Is the Bible true? Snooze... settled argument. Nothing new under the sun. Went sailing. Met Poseiden. Changed my whole operating system. Is Poseiden true? Talk amongst yourselves. Does literature have truth value? Poetry? Is it true? Difference between truth and wisdom?? Time for a nap.
That was AWESOME!! Up there at the top of list for best communucation and conversation from both of you. What a joy and priviledge to be witness to the exchange of ideas, growth of knowledge, and really good humor. Thank you Sam and Brian, you bring so much richness to our lives and learning.
Longtime benefactor of Brian Greene's brilliant perspectives on quantum physics and the state of reality and our interaction with it. Always grateful for his holistic, humane, and interogative approach.
"Fabric of the Cosmos" was the first physics book which clicked for me. The way he combined theory with experimental results and really clear explanations just made sense all of a sudden. PBS spacetime is amazing too. Got me through lockdown....
Didn't pangburn screw a bunch of speakers or something by not paying them? And is now releasing old videos as if they're new? I wonder if that all got sorted out
@@Micas099theres a clear pass scientists been whispering among themselves, but main stream cant stand it. Theres tone of good leads and ideas connected to multi universe theory. But it opens can of warms. Many uncomfortable questions, scientists dont wont to face.
"I don't care if Hunter Biden literally has children's bodies in his basement, provided covering up the story stops Donald Trump from becoming President". Sam Harris.
Frequent listener of Sam Harris' Making Sense podcast. Read both their books. Brian Greene's book is quite complex mathematically, despite the physicist's best effort in simplifying concepts for the laymen, whereas some of Sam's deep dive pieces on morality are complicated in terms of philosophical labyrinth. Thank you for merging great minds.
This is wonderful. My one critique is that it would be nice to have time stamps so one could revisit specific topics. However, this sharing is much appreciated. Thank you.
Brian Greene has hand and arm movement when he speaks Exactly i mean Exactly as my father did while he was alive. Every time i see Brian Greene it reminds me of my dad. Interestingly they come from the very same area of New York!
Also, lets remember. Everyone is built different, not to mention their unique work environments. Rational-thinking scientists are no exception. Some popular science educators are less comfortable offending Christians/Muslims than others. Sam is not afraid to wrestle in the mud, despite his calm demeanor whilst donning a smart, black suit. Others in a teaching positions in academia, say Professor Greene, may have religiously affiliated peers/students to contend with on weekdays, may be cautious of backlashes.
@@ssotkow "cautious of backlashes" Depends how much you want to hit people with that "carrot" - it is bound to get someone to hit back (hopefully proportionately and not loss of a job). The idea that atheism is so so *SO... clear in all its positions, would raise an eye brow🤨 from many atheists (not just theists)
Speaking from experience? No matter what, you're going to pick up a intellectual stink no matter where you go. Being brainwashed is something no one escapes, yourself included. The sooner you realize this, you gain the ability to choose what brainwash you get. What you think doesn't exist probably doesn't exist. That doesn't mean there is no God. I am really curious what it belief means. There are things I know to be true, like the earth is an oblate spheroid that revolves around the sun. I can't make myself believe the earth is a flat disk. Just like you know there is no God, I don't know if you can make yourself believe in God. I don't know if we have control over what we believe in.
@@alexb6695 what a nice idea.. if we have a lot of content then this will happen... for those who miss their loved ones and have enough content to feed the AI about how their loved ones spoke, their views on myriad topics.
So much to unpack in this extraordinary discussion. As to the question of free will it’s obvious that the vast majority of people believe they do have free will. Probably everyone in positions of power believe that. It’s not possible to change one’s mind about something that one’s experience supports. That is, we feel that we have free will, that we are freely making up our minds and choosing our behavior. That’s because our instincts, drives, appetites, thoughts and desires are all willed, freely willed from within us. So, we experience that as having free will. We don’t have free will but our wills are free, autonomous. In Chance and Necessity (1970), Jacques Monod, a physicist and microbiologist, writes, "…a living being's structure…owes almost nothing to the action of outside forces, but everything, from its overall shape down to its tiniest detail, to "morphogenetic" interactions within the object itself. It is thus a structure giving proof of an autonomous determinism: precise, rigorous, implying a virtually total 'freedom' with respect to outside agents or conditions - which are capable, to be sure, of impeding this development, but not of governing or guiding it, not of prescribing its organizational scheme to the living object." And also, "…it is in the structure of living molecules that one must see the ultimate source of the autonomy, or more precisely, the self-determination that characterizes living beings in their behavior." The knowledge that contradicts free will probably never be generally taught nor ever popularly accepted. What we want to believe trumps reality. And that is what inevitably leads us astray. For instance, the want/need to believe that communism can serve as a viable social system while it is blatantly obvious that its record has been and continues to be absolutely deplorable can only be attributed to a perception that one is innately confined to. That perennial perception can be catastrophically disruptive to a free society.
@@mattorr2256Traditionally philosophy has been exclusively associated with metaphysics. I much prefer philosophical thinking that refers to science. In the book I quoted above Jacques Monod examines certain ideological beliefs with respect to physics and in so doing reveals some of their delusions. Certain factions in the US seek to disregard science altogether claiming that their ideology is the arbiter of all things. For example, they have declared that there are more than two sexes and a man can become a woman.
1:38:47. Brian’s curiosity is legit. How did atomic particles create humans? The whole mechanism of how these subatomic particles have created humans over last 4 billion years is described in the book titled ‘Journey to Center of DNA’ ..it’s about the journey of these atomic particles into the DNA. A Noble Prize worthy research into evolution of life and living world. I thoroughly enjoyed the this fascinating read..
Apparently , our biological cells have dormant ancient pathways that still function when healthy cellular mitachondria become inefficient . Then , our cells make energy through fermentation of glucose/glutamine in order to survive .But such cells then grow in a dysregulated way .We call these growths , cancer . The pathways in cancer cells originated about 2 billion years ago (possibly in bacteria) and , unfortunately , still exist in our physiology today. P.s if you ever need to beat a cancerous growth ,adapt a keto diet that deprives the cancer cells of the glucose they need to exist.
"A significant number of Americans will say fuck your cosmology" was not a sentence I would ever have thought would make sense let alone been spot on...
Brian Greene does not encounter the problems that are faced by biologists. I suspect his views about the threats of religion to our understanding would be different if fundamentalist religions that subscribe to Genesis decided that it was blasphemous to assert that there is a limit to the speed of light.
He has addressed this before, he simply has a different approach. That said, quantum physics is harder to have an issue with if you are a fundamentalist because it is simply harder to understand. At their core...a fundamentalist will have issue with anyone who does not agree with their interpretation of their religion. That difference doesn't have to be sciences, it could simply be something like 'secular music is good'...in Saudi Arabia you can go to jail for playing a guitar or even owning one.
The concise answer to Sam's first question would be, for me, that we strive. We strive to discover and learn. There must be questions that only our species, on this earthly plane, wish to answer and are even aware of. There may of course be many that we haven't thought of, not yet at least.
I HAVE NEVER BOUGHT ALL PUBLISHED BOOKS BY ANY SINGLE PHYSICIST OTHER THAN BRIAN... I HATE READING BOOKS EVER SINCE, AND YET I LOVE ALL HIS BOOKS... HIGHLY RECOMMENDED ❤❤❤ (all caps)
Im exactly the same. Never brought a book in my life until i purchased brians book called why does e=mc² and it was brilliant. It so clearly broke everything down into such an understandable way that even i could understand it. Hes such an excellent communicator of science.
Perhaps we should understand that skepticism is the lynchpin of science, and science is actually an advanced and revolutionary ideology. Thanks for your work.
Agree! Now read the comment section and feel your faith in humanity crumble. Can't believe what I'm reading. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Thank you for your sensible and positive comment! 😊
All biological creatures (of necessity, and for survival), from the simplest amoeba to the most advanced human are simply pattern recognition machines (some with a more elaborate form of communication than others). But nothing said so far (up to 11:53) falls outside that. We just have more advanced tools for exploring patterns than other biological creatures. But all of these tools must serve some adaptive purpose or we would not be discovering them. Some of these tools will allow a form of evolutionary progress not achievable without them. But it's all Darwinian evolution. Darwin all the way down. I don't think we have reached the point where we are outside of that yet. Now AI adds a whole interesting new twist to this because of what Mustafa Suleyman said recently in a TED talk: AI is just us. All of humanity distilled down into a tool we can interact with. Presumably it will be either the best of us, or the worst of us (or possibly both), but the evolutionary advantage it provides if we train on "the best of us" will be, I believe, exponentially accelerating in terms of evolution.
I think intelligent life would be extremely rare, just 50 interchangeable factors that lead to intelligent life ends up at something like 8x10 to the power of 60. The number of atoms in the earth is basically zero compared to that number. Intelligent life is very special. And here we are on the cusp of immortality, fighting over holy rocks and lines in the sand.
Existence is time. Change is flow of time. When there is a sub system of the universe that is cyclic, only then we can measure the rate of flow of time with the resolution of period of the cycle or fractions there of. Time only flows in one direction - before to after. When universe reaches an equilibrium and where the entropy is maximum, as long as there is change in configs time still flows. NOTE: I am talking about time of physics - not psychological time that humans perceive.
Around 41:00 Brian says that in the current funding environment it is hard to build a particle accelerator of the size of a galaxy (duh of course), but misses the same point of funding about String theory. The point is not that String theory is still young because the issues it is dealing with are difficult, and will eventually give us some good results. The issue is that of funding. String theory had dominated the physics community and gobbled up majority of the available funding for extended period of time. This was done at the expense of other promising theories. Also some String theorists behaved like gatekeepers and prevented other theories from getting funding. Eric Wienstein rants about this all the time, to the point of being annoying itself, but has the core truth in it. That is the point Brian is missing, may be even intentionally ignoring as he is a member of String theory community. Maybe the time has come for String theory to take a back seat for a while, give other theories a chance to flourish and come back for a second bite at the apple in 30 years.
I never thought there was any paradox in Fermi’s statement. Brian’s “ant” analogy has to be a possibility. The 150 lya v 92 billion lya gotta rate up there too….
When Brian is talking about how he doesn't agree with how many atheists attack theists, or otherwise aggressively defending their positions, instead choosing a more peaceful approach.......Brian reminds of a parent who is about to have their first child, and he talks about how he will never get angry with their child and he will always be understanding and will gladly answer all his child's questions..... And Sam, who already has 4 children, who are now adults, and Sam is looking at Brian, slowly shaking his head thinking...."This man has no idea what he's talking about. He will soon realize the folly of such beliefs." There are some theists out there where peaceful interactions are not just impossible, but they aren't deserved by these theists. Dealing with willfully ignorant people is very taxing. And there are only so many times you can hear things like..... "Evolution is only a theory, not a fact.". Or..."God is going to send you to hell for eternity, but he loves you.". ....and not eventually lose your cool.
@@tonycucca4499 All that typing? lol Oh yeah, all that typing. It must've taken a whole 3 minutes to type. My hands were all cramping up. I don't know how I do it! I'm curious......Have you said those things I mentioned in my comment? Is that what's got you so sensitive?
@@tonycucca4499 I just want to point out something that's really REALLY bothering me. And this doesn't really have anything to do with you tonycucca4499. And this comment will be a long one, certainly by your standards. Read it......Don't read it. I don't really care, I just need to vent for a minute. It has to do with TH-cam, and how much I am hating this site more and more as time goes on. It has to be run by absolutely incompetent people. My comment to you tony was not entirely the comment I had intended. Basically, you called my comment st***d. And by all means, you are allowed your opinions. I essentially called your comment st***d right back, for the reasons that I put in my first response to you. Yet, for some unfathomable reason, my comment would be immediately flagged every time I would try to send it. This confused me. Certainly it wouldn't flag a comment for using the word st***d, of all things, would it? Not to mention, it was used by tony in his comment which was obviously not flagged and removed. So why do they continue to remove my comment? And that is the big problem. It is TH-cam's ridiculously unfair and extremely vague rules and policies. What gets one person flagged, others will get away with. It's making me despise a site that I've been a huge fan of for many years.
@@tonycucca4499 What spot on deduction skills you have. You nailed it. Because I'm annoyed at TH-cam's perplexing ways......clearly it was because I wasn't hugged enough as a child. What brilliance. lol You know, for someone who thought my first comment was st***d, you have done nothing but surpass that st***dity with every comment you make.
Regarding the topic of visitation from aliens, at 15:57 ts, why isn't the factor of time introduced early in the conversation? Most, if not all of the discussions I have encountered on the topic seem to consider the topic under the assumption that if an intelligent lifeform ever came about, that it persisted into our time window, and of course that it had mastered inter-solar system travel. We have been able to look for alien life for not even the time of an eyeblink in cosmological scales. But more importantly, I certainly consider it likely that other intelligent and exoplanetary capable lifeforms have been and will be present sprinkled throughout the universe, but we must consider that this is a space-time continuum. So then the major consideration is the length of time and the time window in which such lifeforms had the capability of exoplanetary travel, and more importantly capable of travel beyond the solar system or galactic area in which they developed. It is for that reason that I think it highly unlikely that we will EVER be contacted by an alien lifeform, unless our species, in whatever form, persists for relevant cosmological time periods, i.e. millions of solar years, if not hundreds of millions. As a youth I read copious amounts of science fiction, and dreamed of being contacted by aliens and of visiting their world(s). And I still love the idea. But I consider it a phantasy because of the scale of the space-time continuum. Lot of time left in their conversation, and hopefully this aspect will be touched on.
Its an honour and a privilege for everyone. Thank you for sharing. The flip side…. Is the more you know the more you are responsible. Assume you know nothing, and assume complete responsibility for yourself. Everyone everything will fall into place. None of which will be an outcome of our design. Just do what needs doing. Love you guys. Jeremy
Had the following thought with respect to the vegan question and the question of free will; If it is not by free will that one chooses to be vegan or to remain a carnivore it seems ludicrous for vegans to preach to meat eaters that they should choose to be like them.
If consciousness is a quantum mechanical process, which many like Sir Roger Penrose thinks it is, and in reality it is rather unreasonable to think its not, then it actually DOES play a role, a rather simple and reasonable role at that, in the notion of taking measurement, without having to insert some wu-wa into the mix. It may not be essential, but the process of consciousness simply might be another tool the universe uses to achieve decoherence and make sure the wave function collapses. Otherwise conscious beings might be able to see the whole wave function, which the universe prohibits. It's probably just some complex iteration of entanglement between the whole system of consciousness and everything it interacts with.
All the answers to all the questions can be discovered within. The fundamental invisible force that moves the universe, flows within each human being. What's missing is the conscious recognition of this awesome power. Be quiet, stay still and feel the magic flowing in every moment.
Magic? Magic by all scientific means is nonexistent or does not occur in any way in nature. Perhaps you mean something other than “magic” but just realize we have never discovered anything magical in nature. Quantum particles can do spooky, nonsensical phenomena and act in ways that cannot be explained but that does not mean it is magic.
Maybe you mean the energy flowing through everything. The quantum connections with all other quantum particles in all other matter. The electromagnetic spectrum interacting with all surrounding matter? Quantum mechanics gets eerily close to magic but it cannot be. Magic is something that happens aside from nature. It is a supernatural phenomenon. Magic in this sense does not exist.
On the right car driving age. Couldn't we if we somehow had the ability, take all the possible arguments for each age (that's most likely to be around the right age to allow driving) and then analyze all those propositions which would in many cases will be based on values or what is important. Which then would have separate propositions for why a certain value is more important then another. If you go far enough to evaluate all of those if only we could and then we could "solve" , this is more important then that and somehow come to a score. That would than give us what age would be better or worse even when we are at the blurry zone rather than at the extremes where it's clear what's worse or better. So could we not somehow solve the blurryness closer at the place where the best possible ages for allowing driving exist, if only we had the reasoning power to analyze all arguments and then assign scores to which value is more important is more important and wherever it all took us to figure out a right age. Isn't it just that it's currently too much to figure out rather than there is best answer or rather than it's merely arbitrary
"You can't test it? You can't even think of a way it could feasibly be tested? Ok... let's park that for now then." I don't understand why this isn't the aproach to string theory. Go and do something useful.
To solve the Fermi Paradox, remember how long it takes light to reach us from "out there", we are seeing the past not the present when we look "out there". Where were we that long ago?
What about if aliens know about earth ,but don't visit because their bodies have advanced immune systems that they know we don't have .For example , they may not want to infect us with some sort of "hyper covid " virus that they know could wipe us out......The same way humans wouldn't visit some rare Amazonian Tribe if we knew they didn't have vaccines from measles , flu etc. .
Around 50:00 Brian talks about ultimately the reading from the instrument doing the measurement of a quantum state needs to be seen by some conscious agent and thus some may think consciousness has some role. That is a very misleading analysis. There is a confusion between three events: - event E1 where a instrument (say a video camera) makes a measurement on a quantum state to make it collapse and records the reading - event E2 when a conscious entity - say Alice reads that recorded reading and groks what it was. Note this can happen 10 years later and 1 billion miles away. - event E3 when a conscious entity - say Bob reads that recorded reading and groks what it was. Note this can happen 20 years later and 2 billion miles away. sure. But Event E1 is when the collapse happened. The lab may even have been destroyed the next day after the instrument with recorded reading was taken out and sent first to Alice and then to Bob. What does it even mean to talk about Alice collapsing the quantum state after 10 years, when the lab was destroyed the next day. That is absurd. E1 is not the same as E2 E1 is not the same as E3 E2 is not the same as E3 but the measurement only happened at E1 and the quantum state collapsed then. So this shows us that a instrument like a video camera - which every one will agree collapsed the wave function. Sure a macroscopic, conscious entity present in the lab could have done the "measurement" to collapse the wave function, but not because it is conscious, but because it is macroscopic. The labs that develop quantum computers do not shield the quantum state from consciousness of human lab personnel. They put the quantum state in vaccum separated from air molecules lest they will destroy it. So, can we please stop bringing in consciousness into Quantum Physics context from now on?
@w.f.4287 IKR. I can not believe how many lay people, and worse, even scientists think that consciousness is required to cause the collapse of wave function. As such, I could care less, but people like Deepak Chopra love to conflate consciousness with quantum mechanics. I do not want to give that crowd to coopt science.
The universe and life didn't exist before we were born, right? From our prospective. It only exists because we are here talking about it. Eventually when we die we will be non existent again and from our prospective there will be nothing. Life has given us a window into reality for a very limited amount of time! Some would say, in a blink of an eye.
If intelligent life never evolved, then no one would be asking this question. Fish and other animals just live and die without questioning why there was something rather than nothing. Just like stars are born and eventually die or atoms react with other chemicals and turn into something completely different. They are going through the motions or processes. I guess consiousness is the difference. Only we are questioning our place in the universe.
I was just thinking aloud 😊. Yes I will answer your question. To come at it at a different angle. Mabe there is no such thing as nothing. After all "nothing" is a human word to describe emptiness. "Nothing" doesn't really doesn't exist in the universe. The word is used to describe situations in our everyday lives. Not the fabric of reality or what reality is made of. Perhaps it's a language thing.
I suppose it comes down to our anthropocentric view of everything. We are trying to describe things from a viewpoint that is only relevant to our everyday lives. Something or nothing is how we describe things around us, and is useful and necessary for us to navigate our lives. It's not really relevant to describe reality or why we are here. I think it is immensely more complicated and we are unable to describe it using classical thinking.
Perhaps the limits of our individual imagination and intellect, explains why we get caught off guard by grand human innovation because it is the result of collective human effort, and this is harder to individually imagine and comprehend.
A question. If the primary function of every form of life known is to evolve, what is the ultimate purpose. A tool, a weapon, reproduction? Is there evidence of design. Or is it simply the mindless play of enthalpy verses entropy.
Perhaps there doesn’t need to be a purpose. Perhaps existence is just that- existence. Perhaps there is no meaning or purpose. This situation is not hard to fathom if you remove certain other distractors that exist
Why must we look for evidence of design. If the earth was designed then the designer is a derelict of their duties. Millions of children die horrifically every single day due to a myriad of factors. Poverty is the main reason. A designer that designed this to happen with this much unnecessary death of children that have no choice on the matter is a do nothing designer. The designer designed, then the designer left to design something else. If it is designed, the designer is terrible and should be discarded as anything other than a lunatic
I think it has to do with the fact that pangburn hasn’t made any new content in… I mean it honestly feels like over a year or even years. They release clips and excerpts of the same two talks over and over and over. They post the clips a bit dishonestly too with extremely click baity titles. I think it discourages fresh organic comments and it basically just leaves a dead cess pool of bots.
-GR & QM can’t mesh? -views on Double slit? -Nobel prize guy proving SPACE time is dead??? -consciousness fundamental? ^plz discuss why or why not…or SOMETHING new (at least)
Evolution oozes Truth and Knowledge. Otherwise, prey goes uneaten, and hunters go hungry. So, Sam is wrong at saying that knowledge is unexpected if we start with Evolution.
I agree with the guy who says its impossible for us to meet aliens we couldn't understand. Theres a difference between us and dogs, ants etc. We understand our place in the world, they dont. They dont understand what intelligence even is, let alone how intelligent they are compared to us. We do.
44:33 "essentially everything that can possibly happen - happens somewhere" "if it's compatible with the laws of physics" ERROR: "Laws of physics" are written📜 ✒by what? The scientific rules 🔢themselves could change in an alternate universe
@@mattorr2256 "theoretically" yes. We don't even know if the laws would completely change in such an alternative universe. Maybe we could presuppose that the only multi-universal constant is logical consistency.
Jesus Christ messiah. Defined: Jesus, annointed messenger. I'm Ron Christ Massiah, you're Sam... We are a divine race. It all got very convoluted didn't it? There are answers. It's the side eye that gets in the way.
JOIN US IN NYC ON JUNE 1st for ALEX O'CONNOR vs DINESH D'SOUZA on "IS THE BIBLE TRUE?"
Tickets available here: www.pang-burn.com/tickets
D'Souza is a masochist. He gets slaughtered in every debate.
damn I wish I still lived there 😢
Is the Bible true? Snooze... settled argument. Nothing new under the sun.
Went sailing. Met Poseiden. Changed my whole operating system.
Is Poseiden true? Talk amongst yourselves.
Does literature have truth value? Poetry? Is it true?
Difference between truth and wisdom??
Time for a nap.
D'Sousa? Really? Isn't he a convicted felon?
Bla bla bla
That was AWESOME!! Up there at the top of list for best communucation and conversation from both of you. What a joy and priviledge to be witness to the exchange of ideas, growth of knowledge, and really good humor. Thank you Sam and Brian, you bring so much richness to our lives and learning.
Longtime benefactor of Brian Greene's brilliant perspectives on quantum physics and the state of reality and our interaction with it. Always grateful for his holistic, humane, and interogative approach.
Brian Greene really inspires me to learn more about math and physics.
Seems so elegant how things work in this realm.
"Fabric of the Cosmos" was the first physics book which clicked for me. The way he combined theory with experimental results and really clear explanations just made sense all of a sudden. PBS spacetime is amazing too. Got me through lockdown....
Try his book, "The Elegant Universe"
Truly miss conversations and discussions like this. A dying breed.
Not looking and engaging in the right place
@@thebritishbushman8389 agreed
Didn't pangburn screw a bunch of speakers or something by not paying them? And is now releasing old videos as if they're new? I wonder if that all got sorted out
Conversation is brilliant and comment section is awesome.
Brilliant format. You’ve found something with it. More more more videos like this please. Keep up the good work. Respect
So good to hear Dr Harris talk about something that isn’t religion. And so good to get these two people together for a chat. We are lucky.
This talk was around 5-6 years ago.
@@FISHDINHO And in the meantime, it looks like string theory isn't all that was hoped for. Seems to me that progress in physics is hitting a wall.
@@Micas099theres a clear pass scientists been whispering among themselves, but main stream cant stand it.
Theres tone of good leads and ideas connected to multi universe theory. But it opens can of warms. Many uncomfortable questions, scientists dont wont to face.
He leads great meditations
"I don't care if Hunter Biden literally has children's bodies in his basement, provided covering up the story stops Donald Trump from becoming President". Sam Harris.
Frequent listener of Sam Harris' Making Sense podcast. Read both their books. Brian Greene's book is quite complex mathematically, despite the physicist's best effort in simplifying concepts for the laymen, whereas some of Sam's deep dive pieces on morality are complicated in terms of philosophical labyrinth. Thank you for merging great minds.
My neighbor leaned over our yard fence and stated, "I did not come from apes" while eating a banana.
I scratched my armpits while contemplating your comment.
Did you remind him that he and apes came from the same ancestor?
And that ancestor looked a hell of a lot like an ape
Was he wearing a maga hat?
@@swank1563 We humans and apes are all considered Great Apes or hominids.
This is wonderful. My one critique is that it would be nice to have time stamps so one could revisit specific topics. However, this sharing is much appreciated. Thank you.
Absolutely loving this discussion of time. I am very interested in understanding time more effectively. Thank you to these men.
Absolutely love both of these guys, and appreciate the discussion, but I didn't think they really meshed as well as I thought they would.
Excellent. It’s so much fun to mute and watch Brian’s hands! Same message!
Brian Greene has hand and arm movement when he speaks Exactly i mean Exactly as my father did while he was alive. Every time i see Brian Greene it reminds me of my dad. Interestingly they come from the very same area of New York!
As an atheist since age 13, I agree Dr. Harris. "You can only hit so hard with a carrot." Most people are just too brainwashed to reason with.
Also, lets remember. Everyone is built different, not to mention their unique work environments. Rational-thinking scientists are no exception. Some popular science educators are less comfortable offending Christians/Muslims than others. Sam is not afraid to wrestle in the mud, despite his calm demeanor whilst donning a smart, black suit. Others in a teaching positions in academia, say Professor Greene, may have religiously affiliated peers/students to contend with on weekdays, may be cautious of backlashes.
You should stop listening to jews
@@ssotkow "cautious of backlashes" Depends how much you want to hit people with that "carrot" - it is bound to get someone to hit back (hopefully proportionately and not loss of a job). The idea that atheism is so so *SO... clear in all its positions, would raise an eye brow🤨 from many atheists (not just theists)
Speaking from experience? No matter what, you're going to pick up a intellectual stink no matter where you go. Being brainwashed is something no one escapes, yourself included. The sooner you realize this, you gain the ability to choose what brainwash you get. What you think doesn't exist probably doesn't exist. That doesn't mean there is no God. I am really curious what it belief means. There are things I know to be true, like the earth is an oblate spheroid that revolves around the sun. I can't make myself believe the earth is a flat disk. Just like you know there is no God, I don't know if you can make yourself believe in God. I don't know if we have control over what we believe in.
As a university lecturer I can attest to the backlash potential. Depts are vigilant and context can be lost in the retelling of a so-called incident.
I can't ever get to watch a discussion between Plato and Newton... but this will do just fine
Hehe. Love that. Me too
Diogenes and George Carlin.
AI may, give an idea. Hmmm.. i never thought about it before. Ask AI to creat conversation between famous philosophers.😊
@@alexb6695 what a nice idea.. if we have a lot of content then this will happen... for those who miss their loved ones and have enough content to feed the AI about how their loved ones spoke, their views on myriad topics.
Great comment.
So much to unpack in this extraordinary discussion.
As to the question of free will it’s obvious that the vast majority of people believe they do have free will. Probably everyone in positions of power believe that. It’s not possible to change one’s mind about something that one’s experience supports. That is, we feel that we have free will, that we are freely making up our minds and choosing our behavior.
That’s because our instincts, drives, appetites, thoughts and desires are all willed, freely willed from within us. So, we experience that as having free will. We don’t have free will but our wills are free, autonomous.
In Chance and Necessity (1970), Jacques Monod, a physicist and microbiologist, writes, "…a living being's structure…owes almost nothing to the action of outside forces, but everything, from its overall shape down to its tiniest detail, to "morphogenetic" interactions within the object itself. It is thus a structure giving proof of an autonomous determinism: precise, rigorous, implying a virtually total 'freedom' with respect to outside agents or conditions - which are capable, to be sure, of impeding this development, but not of governing or guiding it, not of prescribing its organizational scheme to the living object." And also, "…it is in the structure of living molecules that one must see the ultimate source of the autonomy, or more precisely, the self-determination that characterizes living beings in their behavior."
The knowledge that contradicts free will probably never be generally taught nor ever popularly accepted.
What we want to believe trumps reality. And that is what inevitably leads us astray.
For instance, the want/need to believe that communism can serve as a viable social system while it is blatantly obvious that its record has been and continues to be absolutely deplorable can only be attributed to a perception that one is innately confined to.
That perennial perception can be catastrophically disruptive to a free society.
Wow. That is some deep, deep thinking here. Now that is a philosophy topic…
@@mattorr2256Traditionally philosophy has been exclusively associated with metaphysics. I much prefer philosophical thinking that refers to science. In the book I quoted above Jacques Monod examines certain ideological beliefs with respect to physics and in so doing reveals some of their delusions.
Certain factions in the US seek to disregard science altogether claiming that their ideology is the arbiter of all things. For example, they have declared that there are more than two sexes and a man can become a woman.
1:38:47. Brian’s curiosity is legit. How did atomic particles create humans? The whole mechanism of how these subatomic particles have created humans over last 4 billion years is described in the book titled ‘Journey to Center of DNA’ ..it’s about the journey of these atomic particles into the DNA. A Noble Prize worthy research into evolution of life and living world. I thoroughly enjoyed the this fascinating read..
Apparently , our biological cells have dormant ancient pathways that still function when healthy cellular mitachondria become inefficient . Then , our cells make energy through fermentation of glucose/glutamine in order to survive .But such cells then grow in a dysregulated way .We call these growths , cancer . The pathways in cancer cells originated about 2 billion years ago (possibly in bacteria) and , unfortunately , still exist in our physiology today. P.s if you ever need to beat a cancerous growth ,adapt a keto diet that deprives the cancer cells of the glucose they need to exist.
"A significant number of Americans will say fuck your cosmology" was not a sentence I would ever have thought would make sense let alone been spot on...
Brian Greene does not encounter the problems that are faced by biologists. I suspect his views about the threats of religion to our understanding would be different if fundamentalist religions that subscribe to Genesis decided that it was blasphemous to assert that there is a limit to the speed of light.
Well some of them belive the earth was created 4000 years ago
He has addressed this before, he simply has a different approach.
That said, quantum physics is harder to have an issue with if you are a fundamentalist because it is simply harder to understand.
At their core...a fundamentalist will have issue with anyone who does not agree with their interpretation of their religion. That difference doesn't have to be sciences, it could simply be something like 'secular music is good'...in Saudi Arabia you can go to jail for playing a guitar or even owning one.
The concise answer to Sam's first question would be, for me, that we strive. We strive to discover and learn. There must be questions that only our species, on this earthly plane, wish to answer and are even aware of. There may of course be many that we haven't thought of, not yet at least.
Oh man. Thank you! Fantastic conversation
Fascinating conversation. Thanks.
BOTH THESE GUYS ARE AWESOME! Love to hear them speak!
Please can someon timestamp this conversation in order of topics 🙏🙏❤️🥺
I knew this conversation would be intelligent, I didn't know it would be this humorous.
Sam Harris elegantly offers a logical presentation of what is known versus what is believed without any evidence.
this says it was uploaded a month ago, isnt this from a few years ago?
yeah, it looks like they posted the same video with higher quality 5 years ago...
I HAVE NEVER BOUGHT ALL PUBLISHED BOOKS BY ANY SINGLE PHYSICIST OTHER THAN BRIAN... I HATE READING BOOKS EVER SINCE, AND YET I LOVE ALL HIS BOOKS... HIGHLY RECOMMENDED ❤❤❤ (all caps)
Im exactly the same. Never brought a book in my life until i purchased brians book called why does e=mc² and it was brilliant. It so clearly broke everything down into such an understandable way that even i could understand it. Hes such an excellent communicator of science.
Perhaps we should understand that skepticism is the lynchpin of science, and science is actually an advanced and revolutionary ideology.
Thanks for your work.
Brilliant conversation ! Thanks !
Agree! Now read the comment section and feel your faith in humanity crumble. Can't believe what I'm reading. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Thank you for your sensible and positive comment! 😊
@@darktower0603 😭😭😭
All biological creatures (of necessity, and for survival), from the simplest amoeba to the most advanced human are simply pattern recognition machines (some with a more elaborate form of communication than others). But nothing said so far (up to 11:53) falls outside that. We just have more advanced tools for exploring patterns than other biological creatures. But all of these tools must serve some adaptive purpose or we would not be discovering them. Some of these tools will allow a form of evolutionary progress not achievable without them. But it's all Darwinian evolution. Darwin all the way down. I don't think we have reached the point where we are outside of that yet. Now AI adds a whole interesting new twist to this because of what Mustafa Suleyman said recently in a TED talk: AI is just us. All of humanity distilled down into a tool we can interact with. Presumably it will be either the best of us, or the worst of us (or possibly both), but the evolutionary advantage it provides if we train on "the best of us" will be, I believe, exponentially accelerating in terms of evolution.
Love Brian. But just realizing what a fun and learned fellow Sam is too.
I think intelligent life would be extremely rare, just 50 interchangeable factors that lead to intelligent life ends up at something like 8x10 to the power of 60. The number of atoms in the earth is basically zero compared to that number. Intelligent life is very special. And here we are on the cusp of immortality, fighting over holy rocks and lines in the sand.
Great respect. Imagine, inform, enlighten.
Existence is time.
Change is flow of time.
When there is a sub system of the universe that is cyclic, only then we can measure the rate of flow of time with the resolution of period of the cycle or fractions there of.
Time only flows in one direction - before to after.
When universe reaches an equilibrium and where the entropy is maximum, as long as there is change in configs time still flows.
NOTE: I am talking about time of physics - not psychological time that humans perceive.
Damn. That got me thinking
Around 41:00 Brian says that in the current funding environment it is hard to build a particle accelerator of the size of a galaxy (duh of course), but misses the same point of funding about String theory. The point is not that String theory is still young because the issues it is dealing with are difficult, and will eventually give us some good results. The issue is that of funding. String theory had dominated the physics community and gobbled up majority of the available funding for extended period of time. This was done at the expense of other promising theories. Also some String theorists behaved like gatekeepers and prevented other theories from getting funding. Eric Wienstein rants about this all the time, to the point of being annoying itself, but has the core truth in it. That is the point Brian is missing, may be even intentionally ignoring as he is a member of String theory community. Maybe the time has come for String theory to take a back seat for a while, give other theories a chance to flourish and come back for a second bite at the apple in 30 years.
💯 agree!
Sam Harris the number one intellectual in the world.
Food for Thought. Thanks to you both.
Why can’t people not just ask their damn question:-)
I never thought there was any paradox in Fermi’s statement. Brian’s “ant” analogy has to be a possibility.
The 150 lya v 92 billion lya gotta rate up there too….
When Brian is talking about how he doesn't agree with how many atheists attack theists, or otherwise aggressively defending their positions, instead choosing a more peaceful approach.......Brian reminds of a parent who is about to have their first child, and he talks about how he will never get angry with their child and he will always be understanding and will gladly answer all his child's questions..... And Sam, who already has 4 children, who are now adults, and Sam is looking at Brian, slowly shaking his head thinking...."This man has no idea what he's talking about. He will soon realize the folly of such beliefs."
There are some theists out there where peaceful interactions are not just impossible, but they aren't deserved by these theists. Dealing with willfully ignorant people is very taxing. And there are only so many times you can hear things like..... "Evolution is only a theory, not a fact.". Or..."God is going to send you to hell for eternity, but he loves you.". ....and not eventually lose your cool.
All that typing just to say something so stupid
@@tonycucca4499 All that typing? lol Oh yeah, all that typing. It must've taken a whole 3 minutes to type. My hands were all cramping up. I don't know how I do it!
I'm curious......Have you said those things I mentioned in my comment? Is that what's got you so sensitive?
@@tonycucca4499 I just want to point out something that's really REALLY bothering me. And this doesn't really have anything to do with you tonycucca4499. And this comment will be a long one, certainly by your standards. Read it......Don't read it. I don't really care, I just need to vent for a minute. It has to do with TH-cam, and how much I am hating this site more and more as time goes on. It has to be run by absolutely incompetent people. My comment to you tony was not entirely the comment I had intended. Basically, you called my comment st***d. And by all means, you are allowed your opinions. I essentially called your comment st***d right back, for the reasons that I put in my first response to you. Yet, for some unfathomable reason, my comment would be immediately flagged every time I would try to send it. This confused me. Certainly it wouldn't flag a comment for using the word st***d, of all things, would it? Not to mention, it was used by tony in his comment which was obviously not flagged and removed. So why do they continue to remove my comment? And that is the big problem. It is TH-cam's ridiculously unfair and extremely vague rules and policies. What gets one person flagged, others will get away with. It's making me despise a site that I've been a huge fan of for many years.
@@jeremybr2020I don't think you were hugged enough as a child
@@tonycucca4499 What spot on deduction skills you have. You nailed it. Because I'm annoyed at TH-cam's perplexing ways......clearly it was because I wasn't hugged enough as a child. What brilliance. lol You know, for someone who thought my first comment was st***d, you have done nothing but surpass that st***dity with every comment you make.
This crowd will chuckle at anything
This conversation is like 7 years old.
Brian is compassionate and brilliant....
Regarding the topic of visitation from aliens, at 15:57 ts, why isn't the factor of time introduced early in the conversation? Most, if not all of the discussions I have encountered on the topic seem to consider the topic under the assumption that if an intelligent lifeform ever came about, that it persisted into our time window, and of course that it had mastered inter-solar system travel. We have been able to look for alien life for not even the time of an eyeblink in cosmological scales. But more importantly, I certainly consider it likely that other intelligent and exoplanetary capable lifeforms have been and will be present sprinkled throughout the universe, but we must consider that this is a space-time continuum. So then the major consideration is the length of time and the time window in which such lifeforms had the capability of exoplanetary travel, and more importantly capable of travel beyond the solar system or galactic area in which they developed. It is for that reason that I think it highly unlikely that we will EVER be contacted by an alien lifeform, unless our species, in whatever form, persists for relevant cosmological time periods, i.e. millions of solar years, if not hundreds of millions. As a youth I read copious amounts of science fiction, and dreamed of being contacted by aliens and of visiting their world(s). And I still love the idea. But I consider it a phantasy because of the scale of the space-time continuum. Lot of time left in their conversation, and hopefully this aspect will be touched on.
Why cant we see this in something better than 360p?
Its an honour and a privilege for everyone.
Thank you for sharing.
The flip side….
Is the more you know the more you are responsible.
Assume you know nothing, and assume complete responsibility for yourself.
Everyone everything will fall into place.
None of which will be an outcome of our design.
Just do what needs doing.
Love you guys.
Jeremy
I like it…
2 hours that flllleeww by!, love it.
Brilliant! Thank you!
Had the following thought with respect to the vegan question and the question of free will;
If it is not by free will that one chooses to be vegan or to remain a carnivore it seems ludicrous for vegans to preach to meat eaters that they should choose to be like them.
thank you for this ..
Sam humour is very under rated.
💯... his wit is quick!
Should it be ?
If consciousness is a quantum mechanical process, which many like Sir Roger Penrose thinks it is, and in reality it is rather unreasonable to think its not, then it actually DOES play a role, a rather simple and reasonable role at that, in the notion of taking measurement, without having to insert some wu-wa into the mix. It may not be essential, but the process of consciousness simply might be another tool the universe uses to achieve decoherence and make sure the wave function collapses. Otherwise conscious beings might be able to see the whole wave function, which the universe prohibits. It's probably just some complex iteration of entanglement between the whole system of consciousness and everything it interacts with.
Everything in existence is in some quantum state. Literally everything is composed of quantum particles. So this makes sense in my mind
The only free will is virtue.
Free will is the ability to override an impulse and nothing more.
All the answers to all the questions can be discovered within. The fundamental invisible force that moves the universe, flows within each human being. What's missing is the conscious recognition of this awesome power. Be quiet, stay still and feel the magic flowing in every moment.
Magic? Magic by all scientific means is nonexistent or does not occur in any way in nature. Perhaps you mean something other than “magic” but just realize we have never discovered anything magical in nature. Quantum particles can do spooky, nonsensical phenomena and act in ways that cannot be explained but that does not mean it is magic.
Maybe you mean the energy flowing through everything. The quantum connections with all other quantum particles in all other matter. The electromagnetic spectrum interacting with all surrounding matter? Quantum mechanics gets eerily close to magic but it cannot be. Magic is something that happens aside from nature. It is a supernatural phenomenon. Magic in this sense does not exist.
On the right car driving age. Couldn't we if we somehow had the ability, take all the possible arguments for each age (that's most likely to be around the right age to allow driving) and then analyze all those propositions which would in many cases will be based on values or what is important. Which then would have separate propositions for why a certain value is more important then another. If you go far enough to evaluate all of those if only we could and then we could "solve" , this is more important then that and somehow come to a score. That would than give us what age would be better or worse even when we are at the blurry zone rather than at the extremes where it's clear what's worse or better.
So could we not somehow solve the blurryness closer at the place where the best possible ages for allowing driving exist, if only we had the reasoning power to analyze all arguments and then assign scores to which value is more important is more important and wherever it all took us to figure out a right age. Isn't it just that it's currently too much to figure out rather than there is best answer or rather than it's merely arbitrary
The comment section = Dead Internet Theory
"You can't test it? You can't even think of a way it could feasibly be tested? Ok... let's park that for now then."
I don't understand why this isn't the aproach to string theory. Go and do something useful.
Thank you
To solve the Fermi Paradox, remember how long it takes light to reach us from "out there", we are seeing the past not the present when we look "out there". Where were we that long ago?
What about if aliens know about earth ,but don't visit because their bodies have advanced immune systems that they know we don't have .For example , they may not want to infect us with some sort of "hyper covid " virus that they know could wipe us out......The same way humans wouldn't visit some rare Amazonian Tribe if we knew they didn't have vaccines from measles , flu etc. .
Around 50:00 Brian talks about ultimately the reading from the instrument doing the measurement of a quantum state needs to be seen by some conscious agent and thus some may think consciousness has some role. That is a very misleading analysis. There is a confusion between three events:
- event E1 where a instrument (say a video camera) makes a measurement on a quantum state to make it collapse and records the reading
- event E2 when a conscious entity - say Alice reads that recorded reading and groks what it was. Note this can happen 10 years later and 1 billion miles away.
- event E3 when a conscious entity - say Bob reads that recorded reading and groks what it was. Note this can happen 20 years later and 2 billion miles away.
sure.
But Event E1 is when the collapse happened. The lab may even have been destroyed the next day after the instrument with recorded reading was taken out and sent first to Alice and then to Bob. What does it even mean to talk about Alice collapsing the quantum state after 10 years, when the lab was destroyed the next day. That is absurd.
E1 is not the same as E2
E1 is not the same as E3
E2 is not the same as E3
but the measurement only happened at E1 and the quantum state collapsed then.
So this shows us that a instrument like a video camera - which every one will agree collapsed the wave function.
Sure a macroscopic, conscious entity present in the lab could have done the "measurement" to collapse the wave function, but not because it is conscious, but because it is macroscopic.
The labs that develop quantum computers do not shield the quantum state from consciousness of human lab personnel. They put the quantum state in vaccum separated from air molecules lest they will destroy it.
So, can we please stop bringing in consciousness into Quantum Physics context from now on?
Wow! Wish you could have been there to pose this to Brian.
@w.f.4287 IKR. I can not believe how many lay people, and worse, even scientists think that consciousness is required to cause the collapse of wave function.
As such, I could care less, but people like Deepak Chopra love to conflate consciousness with quantum mechanics. I do not want to give that crowd to coopt science.
Why is "String Theory" called a theory when it's not testable. String Hypothesis is what it should be called.
exactly. except i think its called a theory more due to its math and physics proofs.
Need to be called horse shite
if it's testable , will no longer be a theory.
@@bornatona3954science ain’t bs
@@kennypowers1945 I agree but this isn't science...just fantasy covered by artificial formulas
Bloody brilliant Ngā mihi
Amazing
0:58:48 sounds like Green has been listening to Donalf Hoffman. (Hear him on Lex's and Sam' podcasts).
I nominate Brian Greene and Sean Carol to interact with other intelligent beings that have crossed space/time to visit Earth.
Imagine if leaders of the world could have these conversations
The universe and life didn't exist before we were born, right? From our prospective. It only exists because we are here talking about it. Eventually when we die we will be non existent again and from our prospective there will be nothing. Life has given us a window into reality for a very limited amount of time! Some would say, in a blink of an eye.
If we have a perspective that is separate from others can you really call that nothing. Isn't a perspective still a something?
If intelligent life never evolved, then no one would be asking this question. Fish and other animals just live and die without questioning why there was something rather than nothing. Just like stars are born and eventually die or atoms react with other chemicals and turn into something completely different. They are going through the motions or processes. I guess consiousness is the difference. Only we are questioning our place in the universe.
@@Quantum3669 Yes, you already said that. how does that answer my question?
I was just thinking aloud 😊. Yes I will answer your question. To come at it at a different angle. Mabe there is no such thing as nothing. After all "nothing" is a human word to describe emptiness. "Nothing" doesn't really doesn't exist in the universe. The word is used to describe situations in our everyday lives. Not the fabric of reality or what reality is made of. Perhaps it's a language thing.
I suppose it comes down to our anthropocentric view of everything. We are trying to describe things from a viewpoint that is only relevant to our everyday lives. Something or nothing is how we describe things around us, and is useful and necessary for us to navigate our lives. It's not really relevant to describe reality or why we are here. I think it is immensely more complicated and we are unable to describe it using classical thinking.
I wonder how optimistic Brian is feeling today.
Would actively affecting perception extend to oneself body sensations?
Perhaps the limits of our individual imagination and intellect, explains why we get caught off guard by grand human innovation because it is the result of collective human effort, and this is harder to individually imagine and comprehend.
Yes Brian.
Yes. You are processing beautiful
Sam, spit it out already!
Sam and Brian remember carry thy comfort with Thee! Thank you for attending!
And there’s no need to use BOTH sides of the toilet paper.
Wish they’d just read written questions. Even when they say be brief these people can’t resist their big moment!
A question. If the primary function of every form of life known is to evolve, what is the ultimate purpose. A tool, a weapon, reproduction? Is there evidence of design. Or is it simply the mindless play of enthalpy verses entropy.
Perhaps there isn’t one?
Perhaps there doesn’t need to be a purpose. Perhaps existence is just that- existence. Perhaps there is no meaning or purpose. This situation is not hard to fathom if you remove certain other distractors that exist
Why must we look for evidence of design. If the earth was designed then the designer is a derelict of their duties. Millions of children die horrifically every single day due to a myriad of factors. Poverty is the main reason. A designer that designed this to happen with this much unnecessary death of children that have no choice on the matter is a do nothing designer. The designer designed, then the designer left to design something else. If it is designed, the designer is terrible and should be discarded as anything other than a lunatic
It's easy to say that, just as it is easy and known why we have not travelled to any other system or actually beyond our own yet.
prior causes has determined that i write these words here now.
i do hope you all have the drink you want to have in your hand right now too.
SH has never been funnier. “I’ve found you can only hit someone so hard with a carrot” is brilliant.
Funny to see the difference of the amount of gesturing of these two people. Brian a lot. Sam not so much.
So desperate for views he's reposting old videos with new and deceptive titles. Looks like nothing has changed.
Don’t worry my friend brian, i am stepping down, i already thought that
Are any of these comments real?
don't appear to be...looks like botwork
Finally, Ha! I had to scroll down a ways to find this, I was starting to doubt my sanity..
I think it has to do with the fact that pangburn hasn’t made any new content in… I mean it honestly feels like over a year or even years. They release clips and excerpts of the same two talks over and over and over. They post the clips a bit dishonestly too with extremely click baity titles. I think it discourages fresh organic comments and it basically just leaves a dead cess pool of bots.
@@ericgraham8150 good point. It's a shame. They had some really good content.
Superb!
Life, the universe and everything
-GR & QM can’t mesh?
-views on Double slit?
-Nobel prize guy proving SPACE time is dead???
-consciousness fundamental?
^plz discuss why or why not…or SOMETHING new (at least)
i guess the saying is then: "if no one is there to observe IT, did IT really happen"
Double a penny a day for a month doesn't give you a billion dollars or more. It's just over 5 million over a period of 30 days.
Evolution oozes Truth and Knowledge. Otherwise, prey goes uneaten, and hunters go hungry. So, Sam is wrong at saying that knowledge is unexpected if we start with Evolution.
Once you make every mistake possible you've arrived at the truth.
I agree with the guy who says its impossible for us to meet aliens we couldn't understand. Theres a difference between us and dogs, ants etc. We understand our place in the world, they dont. They dont understand what intelligence even is, let alone how intelligent they are compared to us. We do.
Do we? Do the dogs not know somewhat that we are smarter than they are? I’m not so sure
Even the smartest people in the world say, "but...yet." Take a shot every time B.G. says it.
Brian Greene secretly regretting joining this talk
44:33 "essentially everything that can possibly happen - happens somewhere" "if it's compatible with the laws of physics"
ERROR: "Laws of physics" are written📜 ✒by what? The scientific rules 🔢themselves could change in an alternate universe
Theoretically maybe. Only theoretically. We do not know this for certain
@@mattorr2256 "theoretically" yes. We don't even know if the laws would completely change in such an alternative universe. Maybe we could presuppose that the only multi-universal constant is logical consistency.
@@NPC-bs3pm ok… I like it.
Ironically, we observe both great scientific developments and anti scientific populism today.
Isn’t this really old?
Jesus Christ messiah. Defined: Jesus, annointed messenger. I'm Ron Christ Massiah, you're Sam... We are a divine race. It all got very convoluted didn't it? There are answers. It's the side eye that gets in the way.
Hey, Sam. The answer is 42.