Physical Attraction: Recent Episodes
PhysicsPodcast.com
Physical Attraction is the show that explores topics in science, technology, and the future - from a physicist's perspective. From the birth of stars to the end of the world, from interviews with experts to meticulously-researched deep dives, we'll explore the topics that shape our world.
In the last episode, we briefly introduced "climate change doomers" and some of their misleading claims. In this episode, I talk about despair, and why we cannot give in to it.
We're going there. In this episode, I discuss why civilization is not going to imminently collapse due to climate change, explain why doomism is a new form of denialism, and debunk some of its most misleading claims.
A new episode released from behind the Patreon paywall. This episode, we'll review and discuss some of the issues raised by Tim Wu's The Attention Merchants, a book that details the history of the advertising industry.
In this episode, we will continue our analysis of Direct Air Capture and conclude the series on negative emissions - crucial component of decarbonisation, or a techno-utopian distraction from the real problems we face? [Don't expect an actual answer]
Direct Air Capture - machines that suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Could this be the solution to a scaleable negative emissions industry? We'll discuss the pros and cons of the technology in this episode.
Hi all!
This is a slightly special bonus episode. Some years ago I had plans for another series "Black Mirror IRL", which was going to be a series of episodes looking into the technologies mentioned and featured in the Netflix Series Black Mirror. Is anyone working on these technologies in real life? What would their potential social implications be if they were developed? How scientifically feasible would it actually be to develop something like this?
The plan would be to explore one technology alongside each episode of the show.
However, time has passed and I've moved onto other projects, and now I have nowhere near enough time to finish this series alongside everything else, so I only ever got around to recording a single, pilot episode for that putative series, which has been sitting on my hard drive for ages.
Rather than let it go to waste - as it could be years if ever before I get back around to this project again - I am releasing it as a bonus episode for you to enjoy. But one thing I would say is that I would really appreciate your feedback on this episode. Do you think the series is a good idea? Would you like to see more episodes along these lines? How do you think I could improve it? Any and all suggestions are gratefully received. Maybe someday the series as a whole will return.
Thank you all as ever for your support for the show.
What are "nature-based solutions" to climate change? Can we restore the ecosystems that we've destroyed? And how can restoring mangroves help us to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere?
"Give me a tanker full of iron, and I'll give you a new Ice Age." It might sound like something Hank Scorpio would say, but this episode will deal with the very real idea of stimulating plankton blooms to remove CO2 from the atmosphere - ocean iron fertilization.
How could grinding up rocks and sprinkling the dust over vast areas help to combat climate change? In this episode, we deal with "enhanced weathering" as a potential source of negative emissions.
Mention carbon capture, and the refrain you'll often hear is "why invent a machine that captures CO2? We already have one - it's called a tree." But is large-scale afforestation as a negative emissions solution so simple? We dig into its potential in this episode of our series on negative emissions.
N/B: Owing to a ridiculously hectic schedule until the end of the year, episodes will continue to be released on a fortnightly basis until further notice - thanks for understanding.
We hear an awful lot about carbon capture, utilisation, and storage as a technology that could help to mitigate climate change. In this episode, we review the science, the policy, existing CCS plants, and the potential for the captured carbon to be utilised. Will CCS ever materialise?
In this episode, we get into some of the specific technologies that might be called upon to deliver negative emissions at scale. Specifically, we're looking at the advantages, disadvantages, and concerns surrounding BECCS (Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage.)
In this episode, we discuss whether the promises that some new technology - like negative emissions - will come along and "solve climate change" for us are genuine, or if they have instead shaped climate policy into prevarication and procrastination.
Increasing levels of negative emissions are envisioned by models in climate-change scenarios that are compatible with the Paris Agreements. In this episode, we talk about some of the geopolitical implications for trying to deliver this, and the alternative futures that we can envision. Do "thinly-veiled techno-utopias shore up the Paris Agreement?"
Negative emissions technologies (NETs), also called carbon dioxide removal (CDR), are seen by many as an increasingly essential part of climate change mitigation. Many of the scenarios that the IPCC suggests for meeting the Paris Agreement goals suggest that we will suck billions of tonnes of CO2 out of the atmosphere by the end of the century - using technology which has barely made it past the pilot project stage. In this episode, I ask: how did we get here?
The book club returns, with a two-part review and overview of anthropologist Jason Hickel's book "The Divide", about global inequality, its historical origins, and possible solutions in the future.
The book club returns, with a two-part review and overview of anthropologist Jason Hickel's book "The Divide", about global inequality, its historical origins, and possible solutions in the future.
In this episode, we discuss the ongoing battle throughout the 1930s and 1940s between those who believed in a steady-state Universe, and those who thought it was expanding - and how it took more observations to overcome these cosmological contradictions.
To close out this series of news episodes, we discuss the depressing failure of carbon capture and storage projects in Australia, as well as the far-too-slow approach to climate change adaptation across the world.
In this episode of Thermonuclear Takes, we tackle a couple of recent climate-related news stories - the "tipping point" carbon flux measurements from the Amazon rainforest, and the IEA's progress report on a global green recovery.
In this news episode, I discuss recent anomalies around the muon - B-particles decaying into muons, and the muon's anomalous magnetic moment - and whether they herald the glorious dawn of a new era of physics, or are just a mistake.
In this news-y episode, I will give you some updates on how the show is progressing, share some listener emails on our cosmology series, and set up next episode's discussion of some recent results in high-energy physics.
In this episode, we cover the different kinds of universal horizon, whether the Universe has an edge, and talk about how theoretical physicists pondered how it all might've began.
At the dawn of theoretical cosmology, Einstein introduced the so-called "Cosmological Constant" into his equations to explain how the Universe could be static and unchanging in time. He would later say that it was his greatest mistake.
In this episode, we look at how Einstein's theory of general relativity gave rise to a theoretical framework for examining cosmology - the evolution of space, time, and the Universe in general - as a whole.
In 1929, Edwin Hubble published his findings. The redshifts from distant galaxies were proportional to their distance away from us. Theoretical cosmologists would pounce on them as evidence that the Universe must be expanding.
Everything we have been able to infer about the Universe began in total ignorance. Many early theories about how the Universe was structured were wildly incorrect - but astronomers were building up the toolkits that would later allow us to understand.
When you're trying to narrate the history of the entire Universe, where do you begin?
I decided to start in a radio studio in London in March 1949, when the term "Big Bang" was first coined, in the first on our series on cosmology.
Arguments surrounding climate change have become subtler. Outright denial is gradually shifting to rhetoric that supports delaying urgent action. In this review of a paper by Steinberger, Lamb et al, I run down the new "discourses of climate delay".
As the climate change debate has advanced, the arguments surrounding it have become more subtle. Outright denial of the climate problem is rare - so rhetoric has shifted to delaying urgent action. In this review of a paper by Steinberger, Lamb et al, I run down the new "discourses of climate delay"
Folks,
It's been over a year since we had a break from producing content and it just so happens that things are getting rather hectic in non-podcasting life.
For that reason, we will be taking a short hiatus and returning with new episodes on June 1st. This will give me a bit of time to build up a reserve of new episodes - and you all a break.
I may or may not release "repeat" episodes during the relevant Tuesdays for the next two weeks depending on how people feel about that.
If you can't wait that long - subscribe to the Patreon, where there are loads of episodes!
Thank you.
Why should we listen to scientists? Well, because they're right a lot of the time. But also because - ideally - the institutions of science embody values that everyone can agree are good in a system for working out what's true.
How can machine learning and artificial intelligence help us in the fight against climate change? I explore literally dozens of ideas for possible applications of ML algorithms in this episode.
I interviewed David Gerard, author of the cryptocurrency blog and book of the same name "Attack of the 50ft Blockchain", as well as a new book "Libra Shrugged" about Facebook's attempt to develop cryptocurrencies. We talked about Bitcoin, its flaws, its origins, and its future.
I have generally held back on talking about bitcoin - because I'm super opinionated and it's one topic that generates a lot of heated discussions - but I finally let it all go in this one, lengthy rant episode. Think of it as therapy... and if you disagree, get in touch.
In The Coal Question, Jevons - alongside realising that we needed a transition to renewable energy 150 years ago - posed the efficiency paradox. Using energy more efficiently motivates you to use more energy. Can energy efficiency "rebound" and backfire like this in real systems? That's the question we explore in this episode.
In this episode of our series on energy efficiency, we are going to talk about industrial applications - how we can improve the way that high-energy industries and difficult-to-decarbonise sectors use energy.
It's a smorgasboard of climate news as global emissions rebound, slippery definitions of Net Zero abound, the Green Homes Grant collapses, and there's controversy over a Cumbrian coal mine.
In the second part of our series on energy efficiency and its role in combatting climate change, we talk about how buildings can be made more energy efficient... and some of the factors that prevent this from happening.
Thanks to Podcorn for sponsoring this episode. To find out how you can find new sponsors for your podcast, head to podcorn.com/podcasters.
Sigh. Yeah I did a thing about the Gamestop, meme stocks, financial asset bubbles, and so on, if only so that these opinions don't have to rattle around in my head taking up space.
In this episode, we discuss the vital role of energy efficiency in reducing carbon emissions, and the potential to reduce energy consumption in transportation.
Thanks to Podcorn for sponsoring this episode. To find out how you can find new sponsors for your podcast, head to podcorn.com/podcasters.
This week, we have a guest on the show - Rodrigo Aguilera. Specifically, we're talking to him about his book "The Glass Half-Empty: Debunking the Myth of Progress in the 21st Century". We shouldn't be happy with a narrow and limited definition of "progress" when we have the capacity to achieve so much more. But if we want to see things like the elimination of poverty, the application of human ingenuity and compassion and rationality and empathy towards solving the problems that exist in the world - this must begin with an accurate assessment of where we actually are, right now; what has led to progress in the past; and how we can get further in the future.
You're about to hear the second part of the interview, where we will dig into the flaws associated with "New Optimism" in more detail, and at the end we have a discussion about how we might hope to make the glass a little bit fuller in the future.
Listeners to our series on Softbank Vision Fund will be interested - albeit perhaps not surprised - to hear that one of its major investments, Greensill Capital, which we covered in the episode "The Next Financial Crisis", has imploded dramatically. We discuss it - and a new court ruling on another Softbank darling, Uber - in this Thermonuclear Takes episode.
This week, we have a guest on the show - Rodrigo Aguilera. Rodrigo is an economist - born in Mexico, lives in London, and his writing has appeared all over the place in various forms over the years. Specifically, we're talking to him about his book "The Glass Half-Empty: Debunking the Myth of Progress in the 21st Century". Now; this may sound like a rather gloomy take to pick, but the point that he is making is essentially that we shouldn't be happy with a narrow and limited definition of "progress" when we have the capacity to achieve so much more. But, of course, if we genuinely do want to see progress: if we want to see things like the elimination of poverty, the application of human ingenuity and compassion and rationality and empathy towards solving the problems that exist in the world - if, in other words, we actually want things to get better, rather than just complacently gesturing at lines on graphs which tell us things are getting better - this must begin with an accurate assessment of where we actually are, right now; what has led to progress in the past; and how we can get further in the future.
Rodrigo was incredibly generous with his time, and so I've split the resulting interview into two parts: you're about to hear the first one, where we will talk about what the "New Optimism" theory is; I hope you enjoy it.
From the discovery of graphene to the invention of Van Der Waals heterostructures, this episode explores the potential and possibilities surrounding 2D materials - and how a particular twist between layers of graphene could unlock a playground of superconductivity.
In the concluding part of this mini-series on technological implications for being human, we discuss the idea that humans will manipulate their psychology to "short-circuit" the meaning of life - and whether there's anything wrong with doing that.
In this experimental, unusual, and wildly speculative episode, we'll discuss philosophy, and the implications of the imagined techno-future for the unanswerable questions that have been with us since the dawn of consciousness.
I sat down with Professor Rebecca Willis, author of the new book Too Hot To Handle, about the democratic challenge of climate change, how politicians deal with climate issues, the Climate Assembly here in the UK, and the ten-point plan for effective climate policy.
On this episode, we conclude our series examining the work of Project Drawdown and its climate mitigation solutions, and discuss the additional benefits that arise from implementing many of them.
This episode, we have a guest on the show that I'm very excited about. Professor Steve Keen is an economist and author who has been a longstanding critic of neoclassical economics, which has included writing the bestselling Debunking Economics book and hosting the podcast of the same name, as well as developing several alternative models of the macroeconomy. In recent years, he has turned his attention to how neoclassical economics has tried to deal with the issue of climate change... and, well, the fact that his paper is called "The appallingly bad neoclassical economics of climate change" probably tells you something of how he has responded to it.
I was lucky enough to detain him for quite a while, so I've split the interview into two parts. They complement each other, but they can be listened to independently, depending on what you're interested in.
The second part dives deep into the critique of the neoclassical economics of climate change: specifically, how economists have consistently been overconfident in their projections of climate damages and arguably helped lead us towards weak climate policies, and how we might hope to change this in the future. I think this is an incredibly important message and subject to discuss and debate, because unfortunately this stuff has been extremely influential - to the point where one of the main culprits has the so-called Nobel Prize in Economics - so I really urge everyone to listen to that.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction, and thank you to Steve Keen for being so generous with his time and agreeing to be interviewed. You can find Steve on Patreon at www.patreon.com/ProfSteveKeen where you will have access to a good number of podcasts and posts on economics for free, and where you can subscribe for further access to more shows. He's also on Twitter @ProfSteveKeen where you can keep up with the latest news on this work.
You can find us online at physicspodcast.com. There, you'll find the episode guide on the About page, where you can find all of the episodes we've done on subjects ranging from the birth of stars to the end of the world, and the episodes in the ongoing Climate 201 series which talk about the science, economics, and policy of climate change in much, much greater depth. There you can also get in touch with me with any comments, questions or concerns you might have through the contact form, and you'll also find links to support the show on Paypal for a one-time donation or Patreon for longer-term subscriptions. Thanks very much to everyone who has done that already. Until next time then, please do - take care.
In this episode of our Climate 201 series, we continue discussing the practical emissions-reduction solutions from Project Drawdown - talking about regenerative agriculture, managing refridgerants, and why we abandoned electric cars which were the majority of automobiles in the 1880s!
This episode, we have a guest on the show that I'm very excited about. Professor Steve Keen is an economist and author who has been a longstanding critic of neoclassical economics, which has included writing the bestselling Debunking Economics book and hosting the podcast of the same name, as well as developing several alternative models of the macroeconomy. In recent years, he has turned his attention to how neoclassical economics has tried to deal with the issue of climate change... and, well, the fact that his paper is called "The appallingly bad neoclassical economics of climate change" probably tells you something of how he has responded to it.
I was lucky enough to detain him for quite a while, so I've split the interview into two parts. They complement each other, but they can be listened to independently, depending on what you're interested in.
The first part deals with Professor Keen's background, his critique of neoclassical economics, the parallels - and differences - between economics and physics, and a little about financial crises and possible steps we could take to deal with the economic fallout of COVID-19.
The second part dives deep into the critique of the neoclassical economics of climate change: specifically, how economists have consistently been overconfident in their projections of climate damages and arguably helped lead us towards weak climate policies, and how we might hope to change this in the future. I think this is an incredibly important message and subject to discuss and debate, because unfortunately this stuff has been extremely influential - to the point where one of the main culprits has the so-called Nobel Prize in Economics - so I really urge everyone to listen to that.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction, and thank you to Steve Keen for being so generous with his time and agreeing to be interviewed. You can find Steve on Patreon at www.patreon.com/ProfSteveKeen where you will have access to a good number of podcasts and posts on economics for free, and where you can subscribe for further access to more shows. He's also on Twitter @ProfSteveKeen where you can keep up with the latest news on this work.
You can find us online at physicspodcast.com. There, you'll find the episode guide on the About page, where you can find all of the episodes we've done on subjects ranging from the birth of stars to the end of the world, and the episodes in the ongoing Climate 201 series which talk about the science, economics, and policy of climate change in much, much greater depth. There you can also get in touch with me with any comments, questions or concerns you might have through the contact form, and you'll also find links to support the show on Paypal for a one-time donation or Patreon for longer-term subscriptions. Thanks very much to everyone who has done that already. Until next time then, please do - take care.
In this Climate 201 episode, we look at some of the climate change mitigation solutions proposed by Project Drawdown, in an effort to be more quantiative about what needs to be done to address our greenhouse gas emissions.
In this episode, we discuss the Kaya decomposition - splitting CO2 emissions into CO2/energy, Energy/GDP, GDP/person, and population. We'll talk about its usefulness and limitations in tracking what drives carbon emissions.
I sat down with Paul Johnston (@PaulDJohnston), cloud computing expert and tech/climate scholar, to talk about how the tech sector should tackle climate change, as well as his experiences discussing climate change with businesses and helping to run a community energy company.
=> How should technology companies approach climate change?
=> Can we trust the pledges made by big tech companies?
Sometimes in this game you get to do an interview where you genuinely can say: "the person I'm about to interview needs no introduction." This is one of those occasions. But if I were to do that, it would wreck the fun of getting to introduce the interview, and why would I deprive myself of that?
So, this episode, we are interviewing Lord Martin Rees. Martin Rees is one of the foremost cosmologists and astrophysicists of our time. He was made the Astronomer Royal in 1995, has been Master of Trinity College Cambridge, and President of the Royal Society. He has written more than 500 research papers across various areas of astrophysics and cosmology, including contributions to the origin of the cosmic microwave background radiation, the final proofs of the Big Bang theory, quasars, and gamma ray bursts.
In the latter part of his career, he has been an immensely influential populariser of science, writing books on Cosmology such as Just Six Numbers and Our Cosmic Habitat. And he has also devoted himself to considering grand problems of the future of humanity and the existential risks that we face: his book, Our Final Century, helped to kick off the field of existential risk studies, and he co-founded the Centre for the Study of Existential Risks at the University of Cambridge in 2012.
It is no exaggeration to say that a great many of the ideas that we've discussed on this show - and my own personal inspiration to study physics in the first place - owes to the work of Lord Rees, both in discovering much of the science in the first place and then again in popularising and explaining the ideas so wonderfully.
I was extremely grateful that he was willing to be so generous with his time and respond to such a large range of my questions. Our interview touches on existential risks, the current pandemic, extraterrestrial life, cosmology in general, and the nature of fundamental physics.
A bumper episode with a crop of interesting news stories to round out the year:
-> Uber sells its self-driving car section, and Softbank sells robot company Boston Dynamics. What can we infer from these moves about the state of the tech sector?
-> Reports show income inequality rising since 1975 has resulted in $47 trillion additional income accruing to the top 10%, and that trickle-down economics doesn't work as intended
-> Global emissions fall by 7% this year due to the COVID-19 pandemic: could we do this with a positive shift to decarbonisation? And a new study suggests that the land sink of CO2 may be weakening.
Take a listen!
It's a bonus news episode, in which I ramble on about the COVID-19 vaccines and the possibility of defending against future pandemics.
In this episode of Climate 201, we deconstruct the jargon around climate scenarios. What's the difference between RCP2.6 and RCP8.5? What purpose do the scenarios serve? How should we think about them?
This week, taking a break from climate, we have a special guest on the show - Tim Hwang. Tim Hwang is a writer and researcher, and he's the author of Subprime Attention Crisis, a book about how online advertising may have become a bubble. He is currently a research fellow at the Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) at Georgetown University.
He is the former director of the Harvard-MIT Ethics and Governance of AI Initiative, $26M philanthropic fund and research effort working to advance the development of machine learning in the public interest. He previously served as the global public policy lead for artificial intelligence and machine learning at Google.
We had a fascinating conversation that starts with a little word on deepfakes and misinformation, and then gets into the heart of the Subprime Attention Crisis thesis - is online advertising a bubble, and, if so, what does that mean for the internet that depends on it so much? I hope you enjoy.
We explore what is meant by a "carbon budget", how and why we can determine how much CO2 is left to emit before we cross a given temperature threshold, as well as disputes in how to define these budgets and use them politically... and why the world isn't going to end in twelve years.
In this episode, we explore the tantalising - but maybe impossible - dream of blanketing the world's deserts in solar panels to supply all of our energy needs.
In this Climate 201 episode, we introduce the different greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming, analyse how their different lifetimes and ability to absorb radiation and warm the planet work, and discuss different ways of comparing their effects.
To close our series on Softbank's Vision Fund, I interviewed tech journalist and scholar Edward Ongweso Jr. of "This Machine Kills" podcast about Softbank, the corrosive nature of VC on the tech sector and our society, and the Vision that Masoyoshi Son really dreams of... along with whether it will all fall apart, and how we can build a society that uses technological innovations in a less destructive way.
Over the course of this series, we've described how Softbank's $100bn Vision Fund promised to invest in the future and failed to deliver. In this episode, we ask: why should we care? We discuss the wider landscape of technology and innovation, and question why it can't deliver the things we really need.
In this episode of our series on Softbank's Vision Fund, we talk about how their investment in fintech company Greensill Capital is potentially part of a series of investments that might create conditions for a new financial crisis, much like that seen in 2008-9.
In this episode, we talk about why the stock market is increasingly divorced from economic reality, and the fact that COVID-19 is proving to be a great accelerator rather than a great leveller - accelerating the trends towards income and wealth inequality that we have seen over the last 30-40 years, as well as internationally.
We also discuss where the show is going in the future, and respond to listener emails.
We go further into Softbank's investments, including the $2bn-valued company that promised to develop an army of robots to cook and deliver pizzas and ended up just creating a round pizza box.
In this episode, we discuss the leaked FinCEN files - which illustrate trillions of dollars in suspicious financial flows - as well as Nikola, the wannabe Tesla whose "hydrogen truck" was actually just rolling down a gentle slope.
Very excited to say we have a special guest on the show today. Tom Collina has had a long and storied career in nuclear disarmament for many years, in the Director of Policy at the Plougshares Fund, a non-profit foundation dedicated to trying to prevent the spread and use of nuclear weapons. With former Secretary of Defence Bill Perry, he has just written a book called "The Button: The New Nuclear Arms Race and Presidential Power from Truman To Trump", which is about the past, present, and future of nuclear weapons. This is an area long-term listeners will remember from our TEOTWAWKI series, and the interviews with Martin Pfeiffer and Stephen Schwartz.
If you're interested in this, there are plenty of things you can do. Ploughshares has their own podcast on nuclear issues, Press The Button, which Tom co-hosts, as does Bill Perry, "At The Brink", which both discuss incidents from nuclear history and nuclear policy in more detail. You can of course obtain the book The Button - there's also a great audiobook which I can personally attest is well-done. There's so much fascinating nuclear history and details of policy in there which we didn't have time to get to in this interview, so it's well worth your while to pick that book up. You can follow Tom Collina @TomCollina on Twitter, and you can get involved with the Ploughshares Foundation as well.
There are plenty of ways to stay engaged with these issues, but ultimately I think it is a question of demanding the simple changes that need to take place to make us all safer. We don't need ICBMs, we don't need first strike authority, and we don't need launch on warning: the world would be vastly better off without these things, and you could still easily have a nuclear deterrent that would be capable of retaliation.
https://old.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/j6u3et/i_am_former_secretary_of_defense_william_perry/
Hello and welcome to this episode of Physical Attraction.
We have a special couple of guests on the show today. Listeners to our episodes about QE for the People will remember that we briefly mentioned Modern Monetary Theory as a new perspective on how economics works, and I'd talked about getting some MMT speakers on the show to explore that in more detail.
I was lucky enough to get the hosts of the MMT Podcast, Patricia Pino and Christian Reilly, who have interviewed many of the founding scholars and most active economists in MMT as part of that brilliant podcast. We had a very wide-ranging discussion, they were incredibly generous with their time, which I am grateful for.
In our discussion, we'll be talking about some of Modern Monetary Theory's big ideas, including:
Why everything you were taught about where money came from, and comes from is wrong
Why your taxes technically don't pay for the things you think they pay for
Why the US and UK governments cannot "run out of money", and why you maybe shouldn't be so afraid of the national debt
What the real limits on government spending actually are
Why the current economic theories require millions of people to be long-term unemployed, and why
I've divided the podcast into two episodes. The first deals with a background of MMT, exploring the historical and anthropological question "Where does money come from?". The second episode (which is longer!) deals with the consequences of Modern Monetary Theory for our society, some ideas of how it can be used to run economies more effectively and solve many of the biggest problems that we face in the world, and is therefore slightly more political, so there is a content warning there if you don't want to hear any discussion of politics.
I realise that this podcast is not an economics podcast, and it's not billed as such. But I have become convinced, especially recently, that so many of the concerns that we have been talking about recently - this intersection between technology, inequality, and global catastrophic risks, the necessity of dealing with climate change, and so much else in the world - it is necessary to have a deeper understanding of economics, which is in the background of so much that is going on in the world. MMT, to my mind, when it's properly interpreted and described, makes some points that the "classical" understanding of economics misses out on. And even if you disagree with it, I think it's a fascinating area: I have certainly been fascinated by it - and I hope that you find it valuable. As ever - if not, you can always get in touch with me via the contact form on physicspodcast.com and let me know what you think... or just wait a few days and we'll have a different episode available for you on a different subject. Just don't ask for your money back.
Thanks very much for listening to this episode. You can find the Modern Monetary Theory podcast where-ever you're listening to this, and I really do recommend it if you want to hear about much more details on MMT directly from the economists who are working on this stuff; they are on Twitter at MMTPodcast, where you can also find Christian and Patricia's own accounts if you want to follow them. They also have a Patreon with bonus episodes, just like we do, so do check that out as well. And many thanks again to them for coming on the show.
As for our show, we are on the web at physicspodcast.com. Any comments, questions, concerns, things you'd like to hear about, feedback for this episode which I know is a little outside what we often talk about - please do let me know, I'd love to hear what you think, and the contact form is there, it goes to my email and I try to respond to everything people send. If you've found this useful, you can support the show on PayPal, subscribe to the Patreon at Patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction, where you will find many bonus episodes, including the complete Softbank Series and some Climate 201 episodes ahead of their general release, as well as some episodes that are only on the Patreon for subscribers there. Thanks to those of you who have done that already; all of the details, alongside where to find us on social media, are on the website at physicspodcast.com.
We have a special couple of guests on the show today. Listeners to our episodes about QE for the People will remember that we briefly mentioned Modern Monetary Theory as a new perspective on how economics works, and I'd talked about getting some MMT speakers on the show to explore that in more detail.
I was lucky enough to get the hosts of the MMT Podcast, Patricia Pino and Christian Reilly, who have interviewed many of the founding scholars and most active economists in MMT as part of that brilliant podcast. We had a very wide-ranging discussion, they were incredibly generous with their time, which I am grateful for.
In our discussion, we'll be talking about some of Modern Monetary Theory's big ideas, including:
Why everything you were taught about where money came from, and comes from is wrong
Why your taxes technically don't pay for the things you think they pay for
Why the US and UK governments cannot "run out of money", and why you maybe shouldn't be so afraid of the national debt
What the real limits on government spending actually are
Why the current economic theories require millions of people to be long-term unemployed, and why
I've divided the podcast into two episodes. The first deals with a background of MMT, exploring the historical and anthropological question "Where does money come from?". The second episode (which is longer!) deals with the consequences of Modern Monetary Theory for our society, some ideas of how it can be used to run economies more effectively and solve many of the biggest problems that we face in the world, and is therefore slightly more political, so there is a content warning there if you don't want to hear any discussion of politics.
I realise that this podcast is not an economics podcast, and it's not billed as such. But I have become convinced, especially recently, that so many of the concerns that we have been talking about recently - this intersection between technology, inequality, and global catastrophic risks, the necessity of dealing with climate change, and so much else in the world - it is necessary to have a deeper understanding of economics, which is in the background of so much that is going on in the world. MMT, to my mind, when it's properly interpreted and described, makes some points that the "classical" understanding of economics misses out on. And even if you disagree with it, I think it's a fascinating area: I have certainly been fascinated by it - and I hope that you find it valuable. As ever - if not, you can always get in touch with me via the contact form on physicspodcast.com and let me know what you think... or just wait a few days and we'll have a different episode available for you on a different subject. Just don't ask for your money back.
In this episode of Physical Attraction, we'll be discussing the recent announcement by China that they will aim for zero net CO2 emissions by the year 2060 - a massive upgrade to their climate pledge. What would it mean for the world, and what does it mean for China?
In this episode, as part of our series on the Softbank Vision Fund and its risky investments, we're talking about the rise and fall of a real-estate company that posed as a tech company... WeWork (and how it lost Softbank $9bn)
In this, the second part of our series on the Softbank Vision Fund, we discuss Softbank's $10bn bet on ride-sharing firm Uber - which burns through capital and regulations in an attempt to establish an unlikely monopoly over transportation-as-a-service.
So there's a big rumour going around that some scientists may have potentially detected a hint of evidence for phosphine gas on Venus, which they consider to be quite strong evidence of something unexplained, which may be an indicator of microbial life in Venus' atmosphere.
As the saying goes, Huge If True.
Because it's been such an awful year, I try to explain this story and indulge in some pretty rampant speculation.
This year, the UK assembled 108 citizens from across all demographics of the society and from around the country to discuss the best ways to address climate change. In September 2020, they reported back.
In this second episode, we go over the Climate Assembly's mammoth 556-page report, and discuss its recommendations on how the UK should get to Net Zero emissions.
You can read the report for yourself at www.climateassembly.uk
In this mini-series, we'll be discussing the Climate Assembly in the UK - what happens when 100 randomly-selected ordinary citizens are given time and space to debate UK climate change policy.
In this first episode, I talk about what a Citizens' Assembly is, and some of the pros and cons of this democratic institution. Next time, we'll discuss this specific assembly, the report and recommendations they came up with.
The Climate Assembly UK released its 556-page report on Thursday 10th September, and it can be read in full here: https://www.climateassembly.uk/
In this series, we'll be telling the story of the Softbank Vision Fund, the $100bn technology venture capital fund that was supposed to revolutionise the world and bring forward a glorious techno-future.
The Vision Fund that now looks like it's inflated a massive, unsustainable bubble in tech companies (and companies that pretend to be tech companies).
First - the story of Softbank, pre-Vision Fund, and its visionary founder, Masoyoshi Son, who made both the best and worst investments in living memory.
I’m very excited today to talk to Dr Robert Elliot Smith, who – after a thirty-year career working in AI and working with algorithms - has written one of the best books I’ve ever read about artificial intelligence and the impact of algorithms on society – Rage Inside the Machine. More than this, though, it’s really about… the dangers that can arise from trying to boil down complex aspects of what it means to be human, or what is valuable and important, to numbers and metrics which can be processed by these machines. Which I think is a much more fundamental issue, and lies at the heart of a great deal of systemic injustice and misunderstanding, even before the age of algorithms came along to turbo-charge all of these problems.
We had a wonderful, wide-ranging interview and Dr Smith was very patient and willing to deal with my pretty scattershot questions attempting to cover a lot of what is in his book. I hope you enjoy listening as much as I enjoyed our conversation.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction, and thanks again for Dr Smith for coming on the show. His book, Rage Inside The Machine, is one of the most brilliant texts you’ll read on AI – a glorious mix between technical detail explained in a way that’s not too oversimplified, personal stories profound insight into this interface between computers and algorithms and what it means to be human. It’s genuinely great, we just scratched the surface here really, and I know I’ll end up reading it multiple times for the full detail of what’s being said… and just because it’s also one of those books where you feel your brain expanding when you read it. In a good way. Do get a copy.
You can find that at Rage Inside The Machine.com where you will also find Rob’s blog and some of his other appearances on podcasts if you are interested. He’s also an occasional Tweeter at Dr RE Smith, so go check it out.
As for us, you know what to do! The website is physicspodcast.com, there’s a contact form there where you can get in touch with any comments, questions, concerns, things you liked, and didn’t like, and so forth. You can donate to the show via PayPal, or subscribe to our Patreon, where there are currently over a dozen bonus and early-release episodes for you to enjoy. You won’t be charged on the Patreon until a new paid bonus episode is released – and even then the pledge can be as low as a dollar or two I think – so if you want to support people who create the independent content you enjoy, that’s a good way to do it.
As a followup to our series on thermodynamics, the briefest of introductions to one of the most fascinating and beautiful areas of physics - Statistical Mechanics.
Well, I asked Twitter if they wouldn't mind more off-topic content, and although the electorate was pretty tiny, they said they didn't mind.
So, with that shaky endorsement in place, I'm going to spend an hour talking about the psychology of conspiracy theories, US politics, the Anabaptist Siege of Munster, millennialist thinking, and satanic cabals that may or may not run the world. (Spoiler: they do not.)
This episode, we talk to Stewart Lansley, who co-edited the book "It's Basic Income" and has written reports on UBI in a UK context. Where is the debate on UBI in light of COVID-19?
In light of some of the recent furore surrounding a particular algorithm, I thought it might be a good time to release this episode of the show.
Two stories about the responsible use of algorithms in modern society - one about YouTube's algorithm and another about investigative journalism in the age of algorithms.
We have a guest on the show today - Professor Lewis Dartnell. Lewis is an author, presenter, and Professor of Science Communication at the University of Westminster, and has written and researched on topics as diverse as astrobiology, how to rebuild civilization after the apocalypse, and the influence of Earth's geology on the history of the development of the species.
I first came across Lewis' work reading an excellent book he wrote "The Knowledge", which is like a how-to guide on how one might try and restart civilization after a cataclysmic event. We talked about the book, and the prospects for finding life in the Universe, in this interview - which I really enjoyed.
You can find Lewis' work at LewisDartnell.com where you'll find links to his previous presenting work, his TED Talk, his academic publications, and various different multimedia appearances that he's made over the years. You can buy Origins and The Knowledge in all good bookstores, and I'm looking forward to getting my hands on a copy of the former having devoured the latter one. You can also follow him on Twitter @Lewis_Dartnell if that floats your boat. I'd like to thank him again for being so generous with his time for this interview.
This week, we have a guest on the show - Paul Gambill. Paul is the CEO of Nori, a startup that is aiming to create a marketplace for negative emissions - removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. I first became interested in Nori when I saw that they were offering the opportunity to buy negative emissions for the low price of $15/tonne. The increasing importance of negative emissions in our climate change scenarios is something I'm very interested in + will be the topic of future episodes, so I was excited to get into the subject of making this a reality in our conversation. We had a wide-ranging discussion about climate change, the role of negative emissions, and what he's hoping to do with the company.
This week, we have a guest on the show - Professor Felicity Boardman, who works at the University of Warwick on the ethics of genetic screening and genome editing. Specifically, she is co-leader of the Imagined Futures project, which looks at the impact of new genetic technologies on those with rare genetic conditions.
This is a little outside the topics we usually cover on this show - but at the same time, it's an extremely important and under-appreciated topic - how the genetic technologies of today are already impacting people. We had an excellent conversation, and I hope you enjoy it.
You can find Professor Boardman's work at the Warwick website, her previous articles on The Conversation, and several talks on YouTube - I urge you to check them all out.
Remember, you can find us online @ physicspodcast.com and on Twitter @physicspod. Do send any comments, questions, concerns, topics you'd like to see covered and so on to the contact form on the website, and I'll endeavour to email you back! [I generally respond but it comes from my personal email address, so you might want to check if it's getting filtered.]
We have a Patreon, where you can subscribe for a few dollars per bonus episode - you won't be charged until a new bonus episode is released, and there are already a few there for you to download on subscribing.
This week, we have a guest on the show - economics and finance writer Frances Coppola. She's the author of a book, "Quantiative Easing for the People", which argues that central banks and governments should work in concert to ensure that their response to financial crises really helps the entire economy, rather than just inflating asset prices.
In the second part of our interview, we go into much more depth about the specific idea of quantiative easing for the people - essentially, what would happen if the central banks or government directly gave every individual in the country a few thousand pounds, rather than injecting this stimulus into the market indirectly by buying up assets. We also discuss specifically what the ideal response to the coronavirus crisis should be and the role that banks and governments have to play in our response.
This week, we have a guest on the show - economics and finance writer Frances Coppola. She's the author of a book, "Quantiative Easing for the People", which argues that central banks and governments should work in concert to ensure that their response to financial crises really helps the entire economy, rather than just inflating asset prices.
In the first part of our wide-ranging discussion, we demystify the economy and debunk some common misconceptions by asking some basic questions: what's a central bank, and what is its role in the economy? What is quantiative easing, and what was it intended to do? It was a really fascinating discussion and it does amaze me how much economics is almost taken for granted + not explained as par for the course in our education when these ideas and principles have the potential to affect our lives so much. I hope you enjoy.
Hi all. This episode, we're interviewing Brynley Pearlstone, who hosts the Scicurious podcast, which focuses on LGBTQ scientists. We talk about his scientific work on gravitational waves, and about outreach in physics more generally. Enjoy!
In which I post cringe (unrelated prose and poetry) and lose subscriber to commemorate the 3rd anniversary of this show going on the air.
In this episode, we discuss the progress that has been made towards directly detecting Dark Matter in the form of WIMPs, and the recent anomalies observed at the Xenon1T experiment.
Enjoy!
In this slightly news-y episode, we pick up on last week's episode and talk about progress that governments have made in enacting green economic stimulus to follow the coronavirus, as well as the negative redistributive and climate impacts of quantiative easing.
I explore the possible impact that the COVID-19 pandemic will have on our efforts to deal with climate change.
Hey! This is a preview of something new that we're trying out - the Physical Attraction Book Club. We'll be discussing books at a semi-regular intervals on the Patreon, which you can find here:
https://www.patreon.com/physicalattraction
This is a preview to tease you all into being tantalised enough to subscribe. If you do subscribe (for $3 per bonus episode) then not only will you support the show and independent podcasters more generally, but you will also get access to the rest of this episode and the rest of the bonus episodes that are unlocked.
The book is The Attention Merchants, by Tim Wu - a comprehensive history of how advertising has shaped our world and our culture, from the 1800s to 2018.
The first of two episodes on climate change and the coronavirus - parallels, similarities, and differences - in which we consider some of the similarities between "climate skeptics" and "COVID skeptics".
Also, listener mail.
Well, the manifestation of a global catastrophic risk means that it's time for us to bring back the very first guest on this show, from back in 2017. Phil Torres is a scholar of existential risks - you can find him on Twitter @xriskology and his website at xriskology.com, and we are delighted to ask him back to the show to discuss the field of existential risks in the time of the coronavirus pandemic.
In the second part of our interview, we discuss the field of existential risks more generally, Phil's recent work, and ramble about the concerns surrounding the utilitarian foundation of the philosophy.
Episode first aired in Feb 2018 which deals with cognitive biases surrounding how we conceive of the end-times. Sadly relevant today.
Why are we so fascinated with the end of the world?
How do we think about it?
How do cognitive biases impact how we conceive of it?
How can we account for existential risks to humanity?
What is millenial thinking, and why do we fall into it?
Well, the manifestation of a global catastrophic risk means that it's time for us to bring back the very first guest on this show, from back in 2017. Phil Torres is a scholar of existential risks - you can find him on Twitter @xriskology and his website at xriskology.com, and we are delighted to ask him back to the show to discuss the field of existential risks in the time of the coronavirus pandemic.
This week, we have a guest on the show - Kit Yates, who is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Mathematical Sciences and co-director of the Centre for Mathematical Biology at the University of Bath, and who's written an excellent book "The Maths of Life and Death" on various applications of maths in biology, from epidemics to exponential growth. He's been interviewed extensively in the media lately to discuss the COVID-19 pandemic, and we talked about that and the rest of his work, as well as the book, in this interview.
Remember you can find Kit's work at kityates.com and you can find us as physicspodcast.com, contact form, twitter, patreon, tell others, rate and review, etc.
I'm excited today to say that we have a guest on the show - Gemma Milne, who has written a book, Smoke and Mirrors, about how technological hype distorts the future. I really enjoyed the book, which deals with nine areas of considerable hype in technology, and not only takes you through some of the fascinating near-term applications for these technologies but also grounds them in reality. It was a fascinating conversation that I'm glad to be able to present you with.
You can find more of her work on Twitter @gemmamilne or on her website at www.gemmamilne.co.uk and you can listen to the newly relaunched Science:Disrupt podcast, which has a recent episode about science communication in the age of coronavirus, which is obviously extremely topical.
As for us, you can find the show at physicspodcast.com where you'll find all of our past episodes and a contact form. You can send any questions, comments, concerns, episode ideas, people you'd like me to interview that way - it always makes my day to get communication from you guys so do send it over. You can follow us on the web @physicspod or the Facebook page, Physical Attraction. There's also a Patreon which I really need to use more which you can donate to, and a paypal link for one-off donations if you want to support what I do; we are and remain totally independent and solo, a passion project for me, and anything you can do to support us from telling your friends to listen to the show, to reviewing the show on various platforms, to sending us advice or encouragement, is all greatly appreciated. We have some more interviews in the pipeline for you that will be out soon. Our theme music is by melodysheep and used with kind permission. Until next time, then, take care.
For the masochists who apparently can't get enough content about the coronavirus:
=> An interview with my friend who participated in the vaccine trials
=> Some discussion of the risk factors that are associated with deaths from COVID-19
=> Updated discussion of "herd immunity" thresholds and the link between R0 and immunity fractions
=> Reports on serological testing that has taken place so far.
N/B: This series of episodes was written before the coronavirus pandemic. I've decided the best thing to do is to present them as was and maybe have another episode reflecting on what the pandemic means for their conclusions later on.
======================================
We've outlined a nexus between catastrophic risks, inequality, and accelerating developments in technology in the future.
Is there a way out of the mire?
Part IV in a series on Technology, Inequality, and global catastrophic risks.
Given that we are in the midst of a series on technology, inequality, and global catastrophic risks inspired by Walter Scheidel's book on these subjects, and he's just written an op-ed on the topic, I thought I'd release the op-ed as a bonus.
In this, the last of our short series of coronavirus updates, I will be telling you everything I've found out about the hunt for a coronavirus vaccine - when we can expect it to be ready, the testing that needs to be undergone, and some of the techniques that might be used.
With thanks to Derek Lowe of Science Magazine whose blog post on this I used as a main source for many of the details.
In the latest coronavirus episode, we discuss research that has been done into the viable exit strategies from lockdown, including the idea of a contact-tracing app, and discuss some early estimates as to how effective this might be and what would be required to make it a success.
Some further updates in the latest therapy session/ramble:
-
Discussion of the various models that have been used to try to predict the impact of the coronavirus pandemic
-
Discussion of scientific uncertainty (and the importance of doing science anyway)
-
Concerns surrounding the politicisation of science...
-
And some discussion of drug trials for antiviral treatments for coronavirus.
The first of a few quick episodes where I continue going into coronavirus therapy by ranting on to you about all of the things I've learned about the current epidemic... with references to scientific papers so you can read them and find out how wrong I was.
We discuss:
- Estimates for the rate of disease progression in different countries
- Results from the early serology (antibody) tests of the virus (sadly still thin on the ground)
- Why Bayes' theorem means that the accuracy of antibody tests is so important
N/B: This series of episodes was written before the coronavirus pandemic. I've decided the best thing to do is to present them as was and maybe have another episode reflecting on what the pandemic means for their conclusions later on.
======================================
Increasing dependence on algorithms and other, more speculative developments in technology can serve to accelerate and exacerbate inequalities within society, potentially lining them up to be far more susceptible to catastrophic risks.
N/B: This series of episodes was written before the coronavirus pandemic. I've decided the best thing to do is to present them as was and maybe have another episode reflecting on what the pandemic means for their conclusions later on.
======================================
Inequality tends to increase unless there's a catastrophe. Does technology help us - either in addressing catastrophes, or in reducing inequalities?
N/B: This series of episodes was written before the coronavirus pandemic. I've decided the best thing to do is to present them as was and maybe have another episode reflecting on what the pandemic means for their conclusions later on.
======================================================
Walter Schiedel's book The Great Leveller posits that in societies, economic inequality tends to inexorably increase over time until some catastrophe comes along that levels the entire population.
Is this our fate?
In this new episode, we do a deep dive into the Imperial College London paper that models the coronavirus epidemic in the UK and the effectiveness of mitigation and suppression measures, and we speculate wildly and prematurely on what the next 18 months might look like as we do battle with coronavirus globally. Also an update on the expected future of the show at the end.
A quick update on some news surrounding the coronavirus, including why some of the headlines you may have read recently are unlikely to be true, some public service announcements about what you can do to help, and a general urge to read scientific literature and pre-prints with a skeptical eye - especially when they've been digested by headline writers.
For weeks I've been debating in my mind whether or not to do an episode on the coronavirus pandemic, since it's essentially been all I have been able to think about for the last few weeks as my friends and relatives, long-suffering as they are, will attest. For someone who spent so long thinking about existential risks and catastrophes, both in my day job as a doomy climate scientist and in researching the TEOTWAWKI specials for this show where it all kicked off a few years ago, it's absolutely no fun at all to see them unfold in reality.
This podcast summarises what I understand of what's going on at the moment. I am not an expert and make no claim to expertise, but I try to source my information in the facts. It's not an easy listen, as you might expect given the subject matter. This was mostly something I made as therapy for myself. I'm hoping to resume normal service as soon as I can, preferably with things that are a little more distracting for you to listen to, but I had to get this one off my chest. I hope that you get some value out of it, but if you don't think you will, put yourself first and don't listen.
I care deeply for you all for somehow finding this life-raft in a sea of content that meant a lot to me for several years and I'm hoping to return to more regular content production very soon. Thank you and take care of each other.
Apologies everyone... a quick note to explain why (due to illness and general exhaustion) I am putting the show on hiatus until the New Year.
Watch this show for updates on future releases - we will return.
Thanks for understanding + enjoy the holidays if you've got them!
Hi all - something a little different this week.
I was recently interviewed by Richard Foster-Fletcher, of the Boundless AI podcast, on topics as varied as artificial intelligence, nuclear fusion, and self-driving cars.
As a bonus for those that just can't get enough, this is the full, unedited interview, where you can hear just how good I am at responding to questions spontaneously...
On this episode of Physical Attraction, we take a massively tangential dive into wild philosophical speculation.
If I offered you the choice of immortality - but with no possibility of reversing the decision once you made it - would you?
Answers on a postcard to www.physicspodcast.com
A recent review paper in Nature showed some Google-backed academic research, conducted across several institutions, which investigated the claims made by the Cold Fusion community. Agonisingly, it came out a day or two after I'd taped the Cold Fusion episode for our fusion series. But I decided to talk about it anyway.
In this bonus episode, we'll discuss what they found (spoilers: not cold fusion) and describe the experiments in more detail.
In this episode, we discuss Eric Drexler's model of "Comprehensive AI Services" as an alternative route towards artificial general intelligence, and Xiaoice, Microsoft's incredibly popular chatbot software.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
27 episodes, spanning a hundred years of history and many months of this show, some wonderful plasma physics, some truly amazing machines, and a dream that's captivated thousands across the world for decades.
The fusion series is over. And while it's hard to conclude something this monumental, I tried my best.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
In this double-header, we examine the various startups that are trying to make commercial nuclear fusion a reality. What technologies are they using? Who's backing them? And do any of them have a prayer of beating ITER to the punch?
Comments, questions, concerns? Find the contact form on the website, or contact us on Twitter or Facebook.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
In this double-header, we examine the various startups that are trying to make commercial nuclear fusion a reality. What technologies are they using? Who's backing them? And do any of them have a prayer of beating ITER to the punch?
Comments, questions, concerns? Find the contact form on the website, or contact us on Twitter or Facebook.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
What Can Four-Year-Olds Do that AI Can't?
==> Children are the greatest learners on the planet. As machine learning comes more and more into focus, and ambitious AI types are aiming to simulate the human brain in its entirety, there is a question to ask: how can our machine-learning algorithms learn from the curiosity and adaptability of children?
@physicspod
www.physicspodcast.com
Hello and welcome to this episode of Physical Attraction. I’ve been excited about this for a while. Today, on the show, for the first time ever, we have not one but TWO guests, who have co-written an excellent book together. They are both currently researching nuclear fusion, and they have written a book about the future of fusion energy called… well, the Future of Fusion Energy.
Dr Justin Ball is currently studying plasma theory at Lausanne, and Jason Parisi works on turbulent transport in highly magnetized plasmas just a few buildings away from me here at the University of Oxford.
Their book is an excellent guide to the science, history, and future of fusion energy, and of real help in compiling the marathon efforts in the show so far, so I was excited to be able to grab both of them for an interview to talk about fusion. Since this comes after I’ve already been yakking about fusion for ages, the conversation does assume some knowledge of what nuclear fusion is, but should be easy to follow if you’ve listened to some of the episodes in this series already.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction. My guests were Justin Ball and Jason Parisi. If you’d like to find out more, please do get their book – The Future of Fusion Energy – which is a highly entertaining and informative read. They also both have websites in the same format – Justin-ball.com and Jason-Parisi.com – and they can both be found on Twitter if you’re into that sort of thing.
Remember, comments, questions, concerns, feedback, etc. can all be directed to me on Twitter at physicspod, or via the contact form on our website at www.physicspodcast.com – it’s always so wonderful to hear from listeners, and this is your chance to help me make the show as good as it can be! You can help us out by leaving a review on iTunes, purchasing past bonus episodes from the website, or just telling as many people as possible about the show to help spread the word if you like what we do.
Until next time, then, take care.
Hello and welcome to this episode of Physical Attraction. I’ve been excited about this for a while. Today, on the show, for the first time ever, we have not one but TWO guests, who have co-written an excellent book together. They are both currently researching nuclear fusion, and they have written a book about the future of fusion energy called… well, the Future of Fusion Energy.
Dr Justin Ball is currently studying plasma theory at Lausanne, and Jason Parisi works on turbulent transport in highly magnetized plasmas just a few buildings away from me here at the University of Oxford.
Their book is an excellent guide to the science, history, and future of fusion energy, and of real help in compiling the marathon efforts in the show so far, so I was excited to be able to grab both of them for an interview to talk about fusion. Since this comes after I’ve already been yakking about fusion for ages, the conversation does assume some knowledge of what nuclear fusion is, but should be easy to follow if you’ve listened to some of the episodes in this series already.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction. My guests were Justin Ball and Jason Parisi. If you’d like to find out more, please do get their book – The Future of Fusion Energy – which is a highly entertaining and informative read. They also both have websites in the same format – Justin-ball.com and Jason-Parisi.com – and they can both be found on Twitter if you’re into that sort of thing.
Remember, comments, questions, concerns, feedback, etc. can all be directed to me on Twitter at physicspod, or via the contact form on our website at www.physicspodcast.com – it’s always so wonderful to hear from listeners, and this is your chance to help me make the show as good as it can be! You can help us out by leaving a review on iTunes, purchasing past bonus episodes from the website, or just telling as many people as possible about the show to help spread the word if you like what we do.
Until next time, then, take care.
there will be a delay in the release of the next few episodes. My sincerest apologies! Expect a new one in a week or two at the very most.
In this episode, we examine some of the chaotic politics and causes of delay to the ITER project - and the perils of trying to collaborate across multiple countries on a multi-billion-dollar, multi-decade enterprise.
After all this, is ITER still "The Way"?
www.physicspodcast.com for comments, questions, concerns.
@physicspod
Many would argue that the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), currently under construction, is now 'The Way' to achieving power from nuclear fusion. But it faces extraordinary challenges.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
On this week's edition of TT, we take a brief break from the fusion series to look at two recent news stories about giant tech companies expanding their markets: both into healthcare, and into providing internet via satellites.
www.physicspodcast.com for any comments, questions, concerns
The National Ignition Facility poured the heart and soul of the first few years of their work into achieving ignition - a plasma that would heat itself by thermonuclear reactions by as much as it was heated externally.
Ultimately, it was close, but no cigar.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
The National Ignition Facility is, to date, the largest inertial confinement fusion experiment ever developed - and carried with it a huge amount of hope and hype that breakeven might be reached with this new device.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
Inertial confinement fusion has a secret weapon - after all, it's just a scaled-down hydrogen bomb, which gives us hope that it might not be too difficult to fuse fuel under these conditions. This was supposedly confirmed by underground nuclear tests called Halite and Centurion... but all the details are classified.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
In this episode, we cover one of the biggest scientific scandals in history: the tragic, tawdry tale of Fleischmann, Pons, and "Cold Fusion".
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
A step by step description of an experiment run at JET, with information from the Culham Website (CCFE).
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
We discuss the Joint European Torus - the most successful tokamak fusion reactor to date, and the source of a great deal of our knowledge about the outer limits of performance for magnetic confinement fusion.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
This episode, we're looking into one of the most bizarre fusion episodes in its long and storied history. Yes, it's that time a new experimental tokamak fusion reactor was funded almost entirely by pornography millions from the founder of Penthouse Magazine...
Comments, questions, concerns, feedback, reviews? Get in touch with us:
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
At the start of the tokamak revolution, there was a huge proliferation of different designs for tokamaks from universities and establishments around the world - but gradually, as it became clear that making progress would require larger and larger machines, these efforts broadly ended up concentrated in three main devices.
The Joint European Torus (JET) in the UK, the JT-60 in Japan, and the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) in the US.
www.physicspodcast.com
Is nuclear fusion really the perfect energy source that it's sold as and cracked up to be?
Even if we can get it working, will it live up to the considerable hype?
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
What's stopping us from getting magnetic confinement fusion reactors that work?
Is it really just... simple engineering problems?
www.physicspodcast.com
The second generation of laser fusion (inertial confinement fusion) devices was built in the USA in the 1970s and 1980s - but, unfortunately, those pesky plasma instabilities wouldn't go away.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
The invention of the laser in 1960 opened up an entirely new approach to nuclear fusion - dramatically, and drastically compressing individual pellets of fuel with lasers.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
In the late 1960s, scientists crossed the Iron Curtain. Their mission was to investigate whether the claims of Russian scientists about their new nuclear fusion device, the tokamak, were really true. Their findings would change fusion research forever.
www.physicspodcast.com
Taking a break from our nuclear fusion odyssey this week, I have a very special episode for you today. This week, our guest is Dr Kate Devlin. She’s a senior lecturer in computer science who studies artificial intelligence and human-robot interaction, and she wrote a magnificent book: Turned On, Science, Sex and Robots. Now, the tagline is that the book is about love and sex with robots – and there is a great deal of fascinating stuff in there about that – but it’s also a wonderful history of humanoid robotics, in reality and in fiction, and a great survey of the academic research into human-robot interactions in general. As artificial intelligence and chatbots become more omnipresent, and also take on a bigger role in our culture, whole new fields of psychology and sociology open up. We’ve already talked a little about chatbots in past episodes, and Dr Devlin’s book was one of the best and most entertaining works that I’ve read about artificial intelligence and robots in a long time, so I was super excited to get this interview.
Thanks for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction, and many thanks to our guest, Dr Kate Devlin. You can find her book – Turned On, Science, Sex and Robots – where-ever good books are sold, but I also highly recommend the audiobook… if, like me, you’re getting those monthly Audible credits, it’s wonderfully narrated by the author. You can also find out more about her work at www.drkatedevlin.com , and if you Google around, there are some Ted Talks and things of that variety to keep you entertained.
And now for our housekeeping. A reminder that I’m still planning this 100th episode competition, but the due date is being continually extended – send your answers to the question “What Is Physics?” in text or audio format via the contact form on our website, and you’ll be in with a chance to win books from some of our previous interview guests and a place on the show.
The nuclear fusion series will be resuming shortly, and I can’t wait to share it all with you, but I’m also not averse to puncturing it with a few off-topic breaks now and then as a palate-cleanser. But if you have any comments, questions, or concerns about the show, you can contact us via the contact form at www.physicspodcast.com, and you can find me on Twitter @physicspod. If you want to support the show, we have a Patreon account, at www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction – and I’ve actually just put up some “b-sides”, there, shows that I recorded but didn’t release for one reason or another, that subscribers can now enjoy listening to – alongside all the bonus episodes on Alien Attacks, Free Energy Scams, and failed end-of-the-world-predictions. Of course, if you don’t want to donate, the best thing you can do to support us is always always to tell as many people about the show as you possibly can.
Until next time, then, take care!
After the first generation of nuclear fusion reactors had profound instabilities, and couldn't confine the plasma for long enough to achieve their aims, the world began to realise that fusion might not be just ten years away from reality - and the whole field sank into the doldrums... until a very Soviet intervention.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
In 1958, to great fanfare, the ZETA experiment at Harwell announced that they had achieved thermonuclear reactions, controlled in the lab. It was considered a huge breakthrough along the road towards nuclear fusion, and tabloids at the time trumpeted the experiment as allowing "limitless energy from sea water", and called it "Britain's Sputnik". But not everyone was convinced.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
In the early 1950s, optimism surrounding the potential for nuclear fusion in devices like the Stellarator, the pinch devices, and the magnetic mirror were frustrated by plasma instabilities. It turns out that you cannot treat plasmas like charged particles whizzing around in magnetic fields - instead, the complex theory of magnetohydrodynamics needs to be taken into account, and, as the name suggests, it's not easy to understand!
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
In 1950-1, Argentine dictator Juan Peron and German scientist Ronald Richter announced that they had cracked the secret of limitless energy from nuclear fusion, and would soon sell energy "in pint-sized bottles, like milk" to every household in the nation.
Of course, the slight problem was that this technology was really (perhaps) a century away, and Ronald Richter was a crackpot. But they still had their impact on the history of nuclear fusion. This is their story.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
Hello, and welcome to this episode of Thermonuclear Takes - our occasional bonus episodes that deal with topics in the news when there's just TOO MUCH EXCITING STUFF out there to talk about.
This episode:
- The teenager who built a nuclear fusion reactor in his bedroom - should ITER give up and go home? (Spoiler: no.)
- A new study that suggests possible catastrophic climate feedbacks at high temperatures has been published
- OpenAI's new neural network is like nothing we've ever seen, and can imitate human writing more convincingly than I'd thought possible yet
You can find the show at www.physicspodcast.com and contact us with your comments, questions, concerns, etc.
Twitter @physicspod
Facebook - Physical Attraction.
Building a nuclear fusion power plant is no easy feat. Fusion naturally occurs in temperatures comparable to those at the heart of the Sun - temperatures so hot as to instantly vaporise virtually any substance on Earth.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
[Reupload with the actual, correct file this time - sorry!
Thomas]
When Teller's dream of a hydrogen, fusion bomb was eventually realised, it was another physicist, Ulam, who really came up with the winning design... and the first steps along the road to nuclear fusion on Earth.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
Through a contrived, almost absurd series of circumstances, I've managed to release last week's episode again in place of this week's.
A re-record is in order and the REAL Nuclear Fusion, Episode V will be released hopefully this evening.
Sorry everyone!
Perils of the job.
- Thomas
You can get too caught up in praising the beauty of science and conflating that with praising the individual. I think we should recognise and appreciate brilliance, but stop short of hero-worship. It’s reductive. It diminishes people. It removes important parts of who they were. It can, in its worst excesses, be downright dangerous.
Nevertheless, that’s not a problem I have today, even though I’m going to tell this story partly biographically. Because Edward Teller, for all his brilliance in physics, is not the kind of person you’d want to worship as a hero. Yet it’s Teller, for good or ill, rightly or wrongly, who is most associated with the first successful large-scale harnessing of the power of fusion by human beings: the hydrogen bomb.
If you’ve ever seen the film Dr Strangelove, or “How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb”, you’ll know something of the popular perception of Teller. If you haven’t, you should immediately find a copy and watch it. From the moment that Teller was brought onto the Manhattan project, he was pushing for it to expand – not just to create a bomb that would harness the power of nuclear fission, but a fusion bomb. A hydrogen bomb, that would – according to theoretical calculations – be thousands of times more powerful. It would begin a long career in physics and the military that would see Teller consistently and endlessly advocate for more and more powerful weapons – total nuclear supremacy over the Soviet Union. It was an obsessive quest that led some of his oldest friends and colleagues to turn on him, in the end. The physicist Isidore Rabi later said: “He is a danger to all that is important. I do really feel it would have been a better world without Teller.”
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
Physical Attraction: 100th Episode Competition Physical Attraction is the podcast focused on physics, science and technology – and we’re about to reach a very big milestone when our 100th episode releases later on this year.
To celebrate, we’re hosting a special competition with FABULOUS PRIZES.
To enter, you need to send us your answer to the question “What is physics?”, either in written form, or (even better) recorded by you on some suitable equipment. Ideally, entries will be more than a few sentences long and no longer than 1000 words / ten minutes spoken audio, although exceptions will be made for shorter or longer entries of exceptional quality!
You can interpret this as broadly or as specifically as you like, and it doesn’t have to be a dictionary definition. What has physics meant in your life? How do you view the boundaries between physics and “other sciences”? What role do you think physics and physicists have to play in society, in our pursuit of knowledge, philosophically? What does physics mean in the modern world? What can it mean in the future? Or you can focus on some specific aspect of physics that fascinates you.
All suitable entries will form part of the 100th episode extravaganza, which is why I want to get as many different perspectives as possible. You will be on the podcast! Feel free to introduce yourself and details of your own story. All suitable entries will also receive a Physical Attraction postcard and ceramic mug, alongside free download links for the extra bonus episodes that we’ve released so far.
Then there will be first and second place prizes!
The second place winner receives everything above, plus books by Physical Attraction interview guests Phil Torres, Simon Ings, Britt Wray, and SMBC Zach Weinersmith:
Phil Torres - Morality, Foresight, and Human FlourishingSimon Ings – Stalin and the Scientists
Britt Wray – Rise of the Necrofauna
Zach and Kelly Weinersmith - Soonish
The first place winner receives everything from second place, including the four books, plus the right to choose the subject of one episode of the show – anything science and technology-related, topic subject to discussion. I will then research, write, and record that episode, which can include a special dedication to the contest prize winner as part of it.
Sounds good? Great! Get your entries in by March 31st 2019 to be eligible.
Entries should be submitted via the competition email physicspod@outlook.com, or you can contact me on Twitter @physicspod or Facebook.
All details of the contest can be found here: www.physicspodcast.com/about while you can contact us for any clarifications here: http://physicalattraction.libsyn.com/contact
The good people of the United States Senate were not prepared for Huey P. Long.
Could Huey Long's personality, travelling-salesman charm, and Share Our Wealth populism catapult him into the White House?
In this episode, we find out.
www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
www.physicspodcast.com
There’s a famous saying that’s attributed to the statistician Henry L Box – but it’s one of the most important sayings for thinking about physics, and science in general.
“All models are wrong, but some models are useful.”
What does this mean, and how does it relate to the nucleus of the atom? Can we work out how the atomic energy levels behave... without knowing the first thing about quantum mechanics or the strong nuclear force that binds the atom together?
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
Our series of episodes on nuclear fusion begins with the Rutherford Gold Foil experiment, which first discovered the nucleus and changed our understanding of the atomic world forever.
From an experiment "every bit as astonishing as if you shot a 15-inch shell at tissue paper and it bounced back", to the poor graduate students who had to stay up all night in pitch dark counting tiny flashes, we'll discuss this seminal experiment and its results.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
What happened when one of history's most esteemed biologists fought with one of history's most esteemed physicists about how old the Earth could be? And what has any of this got to do with nuclear fusion?
Find out more in the next, exciting instalment of The Hitchhiker's Guide To ---I mean, Physical Attraction.
Physical Attraction is the podcast about physics, science, and technology. You can find further details about the show at www.physicspodcast.com - where you'll find the contact form, for any comments, questions, or concerns you may have. [I'm very good at responding to stuff that isn't spam.]
You can also donate to the show via www.paypal.me/physicspodcast and you can subscribe to our Patreon via www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . Both will give you the opportunity to purchase our past bonus episodes for a nominal donation!
The best way you can support the show, though, is to tell as many people about it as you possibly can.
You can engage with us on social media - Twitter @physicspod and Facebook, Physical Attraction.
Until next time, take care.
In 1928, Huey Long was riding high. He'd beaten all opposition and achieved the second step in his life-plan. Get elected to minor public office, check. Get elected to the Governorship, check. There's little doubt given everything we know about him that he was already angling for a seat in the Senate - although in his early addresses he was already lying about "ridding the state of corruption and waste... without ambition for ever again holding another public office." A bold claim for a man who had "become President" on his to-do list.
But in order to do that, he would have to deliver on his outlandish promises that he'd made in the campaign to be Governer. He had to keep his base onside and prove that he wasn't the lying demagogue that his hated media constantly portrayed him to be. In the meantime, the powers that be in the state of Louisiana dusted themselves off and began strategizing how they would manipulate the young and inexperienced Governor to keep their interests at heart.
They had dealt with demagogues before; Huey was not unique in that respect, although few of them had made it to his lofty position. Confidence was probably high amongst the establishment that most of them could work with Huey, that things would continue more or less as they had before, and in a few years - promises largely broken - the political machines could wrestle back control. This was how many people thought it was going to go. A lot of them were mistaken.
“I would rather go down to a thousand impeachments than admit that I am the Governor of the state that does not dare to call the Standard Oil company to account so that we can educate our children and care for the destitute, sick, and afflicted.”
Huey called mass rallies, warning his supporters to “beware the lying newspapers, pay no attention to what they say”. At the rallies, he quoted his favourite poem, Invictus:
“I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul!”
This is the story of the impeachment of Huey Long.
Hello, and welcome to this episode of Physical Attraction. In this episode, I interview Karin Kuhlemann on the subject of population.
We touched on this briefly during the TEOTWAWKI specials, particularly in relation to the ancient ideas of Malthus - that famine might "correct" natural excesses of human population in due course. In that case, a technological fix in the form of agricultural and green revolutions allowed the Earth to support many times more people. But how sustainable is this? And, if you decide that the world is overpopulated, and there aren't enough natural resources to allow everyone to live fulfilling lives, what could we do to change this situation? Whenever I read any article about the environment, people in the comments section are often quick to blame "overpopulation" rather than "overconsumption", but seldom suggest any solutions that aren't utterly terrifying.
So all this means we have an interesting interview in store today. Karin Kuhlemann is a PhD candidate at the UCL Department of Political Theory and a practicing lawyer specialised in public, financial services and regulatory law. In the course of her PhD, she's published several articles in both the academic and popular press, and they're all well-worth reading: in this interview we particularly refer to "Any size population will do? The fallacy of aiming for stabilization of human numbers", but you can find several of them at http://ucl.academia.edu/KarinKuhlemann.
Thanks for listening to this episode of Physical Attraction. I think this topic is a truly important one to debate, even though it's incredibly complex and prone to all kinds of misunderstandings and moral hazards, emphasising one argument over another too much. Sometimes, dealing with humanity's problems isn't always easy: it requires difficult conversations. But if you'd like to be part of that conversation, there are plenty of ways you can get in touch to discuss this or any of our episodes - you can contact us via the form at www.physicspodcast.com, you can contact us on Twitter @physicspod or Facebook at the Physical Attraction page.
Soon, we'll be launching our series on nuclear fusion. I'm going through some very busy weeks at the start of this year, so it's possible that I might have to duck out for the odd week, but rest assured - there are enough scripts written for us to keep doing shows way into 2019, and I'm not done writing yet. So stick around, and we'll explore all kinds of things in the world of physics and beyond!
Until next time, be kind to each other.
This week, we're going to be talking to Amy Westervelt, host of the new podcast - Drilled - which looks into how fossil fuel companies secretly funded fossil fuel deniers and misled the public about the science.
https://podtail.com/en/podcast/drilled/
Amy Westervelt is a print and radio reporter who contributes regularly to The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Forbes, Fast Company, and various NPR shows and stations. Her work has also appeared in The Guardian, Popular Science, Elle, Teen Vogue, and many other publications. She now hosts multiple podcasts via the Critical Frequency Podcast network. You can find her and the network
@CriticalFreqPod
@AmyWestervelt
We had a fascinating conversation about climate change and politics in the United States, her inspiration behind the show, and the "true crime" aspects of denialism. So without further ado, my interview with Amy Westervelt.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
Imagine, for a moment, that there was a politician in the United States very unlike the others. One who was willing to promise all things to all people, who had no qualms about changing his position on a daily basis. One who viciously attacked the establishment, made personal attacks on his opponents and gave them derogatory nicknames and violated every democratic norm in the book. One who fought against freedom of the press, and constantly denounced the 'lying newspapers', when they reported on the corruption that he was steeped in. A politician who was perfectly happy to tear up the constitution, and anyone who stood in his way, in order to achieve his ends. A demagogue whose rise and rise to power seemed absurd to the establishment, but made sense to the people, many of whom loved him and believed that he was the only one on their side. And, on this wave of popular support and crazy promises, and with a complete disregard for the way things should be done, a politician who set himself up as a ruthless, corrupt, kleptocratic dictator.
Now imagine there was a politician in the US who fought against vested interests, big corporations, and argued tirelessly and energetically for redistribution of the wealth. A politician who was never afraid to speak his mind, and to speak truth to power: who had contempt for Washington because it was contemptible. A man of the people who was frustrated with being blocked and slandered at every turn, and the ineffective methods of his fellows at dealing with crisis, and subverted a corrupt and contemptible democracy on behalf of the ordinary people. He destroyed a system that needed destroying, and sought power in order to do the good that he knew other politicians couldn't do. A man with a sense of destiny, who was unfairly slandered and maligned by the vested interests and the wealthy elite that he sought to undermine. He would argue he was only doing openly what everyone else had done covertly for years. A man who said: 'A demagogue is someone who doesn't keep his promises to the people, and I kept every one of mine' - and many went along with him, and refused to believe any of the attempts to smear him, because they knew he was on their side.
Both men existed in the manic, whirlwind frame of Huey P Long, who cut such a dramatic figure in Louisiana politics, and later national politics, in the 1920s and 30s. The man and the methods make him an irresistible figure for politicised histories. There are always two Hueys: the straight-talking man of the people who sought power to make things better, and the vicious demagogue who exploited lies and popular support to dominate the state and enrich himself. Now, more than ever - when there seem to be two of every major political figure floating around, depending on your stripes - we should examine such a life. It helps that it's also a quite incredible story, and Huey himself is as quotable a politician as has ever lived.
In these episodes, we will deal with his origin story, from obscurity in Louisiana to running for office for the first time.
The laws of thermodynamics govern the flow of energy - from your coffee cup to the sparse plasma floating between stars to the formation of black holes.
And, in short, they are:
You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't get out of the game.
These laws, which were first derived by dreaming of ideal heat engines, turned out to have profound and vital physical and philosophical consequences. Far from just relating to an arbitrary concept called "temperature", they can teach us about how the Universe began - and how it will all, inevitably end.
This episode deals with the Third Law of Thermodynamics - regarding the impossibility of attaining absolute zero. We'll also discuss the seeming paradox that, while you cannot reduce matter to a temperature of absolute zero in a finite time, you can have negative absolute temperatures.... according to certain definitions of temperature.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you. You can also donate to the show there, or buy some bonus episodes to help support us: we have a Patreon, or you can label your Paypal donation and I will send you the episodes.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow. Thanks for listening, and tell fellow thermodynamic systems about the show!
In this episode of Physical Attraction, we'll talk about the breaking news surrounding the birth of the world's first genetically modified CRISPR baby.
"He Jiankui, the Chinese scientist who claims to have helped produce the first people born with edited genomes — twin girls — appeared today at a gene-editing summit in Hong Kong to explain his experiment. He gave his talk amid threats of legal action and mounting questions, from the scientific community and beyond, about the ethics of his work and the way in which he released the results." - Nature Magazine.
This experiment, which - if confirmed - marks the first instance where a genetically modified human was born - may well have crossed the Rubicon and opened Pandora's Box on behalf of humanity, to mix metaphors. An ethical and scientific storm is already brewing. We'll describe and discuss the experiment, and what it might mean, and then brief you on the future of the show.
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
"The law that entropy always increases holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation."
- Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World (1915), chapter 4
And yet, throughout the years and decades and centuries, countless people have tried to convince others that they hold the key to violating the laws of thermodynamics and generating limitless amounts of free energy. Here, in the spirit of narrative fun, we explore the vast array of free energy scams that have been perpetrated over the years - from the age of PT Barnum style "inventors" to the age of GoFundMe and the tragic tale of the self-recharging battery. It didn't work. None of them work. Not the nuclear reactor that was secretly powered by wires. Not the magic liquid that could turn water into gasoline. Free energy is a scam as old as time, and yet people still seem to be taken in by it - often to the tune of millions of dollars.
If you take only one thing from Physical Attraction, let it be this:
It's much easier and infinitely likely that the laws being broken are laws that prohibit fraud, and not the Laws of Thermodynamics.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you. If you're trying to sell me your free energy device, please, feel free to pitch it so that I can laugh and then report you to the authorities.
You can also donate to the show there, or buy some bonus episodes to help support us: we have a Patreon, or you can label your Paypal donation and I will send you the episodes.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow. Thanks for listening, and tell fellow thermodynamic systems about the show!
A brief appendix explaining why the definitions of the Second Law of Thermodynamics really just mean the same thing.
The laws of thermodynamics govern the flow of energy - from your coffee cup to the sparse plasma floating between stars to the formation of black holes.
And, in short, they are:
You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't get out of the game.
These laws, which were first derived by dreaming of ideal heat engines, turned out to have profound and vital physical and philosophical consequences. Far from just relating to an arbitrary concept called "temperature", they can teach us about how the Universe began - and how it will all, inevitably end.
This episode deals with the Second Law of Thermodynamics - regarding the inevitable increase of entropy and the ultimate fate of the Universe. This is a law so philosophically profound that it is believed by many to have contributed to the suicide of one of its discoverers, Boltzmann. So, while you're still acting to keep your own entropy low by increasing the entropy of the Universe (a.k.a fighting the good fight), take a listen.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you. You can also donate to the show there, or buy some bonus episodes to help support us: we have a Patreon, or you can label your Paypal donation and I will send you the episodes.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow. Thanks for listening, and tell fellow thermodynamic systems about the show!
The laws of thermodynamics govern the flow of energy - from your coffee cup to the sparse plasma floating between stars to the formation of black holes.
And, in short, they are:
You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't get out of the game.
These laws, which were first derived by dreaming of ideal heat engines, turned out to have profound and vital physical and philosophical consequences. Far from just relating to an arbitrary concept called "temperature", they can teach us about how the Universe began - and how it will all, inevitably end.
This episode deals with the First Law of Thermodynamics - regarding the conservation of energy. So kick your heels back in nice warm surroundings and take a listen.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you. You can also donate to the show there, or buy some bonus episodes to help support us: we have a Patreon, or you can label your Paypal donation and I will send you the episodes.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow. Thanks for listening, and tell fellow thermodynamic systems about the show!
Towards the end of Stalin's life, he became ever more paranoid, embittered, isolated, and vengeful. As his various ministers and members of the Politburo jockeyed for power and position around him, using his fits of paranoia to exact revenge on one another, the only thing that united them all was fear.
This is the final omnibus in the series from our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, which brings the biography of Stalin to its conclusion.
Listen to the rest of the show over at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
The Starshot Project is one of those rare, exciting technological plans that seems to come straight out of science fiction - a plan to visit the nearest star to Earth within our lifetimes.
It will require huge technological advancements in virtually every relevant field, but it's still the most feasible way to get to the stars.
We'll discuss the project, how it would work, and the physics of why interstellar travel is so damn difficult.
Comments? Questions? Concerns? Praise? Rage?
Visit the website at www.physicspodcast.com
Follow us on that Tweet website at @physicspod. We have a Facebook page if that's your tech giant of choice.
Don't forget our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, just about to wrap up the life of Stalin in its series of shows on the lives of notorious dictators and wannabe dictators.
A recent report released at https://maliciousaireport.com/ on the potential malicious uses for artificial intelligence brings us sharply to the present.
In the TEOTWAWKI episodes on AI, we focused on "hard AI" - the potentials for chaos and rapid change if artificial intelligence becomes "truly sentient". But in the shorter term, machine-learning algorithms and increasing automation are already impacting all of our lives to a greater extent. Recent efforts at electoral manipulation, for example, exploited aspects of the algorithms used by social media companies. Meanwhile, as we turn over the wheel to self-driving cars and the economy to automated industries, we are changing the nature of society - and the potential risks of abuse.
These episodes will talk about the near-term potential for machine learning and AI to be used maliciously over the next decade or two.
To contact the show:
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
Don't forget our sister show, wrapping up the life of Stalin over at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
Comments, concerns, criticism, praise all welcome via the contact link at www.physicspodcast.com
A recent report released at https://maliciousaireport.com/ on the potential malicious uses for artificial intelligence brings us sharply to the present.
In the TEOTWAWKI episodes on AI, we focused on "hard AI" - the potentials for chaos and rapid change if artificial intelligence becomes "truly sentient". But in the shorter term, machine-learning algorithms and increasing automation are already impacting all of our lives to a greater extent. Recent efforts at electoral manipulation, for example, exploited aspects of the algorithms used by social media companies. Meanwhile, as we turn over the wheel to self-driving cars and the economy to automated industries, we are changing the nature of society - and the potential risks of abuse.
These episodes will talk about the near-term potential for machine learning and AI to be used maliciously over the next decade or two.
To contact the show:
www.physicspodcast.com
@physicspod
Don't forget our sister show, wrapping up the life of Stalin over at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
Comments, concerns, criticism, praise all welcome via the contact link at www.physicspodcast.com
So, as you probably already know by now, the Nobel Prize in Physics 2018 was awarded to another trio: Gérard Mourou, Arthur Ashkin and Donna Strickland, “for groundbreaking inventions in the field of laser physics”. Specifically, Arthur Ashkin was awarded the prize ““for the invention of optical tweezers and their application to biological systems” and Mourou and Strickland were awarded the prize for developing chirped pulse amplification, a method of generating very short but very high-intensity pulses of light with lasers.
In this episode, we'll describe how they made these groundbreaking discoveries, and what they meant for science and physics in the years that followed.
But as dismal as the world might seem sometimes, there’s still so much joy to be found in the world of science, the world of physics, and the glorious intricacies of the vast, complex, beautiful and mysterious universe we all live in. And the human ingenuity that has gone into allowing us to discover that, to even make strides towards understanding it, is one of the best parts of our species. Both of these discoveries, chirped pulse amplification and optical tweezers, represent clever tools that we have developed to allow us to probe and explore and understand nature, and there can be few greater undertakings than that. So here’s to the scientists who won the Nobel Prize in 2018, for giving us the tools that can help in many more discoveries to come.
That’s all for this special episode. Remember, if you like the show, which consumes my nights and weekends with its fiery lust, there are plenty of things you can do to support us. Visit the website at www.physicspodcast.com where you’ll find a contact form: I read all your email and try to respond where I can, but it’s really the best part about doing this show is actually hearing from listeners, so you can know that if nothing else you’ll make my day by sending your message. Go ahead, punk. There you’ll also find a form where you can donate to the show, or purchase some of our previous bonus episodes. There’s a Patreon where you can subscribe to do that automatically in the future, so you don’t even need to fiddle with Paypal. You can follow us on Twitter @physicspod and on Facebook, Physical Attraction. You can go listen to our sister show, and by our sister show I mean the other thing I record in my free time, Autocracy Now – at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com – we’re just coming to the end of Stalin’s life, which is a great relief both for me personally and the people of the world in general. But, as I always say, the best thing you can possibly do to support is to tell your friends about the show, and to tell them to listen. I have printed up thousands of postcard-sized flyers, so if you really want to go the extra mile or just give people some merchandise with our logo on, get in touch with me and I can send some of those over to you!
In this episode, we'll discuss the discovery and possible applications of superconductors - these seemingly miraculous materials which have an electrical resistance that drops to zero at a low enough temperature.
Contact us at www.physicspodcast.com
Or follow us on Twitter @physicspod
And tell as many people as you can about the show if you've enjoyed it or if you learned something worth knowing.
Welcome to Thermonuclear Takes, our roundup of all the news in science and technology that’s been fascinating me lately. Some of it will relate to things that we’ve discussed on the show before; some of it will relate to things that we’ll discuss in the future – and some will be just plain interesting.
This episode, we're going to be talking about Ben Franta's latest reporting that Exxon Knew about climate change in advance, and we'll discuss why Solar Freakin' Roadways might not be such a good idea.
You can visit our page at www.physicspodcast.com
There, you can contact us with questions, comments, concerns - I love getting your messages!
You can donate to us on Paypal
You can subscribe to our Patreon
Subscribing to us on iTunes really helps us to get the show noticed
And follow the show on Twitter @physicspod or follow the Facebook page at Physical Attraction for all the latest updates.
Everything is made up of fundamental particles. You have the leptons: that’s the electron, muon, tau, and their ghostly neutrinos that help us to conserve momentum. You have the quarks, which make up all of the hadrons. The up, down, and strange quarks: and their heavier cousins, the top, bottom, and charm quarks. Mixing quarks can give you baryons, like the proton and neutron. It can give you mesons, like the pion particles.
But you also have four forces.
There’s gravity, which pulls on everything with mass. There’s electromagnetism, which pulls on everything with charge. There’s the weak nuclear force, which is involved in the decay of neutrons and other particles, and it’s also how the ghostly neutrinos interact. And, finally, there’s the strong nuclear force: which binds the protons and neutrons together in the nucleus, and binds the quarks within each proton and neutron.
It turns out that the final part of the Standard Model is associated with these forces. Because, although we can imagine force fields that extend throughout space like Maxwell did, it turns out that forces have ‘carriers’. In some sense, when one particle exerts a force on another, another particle jumps between them to spread that influence. These force carriers are bosons.
In this episode, we'll complete our picture of the Standard Model by adding the force carriers and the Higgs Boson into the mix. And then, we'll dive into the terrifying world of BDSM - BeyonD the Standard Model.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow.
Quarks, hadrons, baryons, leptons - we explore the material particles, ponder the question of why the electron has two heavier cousins, and describe the snark of Wolfgang Pauli in this - our second episode in a series explaining fundamental subatomic and atomic physics, and the Standard Model.
Can you tell your quarks from your elbow? If not, never fear, because these episodes will be your guide to particle physics, and, specifically, what’s called the Standard Model. Has absolutely nothing to do with the catwalk, but instead the fundamental building blocks that make up all of visible matter and energy in the Universe.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you. You can also donate to the show, subscribe to our Patreon, or buy extra episodes if you want to help support us for what we do.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow.
A triple helping of our sister podcast, as we follow Stalin's career from the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact to the Battle of Stalingrad.
Can you tell your quarks from your elbow? If not, never fear, because these episodes will be your guide to particle physics, and, specifically, what’s called the Standard Model. Has absolutely nothing to do with the catwalk, but instead the fundamental building blocks that make up all of visible matter and energy in the Universe.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you. You can also donate to the show, subscribe to our Patreon, or buy extra episodes if you want to help support us for what we do.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow.
This episode was brought to you by the American National Standards Institute. To find out more, visit https://www.ansi.org/.
Sometimes, a news story that relates to some of the topics we talk about on this show catches my eye. That's when you know it's time for a Thermonuclear Take!
(tl;dr, experimenting with new bonus episode format.)
This episode, we're going to talk about the recent heatwaves over Europe, Japan and North America, and the thorny issues of Climate Change attribution. We'll also discuss that Steffen et al. paper about a Hothouse Earth: Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. Will climate feedbacks doom us to 4-5C of warming if we fail to meet the Paris Agreement? Can anyone state that definitively? A perspective.
Naturally the aim of these bonus episodes is to be topical and provoke debate, so why not get in touch with us via Twitter @physicspod or via www.physicspodcast.com where you'll find all the archival episodes, alongside opportunities to donate to the show?
If you're more interested in historical than current events, our podcast series about Stalin is in the midst of covering the Second World War...
Trajectories of Earth System in the Anthropocene
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/07/31/1810141115
In this episode, we'll discuss how you can use dimensional analysis to measure the yield of the blast of a nuclear bomb, and weird units from banana equivalent doses to the distance at which sheep remain picturesque.
You can listen to all of our archived episodes up at www.physicspodcast.com or listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
On the physicspodcast website, you will find a contact form where you can discuss any comments, questions, concerns, suggestions for future show topics or interview guests - we'd love to hear from you.
You can also contact us via Twitter @physicspod or @autocracynow.
This episode was brought to you by the American National Standards Institute. To find out more, visit https://www.ansi.org/.
Units and Dimensional Analysis, Pt I: The Metric Revolution
No physicist would be anywhere without dimensional analysis. In this episode, we answer the surprisingly complicated question - how long is a metre?
www.physicspodcast.com for previous shows, information, donations.
@physicspod on Twitter
www.autocracynow.libsyn.com for Autocracy Now, a show about historical dictators.
So in this episode, I am fortunate enough to interview Cornelius Schilt – perhaps better known to the world by his blog title, Corpus Newtonicum, which you can go and read at Corpus Newtonicum.wordpress.com. He is a DPhil student at the University of Oxford, studying the History of Science, and focused on the life, career, and works of Isaac Newton. What’s more, he just handed in his thesis the day before I conducted this interview – best of luck on the viva, CJ!
In this, the second part of our interview, we talk about the context of the philosophy of time and Newton’s philosophy of the universe, Newton’s personal life, his alchemy, his legacy.
Our guest today was CJ Schilt, a History of Science DPhil student here at Oxford – in a few weeks’ time, I have no doubt, Dr Schilt. If you want to find out more, you can follow him on Twitter, and do visit the blog Corpus Newtonicum. You can also check out the newton project atwww.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk which CJ contributed to – an attempt to transcribe all of Newton’s works.
In the meantime, for us – subscribe to the sister podcast, Autocracy Now, which deals with the history of notorious dictators. Follow us on Twitter @physicspod. If you visited the website at www.physicspodcast.com, you’d be able to use the contact form to send us any of your comments, questions, or concerns. You’d also be able to donate to the show if you wished, or purchase some of the bonus episodes I’ve created for the low low price of $3 using the Paypal link. But, of course, the best thing you can do to support the show is always to tell as many of your friends as possible about the show – listeners make it all worthwhile!
So in this episode, I am fortunate enough to interview Cornelis Schilt – perhaps better known to the world by his blog title, Corpus Newtonicum, which you can go and read at Corpus Newtonicum.wordpress.com. He is a DPhil student at the University of Oxford, studying the History of Science, and focused on the life, career, and works of Isaac Newton. What’s more, he just handed in his thesis the day before I conducted this interview – best of luck on the viva, CJ!
In this, the first part of our interview, we discuss Newton’s less well-known works, his attempts to understand chronology, and how his religious faith predominated in his life.
If you want to find out more, you can follow him on Twitter, and do visit the blog Corpus Newtonicum. You can also check out the newton project atwww.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk which CJ contributed to – an attempt to transcribe all of Newton’s works.
In the meantime, for us – subscribe to the sister podcast, Autocracy Now, which deals with the history of notorious dictators. Follow us on Twitter @physicspod. If you visited the website at www.physicspodcast.com, you’d be able to use the contact form to send us any of your comments, questions, or concerns. You’d also be able to donate to the show if you wished, or purchase some of the bonus episodes I’ve created for the low low price of $3 using the Paypal link. But, of course, the best thing you can do to support the show is always to tell as many of your friends as possible about the show – listeners make it all worthwhile!
To keep you all updated on the goings-on at my other podcast, I'm presenting a Stalin Omnibus with all of the episodes that have released since the last time Autocracy Now appeared on my feed.
Episode IV: Revolution In The Economy
After consolidating power over his Bolshevik rivals, Stalin dispensed with Lenin's pseudo-capitalist NEP and replaced it with the top-down bureaucratic nightmare that was the Five-Year Plans.
Episode V: Nadya and Kirov
In the early 1930s, two mysterious (at the time) deaths occurred to people who were close to Stalin as he consolidated power as the supreme leader of the USSR.
Episode VI: Devouring the Children
After the death of Kirov, Stalin would turn his wrath towards the Old Bolsheviks that remained as key revolutionary figures in his own right. His fellow Communists could remember a time when Stalin was not Lenin's divinely appointed successor; and for that, they had to be destroyed.
Episode VII: The Common Enemy of Mankind
Stalin's "Great Terror" was not limited to eliminating his political rivals. Soon enough, detentions and executions were occurring according by quota. In 1937, the killing and persecution rose to its virtually indiscriminate peak.
Follow us on Twitter @autocracynow, our sister podcast @physicspod, and subscribe to the show where-ever you listen to podcasts. Visit our online home at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
If you want to support independent podcasters and enjoyed this show, consider donating to help keep us going, or buying a bonus episode of the physics show - details on the website at www.physicspodcast.com
A primer episode on the world of antimatter. Every particle has its antiparticle equivalent - and if they ever meet, it's annihilation.
You can find us online at www.physicspodcast.com
On Twitter @physicspod
On Facebook as Physical Attraction
And check out my other show about the life of Stalin: Autocracy Now
www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
Alongside all of his scientific achievements, there is another fascinating side to Newton - one intimately linked with the supernatural, even the occult. A belief in alchemy, an attempt to establish a new chronology, hunting through the Bible for the ability to predict the future: were these aspects to Newton's intellect contrary to his rationality, or did they actually feed into his studies of physics?
And, as we bring his life to its conclusion, we'll try to answer Keynes' question:
Was Newton the first of the physicists, or the last of the magicians?
You can subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts, and visit our website at www.physicspodcast.com where you'll be able to find all the archived episodes of the show, a contact form that will allow you to ask me questions or make any comments, and the option to donate or subscribe via our Patreon in exchange for bonus episodes. You can follow us on Twitter @physicspod and on Facebook at Physical Attraction. Why not subscribe to our sister podcast at Autocracy Now at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com - focusing on the lives of famous dictators.
In this episode, we get into the heart of Isaac Newton's scientific contribution. His laws of mechanics and gravitation fundamentally changed the way that we viewed both motion, and one of the (now four) fundamental forces. They would become the theory that dominated our understanding for the next three centuries, and even when relativity is discovered, Newton's laws are accurate enough across a wide enough range of circumstances to allow us to put humans on the Moon.
We'll dive into these laws, explain them, and discuss how they govern so many phenomena in the world around us - from snooker to the cosmos.
You can subscribe to the show on iTunes or where-ever you get your podcasts, and visit our website at www.physicspodcast.com where you'll find a contact form to get in touch with the show, and donate buttons if you want to help the show out.
Also listen to our sibling podcast www.autocracynow.libsyn.com - Autocracy Now, about the lives of famous dictators: currently, Stalin.
We discuss some of Isaac Newton's most notable discoveries, from the invention of calculus (simultaneously with Leibniz) and his early grappling and wrestling with a physical theory of light. Was Newton contemplating wave-particle duality in the 17th century?
You can follow the podcast on Twitter @physicspod and follow us on Facebook at the Physical Attraction page.
Visit our website at www.physicspodcast.com where you can find A YEAR'S WORTH of back episodes, alongside donation links and opportunities to buy bonus episodes if you want to thank the show and help us keep running. There's also a contact form for any comments, concerns, questions, or feedback!
And you can listen to our sister show, about historical dictators - currently an epic series on the life and times of Joseph Stalin - over on Autocracy Now's feed - www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
As Lenin's health declined, Stalin sought to outmanouver his rivals in the Bolshevik party and consolidate single-handed, dictatorial control over Russia.
Follow us on Twitter @autocracynow, our sister podcast @physicspod, and subscribe to the show where-ever you listen to podcasts. Visit our online home at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com.
If you want to support independent podcasters and enjoyed this show, consider donating to help keep us going, or buying a bonus episode of the physics show - details on the website at www.physicspodcast.com
Isaac Newton made an almost incomparable contribution to physics - practically founding the field with his famous Laws that defined the mechanics of how bodies move for centuries, and by discovering gravity when an apple hit his head.
At least, that's the story we all learn in school. But this skips a lot of the crucial history of physics between Aristotle and the 17th century - and, what's more, Isaac Newton was not just a physicist. He was the last of the magicians.
In this, the first episode in our series about Isaac Newton, we cover physics before Newton, and then his childhood and early life. Were there signs of the genius that he would later become?
You can find all our past episodes at www.physicspodcast.com where you will also find an opportunity to donate to the show if you like what we do, via Paypal or Patreon, in exchange for bonus episodes!
You can also listen to our sister podcast, about historical dictators, via www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
And follow us on Twitter @physicspod or visit the Facebook page for Physical Attraction...
But most of all, tell your friends and take care.
Should we be talking about a one-world government to head off existential threats? What about schemes to preserve human genetic information, or launch relics from our civilisation to land on the moon?
Is worrying about the end of the world even worthwhile?
What can we practically do to reduce the risks for our civilisation?
These are the questions that this, the very last episode in our TEOTWAWKI series (okay... for now...) will explore.
Questions? Comments? Concerns?
Twitter: @physicspod
Facebook: Physical Attraction
Website: www.physicspodcast.com
-> where you'll find every episode we've ever released,
-> a contact form for more information and to send in your listener questions,
-> and our Patreon and Paypal accounts for donations.
As always, the best way to help out with what we do is to tell everyone about the show. And don't forget you can listen to our sister podcast, Autocracy Now, about the lives of various dictators - currently Stalin - wherever you listen to podcasts, or at www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
We're having a week to write and research and when we come back, we'll be talking about Isaac Newton.
So, now that I’ve thoroughly frightened us all with the terrifying visions of the apocalypse, I guess I should answer the question: what can we do to save ourselves? What should we do to save ourselves?
Of course, this podcast episode won't save the world - not even close. But hopefully it will raise some interesting questions - and, if you agree or disagree with what I'm saying, as ever, please contact me! You can get in touch via Twitter @physicspod, the Facebook page at Physical Attraction, and through the contact form at www.physicspodcast.com Any comments, questions, or concerns would be greatly appreciated.
If you like what we do, there are many ways to support the show; at www.physicspodcast.com, you'll be able to donate to the show and buy extra episodes via Patreon or via paypal donations. You can leave a rating and review on your favourite iTunes app, which really helps us get noticed! And, finally and perhaps best of all, please tell your podcast-listening friends about the show.
Last episode on the Future of Work, I described the problem – artificial intelligence is going to potentially make a lot of people unemployed in the near-term future; and the range of opinions, you can kind of pick and mix from:
It’s the robot job apocalypse! Society as we know it will soon be over!
It’s okay, we’ll just give everyone a Universal Basic Income and they can all start small businesses or learn to code or something.
It’s okay, we’ll just retrain everyone so that all the coal miners are making solar panels now.
It’s okay, AI won’t replace that many people and has been greatly exaggerated; just because a job has the potential to be automated, doesn’t mean that it will be automated. Instead AI will become a tool that enhances our productivity
It’s okay, AI will replace a lot of people but we’ll just come up with new jobs. No one is smashing spinning jennys nowadays and there aren’t thousands of unemployed loom-weavers on the streets of Manchester because everyone moved on, got new demands, and now they all work in PR.
As for me – I fall in the middle of the two extreme viewpoints, the “we’re all doomed” and “it’s fine” viewpoints. Nice and convenient, you might say. Let me explain in a rant.
I imagine a lot of people listening are going to disagree with me. I'm not always right! Send your constructive criticism to www.physicspodcast.com , the contact page, or get in touch with us via Twitter @physicspod
If you like what you hear, or just that I took the time to say it, consider helping me towards my own basic income via the Patreon account or the donate button, both of which you'll find on www.physicspodcast.com . You won't even need blockchain to do it.
The last bonus from the Autocracy Now feed for a while - we take Stalin's career up to the Russian Revolution and Civil War.
For the rest of his story, head over to
www.autocracynow.libsyn.com
Or subscribe via iTunes, where-ever you get your podcasts.
Some thoughts on the robot-job-apocalypse. Will automation render us all unemployed? How can you hope to keep yourself relevant? Should we all become neo-Luddites, or is reality more complicated than the fears we can conjure up?
If we manage to survive the Sun gradually heating up, though, there might be a bigger problem before the Sun runs out of hydrogen. See, Monty Python and the Galaxy Song have it right; our galaxy is only one of millions and billions in this amazing and expanding Universe.
Physics is stunning. The reason is that it exists on so many different scales. On impossibly small lengthscales, we have no idea what’s going on; things are strange, and weird, and quantum. Then we move up towards the scales of subatomic particles; then the world of atoms and molecules; the world of microscopy. The world of us, and the objects we know; and the world of mountains, the world of worlds. The world of stars, and solar systems; the galaxy of stars and stellar systems. The world of galaxies, and, who knows – maybe the world of Universes, too.
This is the story of what happens if we make it through everything; if we survive the 21st century, and all of the centuries beyond. What new risks can we anticipate?
And how - to the best of our understanding - does everything, inevitably end?
Theme music:
Get Ready for the Apocalypse - Astrometrics
Incidental music:
Julie Maxwells Piano Music, Starry Sky
Both available via the Free Music Archive
So, what happens if we manage to survive all of the catastrophic risks that we've detailed in the previous episodes?
This is a highly-speculative fantasy about what that future might look like. It's highly likely to be wrong.
It's a portrait of what someone might call a utopia. I don't know if it's my utopia; I certainly don't know if it's yours. China Mieville says that you already live in a utopia: it's just not your utopia.
What could the future mean?
Could history end?
Tell me what you think: tell me your visions of utopia.
You can find us on the web at www.physicspodcast.com
On Twitter @physicspod
And subscribe where-ever you listen to podcasts.
This is a bonus episode coming out on the Physical Attraction feed. The topic is even less related to physics than usual, but since it's extra, I hope you'll forgive me.
As I mentioned a few episodes ago, this wasn't the first podcast I ever made. In fact, I scripted and recorded about twenty episodes of a show - Autocracy Now - on historical dictators. It's not something I'm an expert in - just a topic of fascination!
Then I started the physics show. And it became clear to me that it would be impossible to juggle writing, recording, and scripting two podcasts a week - and doing my PhD in physics - and writing for Singularity Hub and other websites to supplement the meagre income you get for doing a PhD.
But I still had all of these episodes recorded, with no idea when to release them, gradually gathering dust in a corner of my hard-drive. And it took months to research and record them. So I've decided I will be releasing them on a bi-weekly basis, via the Autocracy Now feed.
You can subscribe to that feed where-ever you get your podcasts, and via www.autocracynow.libsyn.com - that's the website to visit.
By the time the last episode comes out, if I stick to my schedule, it will be 2019. If anything, I'll be even busier then, so I don't know if the show will continue beyond that point - we'll have to see what happens. But I hope you enjoy the sister podcast while it lasts, and Physical Attraction will keep going for some time to come yet. To save time, I'll put any updates concerning either show on this main feed, but for the rest of the Autocracy Now episodes, subscribe to that feed.
The first of the bonus episodes I'll be releasing is about the Roman Emperor, Commodus. The second is the first in what became a fourteen-part epic series on the life of Soviet dictator and mass-murdering tyrant, Stalin. I hope you enjoy them - and, if you do, subscribe to Autocracy Now as well!
This is a bonus episode coming out on the Physical Attraction feed. The topic is even less related to physics than usual, but since it's extra, I hope you'll forgive me.
As I mentioned a few episodes ago, this wasn't the first podcast I ever made. In fact, I scripted and recorded about twenty episodes of a show - Autocracy Now - on historical dictators. It's not something I'm an expert in - just a topic of fascination!
Then I started the physics show. And it became clear to me that it would be impossible to juggle writing, recording, and scripting two podcasts a week - and doing my PhD in physics - and writing for Singularity Hub and other websites to supplement the meagre income you get for doing a PhD.
But I still had all of these episodes recorded, with no idea when to release them, gradually gathering dust in a corner of my hard-drive. And it took months to research and record them. So I've decided I will be releasing them on a bi-weekly basis, via the Autocracy Now feed.
You can subscribe to that feed where-ever you get your podcasts, and via www.autocracynow.libsyn.com - that's the website to visit.
By the time the last episode comes out, if I stick to my schedule, it will be 2019. If anything, I'll be even busier then, so I don't know if the show will continue beyond that point - we'll have to see what happens. But I hope you enjoy the sister podcast while it lasts, and Physical Attraction will keep going for some time to come yet. To save time, I'll put any updates concerning either show on this main feed, but for the rest of the Autocracy Now episodes, subscribe to that feed.
The first of the bonus episodes I'll be releasing is about the Roman Emperor, Commodus. The second is the first in what became a fourteen-part epic series on the life of Soviet dictator and mass-murdering tyrant, Stalin. I hope you enjoy them - and, if you do, subscribe to Autocracy Now as well!
So, it won't come to any surprise to any of you to realise that - while I've researched all of the various ways the world might end - I've found an awful lot of ways the world CATEGORICALLY WON'T END.
From Raptures gone wrong to Nibiru, the planet that does not exist and will not crash into Earth, this episode eases the drama a little bit by going through some of the end-of-the-world predictions that didn't come true.
The second half of the show will be available via the website as a premium episode; get in contact with me via the website (after donating your $3) or subscribe on Patreon. Help support the show, help support indie podcasting, help us cover our hosting costs (which far outstrip any donations we get) and show your appreciation for all the free entertainment I've given you so far...
At least, I hope it's entertainment. It's certainly free.
You can contact us via www.physicspodcast.com, that Patreon is www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction , and you can follow us on Twitter @physicspod.
Nectome took the tech social media world by storm when they announced, at Y Combinator, that they'd kill you for $10,000. Well, they'd kill you and preserve your brain, possibly leading to some kind of digital immortality when they upload your brain to a computer. This was met with excitement, skepticism, and - ultimately - MIT severed ties with the company.
We look into the science, ethics, and philosophy of Nectome's proposed brain-uploading scheme. Could it really work? Or is it just a techno-fantasy?
www.physicspodcast.com
-> Contact us with comments, concerns, suggestions for content, anything you like.
@physicspod on Twitter
Thanks to Shelly Fan of Singularity Hub and various writers of the MIT Technology Review.
We have a special guest on the show today - Stephen Schwartz. Stephen is an expert on nuclear weapons; he has been studying nuclear weapons policy, particularly in the US, for decades. His book - The Atomic Audit - was the first ever survey of the true financial cost of nuclear weapons; he has been the editor and publisher of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, who manage the famous Doomsday clock and publish scholarly and popular literature on existential threats including nuclear weapons. He edited the Non-Proliferation review, and is currently an Adjunct Professor at Middlebury - he also runs an excellent social media feed on Twitter @AtomicAnalyst where he keeps us all up to date on nuclear weapons and political developments. I was delighted to have him on the show: we sat down for an interview about nukes in the modern era and under Trump, the real financial cost of nuclear weapons, the biggest risks that they pose, dispelling nuclear myths, and what we can do to help keep our society safer from these risks. I also find out why he tried to position his college to stock up on suicide pills in the 1980s. I hope you enjoy.
You can follow us on Twitter @physicspod, we have a Facebook page if you're still on that website, and you can always contact us with your comments, questions, and concerns via the contact form over at www.physicspodcast.com; I read everything and respond to everything that makes sense, and if you want to tell me what you'd like to hear from the show, I'd love to hear it. You can donate to the show via links on the website to help us cover hosting costs and in case you think it's worth a few dollars, pounds, yen or euros for hours of free, independent content. If you don't want to go through the hassle of doing that, though, please do tell as many people as you can about the show. When we come back, there's going to be an overview of the series that we're just emerged from. Episodes include the apocalypses that didn't happen, the ways we might hope to avoid them in the future, and where to go next.
One of the best and most enjoyable parts of hosting this show is when my favourite authors are kind enough to speak to me. I'd like to thank Simon for an excellent, enlightening, entertaining discussion: if you enjoy listening to it half as much as I enjoyed the conversation, you're in for a real treat.
Today, as part of our series on science in the USSR, I'm delighted to say that we have an interview with Simon Ings, the author of a wonderful book on the subject - Stalin and the Scientists. Simon began his career writing science fiction stories, novels and films writing books on perception (The Eye: A Natural History), 20th-century radical politics (The Weight of Numbers), the shipping system (Dead Water) and augmented reality (Wolves). He co-founded and edited Arc magazine, a digital publication about the future, before joining New Scientist magazine as its arts editor, and writing Stalin and the Scientists. He very kindly agreed to be interviewed for our little show; as usual, I detained my guest for a very long time, and so I've split the interview into two parts.
The second part of our interview followed scientists through the Soviet Union's tumultuous time under Stalin - through the Gulags and the Great Terror, through the horrors of the Second World War and the Sharaskhi. We discuss the legacy of the Soviet Union and move towards what we can learn about science in our society today.
If you want to find out more about Simon's work, you can buy Stalin and the Scientists online and at all good bookstores - and I highly recommend you do - and he's online at www.simonings.com and also tweets @simonings.
As for us: follow the show @physicspod , or visit the website for more information at www.physicspodcast.com : there you'll find a contact form where you can bombard us with questions, comments, concerns, topic suggestions, guest suggestions, praise, anonymous threats - anything you like!
If you've enjoyed the show, you can help us a number of ways. We have a paypal donate link which you'll find on the site. You can subscribe to our Patreon. But most of all, please, please - tell as many people as possible to listen. Tie them down if necessary.
One of the best and most enjoyable parts of hosting this show is when my favourite authors are kind enough to speak to me. I'd like to thank Simon for an excellent, enlightening, entertaining discussion: if you enjoy listening to it half as much as I enjoyed the conversation, you're in for a real treat.
Today, as part of our series on science in the USSR, I'm delighted to say that we have an interview with Simon Ings, the author of a wonderful book on the subject - Stalin and the Scientists. Simon began his career writing science fiction stories, novels and films writing books on perception (The Eye: A Natural History), 20th-century radical politics (The Weight of Numbers), the shipping system (Dead Water) and augmented reality (Wolves). He co-founded and edited Arc magazine, a digital publication about the future, before joining New Scientist magazine as its arts editor, and writing Stalin and the Scientists. He very kindly agreed to be interviewed for our little show; as usual, I detained my guest for a very long time, and so I've split the interview into two parts.
The first part of our discussion focuses on the Bolshevik philosophy of science and the Russian Revolution more generally.
If you want to find out more about Simon's work, you can buy Stalin and the Scientists online and at all good bookstores - and I highly recommend you do - and he's online at www.simonings.com and also tweets @simonings.
As for us: follow the show @physicspod , or visit the website for more information at www.physicspodcast.com : there you'll find a contact form where you can bombard us with questions, comments, concerns, topic suggestions, guest suggestions, praise, anonymous threats - anything you like!
If you've enjoyed the show, you can help us a number of ways. We have a paypal donate link which you'll find on the site. You can subscribe to our Patreon. But most of all, please, please - tell as many people as possible to listen. Tie them down if necessary.
Next time, we'll talk about genetics and science in general in the USSR, and what lessons it might have for the future.
"Leave the physicists be," said Stalin to his chief of police, Beria. "We can always shoot them later."
In this series of episodes, we'll take you inside the world of science in the USSR - with a particular focus on how they developed the atomic bomb. The gulags were not the only prisons in the Soviet Union; in fact, they constructed entire secret cities, called "Atomgrads", to house the scientists working on the bomb project.
Technical experts were detained in prisons called sharashka. It was a simple exchange: you got to stay somewhere warm, and live under slightly better conditions than in the gulags - and in exchange, you worked on weapons and other projects to help the Soviet state.
More broadly, the Communist state was a bundle of contradictions. They were focused on the power of science and technology to drag Russia into the 20th century, but also they were dogmatic and suspicious of any outside influence. Huge amounts were invested in technical education, but pseudoscience made it to the height of power and policy-making in the state.
What was life like for these scientists? How did Soviet science react to its contradictions?
We'll explore all this and more in this episode.
If you've enjoyed the show, please tell everyone you know to listen and spread it like a super-virulent biological weapon.
You can contact the show with any comments, questions, or concerns via www.physicspodcast.com or find us on Twitter @physicspod. Getting feedback from listeners is always wonderful, so please drop us a line.
"Leave the physicists be," said Stalin to his chief of police, Beria. "We can always shoot them later."
In this series of episodes, we'll take you inside the world of science in the USSR - with a particular focus on how they developed the atomic bomb. The gulags were not the only prisons in the Soviet Union; in fact, they constructed entire secret cities, called "Atomgrads", to house the scientists working on the bomb project.
Technical experts were detained in prisons called sharashka. It was a simple exchange: you got to stay somewhere warm, and live under slightly better conditions than in the gulags - and in exchange, you worked on weapons and other projects to help the Soviet state.
More broadly, the Communist state was a bundle of contradictions. They were focused on the power of science and technology to drag Russia into the 20th century, but also they were dogmatic and suspicious of any outside influence. Huge amounts were invested in technical education, but pseudoscience made it to the height of power and policy-making in the state.
What was life like for these scientists? How did Soviet science react to its contradictions?
We'll explore all this and more in this episode.
If you've enjoyed the show, please tell everyone you know to listen and spread it like a super-virulent biological weapon.
You can contact the show with any comments, questions, or concerns via www.physicspodcast.com or find us on Twitter @physicspod. Getting feedback from listeners is always wonderful, so please drop us a line.
Physics lost a bright star last week when Stephen Hawking, world-renowned cosmologist, theoretical physicist, and science communicator, died at the age of 76. Although he was only given a few years to live when first diagnosed with motor-neurone disease in 1963, aged just 21 and at the beginning of his graduate studies in Cambridge, he defied medical predictions and lived for another fifty years. Somehow, it still doesn’t seem like it was long enough; but few have made such good use of their time.
In this episode, I pay tribute to Stephen Hawking's life and work, and try to explain some of his discoveries in cosmology. He had a profound impact on the physics community both as a scientist and a communicator without parallel. The world will miss him.
Vasili Arkhipov. Stanislav Petrov. Are the names familiar? They should be: these people saved the world by refusing to use nuclear weapons under incredible circumstances of extraordinary pressure.
Even if you trust every head of state in every country that has nuclear weapons - and even if you feel confident that all future heads-of-state in nuclear-armed countries can also be trusted - there's still the possibility of nuclear accidents. Over time, this possibility becomes a probability. One of the scariest things about nukes is the number of times our species has almost annihilated itself by accident.
We discuss these accidents, and more, in this episode. What's life like for a species living in the shadow of the bomb?
If you've enjoyed this show, you can follow us on Twitter
www.twitter.com/physicspod
and you can visit the show with your comments, questions, concerns, or suggestions for future show topics at www.physicspodcast.com
We have a special guest on the show today! This one was very fun to record. Martin Pfeiffer, perhaps more notorious by his Twitter handle @NuclearAnthro, is a must-follow expert and Anthropology PhD student who studies the history of nuclear weapons, and how human societies interact with them.
We discuss folk beliefs about nuclear weapons, the history of the individuals who've wielded them... and just how easy it is for the President to launch a nuclear strike.
We built them. We can take them apart.
You can find Martin's Twitter @NuclearAnthro, and his blog is below:
https://deusexatomica.wordpress.com/
If you enjoy his work (and you really should), you can find links to a Paypal and Patreon on both.
You can find Physical Attraction at www.physicspodcast.com, where you'll also find ways to support our show, and a contact form for comments, praise, concerns, abuse, and questions as well as suggestions for future show topics. We read it all.
Ten apocalypses later, we're finally here.
It's easy to forget, living our comfortable lives, that there are hundreds of nuclear-armed missiles that could destroy civilisation at the drop of a hat... after just one order. Or maybe - an accident.
In this episode, I'll talk about the history of nuclear weapons; some of the incidents when we came closest to annihilation; and what the world would look like after a nuclear war.
You can follow us on Twitter @physicspod, and visit the website at www.physicspodcast.com
There, you can donate to the show, and contact us with your comments, questions, concerns, praise, abuse, ideas for future shows, and so on.
We have a guest on the show today - Ben Franta. Ben is a scientist, science historian, science writer, and activist. He studied for a PhD at Harvard working on solar cells; while he was at Harvard, he became involved in the movement to persuade that University to divest from fossil fuels. After finishing his first PhD, he moved to Stanford to take up a PhD in the History of Science, where he now studies the history of climate politics, and the influence of fossil fuel companies on that politics. His recent article in the Guardian, published on New Year's Day, explained how Edward Teller knew about global warming in 1959 and warned the fossil fuel industry - thirty years before it hit the mainstream.
The second half, which you're about to hear, is mostly about climate change activism: what can we do to most effectively deal with climate change?
If you enjoyed what our guest had to say, you can find his work via
his LinkedIn
"Benjamin Franta": https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjaminfranta/
and follow him on Twitter @BenFranta.
The article that Ben referred to, which details the case for climate activism, was written by Geoffrey Supran and Ploy Achakulwisut; it's on Mashable, and it's called "How You Can Fight Climate Change."
https://mashable.com/2017/05/06/how-you-can-fight-climate-change/
As always, you can follow us on Twitter @physicspod, and go to our website at physicspodcast.com, where you'll find a donate link that will help you support the show if you're so inclined. Until next time.
We have a guest on the show today - Ben Franta. Ben is a scientist, science historian, science writer, and activist. He studied for a PhD at Harvard working on solar cells; while he was at Harvard, he became involved in the movement to persuade that University to divest from fossil fuels. After finishing his first PhD, he moved to Stanford to take up a PhD in the History of Science, where he now studies the history of climate politics, and the influence of fossil fuel companies on that politics. His recent article in the Guardian, published on New Year's Day, explained how Edward Teller knew about global warming in 1959 and warned the fossil fuel industry - thirty years before it hit the mainstream.
The first half, which you're about to hear, is a general discussion of the politics of climate change: why has this problem proved so difficult to deal with?
If you enjoyed what our guest had to say, you can find his work via
his LinkedIn
"Benjamin Franta": https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjaminfranta/
and follow him on Twitter @BenFranta.
The article that Ben referred to, which details the case for climate activism, was written by Geoffrey Supran and Ploy Achakulwisut; it's on Mashable, and it's called "How You Can Fight Climate Change."
https://mashable.com/2017/05/06/how-you-can-fight-climate-change/
As always, you can follow us on Twitter @physicspod, and go to our website at physicspodcast.com, where you'll find a donate link that will help you support the show if you're so inclined. Until next time.
*** Erratum:
Ben mentioned that the UK currently gets some of its electricity imported from Iceland: this is actually a proposed scheme that's not currently operating, but hopefully will in the near future. There is indeed a cable between the UK and France that helps both countries match supply and demand, and the same is true between Denmark and Norway, which both draw the majority of their power from wind and hydroelectricity respectively. It's the way forward! https://www.landsvirkjun.com/researchdevelopment/research/submarinecabletoeurope
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skagerrak_(power_transmission_system)
Why are we so fascinated with the end of the world?
How do we think about it?
How do cognitive biases impact how we conceive of it?
How can we account for existential risks to humanity?
What is millenial thinking, and why do we fall into it?
All this and more; it's Physical Attraction, the TEOTWAWKI specials.
www.physicspodcast.com - where to go if you want to donate to us, or contact us with your questions.
@physicspod on Twitter - another great way to contact us if you can tolerate Twitter
In this episode, I try to explore a little more the politics behind the simple question: why is it that virtually every other proclamation of physicists is accepted, but the consensus around anthropogenic climate change has been so difficult for people to accept?
Remember: you can follow us on Twitter @physicspod
You can find the website at www.physicspodcast.com
And on either one of those, you'll find a sparkly donate button where you can give to us on Paypal if you want to help us cover our costs.
You may remember not so long ago the hole in the ozone layer was the major scientific apocalypse story out there in the world. It could have proved devastating for society, but - after the Montreal protocol banned and heavily regulated the substances that were causing the problem, the ozone hole has begun to shrink and the crisis has died down.
In this episode, I'll talk about the story of the ozone hole and what - if anything - it can teach us about our own efforts to combat greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.
In this second part of the climate change episode, I will talk about what climate change is going to do to us - what the worst case scenarios are - and what we can do, as individuals and as a collective, to stop it.
Remember; if you enjoy the show, please tell others about it. You can visit the website at www.physicspodcast.com and you can find links there to support us via Patreon or Paypal, both of which will allow you to download bonus episodes at low, low prices.
Our environment links us all: and we know that we are doing immense harm to that natural environment with our human activities. But where are the weak links? What are the potential pitfalls for the natural world, and for civilisation? In other words - if we don't change our ways - what could happen?
We all know that the climate is changing and that humans are responsible for the vast bulk of the change. (If you disagree, I really hope you'll listen to this episode, and I'm happy to take on any questions you might have.) But why is climate change happening, what will it mean for us and what we can do to stop it?
In this first episode, I will explain the physical science basis behind climate change: what is a greenhouse gas, what are feedback loops, and why does it matter that our atmosphere has gone from 280ppm of carbon dioxide to 400ppm in the industrial era?
Remember; if you enjoy the show, please tell others about it. You can visit the website at www.physicspodcast.com and you can find links there to support us via Patreon or Paypal, both of which will allow you to download bonus episodes at low, low prices.
Our environment links us all: and we know that we are doing immense harm to that natural environment with our human activities. But where are the weak links? What are the potential pitfalls for the natural world, and for civilisation? In other words - if we don't change our ways - what could happen?
This is a simply huge topic. So, for the sake of clarity, I’m going to split the ecological and environmental catastrophe into two parts. The first will focus on pollution, species extinction, and scarcity of resources – what you might call a general ecological collapse. The second part is going to focus on perhaps the most famous environmental problem we have: climate change.
We'll start by talking about biodiversity - what does it mean for us and for the planet that biodiversity is in decline due to human activities? We'll also talk about some of the lesser-spotted environmental crises - topsoil degradation and the infamous disappearance of the bees amongst them.
Remember; if you enjoy the show, please tell others about it. You can visit the website at www.physicspodcast.com and you can find links there to support us via Patreon or Paypal, both of which will allow you to download bonus episodes at low, low prices.
We have a guest on the show today! His name is Stuart Armstrong, and he works at the Future of Humanity Institute that we’ve mentioned several times over the course of the TEOTWAWKI specials who are looking at big-picture existential risks. Stuart Armstrong’s research at the Future of Humanity Institute centers on the safety and possibilities of Artificial Intelligence (AI), how to define the potential goals of AI and map humanity’s partially defined values into it, and the long term potential for intelligent life across the reachable universe. He has been working with people at FHI and other organizations, such as DeepMind, to formalize AI desiderata in general models so that AI designers can include these safety methods in their designs.
Today on the show, our guest is Britt Wray. Britt Wray is a broadcaster, author and public speaker researching emerging science and tech. She tells stories about what she finds via podcasting, interactive documentary, print and tv. Recently, she has hosted the BBC Tomorrow's World podcast with Ellie Cosgrave - I'm sure lots of us remember the old TV show which is now being revived in podcast form - and her first book, Rise of the Necrofauna: The Science, Ethics and Risks of De-Extinction - has just been published by Greystone Books. It'd make a good Christmas present for anyone you know who's interested in the possibilities of using synthetic biology to bring back creatures that were once extinct - or, at least, some strange new hybrid versions of them. Britt has spent a lot of time researching the ethics and capabilities of emerging technologies, especially in biology, and especially related to CRISPR, so that's broadly what our discussion is about. I hope you enjoy.
You can follow Britt Wray on Twitter @BrittWray and keep up with developments on www.brittwray.com, as well as buying a copy of Rise of the Necrofauna in bookshops and on Amazon.
We have a special guest on the show today: I’m excited, are you excited? It’s Zach Weinersmith. Zach is the creator of the webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, which I’m sure many of you love and enjoy. He created the Bad Ad-Hoc Hypotheses festival where people give ludicrous solutions to genuine scientific problems. And with his amazing wife Kelly Weinersmith, hosted a podcast, the Weekly Weinersmith, and wrote a book – Soonish: Ten Emerging Technologies that Will Improve and/or Ruin Everything. This book deals with the future of space travel, programmable matter, nuclear fusion, all kinds of emerging technologies, written about in a hilarious and informative way – and it deals with the impacts they’ll have on society.
We had a wide-ranging discussion, from talking about the near-term future of space travel, space elevators, how to tell if technology predictions are accurate or not, how technology will impact society, the inevitability of technological progress, whether we can mine asteroids, and all manner of wonderful things.
You can find out more about Zach and Kelly's work at @ZachWeiner and @FuSchmu respectively. You can listen to more of my show at www.physicspodcast.com where you can talk to us about your questions, concerns, and ask listener questions to be featured on a future episode! Please, tell one of your friends to listen to the show, ensuring the exponential growth in listener base that will one day consume us all.
Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, Martin Rees... all have warned about the risk from Artificial Intelligence. Centres like the Future of Humanity Institute in Oxford, and the Centre for Existential Risk at Cambridge, rate the risk from artificial intelligence as way up there on the scale of potential human apocalypses. But it won't look like killer terminator-robots. We are standing on the precipice of a future that's almost impossible to comprehend. Will it be possible to survive?
In this episode, we'll talk about why people are afraid that this explosion in technology could lead to the end of the world. Pictures of killer Terminators need not apply; instead, we're discussing the philosophical and ethical problems that come with artificial intelligence that could exceed the capacity of humans. How can we be sure that it has the same values as us? How can we be sure that it even understands the value of human life at all? Why are people so afraid of such a miraculous technology? And is there anything we can do to ensure that it will be used as a tool rather than taking over entirely?
Hit us up on Twitter @physicspod if your brain hasn't yet been uploaded to a computer and you still need to use a pesky keyboard interface in meatspace to interact. There, you can donate to the show (in fiat currency, not bitcoin, although I'll take some if you have any going.) Like and review us on iTunes, which will help their 'artificially intelligent' algorithms serve up this show to more consumer human robo-droids. Until next time, stay safe.
This is the much-anticipated second part of the Phil Torres Tapes! We have a guest on the show today – Phil Torres. Phil Torres is an author, Affiliate Scholar at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, former contributor at the Future of Life Institute, and founding Director of the X-Risks Institute. He has published in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Skeptic, Free Inquiry, The Humanist, Journal of Future Studies, Bioethics, Journal of Evolution and Technology, Foresight, Erkenntnis, and Metaphilosophy, as well as popular media like Time, Motherboard, Salon, Common Dreams, Counterpunch, Alternet, The Progressive, and Truthout.
I was absolutely delighted that he agreed to be interviewed for a show like ours, and so I urge you to seek out his website – risksandreligion.org – and buy one of his books. There’s “The End – what Science and Religion have to tell us about the Apocalypse”, which is on my shelf already, and, recently, we have Morality, Foresight, and Human Flourishing, which is is an introduction to the whole field of existential risks. So I would urge you all, if you’re interested in this topic – that of risks to the entire human species, which I think we can agree affects us all – to buy one of those books.
This is the second part of our conversation, which focuses on AI, Superintelligence, and the control problem. How can we deal with AI, how will it impact our lives and have we any hope of controlling a superintelligent AI? There's plenty more general discussion about existential risks, too.
Follow Phil @xriskology and the show @physicspod.
Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, Martin Rees... all have warned about the risk from Artificial Intelligence. Centres like the Future of Humanity Institute in Oxford, and the Centre for Existential Risk at Cambridge, rate the risk from artificial intelligence as way up there on the scale of potential human apocalypses. But it won't look like killer terminator-robots. We are standing on the precipice of a future that's almost impossible to comprehend. Will it be possible to survive?
In this episode, we'll lay the groundwork for talking about the singularity by introducing some of the fields involved - robotics, artificial intelligence and the efforts to create an artificial general intelligence. And we'll try to understand some of the incredible possibilities that might arise as we slowly blur the line between the artificial and the 'real'. We have a choice: tech utopia, or tech dystopia. But in the world of the Singularity, there is no room for Luddites.
Hit us up on Twitter @physicspod if your brain hasn't yet been uploaded to a computer and you still need to use a pesky keyboard interface in meatspace to interact. There, you can donate to the show (in fiat currency, not bitcoin, although I'll take some if you have any going.) Like and review us on iTunes, which will help their 'artificially intelligent' algorithms serve up this show to more consumer human robo-droids. Until next time, stay safe.
Joining me today is Dr Rafael Alves-Batista. Rafael is a post-doctoral research associate at the University of Oxford. He received his Bachelor’s Degree and his Masters’ at the State University of Campinas in Brazil, moved to Hamburg, Germany for his PhD which he received in 2015, and then onto Oxford for his postdoctoral position. And, last year, he supervised my Masters’ project, looking into the origin of Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays: so I can attest to his genius first-hand!
In this second part of the interview, we talk about his famous paper - The Resilience of Life to Astrophysical Events, which describes how likely it is for events in the Universe to destroy all life on Earth. We also talk about the potential for discovering life on other planets, some fascinating missions that are planning to do just that, and the possibility that the Universe was "Fine-Tuned" to allow human life to exist.
For more information you can follow Rafa over at @8rafael, or visit his website at www.8rafael.com where you can read his scientific papers and see the other popular media he's taken part in.
Earlier this year, a couple of scientists in a laboratory did something incredible. Using nothing but the genetic code and a well-equipped lab, they raised the dead.
Specifically, the extinct horsepox virus was brought back to life. The scientists said that they didn't do the experiment out of any malice for horses, but just to demonstrate that - with a few good biotech experts, a decent lab, and $100,000 - anyone would soon be able to bring viruses back from the dead.
So what about when that virus is smallpox, capable of killing millions, with the only surviving samples stored as bioweapons by the US and the Russians? Could it be that the biotech revolution - which has such power to save us from our ills and woes - might doom us as well? And what happens when this power gets into the hands of more and more people; the power over life and death?
As ever, you can follow us on Twitter @physicspod, where we're amazingly active and will respond to any queries you have about the end of the world and similar terrors. You can tell us what you think of the ranking so far, make your own suggestions, and even donate to the show if you like. If you've enjoyed it, please consider rating and reviewing the show on iTunes, which helps us get noticed!
Hey all,
I've been writing some articles for the good folks over at Singularity Hub, who'll help you keep on top of a lot of breaking technology news. Working with them has been great so far.
You can see all my work here but there are also some highlights:
What It Would Take to Suck CO2 Back Out of the Atmosphere I briefly assess some of the various potentials for carbon dioxide removal (CDR) geoengineering. Lots of people ask me, when I talk about climate change, whether we can't just 'invent a machine that sucks carbon back out of the atmosphere'. The fact is, people are indeed working on this - although a better idea is to actually try to enhance natural processes, which are far better at removing and adding carbon to the atmosphere than we can hope to be.
The issue is that any method to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere must be done on the same scale as we're currently putting it up there. And since that is currently on the scale of a vast, industrial activity, it's going to require a whole industry to suck it back out again.
Best, as you always hear, to leave it in the ground in the first place.
Does Our Survival Depend on Relentless Exponential Growth? Expanding on thoughts that will be familiar to those of you who listened to the Malthus episode.
Solar Power Is Getting Cheaper—But How Do We Overcome Its Limits?
This is a slightly less detailed version of the episode I did about various new kinds of solar panel, Splitting Sunbeams.
Amazon Is Quietly Building the Robots of Sci-Fi—Piece by Practical Piece
And this is my pet theory that, of all the companies with an incentive to develop humanoid robots, Amazon are the ones with the most to gain.
Happy reading, all.
www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction, that's www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction . If you go there, and subscribe selecting the $3/episode option, the RSS feed and access to all of the online bonus episodes will be yours. I want to make the subscription $3/bonus episode, so that you're only paying for the content I actually produce and give you rather than some neverending monthly subscription. But I will trail the bonus episodes in advance, so that you know what you're getting. The first one is the second half of the aliens episode that just went up on the feed; in the future, we'll have episodes about failed predictions for the end of the world, and for thermodynamics we'll have free energy projects that just didn't work out. If you're a patron, you can ask me about bonus episodes you'd especially like to hear, and I will do my best to respond to popular suggestions.
If you DON'T want to subscribe via patreon, there are other options. You can go to www.paypal.me/physicspod. There you will see a paypal link that will allow you to send money directly to me. If you send $3 and put in the "note" alongside the sending your email, and the bonus episode you wish to purchase, I will send you a download link to that episode. That way anyone who has Paypal can request an individual bonus episode. At some point in the future if this goes well, I'll look into setting up an online store that will make it easier for people to pay for the individual episodes they want, but for now, best to do things via Paypal and via www.physicspodcast.com. All of the relevant information and links will be at www.physicspodcast.com, so that's the place to go if you're interested; we also have a contact form there where I can explain any details in further... detail.
Thanks so much for listening and telling others about the show. I've recieved a wonderful response from many of you so far and I want to keep going for as long as possible, because I love doing this project, and I hope you guys enjoy it too.
Things have been very serious and very depressing on our TEOTWAWKI specials; so I thought it was about time to do a little bit of light-hearted debunking, rather than ranting about the genuine dangers of apocalypse that might await us in the future.
I'll discuss why the Roswell story doesn't add up - even a little bit - what an actual alien invasion could you like; and why it's just so damn unlikely that any of these alien abduction stories are especially true. We'll even talk about reports of "UFOs" that stretch all the way back to Medieval Europe - with a healthy dose of skepticism.
This is the first part of a TWO-PART episode. The second part will be available as a Premium episode. If you donate $3 or more via the Paypal link at www.paypal.me/physicspod I will give you a download link to the second part of the episode - the Premium bit - (enclose your email or send it to me on Twitter, or via a comment on www.physicspodcast.com). All Patreon subscribers will also get access to a special RSS feed containing all bonus episodes, and other extra content as and when I can produce it! You can find our Patreon at www.patreon.com/PhysicalAttraction
This is not about making me a millionaire; it's about helping us cover the show costs, and all the time I spend making these shows... Although making me a millionaire would be a decent side-effect. So remember, you're not just paying for the episode: you're helping us produce every episode, and helping me carry on bringing you the show.
Human beings have been facing apocalyptic circumstances for thousands of years. Our competitors, our nemesis have been pathogens like malaria, Yersinia Pestis, smallpox... every few generations, a cataclysmic plague would tear through human populations and leave entire towns uninhabited.
In the modern era, with modern medicines, we may feel that - at least in the industrialized West - this horror is behind our species now. But with evolving technology and behaviours come new risks; and we have seen in pandemics like Zika and Ebola that there may well be terrors yet to come for humanity.
What makes these pandemics so threatening? And what has natural selection and evolution produced in the way of pandemics?
NOTE: This is part 1 of a two part series on pandemics; the second part will deal with biotechnology-inspired viruses and pandemics.
If you're enjoying the end of the world, why not hit us up with episode suggestions on twitter @physicspod? You can donate to the show via Paypal there - every little helps us cover our costs. Please rate and review the show on iTunes if you don't want to donate - it helps us get noticed by generous, physics-loving billionaires. Until next time, stay safe.
Joining me today is Dr Rafael Alves-Batista. Rafael is a post-doctoral research associate at the University of Oxford. He received his Bachelor’s Degree and his Masters’ at the State University of Campinas in Brazil, moved to Hamburg, Germany for his PhD which he received in 2015, and then onto Oxford for his postdoctoral position. And, last year, he supervised my Masters’ project, looking into the origin of Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays: so I can attest to his genius first-hand!
In this first part of the interview, we talk about cosmic rays - what are they, where do they come from, and what can they tell us about the Universe?
We also talk about the current scientific understanding surrounding the topic of the Multiverse, and what the origins of the Universe can tell us about how it is today.
For more information you can follow Rafa over at @8rafael, or visit his website at www.8rafael.com where you can read his scientific papers and see the other popular media he's taken part in.
LIGO hold a big press conference and announce the merger of Neutron Stars detected via gravitational waves and optical instruments for the first time. We now know about types of gamma ray burst, and where gold and platinum come from.
Since we did an episode about the gravitational wave detections and the Nobel Prize less than a week ago, I thought it would be fun for me to breathlessly describe it based on what reading I've been able to do and give a few early thoughts.
YAY SCIENCE!
This episode of the TEOTWAWKI specials, we're focusing on every crazed doom-prepper's favourite scenario for the end of the world - Peak Oil.
Our society runs on oil and petroleum products (sadly, still). These fossil fuels are the fossilised remains of plants and animals that died millions of years ago, and they take tens of thousands of years to form. So it seems to be a perfectly reasonable assumption to make: one day, we are going to run out of fossil fuels, and we will need renewable forms of energy.
But what if we run out of fossil fuels before transitioning to renewables? What if surging oil prices, and steady demand, causes us to pursue more and more dangerous and environmentally unsound methods of extraction? What could the consequences of our dependence on oil be, and how can we hope to get around it?
You can find us on Twitter @physicspod, where you'll even find a donate link for the show if you want to support what we do. Fire all questions @physicspod or towards physicspod@outlook.com . Until the oil runs out - stay safe.
As you may already know, yesterday, the Nobel Prize in Physics, 2017 was announced: it went to Kip Thorne, Barry Barish, and Rainer Weiss for their contributions towards the LIGO collaboration that detected gravitational waves.
In this special episode, I'll talk a little bit about the history of the Nobel prizes, explain what they were looking for at LIGO, how they found it, and what it means. So if you ever wondered what a gravitational wave was but were too afraid to ask, hopefully, it'll help you out.
Stay tuned at the end for a marathon housekeeping session where I once again appeal for listener questions.
The human population has been growing exponentially for a long time. It’s been continuously growing since the Black Death in the 1300s – and although wars, famines, and plagues cause occasional blips in the growth since, it’s been pretty close to exponential since the Industrial Revolution kicked off. Now Malthus was not the only one to notice this, before I get letters, but he is indisputably the one who has his name most closely associated with the concept. Malthus, among others, saw this in the 1790s and said “Oh, boy.” He was afraid that human population would overshoot the availability of resources: and then things would really hit the fan:
“Famine seems to be the last, the most dreadful resource of nature. The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction, and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and tens of thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world.”
Could a Malthusian catastrophe hit us today?
Can our society adapt to the continued demand for exponential growth?
What would it look like, in the modern world?
Find out in this week's TEOTWAWKI
We have a guest on the show today – Phil Torres. Phil Torres is an author, Affiliate Scholar at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, former contributor at the Future of Life Institute, and founding Director of the X-Risks Institute. He has published in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Skeptic, Free Inquiry, The Humanist, Journal of Future Studies, Bioethics, Journal of Evolution and Technology, Foresight, Erkenntnis, and Metaphilosophy, as well as popular media like Time, Motherboard, Salon, Common Dreams, Counterpunch, Alternet, The Progressive, and Truthout.
I was absolutely delighted that he agreed to be interviewed for a show like ours, and so I urge you to seek out his website – risksandreligion.org – and buy one of his books. There’s “The End – what Science and Religion have to tell us about the Apocalypse”, which is on my shelf already, and, forthcoming, we have Morality, Foresight, and Human Flourishing, which is going to act as an introduction to the whole field of existential risks, which people have been thinking about for a good deal of time now. So I would urge you all, if you’re interested in this topic – that of risks to the entire human species, which I think we can agree affects us all – to buy one of those books.
This is the first part of our conversation, which touches on what is meant by an existential risk, some specific examples from the modern world in terms of nuclear profileration and nuclear accidents; transhumanism, and how our societies and institutions can deal with existential risks more effectively. We talk about the field in general and how we can hope to think more constructively about the end of the world - without waving a 'The End is Nigh' sign! The second part, which focuses on AI, will be released shortly.
Follow Phil @xriskology and the show @physicspod.
75,000 years ago, the human race was on the brink of extinction.
The cause was the Toba supervolcanic eruption, which had plunged the earth into a volcanic winter and killed all but a few thousand remaining humans. This moment was the closest we have come to extinction since our species began.
Even smaller volcanic eruptions have lead to such cheerful-sounding phenomena as "The Year Without a Summer".
Now, the question has to be asked: could this happen again? And how likely is it to occur during our lifetimes?
On this week's TEOTWAWKI special of Physical Attraction, we're going to be talking about the threat from supervolcanic eruptions.
How are you feeling about the countdown so far? Let us know over on Twitter @physicspod, or via the email, physicspod@outlook.com
Occasionally, in the world, we observe empirical laws – the laws of experiment - that seem to be spookily accurate. There’s no theoretical reason why they should be obeyed, but they just happen to describe the world remarkably well. Perhaps the best example of this, that has changed and will change the world the most, is Moore’s Law. But there's another example - one that will render every Green warrior happy to think about. The price of solar energy is dropping off a cliff.
Tweet us @physicspod
Listener Questions sought for Upcoming Listener Question Episode
Read old scripts on Medium
Like and review on iTunes for your chances at a PRIZE DRAW
Tell one friend and in thirty episodes we'll have a trillion listeners.
Regular apocalyptic service will be resumed next Saturday.
We know that a great deal of our critical national infrastructure depends on complex cyber-systems; but in the fast-changing world of the internet and computer systems, it's become impossible for slow-moving legislators to catch up to the shifting goalposts. Hackers and similar groups have had major impacts on society. But most of what's been visibly done so far has been limited to what you might call petty crime; theft, extortion, exposure of secret or sensitive information.
But, as our systems increasingly depend on these complex networks, there is a disturbing question we can't answer. How much could a determined group of cyber-criminals disrupt society? Could they find a way to compromise highly sensitive weapons systems? Could they trigger a nuclear war?
Coming in at number 8: Cyberwarfare.
I'm not an expert in this field, so if you have any opinions, thoughts, or facts I should be aware of - please, get in touch with the show @physicspod and we'll shoutout to you!
It's easy to forget that we are on a pale, blue dot - the one habitable place we know of in the whole, wide, Universe. Fragile. Perhaps too fragile.
It's not that the Universe wants to kill us; it's just that astrophysics doesn't care too much whether a planet is inhabited, or whether the inhabitants have feelings - or not.
Asteroid strikes. Impact from a giant comet. Gamma ray bursts, supernovae, and black holes. Any one of these has the potential to destroy our civilisation.
But how likely is that to happen? And what is there that anyone can do about it?
If you enjoyed this episode, Death From Above - by Phil Plait - is an excellent resource.
Join me as we talk about the potential for an apocalypse... from outer space!
Let’s talk about earthquakes. As we know, the Earth’s crust is made up of tectonic plates – vast plates of rock that shift around due to convection and the motion of fluid in Earth’s mantle. They, roughly speaking “join together” at fault-lines. But in reality, the plates can’t slide past each other frictionlessly; what tends to happen is that they “catch” on each other, stick for a while – with pressure building, because whatever predominant force is pushing them along is building up pressure and elastic strain energy. Then, eventually, it all becomes too much, and they slip dramatically, releasing all that built-up energy quickly and causing vibrational waves to propagate, which we feel as Earthquakes. For this reason, they occur predominantly around faultlines, like the San Andreas fault that runs through California, and others in Japan, South America, and the middle east.
But do earthquakes have the power to destroy the world or even wreak major damage on human civilization as a whole? Let's find out.
We're going to be presenting a very special series of episodes over the next few months.
The end of the world. Is it going to end in fire, or ice? And is there anything we can do about it?
Get ready for the apocalypse.
Are we alone in the Universe? Or are there alien civilisations out there?
And if there are, where are they, and why aren't they talking to us?
We'll explore the Fermi paradox, the Drake equation, and, of course... the simple fact that we're all living in a computer simulation. Don't miss it.
"Hope that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'cause there's bugger all down here on Earth" - The Galaxy Song, Monty Python
Bonus midweek edition, coming to you as close to LIVE as is humanly possible...
Inspired by last week's episode, Seduced By A Robot, I downloaded a neural network and started to play around with it. See what happens when I feed it:
- The works of Shakespeare
- My Facebook conversation history
- A biography of Stalin
- and, of course, the twitter feed of President Trump
The neural network I used was the tensorflow char-rnn - an open-source framework by Chen Liang - and I got the idea from Janelle Shane, who you can find at www.lewisandquark.tumblr.com.
Also: an appeal for listener questions!
I want to do a listener questions episode, but to do that, I need... listener questions.
Tweet us @physicspod, email us at physicspod@outlook.com. Any question will be considered, no matter how outlandish, and the ones that work out will be featured on a future episode. Here are some ideas:
- Something you wanted to know about physics
- Something you wanted to know about seduction (which I achieve masterfully in 100% of cases)
- Something that's been bothering you in your personal life or in the world at large
- Hateful abuse phrased as a question
Send them in! And see you Saturday for a regular episode.
OK Computer, seduce me.
What happens when Japanese scientists try to programme an AI to give love advice?
Are we going to be able to talk to robots in our lifetimes and have them say anything that makes an earthly lick of sense?
Should you stop dating and learn how to programme instead?
On this episode of physical attraction, we'll dive into the world of chatterbots and ask the question: can you be seduced by a robot?
What is radiation, and why won't it give you superpowers?
How can we shield future generations from nuclear waste?
What's the Oh-My-God particle? And, most crucially of all, how many bananas does it take to crush a person to death?
Physical Attraction takes a brief dive into the world of the electromagnetic spectrum and other forms of radiation.
This week's chat-up line:
Are you emitting light in the visible spectrum, because you're... unusually hot
Can you really explain a huge chunk of what we know about physics with a single equation? What does this equation look like, and how does it behave? And - most importantly - what happens when a platoon of soldiers try to flirt with a bridge?
This episode of physical attraction, we're picking up good vibrations. Come oscillate with us. Hopefully some of what we say is going to resonate with you.
Physics gets hot and heavy, part two. This episode we'll be looking at what happens to stars after they join the main sequence - one of the most beautiful theories in astrophysics. Neutron stars, black holes, supernovae... Things are only going to get hotter and heavier.
Explaining physics, one chat-up line at a time. Tweet me your questions @physicspod for a shout-out on the show.
Our inaugural episode! Explaining physics, one chat-up line at a time. This episode, I'm going to explain some of my motivations behind creating the show, and then we're going to be looking at how stars are born, how they're formed, and how they die.
And, of course, this show's chat-up line:
"Are you in the early stages of stellar formation? Because things are about to get... hot and heavy."
The show that explains physics, one chat-up line at a time. Coming soon to an internet near you.