their machines. This is a type

two civilization. And we see this in

science fiction, Star Trek, the

Federation of Planets would be a type

two civilization. Then there's type

three. A type three is galactic. They

roam the galactic space

lanes. They're able to play with black

holes. And that would be Star Wars. Star

Wars is a galactic

civilization. That would be type three.

Then the next question is if they visit

us, are they type one? Are they type

two? Are they type

three? Well, type one civilization can

basically just colonize a few planets in

their nearby sector of the solar system.

So, flying saucers probably do not come

from a type one civilization. A type two

civilization then there then therefore

begins to uh understand the nature of

stars. However, even stars do not allow

you to approach the light speed that we

need to go across the universe. A type

three however may allow you to access

the plunk energy is the ultimate energy

of the universe. The plunk energy is the

energy at which space itself becomes

unstable. You put enough energy into the

plank. You put the plunk energy into an

oven and you then begin to find that

within the oven bubbles form. Anomalies

in spaceime form and these bubbles for

the most part simply pop in existence

and pop back into existence. This is

called a space-time foam uh invented by

Stephven Hawking. The space-time foam is

when you heat up a microwave oven, let's

say, to enormous temperatures to the

point that space becomes

unstable. And then if you exceed the

plank

energy, universes may start to come

about. In other words, this could be the

origin of the big bang. The big bang

itself was a bubble that reached the

plunk energy and then began to grow and

grow and give you the big bang of today.

That would be probably the province of a

type three civilization which may then

use it as a gateway across the universe.

Well, one problem with civilizations is

that they may have a tendency to

self-destruct.

There are basically four ways in which a

type one civilization can

self-destruct. You have nuclear weapons,

you have germ

warfare, you have global

warming, and you have artificial

intelligence. So there are four ways in

which you could have planetary

destruction of a type one civilization.

You recognize AI as a destruction power.

It has the power of of all of humanity's

technology and used in the wrong way,

these technologies could be

self-destructive. So there are four ways

in which civilization can self-destruct

using its own technology. I tend to be

optimistic in the sense that the

smallest unit of history is the decade.

Now when you look at history year by

year is very depressing. Disasters form,

governments fall. So I think that if you

look at history decade by decade, it is

rather depressing. But when you look at

history century by century, then you

begin to realize, oh my god, think of

the progress. It's better and better and

better. I mean, just 200 years ago, we

had the industrial revolution. We were

dealing with steam power. We were

dealing with uh the beginning of the

industrial revolution for the first time

in world history using machines instead

of your hands to create things. And that

was just 200 years ago. And so I think

that when you look at history through

the lens of science and the lens of

centuries, you realize that history has

a direction. This history is going

toward democratization.

History is going toward the dispersal of

technology that can relieve us relieve

us of backbreaking work and um of course

the development is uneven but the

direction is clear. Technology has given

us the ability to communicate to share

knowledge and that is what the internet

has done. The internet has democratized

world society to the point that people

that normally would be forgotten in a in

a village and die without a name at all.

These people can now communicate. They

can learn. They can communicate with

people around the world because they

realize that their government does not

have to be that way. if their government

is repressive on the internet they can

see that there are governments that are

not repressive and so they want to

change and so in other words I think

progress has a direction so I would

disagree with some people who say that

science has no direction that science

can be used to destroy the world or

science can be used to liberate but it

has no direction I tend to disagree I

tend to think that science does have a

direction and the direction is toward

democratization toward sharing of the

fruits of this

technology which did not happen in the

past. Now that doesn't mean there won't

be ups and downs. That doesn't mean

there won't be wars, skirmishes and

problems. But when you look at history

decade by decade, century by century,

you realize that there is a direction to

history. Chapter number 11. time

machine. Time is like a river. It flows

in one direction and it seems to be

irreversible. However, along comes

Einstein who says, "No, time is a river

that has

whirlpools. It can maybe fork into two

rivers." So, in other words, the river

of time is d is dynamic. It's not just

one river moving in one direction.

But then the next question is if the

river of time can be altered, can you go

backwards in time? Well, Stephen Hawking

looked at that question and said that he

thought that with

wormholes you could go forwards in time

but not necessarily backwards in time

using wormholes as gateways to another

era in time. What was his argument? His

argument was

that if you go backwards in time, then

eventually you go forwards in time and

then you go backwards in time and you

form a loop. The loop allows you to

accumulate energy until it explodes. And

so your time machine blows up. That was

Stephen Hawkings argument against time

travel. But there's a

loophole a loophole in that in that

theory and that is if you make one

pass not so that you make infinite

number of passes accumulating energy so

the machine blows up but you just make

one pass then perhaps you don't have

this problem of exploding universes and

then you can go backwards in time. This

of course is still science fiction but

the mathematics seems to indicate that

if you make a one pass in backwards in

time then you can do it if you have

enough energy how much energy the plank

energy 10 to the 19 billion electron

volts that's one with 19 zeros after it

that is the energy perhaps of a time

machine the plon energy uh to finalize

our conversation I would like to a

little bit talk about you. How do you

perceive yourself? When I was 8 years

old, something happened which changed my

life. All the newspapers said that a

great man had just

died and they put a picture of his desk

on the evening

news and they said that this great

scientist could not finish this book.

So I said to myself, why couldn't he

finish this book? If he was such a great

man, then why couldn't he finish this

book that was sitting right there on his

desk? Why couldn't he ask his mother?

Why couldn't he simply look up the

answer? What was so hard? Well, I was

fascinated by this man. Over the years,

I went to the library and I found out

this man had a name. His name was Albert

Einstein. And that book, that book that

he could not finish was to be the theory

of

everything, an equation perhaps no more

than one inch long that would allow him

to quote read the mind of God. These are

his own words. So I said to myself,

that's for me. I want to be part of this

great journey to read that book to

understand the theory of everything.

Well, today I can read that book and I

can see all the places where he got

stuck, all the places where he got lost

in in a thicket of mathematics. We can

read that book of Einstein and realize

that yes, he was on to many ideas, but

he didn't have the one paradigm. He

didn't have the one image that would

push the whole theory into into reality.

And we think that image, that paradigm,

we think is a violin string. And that

each violin note is a particle. And

that's why there's so many particles.

Why wouldn't ma nature flood us with all

these particles with Greek names? And

it's because they're nothing but

different notes on the same string. It's

just the same string vibrating in

different

modes. And so I said to myself, when I'm

when I grow up, I want to begin to work

on this project. So when I was in high

school, I decided to build an atom

smasher, a 2.3 million electron volt

betron particle accelerator in my mom's

garage. So, I got 22 miles of copper

wire, 6 kilowatts of

energy, 600 lb of transformer steel, and

I built a Betatron accelerator in my

mom's

garage. Every time I turned it on, I

blew out all the circuit breakers in the

house. The whole house would be plunged

in darkness. And my poor mom, she would

say, "Why couldn't I have a son who

plays

basketball? Why can't he play football?

And for God's sake, why can't you find a

nice Japanese girlfriend? Why does he

have to build these machines in the

garage? Well, these machines won the

attention of a physicist, Edward Teller.

He's the father of the hydrogen bomb.

And that was when I made contact with

other physicists. These are the

physicists who built the atomic bomb and

they built the hydrogen bomb. And then I

began to realize the power that this

technology is not something that you

simply look at over coffee. This is the

engine of the universe. This is what

makes the universe move. It is the

engine of the universe itself. Realize

that people have a thirst. A thirst to

understand who am I? Where do I fit in

this larger sche scheme of things? What

is it all about? And we're flooded with

all these images from Hollywood and all

these images from the movies, but they

never ask the question, what does it

mean? Where did it come

from? Why? Why is the world the way it

is? And that's where I think that when

presented well to the average person,

they'll say, "Ah, that's the reason.

That's why the the world is the way they

are." But unfortunately, our media is

driven by profit and you make a lot more

money talking about talking about uh the

latest movie star rather than talking

about Einstein or or the nature of the

universe

itself. But it's a way that we as

professors now can reach our students at

the university level because at the

universities we don't have the

distraction of competing with Hollywood

movies. And so at at that level then we

can begin to engage people because they

are curious you know they do wonder what

is it all about. Are you fighting with

fake news about yourself? Well you have

to realize that in a free press people

can say

nonsense and all sorts of things and you

just have to live with it. That's one of

the prices of being in the the public

domain. If you are a private person, you

can sue other people for

slander. You can sue them. But if you

are part of the public discourse, it is

very difficult to sue people because it

was your fault. You

voluntarily you voluntarily exposed

yourself to all sorts of different kinds

of uh reputations. So it is much harder

to sue people uh once you become part of

the public domain.

You just have to grin and bear it. In

other words, well, I would hope that

what I talk about when I talk about

science is understood because we're

talking about being able to understand

and control and create a better world.

That is there's a point to all this and

that we want to change society. Who

inspired you uh the most today?

Well, I have my heroes and these hero

well these heroes are within string

theory and these are the people that

have pioneered the mathematics of string

theory. People like Ed Whitten at at

Princeton for example, people that have

really created whole new worlds of

mathematics. So even mathematicians have

been fascinated by string theory because

string theory has forced mathematicians

to explore new forms of mathematics. And

so I think that it's interesting that a

revolution in one field string theory

and physics affects another field pure

mathematics and gives hope that one day

we'll have a unified theory of

mathematics. that in the same way that

string theory is unifying most of

physics, it'll spin off and unify most

of mathematics as well. Which part of

your career was the most difficult?

Well, one of the most difficult things

of being a physicist is you have to have

what is called butt power. You have to

be able to sit on your butt without

distractions and just go through pages

and pages of calculations, sometimes

several hundred pages just to get one

formula that works. And that's

gratifying because after spending hours

and days and weeks going through a pile

of equations, it all works. And then you

realize there's something there that

this is not just garbage. There's

something there that all of these

equations cancel out

exactly. And that's when you say to

yourself, "Aha, there is a rhyme or

reason to nature. Nature is not

malicious." Einstein would say that

nature is not malicious. She is subtle

but not malicious. So after plowing

through hundreds of pages of calculation

you realize oh my god it all works. Why

you agree for this interview guys from

Poland far away from United States?

When I was a child reading about

Einstein being fascinated by all these

new concepts. I would go to the library

to try to find out more about the fourth

dimension, to try to find out more about

intelligent life in the universe. And I

found

nothing.

Zero. Just nothing except maybe a few

comic books, but nothing about the

science of what's out there, about the

universe, about intelligent life.

Nothing. And I said to myself, when I

grow up and I become a physicist, I want

to make sure that of course I'm at the

cutting edge of research, but also I

hope to convey the excitement that I

felt as a child to the next generation

of children. And so when children email

me and write to me, they say that this

is more fascinating than a comic book.

This is real. This is reality.

And then I say to myself, maybe I've

done something that I've touched people

and I've made them realize there's a

universe out there, not a universe of

comic books or or Hollywood movies, but

the real thing and that they too can be

part of this great search for the theory

of Everything.