"We Don't Know How Long We Have Left" Eric Weinstein On Nuclear Threat To Humanity

Summary

In this thought-provoking conversation, Dr. Eric Weinstein, a mathematician and intellectual dark web figure, discusses a range of topics with host Pierce Morgan. From the complexities of the Ukraine-Russia conflict and the potential dangers of AI, to the state of free speech and the challenges faced by the modern university system, Weinstein offers his unique perspectives, emphasizing the importance of intellectual rigor, civil discourse, and the pursuit of truth in an increasingly polarized world.

Takeaways

• 🌟 Dr. Eric Weinstein is a mathematician and a prominent figure in the intellectual dark web, known for challenging mainstream narratives.
• 📚 His PhD dissertation focused on extending self-dual Yang-Mills equations across higher dimensions, showcasing his deep mathematical expertise.
• 🌍 Dr. Weinstein discusses the complexity of international relations, particularly the situation with Putin and Ukraine, emphasizing the need for understanding cultural differences and historical context.
• 💡 He highlights the importance of intellectual curiosity and the willingness to challenge group think, which he sees as a driving force behind the intellectual dark web.
• 🚨 Dr. Weinstein expresses concern about the potential for nuclear conflict, especially in the context of evolving geopolitical scenarios and the rise of multi-polar game theory.
• 🤖 He is cautious about the hype surrounding AI, suggesting that nuclear weapons pose a more immediate threat, and that public perception of AI risks is often exaggerated.
• 🗣️ Dr. Weinstein advocates for free speech, but acknowledges its limitations and the need for responsible use, especially in the context of misinformation and personal attacks.
• 📈 He criticizes the current state of academia, particularly the influence of diversity, equity, and inclusion policies, which he believes are hindering academic freedom and the pursuit of truth.
• 🌐 Dr. Weinstein emphasizes the role of the internet and social media in shaping public discourse, noting both their potential for amplifying voices and the risks of spreading disinformation.
• 🔬 He discusses the challenges of understanding and responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, including the evolving scientific consensus and the need for transparency in public health communication.
• 🌠 Dr. Weinstein's Theory of Everything suggests a 14-dimensional reality, contrasting with the commonly perceived four-dimensional world, indicating a more complex understanding of the universe.

Q & A

What is Dr. Eric Weinstein's background and area of expertise?

Dr. Eric Weinstein is a Harvard-trained mathematician, known for his work in mathematical physics, particularly his dissertation on the extension of self-dual Yang-Mills equations across higher dimensions.

How does Dr. Weinstein view the concept of the 'intellectual dark web'?

Dr. Weinstein sees the 'intellectual dark web' as a group of thinkers who challenge mainstream narratives and do not accept everything the media presents. He emphasizes the importance of civility and intellectual curiosity in this group.

What are Dr. Weinstein's thoughts on the current state of the world in terms of safety and progress?

While acknowledging that statistically, it is the best time to be alive, Dr. Weinstein expresses concern about the potential for catastrophic events due to advancements in science and technology, particularly nuclear weapons.

What does Dr. Weinstein believe is the greatest danger facing humanity at the moment?

Dr. Weinstein believes that the greatest danger is the underestimation of the threat posed by nuclear weapons, as people have become too unconcerned with the potential for self-destruction.

How does Dr. Weinstein view the role of public-spirited fictions in governance?

He holds the view that public-spirited fictions are essential for proper governance, but the problem lies in the lies being told that are not public-spirited, competent, or minimal.

What is Dr. Weinstein's stance on the situation in Ukraine and Russia's actions?

Dr. Weinstein does not support Putin's actions but emphasizes the complexity of the situation, highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of the historical and cultural context.

What are Dr. Weinstein's views on free speech and its limitations?

He supports free speech but acknowledges that there are limits, such as liability and export controls. He also criticizes the exploitation of free speech for personal attacks and the spread of disinformation.

How does Dr. Weinstein describe his Theory of Everything?

He describes it as a 14-dimensional world that we are living in, which is more complex than the four-dimensional space we perceive, and he believes this understanding could resolve many scientific paradoxes.

What is Dr. Weinstein's perspective on the role of universities in the current academic and scientific landscape?

He criticizes the current state of universities for prioritizing diversity, equity, and inclusion over rigorous scholarship and academic freedom. He advocates for a return to these values and the purging of activist subjects from the university system.

How does Dr. Weinstein plan to address the issues he sees in the scientific community?

He plans to use his large following and platform to amplify voices that need to be heard and to challenge the status quo, particularly in the field of string theory, which he believes has made scientific progress difficult.

Outlines

00:00

🌟 Introduction to Dr. Eric Weinstein

Dr. Eric Weinstein is introduced as a Harvard-trained mathematician and a prominent figure in the intellectual dark web. He is known for challenging mainstream narratives and engaging in controversial debates. The conversation touches on various topics, including Putin, Ukraine, globalization, and Jeffrey Epstein. Dr. Weinstein's academic background and his views on the importance of intellectual diversity and civility in discourse are highlighted.

05:03

🌍 Global Concerns and the State of the World

The discussion delves into the state of the world, with Dr. Weinstein expressing concern about the potential for human extinction due to nuclear weapons and the loss of an indefinite human future. He criticizes the idea that we are living in the best of times, arguing that the threat of nuclear war and the power of science have created a ticking time bomb. The conversation also touches on the role of science in society and the importance of self-awareness and understanding the dangers we face.

10:04

🗣️ The Intellectual Dark Web and Civil Discourse

Dr. Weinstein discusses the concept of the intellectual dark web, emphasizing the importance of civility and the ability to engage in good fights. He contrasts the current state of public discourse, which often resorts to ad hominem attacks, with the more respectful debates that were once possible. The conversation also explores the challenges of cross-cultural communication and the potential for misunderstandings that could lead to catastrophic outcomes.

15:05

💡 The Role of AI and Nuclear Weapons

The conversation shifts to the potential dangers of AI and nuclear weapons. Dr. Weinstein expresses concern about the prioritization of AI risks over nuclear weapons, arguing that the latter is a more immediate threat. He discusses the need for a better understanding of the capabilities and limitations of AI and the importance of ethical considerations in its development. The discussion also touches on the potential for AI to become sentient and the implications of such a development.

20:06

🌐 Geopolitical Tensions and Strategy

Dr. Weinstein shares his views on geopolitical tensions, particularly focusing on Russia's actions in Ukraine and the broader implications for global security. He discusses the complexities of international relations, the concept of spheres of influence, and the challenges of understanding the cultural and historical context of conflicts. The conversation also explores the role of the United States in international affairs and the need for a coherent strategy.

25:08

📢 Free Speech and Information Integrity

The discussion addresses the concept of free speech and its limits, with Dr. Weinstein emphasizing the importance of public-spirited fictions in governance. He criticizes the spread of disinformation and the degradation of authoritative sources, particularly on platforms like Wikipedia. The conversation also touches on the challenges of maintaining integrity in the face of personal attacks and the need for a more thoughtful approach to public discourse.

30:09

🔬 Science, Ethics, and the COVID-19 Pandemic

Dr. Weinstein reflects on the scientific response to the COVID-19 pandemic, expressing frustration with the lack of transparency and the changing narratives around the virus. He criticizes the scientific community for not being more aggressive in seeking answers and for failing to hold individuals and organizations accountable. The conversation also explores the importance of scientific ethics and the need for a more rigorous approach to research and public communication.

35:11

🌌 The Theory of Everything and Higher Dimensions

Dr. Weinstein discusses his views on the Theory of Everything, suggesting that our understanding of the universe may be limited by our perception of four-dimensional space. He proposes that we may actually be living in a higher-dimensional reality, which could explain phenomena like quantum mechanics. The conversation also touches on the challenges of communicating complex scientific ideas to the public and the importance of scientific literacy.

40:11

🏛️ The State of Universities and Academic Freedom

Dr. Weinstein expresses concern about the state of universities, particularly the influence of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives on academic freedom and rigor. He advocates for a return to a more traditional focus on scholarship and collegiality, arguing that the current system is corrupt and needs reform. The conversation also addresses the importance of protecting academic freedom and the need for a more critical approach to the subjects taught in universities.

45:13

🎥 The Role of Media and the Intellectual Dark Web

Dr. Weinstein discusses the impact of media on public discourse, particularly the rise of podcasts and the intellectual dark web as platforms for alternative voices. He shares his experiences with the media and the challenges of being misrepresented or misunderstood. The conversation also explores the importance of using media effectively to promote scientific ideas and the need for a more nuanced understanding of complex issues.

Keywords

💡Intellectual Dark Web

The term refers to a loosely connected group of intellectuals and thinkers who engage in open and often controversial discussions across political divides. In the video, Dr. Eric Weinstein discusses the importance of this group in challenging mainstream narratives and promoting critical thinking. He emphasizes the value of civil discourse and the exchange of ideas, even when they are unpopular or controversial.

💡Free Speech

Free speech is a fundamental right that allows individuals to express their opinions without fear of censorship or retaliation. Dr. Weinstein discusses the limits of free speech, noting that while it is essential, it is not without boundaries. He criticizes the current state of free speech, where it has become more about exploiting loopholes rather than genuine exchange of ideas, and highlights the need for a more responsible approach to the freedom of expression.

💡Nuclear Weapons

Nuclear weapons are devices that harness the energy from nuclear reactions to create an explosion with devastating effects. In the context of the video, Dr. Weinstein expresses concern about the potential for nuclear conflict, particularly in relation to the actions of Vladimir Putin and the geopolitical tensions involving Russia. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the cultural differences and historical contexts that influence perceptions of nuclear threats.

💡Globalization

Globalization refers to the process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale. Dr. Weinstein touches on the topic of globalization in the video, discussing its impact on various aspects of society, including economic and cultural exchanges. He also raises concerns about the potential for global crises, such as pandemics, to exacerbate existing inequalities and tensions.

💡COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing global outbreak of the coronavirus disease caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Dr. Weinstein discusses the pandemic's impact on society and the scientific community, highlighting the importance of accurate information and the challenges faced by scientists in navigating the rapidly changing landscape of the pandemic. He criticizes the handling of the pandemic by various authorities and emphasizes the need for transparency and rigorous scientific inquiry.

💡String Theory

String theory is a theoretical framework in which the point-like particles of particle physics are replaced by one-dimensional objects called strings. Dr. Weinstein mentions string theory in the context of his own work, suggesting that our understanding of the universe may be more complex than the traditional four-dimensional space-time model. He implies that a more comprehensive theory, such as his own 'Theory of Everything,' could provide a more accurate description of the universe's structure.

💡Academic Freedom

Academic freedom is the belief that scholars should have the liberty to explore and communicate ideas and conclusions without fear of censorship or retaliation. Dr. Weinstein advocates for the protection and restoration of academic freedom within universities, arguing that it is essential for the advancement of knowledge and the pursuit of truth. He criticizes the current state of universities, where he perceives a decline in rigor and an overemphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion at the expense of intellectual inquiry.

💡Cultural Differences

Cultural differences refer to the variations in customs, traditions, values, and social norms among different societies or groups. Dr. Weinstein discusses the importance of understanding cultural differences, particularly in the context of international relations and diplomacy. He uses the example of Russia's relationship with the West to illustrate how cultural misunderstandings can lead to dangerous miscalculations and conflicts.

💡Public-Spirited Fictions

The term 'public-spirited fictions' refers to narratives or stories that are propagated for the benefit of society, even if they are not entirely true. Dr. Weinstein suggests that while such fictions can be necessary for governance, the problem arises when these narratives are not competent or adult-level stories. He implies that the public should be presented with information that is both truthful and beneficial to society, rather than simplistic or manipulative narratives.

💡Yang-Mills Equations

The Yang-Mills equations are fundamental equations in theoretical physics, describing the behavior of non-gravitational fields. Dr. Weinstein's dissertation work on extending these equations across higher dimensions is mentioned in the video. His research contributes to the understanding of these equations and their implications for the structure of the universe. The Yang-Mills equations are a key component of the Standard Model of particle physics and are crucial for the development of quantum field theory.

💡Dyslexia

Dyslexia is a learning disorder characterized by difficulties with accurate and fluent word recognition and spelling. Dr. Weinstein mentions his own struggles with dyslexia, which he sees as a testament to the triumph of will and the power of neurodiversity. His personal experience with dyslexia underscores the importance of recognizing and supporting individuals with learning differences, as they can make significant contributions to society and their fields of expertise.

Highlights

Dr. Eric Weinstein is a Harvard-trained mathematician and a prominent figure in the intellectual dark web.

Weinstein's work on self-dual Yang-Mills equations in higher dimensions has been recognized as accurate and influential.

Weinstein discusses the importance of civility in debates and the intellectual dark web's commitment to respectful discourse.

He emphasizes the need for intellectual curiosity and challenging mainstream narratives, which he sees as a defense against groupthink and tribalism.

Weinstein is concerned about the potential for nuclear conflict, particularly due to cultural misunderstandings and the current geopolitical landscape.

He criticizes the lack of public understanding and engagement with the dangers of nuclear weapons, suggesting that fear has become unfashionable.

Weinstein discusses the impact of the internet and social media on the quality and nature of public discourse, highlighting the challenges of misinformation and the amplification of voices.

He expresses concern about the state of academia, particularly the influence of political correctness and the suppression of free inquiry.

Weinstein advocates for a return to rigor, scholarship, and collegiality in universities, and the removal of activist subjects that he believes have diluted academic standards.

He discusses the concept of 'public-spirited fictions' and the necessity of some level of agreed-upon narratives for governance.

Weinstein shares his views on the limitations of free speech, arguing that it should not be unrestricted and that there are historical precedents for restrictions.

He addresses the challenges of understanding complex issues like the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for transparency and honesty in scientific research.

Weinstein criticizes the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that there was a failure to be honest about the situation and the policies implemented.

He discusses the potential dangers of AI becoming sentient and the need for a deeper understanding of the underlying technologies.

Weinstein talks about his Theory of Everything, which posits a 14-dimensional reality that we perceive as four-dimensional.

He shares his plans to use his large online following to promote scientific ethics and challenge the status quo in academia and media.

Transcripts

Dr Eric Weinstein is a Harvard trained

mathematician and a Titan of the

so-called intellectual dark web they're

the big iconic clastic thinkers who span

political divides to challenge

mainstream narratives stoking

controversy and debate along the

way Dr Weinstein tackles everything from

Putin and Ukraine to globalization and

Jeffrey Epstein's become a superstar

guest on the world's biggest podcast and

streaming shows you met Jeffrey Epstein

the hero from the back of my neck stood

on end there are people that you need in

your dark hours and as soon as they

emerge we tar them with and now he

goes

unsensitive I'm always surprised when

people with your kind of intellect um

wrestle with any kind of quandry about

Russian dictator invading Sovereign

Democratic country powerful Nations like

Russia have concerns that don't have to

do only with their exact borders I mean

do you think anyone like like Putin who

has 6,000 nuclear weapons at his

disposal would want to start a war that

would obliterate everything hand

somebody a pair of nunchucks uh they're

most likely to knock themselves out

rather than to become Bruce Le we sit

here with a ticking Time Bomb we don't

know how long we have the four most

overrated things in life were Lobster

champagne anal sex and picnics I don't

really know much about champagne perhaps

the next question are there any limits

to free speech it has morphed more into

a question of what what can I get away

with that might not be true I've got 10

things rapid fire no no no yeah I declin

no I'm I'm quite

serious Eric wiy great to have you good

to be with you so I was just checking

your Wikipedia a minute ago uh and under

education defaced recently you can

challenge this if you like but under

education it said wi te receive his PhD

in mathematical physics from Harvard

University in 1992 in his dissertation

extension of self-dual Yang Mills

equations across the eighth Dimension

Weinstein showed that the self-dual Yang

Mills equations were not peculiar to

Dimension four and admitted

generalizations to higher dimensions and

I realized at that point having read

that Eric that you and I were probably

on slightly different intellectual

Pathways in our lives and this might be

quite a challenging

encounter you have a different theory

about the Yang Mills equation by the way

that's the most that's the most accurate

thing I've heard in my Wikipedia entry

in some time so maybe things are

improving I mean look obviously you've

got a massive brain um do you think

that's been a Force for good or for

angst in your

life I see evil isn't on the table um it

can be I I avoided that yeah yeah yeah I

mean to be honest uh I hope it's

inspiring to people with learning

differences and neurode Divergence

everywhere I was a terrible student in

high school um so to me it's quite funny

I mean I I I don't know what to say it's

a it's a it speaks to the Triumph of

Will and the Power of

Dyslexia the um the intellectual dark

web as it's called I've interviewed many

people uh from this Douglas Murray Ben

of pio Jordan Peterson Professor Steven

Pinker and so on on the common theme

seem to be people who just decid that

they're not going to accept everything

that the mainstream media pumps out to

the public they want to challenge uh you

know what I would call group think they

want to challenge tribalism certainly

fueled by social media they just want to

be I guess annoyingly curious and

combative about stuff that we're told

collectively we have to

believe I think it's a lot more than

that I mean uh I never explained who was

in it uh or what it meant so people try

to wrap ideas around it and one of the

reasons that it it gained currency was

that no one had a description for the

fact that many smart people were not

going along with the sort of

intellectual hegemony of the mainstream

which should represent a huge diversity

of viewpoints but in fact uh that's only

honored in the breech uh I think that

one of the things that is not frequently

thought about in terms of uh that

project was the importance of Civility

it's incredibly difficult to tease out

our differences when we're yelling at

each other calling names and in in point

of fact I believe that we've lost the

ability to have good fights our fights

are terrible I totally agree uh we can't

we can't get good people to sit down

because without uh intellectual

Queensbury rules all you get is eye

gouging and while there's a segment of

the internet that's always looking uh

you know for somebody to rip off an arm

lose a digit um most of us want to live

to see another day and continue to

develop our points and even concede when

the other person has a better one so I

you know the the the Dirty Little Secret

of the intellectual dark web is that

even though we were across the political

Spectrum we were pretty we were pretty

darn good to each other for a long time

and I think that that's the key to

getting great fights what I've noticed

is that um Ben Shapiro still has a

pinned tweet I think facts don't care

about your feelings

and I've definitely noticed in debates

that people go ad hominum very quickly

and very abusively normally to mask the

fact that their actual argument is

devoid of

fact well when you don't have a point uh

it's an excellent

tactic where are we in the world right

now Eric I mean you you know you've

you've written and spoken so much about

the state of the world but you know I

always say to people that if you

actually look at it statistically this

is the best time to ever be alive you

know we we're living longer we're living

healthier there's less child poverty the

a fuel Wars and so on and so on by every

conceivable metric this is arguably the

best time to ever be alive and yet so

many people seem so angst-ridden you

know young people have an epidemic of

anxiety um a lot of people having real

problems just dealing with life when in

fact compared to all their ancestors

they've got it good why

why well see I you've got to stop

drinking uh with Stephen pinkler picker

I think uh hey was that see him that

said that you're right yeah yeah uh well

this is a terrible idea that was spread

by Stephen Pinker um and what it is you

know to to borrow from my physics and Ma

and math background is uh you can't

understand the conservation of energy if

you don't have terms for both potential

and kinetic energy so if you think about

what you're talking about you're talking

about the cessation of all kinds of in

some sense human kinetic energy from the

early part of the 20th century with all

of the you know two two terrible Wars a

horrible pandemic Etc uh we don't see

that much in the world only Ma's grap

Leap Forward I think Rises to that level

of

atrocity um so that has been a huge

Improvement the problem is why that is

the case which is largely because in

1952 53 over six months we acquired ired

the secrets to both the atom and the

cell um so with the first Hydrogen Bomb

named Ivy Mike in the Pacific and Watson

and cric's elucidation of the double

helix structure for nucleic acid uh we

became Godlike in terms of our power and

as a result we acquired the first time

uh for the first time the ability to end

the human project and I think it's the

loss of an indefinite human future uh

future that has to be restored and no

one can figure out how to do it so we

sit here um effectively uh with a

ticking Time Bomb we don't know how long

we have and uh things are very pleasant

I mean you can you can uh sit in a

coffee shop and um have a have a

perfectly good life uh but you never

know when the end is coming whereas in a

previous era you didn't know how often

you were going to be you were going to

be conscripted into a war but on the

other hand uh there was no chance of

humans extinguishing themselves so I

think you really have to to broaden that

concept and I would agree with you in

terms of the

realized um Terror uh that has engulf

the world in fact most of it is

potential Terror did you watch oppenheim

in the movie sure what did you think of

it it's very tough

um I don't think people

remember that we have this power and

that it was Unleashed by science and in

particular it was Unleashed

by effectively my former colleagues um

so that you know when you see a cameo

appearance by Richard Fineman let's say

uh or at least you know someone uh

portraying him uh you have to recognize

that these are the people who

unleashed the uh the Doomsday scenario

and for me because we ceased exploding

atmospheric nuclear weapons in 1962 I

believe uh We've really grown far too I

don't know how to say it we we're too

unconcerned with the danger in which we

live and for me it was an attempt to

reawaken our self- knowledge and to

remind ourselves how important science

is how how you know currently we we say

that scientists are feeble they don't

live in the real world and I promise you

uh you'll be living in their world uh

for the rest of for the rest of time

this is very much the real world and it

was it it was painful in part but it was

a very intriguing film I mean when

Vladimir Putin rattles his his nuclear

saber um which he does regularly as a

form of trying to intimidate the West in

particular do you think he means it I

mean do you think anyone like Putin who

has 6,000 nuclear weapons at his

disposal is ever I don't know whether

the St stupid isn't the right word is is

ever going to be in a position where he

would want to start war that would

obliterate

everything you can ask the same of us

yeah but I'm I'm I'm quite

serious the

um in terms of a cultural difference the

Russians regularly use nuclear uh

explosions for engineering purposes they

have a comfort with nuclear weapons that

we lack I think that many Americans do

not really understand the cultural

difference between Central and Eastern

Europe and the modern

West um which is you know frankly

terrifying I I really I see

cross-cultural

miscommunication as a potential start to

a nuclear uh nuclear scenario and as

we've seen from the Cold War there have

been many situations in which uh if

there's a glitch in a system and you

believe that somebody is uh firing upon

you that uh you're forced to make a very

tough decision quite honestly humans are

just not good enough to play this kind

of game theory and remember that with

the Cold War it was basically a bipolar

conflict you're about to move to

multi-polar Game Theory and I can assure

you that it's a much less stable

scenario where you're trying to figure

out what eight different players are

doing with regional conflicts and

unannounced nuclear Powers uh entering

the frame do you worry more about

nuclear Armageddon or AI becoming

sentient I worry about people trying to

to make AI a more pressing problem than

nuclear weapons a lot of the cool kids

in Silicon Valley have developed a meme

which is that oh AI is far more

dangerous than

nukes and that may be in the long run

but at the moment it's not even it's not

even close however it feels kind of P to

worry about nuclear weapons five years

ago or so I think I started publicly

calling for rare atmospheric tests of

nuclear weapons uh because I think the

greatest danger at the moment is that

fear of nuclear weapons is seen as out

of Vogue and we have to reacquaint our

our viscera with the danger in which we

live I mean I I did the last interview

with Professor Steven Hawking before he

sadly died and I asked him what's the

biggest threat to Mankind and he said

when artificial intelligence learns to

self-design the implication being that

when it does the first thing it would do

is probably conclude that humans are

completely pointless and irrational and

useless in many cases and they just get

rid of

us I don't think that's his best

work really you're you're not as

concerned well in the long run I think

that uh it's a huge concern but if you

look at what large language models are

and how quickly humans have confused

large language models for general

intelligence uh it tells you that maybe

more humans need to spend time C and

understanding the Transformer

architecture which enabled this uh

recent mini Revolution I mean it's

absolutely astounding but mostly what

these machines are doing are feeding us

back to us and once they've read all our

books and read all our papers uh it may

quite it's easily possible that this

model and this architecture May Plateau

but isn't it the same kind of situation

with nuclear weapons where in you know

decent hands supposedly decent hands of

people who have a moral code a code of

ethics who don't want to do the wrong

thing um nuclear weapons uh can be

controlled and can be safe but in

nefarious hands from people with evil

intent they become incredibly dangerous

and I I would say it's the same argument

with AI isn't

it I don't agree with the premise so

maybe ask that to someone else I believe

that if you take uh 10 very moral people

and very intelligent people and you give

them all nuclear weapons and the ability

to annihilate each other you can play

all sorts of game theoretic experiments

and find that we're simply not wise

enough to solve coordination problems

and signaling problems I I I I just

don't agree with this idea that it's our

morality and our intellect which makes

nuclear weapons dangerous it is simply

the power it's like handing a a

lightsaber to somebody in a Star Wars

film and uh you know watching them learn

U by slicing off you know a leg and an

arm within the first five minutes hand

hand hand somebody a pair of nunchucks

uh they're most likely to knock

themselves out rather than to become

Bruce Lee yeah but if you have Mother

Theresa with her finger on the nuclear

button and Adolf Hitler the chances are

more likely that it'll be the bad guy

that presses

it uh you took two people uh one is much

worse than the other but those aren't my

favorites uh

Mother Teresa I don't I we don't need to

relitigate the Christopher Hitchens

point I would say that um I just don't

know of of these good people who can

Steward nuclear weapons uh I it's simply

too much

power one of your or if you think about

it in terms of systems uh a democracy is

capable of having a string of uh you

know 10 moral ethical leaders and then

it gets itself into a period of distress

and suddenly it elect somebody who's

completely unfit for the office we we

don't have the ability to live with this

this amount of Leverage I had a a good

relationship with Christopher Hitchens I

employed him actually as a columnist

when I was editor of Daily Mirror and he

once sent me one of my favorite emails

ever which was he said the four most

overrated things in life were Lobster

champagne anal sex and

picnics

ah I I don't really know much about

champagne and some of the other items on

your list don't appeal to me for this

conversation perhaps the next

question uh one of your big thoughts is

that Western institutions including

politicians scientists the media are

actively lying to us and we've seen this

exacerbated by things like the pandemic

like modern warfare and all the

propaganda that flies around around it

how much of of your belief that they're

lying to us is driven by uh I guess the

social media element of this where

everything is Amplified in real time to

the public in a way it never used to be

in other words information used to Flow

To Us in a in a far slower a more

controlled way whereas now everything is

coming out as 24/7 in real

time well you know I I hold an unpopular

view which is that

uh

public-spirited fictions are essential

to proper governance the problem isn't

that they're lying to us the problem is

that the lies are not public spirited

they are not competent uh they're not

adult level fictions and they're not uh

they're not minimal you want to lie as

little as possible uh a French

philosopher once said that a nation is a

collection of people that have agreed to

forget something in common so in part

you know if you were to resolve the

contradictions let's say in the United

States first

amendment um you might find that you had

no Constitution the problem is the

nature of the laws and they are not

adult level and I don't mean to boast on

your program but I have an IQ above 40

so I find this really distressing that

I'm constantly asked to believe things

that uh no child should be asked to

believe I mean you you tweeted the other

day about Ukraine and Putin I can't tell

you my position on us strategy in

Ukraine if I don't know more all I know

is that in a democracy I'm being lied to

and pressure to support something I

don't sufficiently understand that's it

I mean you could take that argument in

1939 and say you know when Hitler

invaded Poland I don't know enough about

it I haven't been told enough about it

by my government therefore I can't take

a position about Adolf Hitler uh I would

say that what uh Putin is doing in

Ukraine is not dissimilar actually and

but his aspirations may not be quite as

heinous in terms of global domination as

as Hitler but no but I would I would say

his aspirations are heinous and I'm

always surprised when people with your

kind of intellect um wrestle with any

kind of quandy about Russian dictator

invading Sovereign Democratic country

and murdering loads of people and

helping himself loads of land and why

that shouldn't be in everyone's interest

to

repel well I would like to think that's

because you misunderstand my position um

but it could be a it could be a failure

of intellect on my

part we we're in a very long running

postc cold war strategy where in 1999 I

believe we extended Article 5 NATO

status to

Poland uh which was not former Soviet

Union but was Warsaw pack I didn't have

a problem at that point I think it was

in 2004 where we extended Article 5

status to lvia Lithuania and Estonia and

at that point I clearly felt that I

didn't understand what we were doing I

believe that you know Ria is within a

thousand miles or kilometer I don't even

know of Moscow and you know because the

Cuban Missile Crisis was very much top

of Mind during the part of the Cold War

that I saw and its aftermath I very well

remember the concept of America spheres

of influence that Cuba was not

considered a Sovereign Nation that could

choose to do whatever it wanted because

it was simply too close to the United

States I think that in part it's the

desire to only put on one pair of

glasses one set of lenses The Sovereign

Nation lens clearly suggests uh that

Putin is a madman and that his crossing

of the border of Ukraine um it's a slam

dunk so so it's not that I don't

understand your point but then again

there's another set of glasses which is

the spheres of influence glasses and

that says that in fact um powerful

Nations like Russia have concerns that

don't have to do only with their exact

borders and if you look for example at a

time lapse of the borders in Central and

Eastern Europe you'll notice that

they've been fluid for forever if every

time there is a border Readjustment we

go to the brink of nuclear war that's

game over furthermore uh there are very

complicated relations in Central and

Eastern Europe and I don't think that

Americans are particularly Adept uh at

discussing them and forcing us to say

Slava Ukraine is as a as a slogan uh you

know we're not allowed to say glory to

anything but we're supposed to to be

100% on board this is a long running

statecraft level narrative uh clearly

there was an idea in place as far back

as the fall of the bird Berlin Wall I

don't understand what the strategy is it

might be the right strategy I'm

certainly not supporting Putin who's an

absolute brutal Thug uh that's not in

question the problem is is that we are

now the stewards of a thermonuclear

planet and uh the simple application of

an idea that he crossed the border of a

Sovereign Nation after everything we've

been doing in Ukraine and all the games

that we've played uh I don't think that

this really makes sense and the problem

in in as I understand it is that we keep

telling the audience uh the electorate

if you will that these incredibly

simplistic lenses with which we choose

to view everything are sufficient to

actually form grown-up opinions and they

they aren't I mean the irony of course

is that if Ukraine had not been

encouraged to give up its nuclear

defense then Putin is highly unlikely to

have invaded

him there are so many choices that we

have made in terms of how we've handled

the postc Cold War former uh Soviet

Union countries and Warsaw pack

countries I I think you have to

understand that this is part of a long

running Grand strategy and it's not

shared with me this whatever I'm not

even positive that today's uh State

Department

officials are really 100%

in that they have good knowledge of what

this extended plan is very often what

you find is the architects of a

multi-decade plan die and they don't

teach their successors what the actual

strategy was when when Saddam Hussein

invaded Kuwait did you think it was

right that American boots were put on

the ground to kick him out given it

wasn't a NATO

country Kuwait in some sense uh is in

part created as a block so that uh

Saddam H that Iraq would have the

tiniest um

seafront the the creation in some sense

of states by Colonial powers or um

accidents of History I I think the the

the problem here is that Saddam Hussein

was an absolute

brute uh but he was a brute in a region

in which one has to become brutish it is

astounding the extent to which many

Iraqis who were relatively middle class

and new the difficulties of governing in

that region uh viewed him as an absolute

brute but were appreciative of of his

efforts of keeping Iraq relatively

secular that's not to say that I'm a

Saddam Hussein supporter far from it

it's just to say that we keep

communicating very strange things into

these

regions for example when I think it was

George Herbert Walker Bush who told the

marsh Arabs in the south of Iraq to rise

up and then got them slaughtered we we

have to be very careful in our

Communications in incredibly different

regions from our own do you think it's

really in America's national

interest that Vladimir Putin could win

in Ukraine could just seize a vast chunk

of that country and claim it as Russian

um as he did with Crimea and this of

course after invaded Georgia as well I

mean do you think it's in America's

national interest that a Russian

dictator expands the power and

geographical land of

Russia no no no no I I very much don't

want Vladimir Putin to uh taste victory

I don't want him to try to reassemble

the former Soviet Union so how do you

stop him

uh well in part you might want to

cooperate you you might have wanted to

have cooperate Co cooperated with him

more

and it's very difficult look my family

comes from the region almost uh 100% of

my ancestors came from Poland Russia

Ukraine and

lvia

um I'm very hesitant to talk in Western

media about the realities of the region

because I don't think that Americans

have been prepared for quite what the

pressures are in this area and it is

incredibly important that we understand

just how dangerous this region is in

part because of the skill level of the

players Vladimir Putin may be a brute a

butcher but he's also incredibly skilled

and you have to remember that America's

nuclear power effectively um came from a

bunch of igrs from places like Lavo

which is now called Lviv which I think

of as a Polish city which is now claimed

to be

Ukrainian um we have to um we have to

appreciate that this is a region that is

incredibly skilled incredibly

dangerous uh a source of intellectual

horsepower which built America's own

Atomic Arsenal uh refugees from the area

so I think that you just have to

understand that uh most of us are way

out of our depths if we don't have great

information we don't have cultural and

historical understanding of the tensions

between these peoples I want to just

change Tac to free speech in your

estimation are there any limits

to free

speech well it depends if you know

people say free markets and there are

all sorts of limits on free markets

usually when we say Free Speech adults

know the limits you know that there are

liable limits there's uh you know

Brandenburg versus Ohio there are all

sorts of things that you can't say or do

we have export

controls uh in fact in uh in physics uh

there's a concept called restricted data

where if you have an idea and you're not

a federal employee and you don't have

security clearance if the idea uh

touches nuclear weapons uh you may not

share it uh at all because it is born

secret uh there are huge limits on

speech that are part of free speech so

when we say Free Speech I'm 100% for

Free Speech but that is an understanding

that that's a reserved term of art it's

not uh unrestricted speech it has it has

never been and it can't exist as such I

mean you and I I think are both big fans

of Elon Musk uh I had an interview plan

with him at the start of the year which

he unceremoniously cancelled when he

found a clip of me on the show mildly

criticizing his decision to let Alex

Jones back on to X having previously

said he would never let him back on and

he wouldn't let people who stand on the

graves of of dead children on the

platform and I thought he was wrong to

change his mind about Alex J but I found

it quite ironic that Elon who you know

is a constant uh promoter of free speech

particularly onx would not want to

engage in an interview with me because I

criticized him over something like

that well you know everyone wants to

date Free Speech but when Free Speech

wants to date other people we always

have second thoughts and uh I'd like to

think that I'm at least self-aware

enough to realize that most of the

things that we stand up for truth ethics

Free Speech Etc when they bind on us we

as humans are very likely to change our

mind that's why we try to ins Shrine

this in law it's sort of a Ulisses

contract that I know that I'm going to

be against Free Speech when it's used in

a way that I don't like I bristled when

you said you read my Wikipedia entry

because I have idiots who constantly try

to deface it uh on the other hand

because I'm locked into a free speech

mentality I it stays my hand when I try

to say that that's something that

shouldn't be permitted effectively I

have to put up with uh the empowerment

of idiots and Dangerous Ones at that if

I'm really signed up for the Free Speech

project and you know there you have it

it's interesting on Wikipedia me my

eldest son noticed I don't know if you

know if it's still there I never look at

it but it said that I was the youngest

of four children and I happened to be

the oldest of four children so it's a

tiny little fact it doesn't matter to

anybody other than it's wrong so my

oldest son is a journalist corrected it

and then whoever it was who' put the

erroneous information up there Rec

corrected it back to the false one and

this went on and on and on and on and it

was there was no end to it where my

eldest son kept saying I was the eldest

and whoever this person was kept saying

I was the youngest and all it showed me

was that Wikipedia professes to be you

know a great vehicle for information

accurate information about people and so

on and free speech and so on but there's

not much it can do if someone is utterly

determined to put disinformation out

there well it was briefly a great

resource the problem that we find is it

had certain flaws when you had rules

about you know authoritative sources and

sources were in fact largely

authoritative it worked well as you've

seen the degradation of authoritative

sources and as people have become more

sophisticated about what kinds of

exploits work on w wikipedia you have a

very dangerous situation which is that

technical articles continue to be of

Fairly high quality because there's no

one determined to Graffiti over them

however when you start including

political uh people or people who are

disliked by someone the incentives

change and as a result what you see is a

sort of a chimeric resource which is

very high quality if it was going to

describe hydraulic uh presses let's say

but very low quality when you have a

controversial figure who's hated by a

determined group so I think that it has

morphed over our lifetime from being

something which is an

astonishing uh achievement to something

which is in fact very dangerous though

the other thing I would say is that we

have a very strange

um situation in that we expected that

Free Speech was going to be the exchange

of ideas with which we disagreed and

instead it has morphed

I think over my lifetime much more into

a question of what what can I get away

with that might not be true uh it might

not uh be a different point of view but

it's simply a free speech exploit to

destroy if I don't have a good argument

against somebody's position I always

have the ability to try to talk about

that person's family or skin care or

what have you and I think that for many

of us we're sort of waking up to the

idea that a world saturated in in speech

without friction which is what we now

have you don't have to print a pamphlet

or get a book deal in order to to say

your peace that in a in a cinus world

mostly what Free Speech produces is a

vitriol and personal attacks and I think

that we're all sort of scratching our

head this isn't exactly the future that

we had envisaged yeah on the covid

pandemic which we touched on earlier um

your brother Brett's become a very

high-profile uh part of this debate we

got a a clip of him talking about it

let's listen to this I believe we must

zoom out if we are to understand the

pattern that we are gathered here to

explore because the pattern is larger

than federal health agencies and the

covid cartel if we do zoom out and ask

what are they hiding the answer becomes

as obvious as it is disturbing they are

hiding

everything so that was to a senate

committee this week um what did you make

of your brother's appearance there what

do you make it the general debate about

covid as it raged in real

time well first of all I just I want to

be very clear that whatever Brett's

positions are on covid are his positions

uh they are not my positions and I don't

want to be referenced to his positions

much of what he says is true but the

problem is that when you are so clearly

lying about the origins of covid its

treatment the reasons for doing things

the science you open up the question

what exactly is going on and why are we

lying about

everything uh I think the Stark

difference is is that Brett claims that

he can figure out much more of that

story than I think I can and I dare say

I don't think anyone can if you're not

going to really go after the Eco Health

Alliance and Peter daik in terms of the

information that that organization and

that individual holds

and you're not going to discuss Ralph

Barrack's lab uh in North Carolina

you're not going to talk about the

private Communications inside of NIH

with Francis Collins if you're not going

to talk about Anthony fouche's duties uh

in terms of biowarfare after the Geneva

and bow Warfare conventions of the

1970s because presumably this is all

about statecraft and extremely secret

programs as to why are we in Wuhan um

talking about inserting inserting if

you're in cavage sites and humanizing

Corona

virus it's an absolutely terrifying

vacuum of

knowledge and I don't think we know why

I I think that this you know very likely

we are trying to play 12-dimensional

chess and we're barely able to play

Checkers and this goes back to the

original point about uh I think it was

April of 53 when we figured out DNA and

then 10 years later we had the genetic

code with the work of Marshall nerenberg

it's so much power and the treaties that

we've signed

are possibly nonsensical I mean we we

have a problem that we don't develop

offensive weapons but defensive measures

can be easily converted to offensive

measures we have put restrictions on

ourselves that we then attempt to get

out of uh almost certainly this has to

do

with questions that we don't want

resolved in public and I came from from

you know I'm I'm an old man now uh at 58

I remember the church hearings the pike

hearings the Watergate hearings the Iran

Contra hearings we have given up on a a

a taste for actually figuring out who we

are what we've done what our

responsibilities are and I think I think

that we don't know Brett may know I

don't think he does I know that I don't

know and uh the hearings were the way

that we were going to figure this out

and I don't think that we did that in a

smart and aggressive fashion how do you

think the pandemic

began I don't know it could be a wet

Market it's very unlikely I think that

the diffuse proposal that came out of

the Eco Health Alliance um clearly

suggests that uh there's a whole lot of

coincidence that was going on in Wuhan

China but I have to say that you know as

somebody with a a stem

PhD um

I'd like to restrict myself first to

what I can say and what I can say is

we're not trying to figure it out I can

also say with absolute certainty that

the claim coming out of places like the

Lancet that uh any attempt to figure out

the origin of covid that considered the

Wuhan Institute of virology was

necessarily racist was an Abomination

the attempt to sign up Nobel

laurates uh in order to make this seem

like a respectable position what was it

like 60 plus Nobel laurates

um this is a great danger to science we

cannot spend our credibility covering up

for failures of statecraft and uh 12d

Chess at a geopolitical level I think we

have to go back to a world in which we

actually get answers and if we killed a

bunch of people by helping the Chinese

in their biological Laboratory iies

we're going to have to take

responsibility that uh potentially tens

of millions of people are dead through

our stupidity during the pandemic that

the science regularly changed as facts

changed that struck me looking back on

it as a perfectly normal sequence of

events that with a novel virus that that

would happen um I mean were you are you

sympathetic to the issues that

scientists had and the fact that they

did keep changing their mind about

things from the efficacy of masks for

example to whether if you had a vaccine

you could transmit the virus and so on

are you sympathetic to that's that's the

fog of War when you're dealing with

something like

that

no really you think it was willful

willful deliberate disinformation

knowing the facts look I'm not a bi I'm

not a biologist but uh you know again

that that above 40 IQ uh you know keeps

causing me problems

this was obviously two separate things a

small amount of Revision in terms of our

knowledge as we learned more and a

massive amount of revisions as

our as our policy changed if you

expended too much uh PPE personal

protective equipment in a previous

administration and then you failed to

follow the admonitions of the literature

which said that you had to be prepared

for surges very sudden uh needs for a

very large amount of PPE for example um

it was very clear that we were being

told that masks didn't work at the

beginning in part because we were trying

to reserve them uh for people who were

working in emergency rooms and then we

decided that we needed these masks

despite questions about the size of the

virus and the width of the mesh of the

mask and then we go back and forth and

back and forth this is a transparent

situation in which we're

pretending that our reasons for doing

something are are given by some proxy uh

I think that what what we had was we

didn't want to admit that we'd failed to

replenish our stock under Obama I think

we didn't want to admit that the masks

weren't necessarily very

efficacious we didn't really have great

tools and as such we just look like

idiots and we couldn't ask questions

right when you if if you look at the for

example the phds who are outside of the

control of the University system who

aren't dependent on NIH grants who are

free effectively to ask questions we

were supposed to be the representatives

of ordinary Americans who wanted answers

to these

questions and we were all denigrated we

were told that we

were I don't know crazy people

conspiracy theorists etc etc you look at

the the trajectory of Jeffrey Sachs who

was put on Let commission to investigate

these things he appointed all of these

people from inside the system and he

realized that he uh hired wolves and

foxes to guard hen houses

um this is a crazy situation we need to

give our scientists Fu money and we need

them to tell us the truth and I don't

think it was that the science was

changing I think that the idea is

something terrible happened and we

weren't honest about it you have been

called the new Einstein um because you

love math and physics but also because

he had the theory of relativity you have

The Theory of Everything um it's complex

The Theory of Everything but what's the

simple Layman version of

it that Einstein was well first of all I

mean I I I it's a very kind introduction

uh I'm happy to just be myself uh

effectively that you're looking at

something that's extraordinarily simple

that uh Einstein's theory if you will

began with four degrees of freedom which

you can think of as any four degrees of

freedom like treble mid Bas and Reverb

on an amp then he what he did was he

took the four degrees of freedom and he

said let's put three rulers and one

watch as measuring devices and six

protractors to measure the angles

between all of those four objects and he

called that

SpaceTime that SpaceTime object is not

where I believe uh we live we actually

live on top of all of those extra rulers

watches and

protractors and we are played back in

this four-dimensional space so imagine

you have a record on a phonograph

imagine that that record was in some

sense 14 dimensional data the stylus was

Einstein's SpaceTime metric and the

gramophone is the four-dimensional world

that you perceive that is in essence

where I believe we are I believe that we

are looking at a 14-dimensional

world effectively you think you're

living in four dimensions but you're

playing back a 14-dimensional world

versus via Einstein's metric and you're

getting confused how is it um that you

know you have Schrodinger's cat both

dead and alive well how is it that on

the door's first album you have both

Break On Through To the other side and

Light My Fire but you don't hear them

both at once um you don't think of that

as a paradox and I think that in part

uh we have all of these crazy log jams

because we think we're living in a

four-dimensional manifold so for people

who are scientifically illiterate like

me what is your plan to resolve

this uh sooner or later the string

theorists will retire and die and my

desire is to outlive them effectively

what you have is one group of very

brilliant very smart people who refuse

to follow scientific ethics they won't

consider other people's work they name

everything after themselves they absorb

everything into their worldview and

they've made science impossible much the

way biology was made unpossible under

covid and what I thought I would do is

I'd start a podcast I'd grow an enormous

Channel I think I'm the mathematician

with the largest following in the world

yeah and uh the the entire point of that

is to make sure that they can't do to me

what they did to me before which is to

uh drown me out and uh use the official

channels so I'll use the unofficial

channels in fact the intellectual dark

web came about because I'd spotted that

podcasts were far more powerful than

anyone in traditional media had thought

and so what I did was I tried to

aggregate uh few people with mega

channels and a lot of voices that needed

amplification and uh wrap a kind of a

concept or a brand around it uh right

now the Legacy Media doesn't know why

it's dying and what I intend to do is to

use a large channel to become even

larger and apparently I jumped the gun a

little bit I think that um unfortunately

this University system that holds back

new

ideas and and I mean scientific ideas

and it is still too powerful this thing

that we just saw with Claudine gay

however is a huge I don't know it's a

huge window of hope that's opening

because if I had told you before that

the president of Harvard was completely

unqualified uh for that office and that

that person might be a plagiarist uh

that might have sounded completely

fanciful you might have thought I was

crazy well the fact that she lost her

job for it is actually would have

sounded crazy because you would have

thought that no no no no she she's still

she's still employed as a professor

right but she lost her job as a

president of the of the of Harvard right

absolutely but what I'm trying to say is

you when you find out how corrupt our

universities are and how much amazing

work is still being done within them

you'll be ready to listen to geometric

Unity but you're not in you're not there

yet right now you're in the process of

figuring out that Harvard isn't Harvard

MIT isn't MIT and I I sure hope that

Oxford and Cambridge are still

themselves they have a little bit uh a

little longer in the tooth and maybe a

little bit more history under their belt

but right now it's important to purge

the universities of everything related

to diversity Equity inclusion plagiarism

all we need to get rid of a lot of these

activist subjects uh that were maybe

founded with the best of intentions in

the late 60s and we need to return to

rigor scholarship and above all

collegiality with enough money that

professors do not fear if they don't

sign a loyalty oath they don't need to

worry about walking to campus that

they're going to be um you know attacked

uh right now what we need is something

like a civil war in the universities and

the right side has to win you know I I

realized we' reached an absolute Nadar

with this when a professor at an

American University I can't remember

which one for 25 years had delivered a

lecture about the use of offensive

language in modern society and as part

of the lecture he used examples of

offensive language and he was reported

by students who couldn't handle this and

were triggered by it for using a

offensive language and he was fired even

though the whole point of his lecture

for a quarter of a century had been how

you navigate the use of offensive

language in society and at that point I

realized we had literally lost our

mights I mean the idea that a university

Professor would be hounded out of his

job for giving a lecture about a subject

where the students had just

willfully

deliberately misused the use of the

offensive language to get him out of his

job seemed to me extraordinary

University is not

kindergarten it is important to become

intolerant of people who are not

tolerant themselves that will sound like

a paradox to some we have no time for

that it is very important to restore

collegiality academic freedom freedom of

speech and a lot of people don't belong

in University and we need to practice

exclusion rather than inclusion in their

case I don't know how to say this this

idea this Vogue that we have for things

that sound good but make no sense has to

be purged from the system by the adults

otherwise there will be no adults in the

system I want to end very quickly Eric

um I've got 10 things I want to give uh

you the opportunity to give me a

statistical probability of these things

happening so you can choose any

percentage you like okay but you got to

answer quickly it's rapid fire no no no

yeah I decline you can't do that

no really why because it's going to be

well because it's going to be extremely

low quality I live on the internet and

as no I'm I'm quite serious the there's

a Vogue for trying to get people to

answer all questions I didn't

particularly want to answer a question

about my brother's views on covid

because why I I completely supported him

with respect to Ivor mechon and the idea

it wasn't horse to warmer but I

completely disagreed with his Ivor mecon

maximalism and the internet can't

maintain a distinction like that you see

in other words to the Ivor mechon Army

uh Brett was a genius for realizing that

Ivermectin was a near-perfect

prophylactic which I didn't believe on

the other hand to people who were buying

the official line I was killing people

by suggesting that ior maon was a

replacement so every time you ask a

person to engage in such activities what

happens is that that person's life turns

to crap because of the low quality

people on the internet many of whom are

Bots probably not even humans uh that

dog you with everything that you say so

the reason that I don't accept what

you're saying is that uh I don't want

three weeks of pain in my life that I'm

an idiot for giving those

probabilities that's actually a

brilliant answer uh Eric W it's been a

pleasure talking to you thank you very

much really enjoyed it Pierce thanks for

having me take

care