Intro. [Recording date: September 24, 2024.]
Russ Roberts: Right this moment is September twenty fourth, 2024, and my visitor is physicist and writer Alan Lightman. That is Alan’s third look on EconTalk. He was final right here in April 2020 speaking about stardust, which means, faith, and science. His newest ebook and the subject for at the moment’s dialogue is The Miraculous from the Materials: Understanding the Wonders of Nature. Alan, welcome again to EconTalk.
Alan Lightman: Good to be again in your present, Russ.
Russ Roberts: Now, you write that you do not consider in miracles, however you do consider within the miraculous, and that is in your title, The Miraculous from the Materials. It is a beautiful title. Clarify that distinction for you between miracles and miraculous.
Alan Lightman: Effectively, for me, a miracle is one thing that contradicts the legal guidelines of nature as we perceive them. Usually, individuals who speak about miracles check with the intervention of God and the bodily world–or some supernatural being, the intervention into the bodily world. And naturally, the phrase ‘supernatural’ by itself already means past the pure or past something that human beings can clarify. So, that is what I imply by a miracle; and I do not consider in miracles.
However, by the miraculous, I imply the expertise of awe, the sweetness that we see on the earth, the super order, and particularly, visually extraordinary phenomena, which is what I speak about within the ebook. And, I really feel that I–and most of us are–are open to experiencing these extraordinary phenomena. And, that is what I imply by the miraculous. So, I believe that we will have a scientific worldview, which implies that we consider that the world is made out of–it follows pure law–but we will nonetheless be appreciative and open to those stunning phenomena.
Russ Roberts: And this ebook is a set of brief explanations and observations about such stunning visible phenomena. I believe everyone has their very own checklist. That is yours, presumably. And at one point–I can not keep in mind which, and there are issues like rainbows, flowers, capturing stars, and many others.–at one level, you talked about how, I believe it was spider webs, which one other chapter you simply talked about how all your youngsters or grandchildren will cease and look at a spider net. And, I lately, we did an episode on owls, and I discussed how my granddaughter loves owls. And I attempted to get all of my youngsters and now my granddaughter to be in awe of the pure world. By itself phrases. They have been all raised with some stage of Jewishness as nicely, spiritual perception, however I felt it was necessary to provide them simply that transcendent appreciation of magnificence.
And, simply, I am curious what your ideas are as a mum or dad and grandparent, as how you probably did that. And, by the way in which, none of my children are scientists. One among them studied science, however none of them grew to become scientists, not less than not but. I would not say that was my objective. I haven’t got a objective that my granddaughter change into an ornithologist or an skilled on owls. However, I am curious what your ideas are on that as a mum or dad and grandparent.
Alan Lightman: Effectively, I believe that the majority youngsters from my very own restricted expertise do have an awe and an appreciation of the pure world. So, I believe as a parent–and I’ve acquired 4 grandchildren as well–I believe that I simply wish to encourage that and I need them, my youngsters and grandchildren, to spend time in nature and simply to concentrate. I believe that the awe is pure, however we have to listen.
And, we do not actually listen as a lot on the earth at the moment as we used to due to the way in which that every part has been digitized. All of us have our smartphones and are these as an alternative of trying on the bushes and the sky and the water. And likewise, the tempo of the world has gotten so quick, pushed by the pace of communication that we do not take the time to only listen. And, I believe once we listen, the awe will come, however we have to make time to concentrate.
Russ Roberts: Now, some would argue that the rise of science within the final couple centuries has decreased the quantity of awe. Issues that have been earlier than thought-about, as you say, supernatural or spiritual divine, now some would argue that the magic has been dispelled as a result of now we perceive why these items happen–at least at some stage, I might stress. However, you argue the other within the ebook in quite a lot of locations, so clarify that.
Alan Lightman: Effectively, I believe which you could nonetheless discover awe in a pure phenomenon like a rainbow or a volcano or lightning or a spiderweb, even should you perceive the science behind it. I perceive how Saturn varieties its rings, and I encourage everyone to get a very good pair of binoculars or a small telescope and take a look at the rings of Saturn. And, I perceive how these rings kind by gravitational pull and angular momentum. However, each time I take a look at the rings of Saturn, I am simply blown away by the fantastic thing about them and the perfection.
So, I do not suppose that understanding, on this case scientific understanding, is incompatible with awe and appreciation of magnificence.
I do agree with you that science over the past couple of centuries has given explanations for a lot of phenomena that we did not beforehand perceive, however we nonetheless have an emotional response to those issues. After I go outdoors on a transparent evening and take a look at the celebrities, I understand how far-off a few of them are. I do know that stars are suns like our solar. Nevertheless it would not cut back the magnificent, the majesty of that view of an evening sky for me. That is an emotional response.
And I believe our emotional reactions–a complete set of emotions–come from a really historic a part of the mind, the amygdala. I am most likely mispronouncing it. And that is a really historic, primitive a part of the mind. And, we nonetheless react with that historic a part of our mind to the sweetness that we see round us. Even when now we have one other a part of the mind that has learn up on the most recent theories of diffraction and astronomy, that primitive a part of our mind, which is the seat of our feelings, continues to be lively. And, after all, I am very, very glad that it’s.
Russ Roberts: For me, I believe the data truly normally enhances the awe. I imply, should you consider the celebrities, I stay in Jerusalem–not a really industrial metropolis, however there’s enough gentle air pollution that there is solely a handful of stars are seen on a winter evening. If I head a pair hours south into the desert right here, you get a rare view of the Milky Manner. So, I like that after I’m trying on the skies right here in Jerusalem, I do know there is a richer tapestry to be loved.
And after I see that tapestry, the data that they don’t seem to be all equally removed from me is I discover so mind-blowing that even once we take a look at a constellation which seems to be prefer it’s representing one thing, once you understand that they don’t seem to be truly close to one another typically, perhaps nearly ever–I believe there is a handful–but most of them are very far aside. It is an phantasm that they appear to be they’re shut to one another. To me, it is like going from 2D to 3D, even after all we all know it is 3D [3 dimensions]. So, for me, it makes it higher for me.
Alan Lightman: Effectively, I agree with you that understanding and data has a great thing about its personal.
Russ Roberts: And also you write within the ebook very properly about being conscious of that, as human beings, is sort of extraordinary. Effectively, perhaps we’ll come again to that.
Russ Roberts: Let me ask a extra philosophical query. Are there limits to what we will perceive concerning the bodily world, the fabric? Clearly, we have made super progress over these centuries we’re speaking about; after all, we do not know why issues are the way in which they’re. We sort of have a facet of us that desires to know, I believe. However, understanding the bodily processes and the legal guidelines that produce these phenomena is a rare achievement in and of itself of the human thoughts, which as you level out, is simply this bizarre little set of neurons firing in a three-pound package deal, [?] a loopy concept that that may result in understanding the previous that we won’t observe straight in any respect or not less than would not really feel like we will. Are there limits to what we will perceive otherwise you suppose what we’ll perceive?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, I believe once you speak about understanding, we have to distinguish between the bodily world and perhaps you could possibly name it the ethical or moral world. There actually are boundaries to the province of science, and there are questions that–important questions–that do not lie inside science, like: Does God exist, or would we be happier if we lived to be a thousand years outdated, or is it moral to kill an enemy soldier in time of conflict? These are all crucial questions, however I believe they lie outdoors of science.
So, we’ll put these questions apart and simply speak concerning the bodily world, and ask the query: Are there limits to what science can know concerning the bodily world? And, I do not suppose that there are any limits, in precept. I view science as an extended challenge of getting higher and higher approximations to the way in which the pure world works. And, we do not have full data of how the world works bodily, however now we have very, excellent approximations. And, I believe that our approximations will get higher and higher.
There’s one other side of that query, and that’s whether or not science is the perfect device for understanding sure bodily phenomena.
And, after all, let’s take our feeling of appreciation for nature or our awe at trying up at an evening sky or our falling in love. So, all of these experiences are psychological sensations. And, I do consider, and I believe that the majority scientists agree with me, that every one psychological sensations are in the end based mostly within the bodily neurons of our mind and the chemical and electrical exchanges between them. So, I believe that every one of these experiences that I discussed, like falling in love, are in the end rooted within the bodily mind.
However, even should you wired up my mind to an enormous laptop that recorded the entire electrical exercise within the 100 billion neurons in my mind, you set all of that out on a chart, it nonetheless would not convey or characterize what I really feel after I search for on the evening sky and really feel a part of it–that feeling that I’ve. Though I consider that that feeling is in the end rooted within the materials mind. Science is simply not a very good device for capturing that feeling. That’s, the info of all of these neurons and what they’re doing would not actually seize the feeling and the sensation that I’ve.
Russ Roberts: Yeah, I believe the philosophical time period is qualia, which is a extremely pretentious approach, perhaps simply to say emotions, but–
Alan Lightman: Proper, qualia; sure, I find out about that time period.
Russ Roberts: However, the puzzle for me is: Why would we not count on science to unlock that? At one level, you talked about the emergent phenomena of the mind and consciousness, which we speak about each every now and then on this program–without a lot progress. However, in going past what I simply mentioned: Do you not suppose there shall be a, quote, “sufficiently big laptop”–a computing model of the mind that may enable us to foretell who you’d fall in love with or which evening sky would make you extra rapturous, and many others.? Do you suppose it is past our understanding? Is it a computing problem or is it a philosophical barrier?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, it relies on who you speak to. And I did speak to a neuroscientist at MIT [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] named Robert Desimone about simply this query, about whether or not a pc and a neuroscientist working collectively might ultimately predict who we might fall in love with. And, what he mentioned was it is a query of likelihood: that proper now we’re at a stage the place a neuroscientist working with AI [artificial intelligence] might most likely, in the event that they did sufficient interviews with you and examined your mind, they may most likely say, ‘Effectively, there is a 70% probability you fall in love with Mary and a 30% probability you may fall with Eileen.’ And he mentioned that these possibilities will most likely get increased and better because the know-how and because the neuroscience advances.
So, I believe that in precept that you just would possibly be capable of make such predictions with excessive likelihood, however nonetheless there’s the query: Does the pc seize the qualia? Does the pc seize the feeling of being in love? And, there was an excellent thinker named Thomas Nagel who wrote a ebook, “What Does it Really feel Prefer to Be a Bat?”
Russ Roberts: It is an essay. Yeah, it is an article.
Alan Lightman: Yeah, an essay. And, after all, he argues that in precept, we will by no means actually know what it feels wish to be one other organism. I imply, I do not know precisely what it feels wish to be you, Russ Roberts. I can take a look at your expressions and listen to what you need to say, and I can kind of evaluate that to my data [?] assist with the expressions that I make and the issues that I say, and conclude that you just most likely are feeling issues that I am feeling or that I can perceive. However, I do not know for positive what you are feeling. And I do not know what my spouse is feeling, for positive. I actually hope that she’s, more often than not she’s pleased with me and never sad with me. I imply, I suppose I agree with Thomas Nagel.
One very attention-grabbing query that has come up rather a lot recently–and actually because the introduction of ChatGPT [Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer] and the conclusion that computer systems are getting fairly smart–is a query of whether or not a pc can ever be aware. And naturally, you need to outline what you imply by consciousness, which is after all the elemental psychological sensation. And, my view, and I believe the view of many AI specialists, is that any finite checklist of attributes of consciousness which you could write down–like with the ability to acknowledge your self in a mirror, self-awareness, with the ability to plan for the future–any restricted checklist of manifestations of consciousness you may make that we’ll sometime, perhaps 10 years away or 20 years away, have a pc that can test all of the containers of manifestations of consciousness.
However that is not the identical as saying: Is the pc actually aware? And, to reply that query, you would need to know what it feels wish to be a pc. And, perhaps 100 years from now, we’ll all have silicon chips in our brains that make us part-computer and part-machine. And, then, we could begin understanding what it feels wish to be a pc. However we actually do not know now.
Russ Roberts: Yeah. I used to be in my first driverless automobile lately. I used to be picked up by a driverless automobile in San Francisco, which has these on the road. And, my joke I’ve used right here up to now is: I ponder if it has any regrets that it is not an electrical automated vacuum cleaner or Roomba. Does it sit and lengthy for it to be one thing, some different sort of laptop machine, generative machine? It is exhausting to think about.
I used to be serious about your love instance. Most of us would have bother remotely defining what it means to be in love. In its earliest manifestations, I might say it has a bodily correspondence to–I might typically get a abdomen ache serious about an individual and lacking her.
And, I believe as you keep longer with one particular person, there is a completely different set of bodily and naturally emotional reactions. And, how would you start to quantify? I imply, I do not know. A few of it appears to be past the purview of science.
Alan Lightman: Yeah, I might agree with that.
Russ Roberts: Let me ask you about physics. You could have a Ph.D. [Doctor of Philosophy] in physics. I do not know what your dissertation was on, however normally it is one thing you specialised. I am simply curious, given the enormously wide selection of phenomena on this ebook, how most of the explanations got here effortlessly to you, versus having to do analysis? A number of the smartest folks I’ve ever met are physicists. They don’t seem to be simply sensible although: they know about issues. Which, that is two various things. And if I say, ‘Why is that this such and such a approach?’ They normally have some concept, and it is sort of extraordinary. How’s that be just right for you on this ebook?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, the ebook has every kind of scientific explanations. A few of them come from the sector of biology, some from chemistry, some from physics. And, there have been, I do not know what fraction of chapters come from the world of physics, however the physics, I used to be capable of write the reasons and the understandings from my very own data. There have been fields that I used to be not very conversant in, like climate, and what makes the colours of a mandarinfish–which is chemistry and biology. And, for these, I had to do a little analysis. And, even after I did the analysis, I did not fully belief myself in fields that weren’t my very own. And I might speak to specialists in that space.
One of many nice privileges of dwelling within the Boston/Cambridge space, which is the place I stay, is that there are many specialists close by in nearly each topic. And, I’ve the privilege of understanding a few of them. So, I can decide up the telephone and ask somebody, ‘What are the the reason why the mandarinfish has these colours?’ and so forth.
So, after all, should you’re a scientist, you have got a sense for the entire sciences. You perceive logical arguments, you perceive quantitative arguments; however you could not know the small print and fields aside from your personal. And, I take a really humble method to this: that I can study from numerous completely different folks. And naturally, writing a ebook and writing a ebook, the issues that you just learn–and I do know you’ve got written some books yourself–the stuff you study within the analysis is without doubt one of the joys and pleasures of writing the ebook.
Russ Roberts: For positive. I used to be [?] going to say: my dad was a really curious man, and he was not an instructional. He would sometimes write folks within the Boston/Cambridge space, say, for info, and lots of of them would write again, which is very nice. After which, he would inform me they have been ‘on his employees’–they have been a part of the folks he might seek the advice of. And, I might simply add that the folks you are speaking about once you say ‘the specialists,’ they’re precise specialists. They’re individuals who truly do find out about these scientific phenomena.
I am curious if writing the ebook made you extra curious. Did it begin to, or the stuff you what the ebook that you just did not intend to as a result of one thing grabbed your eye?
Alan Lightman: Oh, yeah. It undoubtedly made me extra curious, and extra , and naturally extra conscious that there are zillions of extraordinary phenomena on the market, solely a small fraction of I perceive.
What began off the ebook is: I am a jogger, and I used to be operating by a area that I typically run by, and it was early within the morning. I believe it was most likely within the fall. And there was a good looking mist hanging over the sector that went up perhaps about six toes or one thing like that–this layer, this six-foot layer of mist hanging over the sector. And, I had seen such mists earlier than, and I knew that because it gotten hotter and the solar got here out, that they’d dissipate. And I started serious about why mists kind, and I noticed that I did not perceive all of it. I had some guesses, however I did not know for positive all the small print and what makes a mist kind. And, so, that is what began the ebook off. It was my very own curiosity.
Russ Roberts: Yeah. It is like my spouse requested me why resorts are so costly in New York. I’ve acquired a fairly good concept, however why they’ve gotten dearer as Airbnb has principally been eradicated from New York–is it as a result of resorts have been going to be constructed, would have been constructed, however due to Airbnb they weren’t? And now that Airbnb is gone, they’re–I do not know. So, I am after all semi-joking as a result of the data that economics brings to the world is restricted in comparison with, say, physics, however I will take what I can get.
Russ Roberts: Inform us what ball lightning is. I might by no means heard of that. And, it occurred to you as soon as. Clarify what that’s.
Alan Lightman: Effectively, that is a very good instance as a result of we do not actually totally perceive what ball lightning is. However, what causes it–but, the phenomenon itself happens normally throughout a thunderstorm. And, a shining ball varieties, that’s one thing like perhaps two toes or three toes in diameter, and strikes in a short time. And my very own expertise with it was that one summer season I used to be standing on the second ground deck of my home and a thunderstorm was simply letting up, and all of the sudden this shining ball got here at me. It glided by me and into the home and exploded with a bang. I imply, I believe it knocked out some electrical home equipment. And it moved in a short time. The whole phenomena, from the time I first noticed this ball to the time it exploded, was most likely solely about three seconds.
And so, there are numerous theories about what it’s. It is actually some sort of electrical energy. That’s, you most likely have the lightning and the thunderstorm most likely ionizes an remoted area of air–that is, it strips the electrons off the atoms: that is what ionization is. And it is electrically charged; however we do not actually know way more than that about it. It’s a uncommon phenomenon, nevertheless it’s actually extraordinary.
Russ Roberts: Within the film model, it will both be an alien or God speaking to you to get your consideration.
Russ Roberts: I count on that the bang was extraordinarily loud. Is that right?
Alan Lightman: Um, it wasn’t extraordinarily loud. It was loud. I suppose–you know, an attention-grabbing case was I believe I had written one thing about it. And there was a authorized case within the State of Tennessee that concerned ball lightning and somebody had had property harm, and one of many legal professionals within the case acquired in contact with me and requested me to explain what it was. And so, the truth that a lawyer that I did not know would name me up and requested me to be a witness, so to talk, instructed to me that it is a very, very uncommon phenomenon.
Russ Roberts: The explanation I ask is that I’ve by no means been struck by lightning, however I’ve heard it strike, quote, “close by.” Close by, which means perhaps 30 yards away. It is actually loud. And, I am curious: One–you did not write about this–one, why is it loud? And, secondly, when it fried your home equipment, did the ball lightning go away every other mark, bodily manifestation in your home? Like scar, like burn marks or–?
Alan Lightman: No, it did not. It did not go away something. It did not go away something like that.
Russ Roberts: Have been you alone?
Alan Lightman: I used to be alone.
Russ Roberts: Did you yell? Do you keep in mind?
Alan Lightman: I am fairly positive that my spouse was in the home, and I believe I did yell.
Russ Roberts: However, she heard both the bang or the yell or each?
Alan Lightman: Yeah, she heard one thing. She both heard it or noticed it as a result of she was one other spectator and confirmed my expertise. I imply, I believed perhaps I imagined the entire thing.
Russ Roberts: Certain. And, one of many conceits of–I am blanking. Oh, encounters of the–I can not even keep in mind the identify of it now. I believe it is Spielberg movie.
Alan Lightman: Encounters of the Third Variety.
Russ Roberts: Is that what it’s? I can not even keep in mind the identify now, however I believe one of many nice charms of that film is that should you truly did see aliens, folks wouldn’t deal with you kindly. And, I believe it might have been a comedy. I am positive there’ve been some comedies prefer it. However, a part of that film is watching how irritating and insufferable it will be to see one thing extraordinary that nobody believed you. And, what you simply described, a ball of sunshine coming via the sky and nearly hitting you and going into the home–I am glad your spouse heard the noise. That is all I’ll say.
Alan Lightman: Proper. Effectively, I hear you and I perceive what you are saying.
Russ Roberts: It is Shut Encounters of the Third Variety. That is the title, sorry.
Alan Lightman: Yeah, Shut Encounters of the Third Variety.
However, there are lots of people that declare to have seen UFOs [unidentified flying objects] and different kinds of supernatural phenomena. In fact, the UFO just isn’t supernatural, however there are folks that say that they noticed supernatural occasions. And, science requires that phenomena be repeatable with the intention to be plausible. I imply, there are specific exceptions to that just like the origin of our universe occurred solely as soon as, and but science nonetheless believes it as a result of there’s numerous proof and numerous fingerprints of that occasion.
However, the tactic of science is that one thing must be reproducible. It must be witnessed by multiple particular person, and so forth. That is simply the way in which that science works. It is a very conservative means of science. We’d like numerous proof to consider one thing. I believe there are each pluses and minuses to that method. However, on the entire, science has carried out very nicely for us civilized folks; and it has introduced us antibiotics and every kind of cell telephones and all the opposite components of our fashionable world has been delivered to us by science and know-how.
Russ Roberts: Do you have got a thought on why it is so loud, lightning, when it strikes, or when a bit of ball lightning ricochets off your eating room wall?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, after all, thunder–I imply, lightning is related to thunder. And, thunder, I am fairly positive is when there is a area of area the place there is a stress wave and it is first evacuated from air, after which the air rushes again in; and that is what makes the sound. I imply, in any case, sound is simply vibrating molecules of air. That is what sound is. So, it has one thing to do with eradicating the air from a area after which having it rush again in.
Russ Roberts: And, after all, we all know sound travels slower than gentle, so there is a delay there.
Alan Lightman: Sure, we see the lightning bolt first after which hear the sound.
Russ Roberts: I imply, does each lightning bolt have thunder? Typically we simply do not hear it?
Alan Lightman: No, I do not suppose so. I imply, I am not an skilled on lightning, however I do have a chapter of it within the ebook. However, I do not suppose that each lightning bolt has thunder related to it. And naturally, static electrical energy, which is expounded to lightning and all electrical phenomena, it would not have any sound in any respect related to it.
Russ Roberts: A pair locations within the ebook you speak concerning the position of shade in nature, and naturally, as human beings, we like–for no matter purpose, one other mystery–we like shade; and we like a mandarinfish. And, if you have not seen one of us, you should purchase Alan’s ebook or you could possibly cheat and Google Picture it. However, animals tend to concentrate on both being colourful or not colourful, and there is a Simply So story afterwards to attempt to perceive these two variations. However, these tales make sense.
However, one piece I struggled with–and I do know this however I do not perceive it–some animals use shade to sign that they are harmful as a result of they’re toxic. You speak about frogs; the mandarinfish is an instance, as a result of common shade would not make sense. There is a mating benefit typically, however generally, shade is expensive since you’re simply seen, and meaning your predators can see you.
How is it potential for a predator to study that you just’re harmful? As a result of, if I eat you and I die–
Alan Lightman: Then you definitely’re dead–
Russ Roberts: Yeah. That is downside primary. And, I even have very little–if I am a fish, there’s colleges of fish, however there’s not that many fish colleges the place child fish can study that mandarinfish are toxic and it is best to keep away. How does that work?
Alan Lightman: Yeah. Effectively, there are two methods it might work, and doubtless each of them function. One is that should you’re a predator and you are taking a small chew out of a mandarinfish–let’s simply say–and you get some poison that makes you very sick, that does not kill you, then you definitely would know to steer clear of fish that appear to be that sooner or later.
The opposite mechanism that most likely additionally operates is that as a matter of pure choice, that in case your ancestor fish–well, it must be half is identical as the primary example–that should you have been a predator of a mandarinfish and took a small chew that made you sick however did not kill you, then the descendants of yours, which had genes that acknowledged the mandarinfish as being harmful, that these fish would survive–that these predators would survive–and those that did not have the genetic make-up to be cautious of this explicit colourful fish would not survive.
So, I believe that pure choice operates, however I additionally suppose that most likely even with out going a number of generations and considering Darwinian evolution, that there are most likely some predators who’ve had dangerous experiences with mandarinfish and getting a little little bit of poison, however not sufficient to kill them.
Russ Roberts: And naturally, that may enable different fish to change into colourful imitating the toxic ones and free-riding on their–
Russ Roberts: Proper. If it really works that nicely.
Alan Lightman: Their adaptation, they’d adapt to that.
Russ Roberts: After which they may use it for mating or no matter.
Russ Roberts: Let’s transfer to a few of my favourite issues within the ebook that I realized, and I’ll ask you some follow-up questions. I by no means thought of it: Mount Everest is the very best mountain on the face of the earth. It is 29,000-plus toes. I used to be shocked to study it could not be a lot increased. Clarify. There might by no means be a 80,000-foot mountain on the earth and there are increased mountains than Everest on Mars. Why is that?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, I believe the reason being associated to why glaciers can transfer. That’s, because the mountain will get increased and better, there’s increasingly stress on the backside of the mountain. And, sooner or later, there’s a lot pressure–because there’s extra stress, as a result of there’s extra weight because the mountain will get increased. And, sooner or later, the stress on the backside can liquefy the bottom beneath it, after which the mountain just isn’t standing on a strong basis anymore. And, that liquid can escape and restrict the peak of the mountain since you’ve taken away a part of the bottom of the mountain.
So, it has to do with the quantity of gravity: the burden of the mountain exerts a pressure–and after all, the burden is expounded to gravity–the stress on the base of the mountain principally melts the underside of the mountain when it will get above a sure peak. And, planets with decrease gravity and due to this fact much less stress on the base can have taller mountains.
Russ Roberts: Presuming there is a enough power within the up-thrust over time. It isn’t just like the mountain tries to be tougher [?higher?–Econlib Ed.] or folks attempt to construct an even bigger one.
Alan Lightman: Yeah, proper.
Russ Roberts: Hummingbirds: When wings flap 1200 occasions per minute, that is actually quick. And, they do it in a approach that you just described within the ebook as kind of semicircular oscillation. It isn’t fixed. I imply, it is not the identical each time. It jogs my memory a bit little bit of treading water, a bizarre movement–which can be exhausting to describe–that you do together with your arms to remain in place. I’ve a reminiscence that the majority animals aside from people stay for roughly the identical variety of heartbeats–
Alan Lightman: Variety of heartbeats–
Russ Roberts: That means their hearts put on out after just about the identical variety of beats. So, I assume hummingbirds do not stay very lengthy. Is that right? Are you aware?
Alan Lightman: I do not know the reply to that query. It is a good query. My guess isn’t any, they do not stay very lengthy. In addition they have a really excessive charge of metabolism. I imply, to produce the big vitality must flap 1200 occasions a minute. And I believe that is additionally a restrict to their lifespan–that the upper the metabolism now we have, the extra that we’re taxing the physique; and the components simply put on out.
Russ Roberts: Yeah. You additionally level out they get actually heat as a result of they’re flapping their arms actually exhausting, their wings.
Alan Lightman: Proper. That is fairly apparent: that motion creates warmth.
Russ Roberts: And they also must dissipate it.
Alan Lightman: They must dissipate it, and so their our bodies are designed to dissipate warmth effectively. It is kind of the identical purpose why camels have a lot of the fats of their our bodies in a hump in order that the remainder of their our bodies might be skinny: the pores and skin might be skinny and might dissipate warmth simply as a result of got here camels–this was not a chapter of the book–but camels, which stay in sizzling locations, want to have the ability to dissipate warmth simply and effectively.
Russ Roberts: Presumably they do not pant, which is the opposite approach that some canines launch warmth.
Alan Lightman: Sure. Proper, precisely proper. I’ve by no means seen a panting camel, however that may be one other solution to preserve cool.
Russ Roberts: I used to be surprised to learn that there have been about 9 million lightning strikes per day on our Earth. That appears implausible, however I’ll take it as roughly true. It is clearly not a census; it is not a exact quantity. Lengthy-time joke on this system: In case you mentioned 9,357,640, I most likely would discover it much more believable. However–
Alan Lightman: I would not say that.
Russ Roberts: I know you would not since you’re a severe particular person, not like many economists–inside joke for listeners. However, how do we all know that and is a strike which means it lands, it hits the Earth?
Alan Lightman: No, I believe that that simply implies that they’re seen. 9 million strikes are seen, lightning bolts are seen; and I believe most locations on Earth have climate stations that report these items. However, even when you do not have a climate station in each hundred sq. miles of the Earth, you’ll be able to nonetheless take a look at the locations the place you do excellent recording statistics and you may extrapolate from that to different components of the Earth. So, that is most likely the way in which that that quantity was computed.
Russ Roberts: That is very cool.
Saturn has 146 moons. What number of, if any, are as large as ours? Are you aware? If some are larger, how large? What is the largest moon in our photo voltaic system? Is it ours? Are you aware? And, why does Saturn have so many?
Alan Lightman: No, ours just isn’t the most important.
Russ Roberts: Why does Saturn have so many?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, it’s most likely related–although I do not know for sure–to the explanation why it has rings, though the full mass within the rings is not–is little or no.
However, it comes all the way down to the formation of planets, which was the condensation of fabric out of an enormous revolving gasoline cloud across the solar when our photo voltaic system first shaped. And, there have been plenty of fragments in that gasoline cloud, and there have been different objects that broke up. There have been collisions between completely different fragments. And, I do not know precisely why Saturn has so many moons, however I do know that the situations round every planet have been a bit bit completely different. And, it was most likely simply an accident of the situations round Saturn. It is most likely not unrelated to the truth that Saturn has the rings, which additionally got here from particles on the time that the photo voltaic system was shaped.
I do know that our moon just isn’t the most important moon within the photo voltaic system. And, whether or not or not you name one thing a moon or a planet is considerably arbitrary. I believe we normally outline moons as smaller our bodies than planets which can be orbiting issues that we name planets.
And, after all, if a planet will get massive sufficient, then it turns into a star. I imply, if a mass turns into massive sufficient, then the temperatures at its heart are excessive sufficient to begin nuclear reactions, which is the vitality supply of stars. So, Jupiter, after all, is the most important planet in our photo voltaic system. And, if Jupiter have been, say, 10 occasions the mass that it’s, it might have been a star.
Russ Roberts: I chorus from asking whether or not it ever has any disappointment about that.
Russ Roberts: However, I truly wish to ask a semi-serious query alongside these strains earlier than I overlook. At one level you write–you’re speaking about trying up at 100 billion stars. I believe you are trying on the Milky Manner. Most of them–this is a quote now:
Most of them with their very own photo voltaic methods, and nearly actually a few of these photo voltaic methods have been inhabited by dwelling beings, most likely a few of them smarter than us. Due to the huge distances of area, we’ll most likely by no means keep up a correspondence with these different beings, but we’re fellow spectators on this unusual place of a universe we discover ourselves in. We, clever and dwelling beings, constituting solely a small fraction of the full mass of the universe, are the one means by which the universe can observe itself, the one means by which the universe has self-awareness.
Shut quote. Some folks suppose that every part has some stage of consciousness. That paragraph suggests to me that you do not agree with that. Am I proper?
Russ Roberts: I believe [inaudible 00:53:22] my Jupiter comment, proper?
Alan Lightman: Sure, proper. Effectively, consciousness is sort of actually a graded phenomenon. It isn’t an all or nothing phenomenon. So, I believe crows and dolphins have a reasonably excessive stage of consciousness, though most likely not as excessive as human beings. We all know that they’ll acknowledge themselves in mirrors. We all know that crows play with one another or they exhibit exercise that appears very very like our play.
However, I believe as you go down the ladder of the animal kingdom and also you get to smaller and smaller brains, that the psychological capabilities lower. And I believe sooner or later, and the place you draw the road might be considerably arbitrary, however sooner or later that the entire psychological exercise that we affiliate with consciousness would not exist. I do not suppose an amoeba could possibly be aware in any significant sense. I additionally don’t suppose that inanimate matter like rocks are aware. I do not suppose they do any pondering in any respect. So, it is a graded phenomenon.
Russ Roberts: You are smiling once you say that, though there are individuals who suppose in any other case, proper?
Alan Lightman: Oh, I do know there are individuals who suppose in any other case. However, from every part in neuroscience, the thoughts and the mind are the identical factor. And it is only a query of what number of neurons you’ve got acquired and what number of connections there are between the neurons.
It isn’t absolutely the variety of neurons that results in increased mind exercise and experiences like consciousness. It is also the variety of connections between them, which we name synapses. So, I am positive that individuals who have pets, significantly canines, that they really feel like that these canines are actually in tune with them emotionally. And so, there is definitely some stage of consciousness there. However, you actually must outline what you imply by consciousness. And, I believe there are various ranges of consciousness.
Russ Roberts: However, what concerning the universe as an entire? Or, lots of people wax poetic about how the Web has made the Earth aware, or us conscious–whatever that means–that now we have some emergent stage of quote, “understanding,” crowdsource, no matter you wish to, I do not know what you name it–some crowdsource stage of consciousness, data, perception. Do you consider in any of that?
Alan Lightman: So, if I can rephrase your query, are you asking whether or not a group of clever beings can have kind of a group consciousness? And, I believe that is a matter of semantics. I imply, you could possibly say that every part that human beings have created, all of our artwork and science and our civilization and our cities and buildings, that that may be a group exercise, and actually you’ll be able to interpret that as one mega-being, one mega-consciousness. And, you are able to do that if you need.
However, I believe that every of us human beings has a really robust sense of being a separate entity, an impartial entity. There is a boundary between me and the lamp on my desk, and we’re not the identical factor and I am separate from it. And, I do not hear the ideas of different folks in my mind, though that would change in 50 or 100 years.
So, we do have such a powerful sense of being impartial beings that I believe that we are impartial beings in any significant sense. And any group consciousness that you just attribute to a gaggle of human beings is a metaphor or an interpretation or a philosophical assertion.
Russ Roberts: I might describe it as a type of romance. We wish to belong, human beings, and there is one thing romantic, poetic, no matter you wish to describe it, religious, about the concept that we’re related to the lamp or the sunset–or, you and I are speaking; we have by no means met. We’re each born in Memphis, Tennessee. We each lived within the Boston space. We’ve this connection. I’ve learn Einstein’s Desires, which one in every of your earliest books–which is an excellent, really useful to listeners. So, I hook up with you in a sure approach. However, I’ll die and you are going to die. And that connection shall be severed, presumably. And, it’d even be severed once we dangle up the Zoom name in any actual sense. However I do not like that concept. I believe a part of the enchantment of faith is–and different types of romance–true or not, is that they communicate to this urge for belonging that now we have.
Alan Lightman: Sure, I agree with every part you mentioned. I had forgotten that you just and I have been each born in Memphis, Tennessee. However I believe that our feeling of belonging and want to belong–and sure different emotions that now we have, together with our appreciation of beauty–I believe that these emotions have been hardwired into us via pure choice. In case you return a few million years in the past when our species was rising, Homo–I do not know whether or not that is a genus or I believe that is, I suppose, a genus; I used to be by no means that good with zoological categorizations–that once we lived in caves–and I believe we all know from archeology that normally there have been 15 or 20 folks to a cave, one thing like that–that we trusted one another for survival. The hunters went out and gathered meals, and the others stayed within the cave, stored the hearth going, and took care of the youngsters, and so forth.
We have been a extremely interdependent neighborhood in these early days. And, if one in every of us acquired separated from the group–went out on a stroll from the cave and could not discover their approach again or something–it was a fast loss of life. And so, there was–the sense of being related to different folks and needing different folks was actually necessary as a survival technique. So, I believe that that want was constructed into our brains as a survival technique.
Now, which will de-romanticize the great feeling of being related to different folks and being related to nature. So, I believe it is an exquisite feeling, and it is one thing that I honor and treasure. However, I do suppose that it has a scientific or an evolutionary rationalization. Like most of the issues that we expertise and the ways in which we relate to the world and even the issues that we worth had an evolutionary origin. We’re animals, and we’re magnificent animals. We have created artwork and science and philosophy, and even economics; however ultimately, we’re animals. That is what Charles Darwin advised us. And, it would not make us any much less magnificent to say that we’re related to chimpanzees and dolphins and crows.
Russ Roberts: Yeah, I believe the explanation you forgot I used to be from Memphis is I haven’t got any accent from my birthplace. I lived there a 12 months, however my mother and father grew up there. And so, after they can be in Boston, the place we lived for nearly a decade, they’d lose numerous their accent. I hear it in your voice; it is nonetheless there. However, after they would go dwelling to Memphis or speak on the telephone to somebody from Memphis, it will get stronger. I assume that is true for you, too. I am positive there’s an evolutionary rationalization for it as nicely.
Russ Roberts: However, I wish to shut with an statement. It isn’t a coherent thought, so I am not going to attempt to make it a query, however I’ll allow you to simply reply to it. You used a standard metaphor–that, after all, you did not imply literally–when we talked about creation, you mentioned: The fingerprints of the creation are nonetheless current. And, I could not assist however take into consideration the Sistine Chapel and the ceiling the place Michelangelo imagines God animating human beings with a fingertip. It is a magnificent factor. And as you alluded to briefly in our dialog and within the ebook, people have created some actually extraordinary, stunning things–through intention. The Sistine Chapel is one in every of my prime 10, probably–the ceiling of it.
And we do not like–I do not know, perhaps you’re feeling differently–but as human beings, and whether or not this is–you can consider this as both evolutionary or divine–we like causation rather a lot. We like the concept that there’s fingerprints. There’s issues that trace on the origins of issues. And, it is simply attention-grabbing how compelling that’s. And, I do know you did not imply that that approach, and I do not consider that God has a hand. I do not even know if Michelangelo thought God had a hand. However he wished to indicate one thing causal there. Anyway, simply any ideas on that?
Alan Lightman: Effectively, we want order. And, I believe that is on the root of what you are speaking about: that we do not wish to live–I imply, the universe is unusual sufficient as it’s. And we shudder on the thought that issues can occur randomly and by chance with out cause-and-effect relations. It simply means something might occur. You would begin floating up within the air, or the books in your bookshelf might begin popping out at any second, or the solar might flip right into a pumpkin. You already know–we want–because the universe is as unusual as it’s, we wish there to be some rationalization, some purpose, some cause-and-effect relations for every part that we see.
And, that was actually a part of the motivation of a well-known ebook written 2000 years in the past by the Roman poet Lucretius, who wrote a ebook known as The Nature of Issues, through which he instructed the atomic course of: that every part is made out of atoms that obey cause-and-effect relations, every part is materials. And, a part of the motivation was to decrease the ability of the gods to carry out acts at random and upon whimsy. And, that was one of many motivations for his proposing the fabric atomic speculation underlying all phenomena: to decrease the ability of the gods. I imply, he nonetheless believed within the gods, however he thought that they need to keep of their place and allow us to human beings conduct our lives as we want to.
Russ Roberts: However, we do like order. And, on the similar time, as you level out within the ebook, you need some sort of unpredictability. You do not like the concept that we might actually know every part about what’s coming subsequent.
Alan Lightman: Sure. Effectively, you are proper and that is one other attention-grabbing side of our human minds.
I believe it is associated to the very fact that–and my spouse is a painter, and he or she all the time talks to me about what makes a very good painting–and a completely symmetrical portray just isn’t as attention-grabbing as a portray that has a bit little bit of asymmetry or a portray that has a bit dot of purple paint over within the right-hand corner–something that breaks the right symmetry.
So, it is an attention-grabbing side of the human thoughts and the human psyche that though we like most issues to be orderly and predictable and symmetric, can we additionally like a bit little bit of unpredictability.
And, should you learn a novel and the actions of characters are fully predictable, the novel just isn’t as attention-grabbing to you. It is all the time good to have just a few surprises.
Russ Roberts: Certain. My visitor at the moment has been Alan Lightman. His ebook is The Miraculous from the Materials. Alan, thanks for being a part of EconTalk.
Alan Lightman: Effectively, thanks, Russ, for inviting me once more to be a part of your very stimulating program.
