---
0:00Okay, good morning. So, today we do the scientific revolution, okay? And as I mentioned in previous classes, it was really Dante who helped give the give birth to the idea of modernity. And he really launched three major movements, which include the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and the scientific revolution, okay? We would not have modernity without Dante.
Okay. All right. So, let's see how the three connect together, okay? We're going to review the previous two classes to connect to today's class on the scientific revolution. So, the Renaissance, what it was was it was a celebration of what makes us human.
Before we were focused on the divine, on the idea of God. Now, we want to tell the story of what it means to be human, okay? That's the Renaissance. Protestantism believes that we have direct access to God. The Catholic religion, the Pope is the divine representative, and the clergy is the spokesperson for for God.
But Protestant Protestant believes that we have direct access to God, we should be able to speak with God directly through the Bible. Um The scientific revolution, it's really about how can we know God, okay? That's the idea of the scientific revolution. So, let's review why we have these ideas. And it has to do with Dante.
So, remember last week we discussed the dialogue between Beatrice and Dante. Let's review it really quickly. So, Beatrice is saying, I just said that God is perfect. Whatever God touches, whatever God creates is perfect. So, if that's the case, why is it that there is decay, destruction, and death in this world?
2:02What are the forces that give rise to this decay? And then she explains, okay, whatever God creates is perfect. So, angels are perfect, they're immortal, they're eternal. But, the elements that are in this world, they are not created by God. What is created by God are the divine laws that underlie the universe.
God created the atoms, God created created the laws that allow these atoms to interact with each other, okay? So, the rays and motion of the holy light draw forth the soul of every animal and plant from matter able to take form. So, it's these divine laws that create the animals and the plants. But, these divine laws also necessitate that they die in order for new forms to come into being, okay? So, this is the idea of evolution.
Um we humans are special, why? Because we are both divinely created and created by the laws of the universe. We have a dual nature. And the main advantage of this dual nature is it gives us a capacity to imagine. Remember the issue with God is that God is perfect.
If you're perfect, if you're eternal, if you're immutable, you lack imagination, because there are no boundaries to you. But, if you're human, you're forced to have an imagination, because you'll make mistakes. You will fail. There are things that you do not know. And the imagination gives you the capacity to know this world and to perfect this world, okay?
So, that's what it means to be fundamentally human. Okay. So, let's recap, okay? These are the three main messages that Dante is relaying to us through his poetry. First of all, God is within us.
How do we know? Because we are capable of loving others.
4:03God is the light of love within us. The more we love someone, the more this light grows in us, okay? So, we must focus on loving someone who is dear to us. Second idea is we have the imagination and thus responsibility to discover the universal laws underlying reality. God created the laws of the universe, God created us in order to know these laws, okay?
That's very fundamental to the idea of science. The last idea is we can master these laws to better our reality, okay? So, this these are the three hidden messages of the Divine Comedy that will influence development of science in the Western world. Okay. So, I want to talk briefly about science that it has been traditionally been practiced in ancient societies, okay?
So, in ancient societies, the the major ancient civilizations are China, Egypt, and India. And you will see a lot of similarities among these three civilizations civilizations on how they practice the idea of science, okay? It's very intuitive, it's very imaginative. Um it will it will make sense to you, okay? So, the first science that they focus a lot on is the idea of sacred geometry.
I'm not I'm not sure if you've heard of this, okay? But, the idea of sacred geometry is that the underlying fundamental structure of the universe, of reality, are geometric shapes, okay? And from these geometric shapes, you can give rise to every possible reality. All right. So, um um this is called the egg of life, and from the egg of life, you just keep on expanding it, you will get all of reality, okay?
These are actually 3D, 4D shapes. I can't illustrate them, but if you're but if you're curious, go online, these are beautiful
6:03um um ideas. Okay? Um so, there are two possible ways to understand sacred geometry. The first possible way is to understand understand as solids, okay? So, the Egyptians understood them as solids, and Plato understood them as solids.
Remember Plato, a lot of his philosophy is derived from the Egyptians. And the idea of sacred geometry, it's very apparent in Plato's writings, and he got this from the Egyptians. So, basically the idea is that if you train yourself on how to understand sacred geometry and how to manipulate sacred geometry in your head, you can access God, okay? So, the first idea is to understand it as solids. But, there's another way you can understand sacred geometry, and it's as vibrations, as energy, as a force, okay?
And this is the way that the Chinese understand sacred geometry, right? As chi, as life force, also as well as the Hindus. And so, imagine a monk who's breathing, okay? Who's meditating. What are you doing What is he doing?
He's breathing, and he's meditating, and he's focusing his energies in order to achieve the sacred geometry within him. The the monk will often say things like om om om, okay? He's causing vibrations that try to mimic the sacred geometry. W- Why is he doing this? Because the belief at this time is that if there is a God, okay?
If there are a cre- if there's a created God, the question is, how does it think? Right? It's It's not going to think with words the way we do, it's going to think using mathematics with sacred geometry. And by thinking, he is going to create the underlying universe. And how does he do that?
He does it by
8:04breathing, breathing in, emitting sacred geometry, and then breathing out, breathing back in, okay? Inhaling, exhaling. And this will give rise to the universe. So, if you're a monk or a priest, you practice meditation in order to try to mimic the act of creation. And if you are able to succeed, then what will happen is you harmonize yourself with the vibrations of the universe, and therefore you're able to access divine energy, okay?
So, that's the idea of sacred geometry. And again, it's a very complicated idea, but but that's the general gist. Um any questions? Okay? And again, this is this make intuitive sense, okay?
This should make intuitive sense to you. All right. The second big field that the Egyptians, the Chinese, and the Indians were really compa- really passionate about is astronomy and astrology, okay? So, the Egyptians basically created astrology. And the idea is that you're trying to link the movement of the stars, the cosmos, with events in the world, okay?
So, by understanding the movement of the stars, you're able to divine or predict the future of humanity, okay? Every major king had an astrologist in order to divine the future through the practice of astronomy and astrology. All right. And the last thing is alchemy. What is alchemy?
Alchemy is basically chemistry and sorcery combined together. Um this is a polytheistic world, and the idea is that because it's a polytheistic world, it's a chaotic chaotic world, and somehow, if you're clever enough, you're able to hack this world, okay? Think think of it as hockey. That there are secrets to this world, and you are able to take elements in this world, combine together, and create something called
10:04the philosopher's stone. The philosopher's stone is the power of God in order to give you the elixir of immortality in order to live forever, as well as to manipulate the environment. So, basically to turn lead into gold. And again, this was an extremely popular practice um in ancient societies. Okay?
So, these are three major sciences in uh the primitive societies. China, Egypt, and India. And they um pro- they promulgated outwards and influenced other societies. We still have them today, okay? There are still people who practice alchemy, um sacred geometry, and um astrology today.
Okay? Um any questions about this before I move on? Okay, so this is primitive primitive science. So, the question then is what's the difference? Okay, so let's focus on the three major differences between um pre-modern science and modern science, okay?
The first major difference is it focuses focuses focuses on the spiritual world, on the outer worldly. All right? And the point of science was to create harmony between our world and the spiritual world. Okay? Because if you harmonize these two worlds, you can have a more prosperous, more peaceful future.
Um today we are only focused on the material world, the world that we can see and know in order to create progress. Okay? We have abandoned the spiritual world, and we focus on this material world in order to manipulate it in order to promote technological progress. And quite honestly, we have been extremely successful at that. In fact, I will argue we've been too successful at that, okay?
So, that's the first major difference between pre-modern and modern science. Second major difference is that pre-modern science relies entirely on intuition and imagination, okay? You don't do experiments. You don't um have
12:05conferences, you don't debate. You just meditate, you just dream. Okay? And you often fall into trances in order to communicate with the spiritual world. Um in this world, they use a lot of hello and um um hello su- sugenics, okay?
They um a lot of psychedelics, okay? Including uh magic mushrooms, uh a drink called soma, which is very um important in the Hindu religion. Um as as as as well as the Zoroastrian religion. It's basically a psychedelic, okay? Um Today, we don't rely on intuition and imagination.
We think this is um superstitious. We rely mainly on something called the scientific method, okay? And in the in in um Later on, I will discuss the scientific method more in detail. All right? The last thing is in pre-modern science people are relying on divine inspiration in order to discover the truth.
The big question is what is truth? Today, we care about the question how do we know truth? Okay, it's really the idea of in- in- the institutionalization of doubt. Our main Our main priority is to question and doubt the truth. And what And what And what will happen is because of this emphasis change, we've changed from what is truth to how do we know truth, it will launch a revolution in techno- technological progress.
All right? All right. So, underlying the scientific revolution are three major theological assumptions. Without these theological assumptions, the scientific revolution would not be possible, okay? So, the first and most important idea is the idea of monotheism.
There is one God. Okay?
14:05And again, um the very idea of monotheism is also revolutionary in human thought. Second idea is that God designed and willed the universe into being. So, there is an intelligent design to the universe. And it's up to us to discover this design. God endowed us with the capacity to discover his design and will.
Okay? So, these are the three major theological assumptions underlying the scientific revolution. That is why these That is why the scientific scientific revolution happened in Western Europe and not, say, in China or the Islamic world or India, okay? Because you need these three theological assumptions. Okay.
So, what do these assumptions bring us? Okay, so let's look at poly- polytheism again. Throughout most of human history um most societies have been thought polytheistic. What is the difference between a polytheistic worldview of science and a monotheistic worldview of science, okay? So, I I I I need you to memorize this chart, okay?
The first major difference is the poly- polytheistic system, there's there's really no design. There's really no progress. It's just chaos and struggle. But in the monotheistic worldview, there is an underlying truth to the universe. Okay?
That's the first difference. Second major difference is the idea of randomness. Things happen for no particular reason. If you um win the lottery, that's great, okay? But if you lose all your wealth that's just random, okay?
There's It's just fate. It's just destiny. There's no purpose or no design to your fate. But in a monotheistic world, there's the idea of good and evil. Things happen to you that benefit you if you're doing good.
But if you're doing evil, then bad
16:06things will happen to you, okay? So, there's a very um There's a deep sense that God is in our lives orchestrating events. The last major difference is that between fate and progress, okay? If there's truth in this world, if there's goodness in this world, then we have a responsibility to progress by doing good and by discovering this truth. Okay?
That's why I keep on emphasizing this, but mon- monotheism is really an intellectual revolution first and foremost. Okay. So, um the scientific revolution happens, and what drives it, okay? There are three major forces that drive the scientific revolution. The first is the idea of the Protestant Reformation and the Counter-Reformation.
So, the Protestants have come and they're challenging the authority of the church, and the church responds by um what's something called the Counter-Reformation. There is this belief or this is prejudice um that the church is anti-science. The church The Catholic church is not anti-science. In fact, the both the Protestants and the Catholic church are trying to use science in order to promote their legitimacy and authority, okay? So, the Protestants are heavily uh devoted to science because because they want to understand the will and mind of God.
The Catholics themselves are also promoting science. Um the Catholics will create a new society called the Jesuits who are renowned for um for for being great scientists. In fact, a lot of universities in this world were founded by Jesuits. Um a lot of Jesuits came to China, and they promoted knowledge and science in China. And this has been true for many centuries, okay?
So, both the Catholic church and the Protestant movement, they're all in a struggle to use science in order to promote their own authority
18:06and legitimacy, okay? So, that's the first major force driving the scientific revolution. Second is war. During this time, Europe is in constant state of war. It's fighting amongst themselves um between the Catholics and the Protestants.
Um it's also fighting with the Muslims, okay? The Ottoman Empire, which is at this point um the strongest empire in um in the world. All right? And the last idea that's driving science is the age of exploration and conquest. As Europe is trying to expand outwards, if they're going to North America, they're going to South America, they need better navigation tools.
They need compasses. They need um um astrolabes, okay? They They So, science solves all three problems, okay? Okay. So, again the scientific revolution, the best way to remember the scientific revolution is it's a fundamental change from asking what is truth to how do we know truth?
Okay? How can we know truth? And believe it or not, but no one really bothered to ask this question before. How can we know truth? Okay?
Um And because science is asking this question, how do we know truth, what it's really doing is it's separating itself from religion. And putting itself above religion, okay? Because religion purports to be the truth, right? And what science is saying is like, how do you know if you if you're right? Well, we know if you're right because we have methods to test you, okay?
So, science is putting itself above religion. And as you can imagine, this will create conflicts within the Catholic Church very, very soon. Mainly in the trial of Galileo. Okay. So, because science asks this question, how do we know truth?
What it does is it
20:07creates the scientific method. Okay? And the scientific method is composed of three main elements. The first is you ask questions and you propose hypothesis. So, there are no questions now that are out of bounds.
And you have to think of solutions and ideas to solve these questions. Okay, so that's the first step. Second step is there are these processes and protocols for testing hypothesis. Experimentation basically. All right, so only if you can experiment, only if you can only if your hypothesis matches experimental results can it be true.
Now, last thing is it creates a system of doubt and criticism in order to test all experimental results. And today we call them academic societies and peer review journals. Okay, so if you're a scientist working today at a university, whatever results you have you have you must first publish and then you have to present your journal results to a conference of peers who will criticize you and they will look for flaws in your argument. And this is an extremely effective system on how to know what is true. And again, because of the system, it's allowed for a remarkable explosion of wealth and technology and progress in the world today.
And this is the chart that shows us, okay? So, for most of human history, progress, meaning productivity, has been flat. And then starting around the year 1700, it starts to exponentially rise. Okay? And this has meant that we are now able to feed more and more people.
So, before 1700, you really couldn't get above a few hundred million people. And now we are at nine we are projected to reach nine billion people. And you can
22:10ask, is this a good thing? And I will argue it's not a good thing, but it shows us the remarkable power of science. Okay? All right. So, now the question then is what caused the scientific method to arise?
And it really has to do with a major debate among scientists. It was it was the geocentric versus the heliocentric debate. Okay? Now, what's interesting is that if you look at the Egyptians, they knew that the sun was the center of the universe. That's why their god was the sun god, Ra.
Okay? But by the time you had to you hit the Greeks, there was now all this divergence between those who believed that the universe revolved around the sun and those who believed it revolved around the Earth. In about 150, a Greek scientist named Ptolemy working in Egypt, he developed the first comprehensive cosmological system. And this cosmo cosmological system which he wrote in a book called the Almagest, he made certain arguments. Okay, the first argument is that the Earth stands still.
Okay? The Earth does not move. It doesn't revolve. Okay? Second is that all other celestial bodies, including the moon, including the stars, the planets, revolve around the Earth in a circular motion.
Okay? Why? Because in the heavens it is assumed that everything is perfect. Okay? So, for example, on planet Earth we breathe something called air.
Right? We we air oxygen is what gives us life. But up there in space, air becomes ether. Ether is the air that the gods breathe.
24:11Ether is what allows the world the heavens to be perfect. Okay? And so and this is the Arabic edition of the Almagest. And as as you can see, there you can't read this, but there's a lot of mathematical detail in the book. And because Ptolemy's perspective aligned with theology, the Bible, it was accepted it was accepted truth for over a thousand years.
Okay? The Islamic golden age relied heavily on Ptolemy's understanding of the cosmos. But the first person to suggest that this model is wrong is Copernicus. Okay, who is a Polish polymath. He did many things.
He did astrology. He also did astronomy. Okay, and when he died in 1543, he proposed the heliocentric model. Now, what's really important for us to remember is that Copernicus was a devout Catholic. And many of his friends were major figures within the Catholic Church.
And guess what? They were extremely supportive of his theory. In fact, they want they wanted him to publish his theory. Okay? Why?
Because at this point, there is no conflict between science and religion. So, the saying back then is it is the job of the church, the Catholic Church, to tell you how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. Okay? So, the Catholic Church didn't really care one way. Didn't care about the geocentric model or the heliocentric model.
Didn't care at all. So, Copernicus was heavily supported. The problem with Copernicus is that the mathematics didn't really make sense.
26:12Okay? So, if I put two books in front of you, Copernicus' book called On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres, or Ptolemy's book, well, most scientists would tell you that Ptolemy's book is better, okay? There's more math. It's it's more well argued. And the reason why is Copernicus, his idea is new and so there was not that much time he didn't have that much time to refine it.
People didn't really have time to work on it. Whereas Ptolemy, people thousand people have been working at over the centuries, okay? So, the geocentric model, it is much more refined, much more accepted at this point than the heliocentric model. We there this this man, his name is Tycho Brahe and he is a Danish polymath as well. He comes from a very noble family and he spent a lot of his time doing observations.
Okay? He collected a lot of data. He observed how the planets revolve. And his conclusion is that the geocentric and the heliocentric model are both correct. And this and this and his proposal was that Earth was the center of the world, but the planets revolve around the sun.
Okay? So, the sun revolved around the Earth and every other system revolved around the sun. Okay? So, that's what he that's what he derived from his data. Now, he he had a protege named Johannes Kepler.
He's a German and he looked at the data and he and he discovered that the data actually makes the heliocentric model actually supports the heliocentric model more than the geocentric model. And but because he is not a member of the Catholic Church, he's a Lutheran, okay? The Catholic Church couldn't really do any do anything about him. All right? And what's remarkable about Kepler is that just from this data, he was able to make certain predictions
28:13about the stars that we've confirmed over time. The first is that the sun so every revolves revolves around the sun. His problem though is that he didn't put the sun at the center of the universe. He put something else at the center of the universe. The sun revolved around that and the Earth revolved around the sun.
Second major law of motion is that the orbit is actually not circular. It's elliptical. Okay? That's what the data was telling him. All right?
And this goes against theology because remember in theology, the heavens are perfect. Right? That means that's where God lives. But um Kepler is saying, nope, the universe sorry, the orbit is elliptical. And then what he what else he did that was revolutionary is that he he developed he discovered that there was a correlation between this orbit and the mass of the planet, okay?
And this will give rise to Newton. But Kepler made all these revolutionary discoveries. Now comes Galileo. And Galileo he lives in Florence at this time. And so he's under the purview of the Catholic Church.
So, he comes from a pretty normal background. When he grew up, he wanted to be a monk, but his dad wanted him wanted him to become a doctor instead. And then he they made a compromise and he said, I'll go study mathematics. But his dad was insistent that he go study medicine. Eventually, Galileo managed to go to do what he wanted and just do science, okay?
Um at this point, they invented a telescope. And this was not a great telescope. So, the telescope could give you three times the magnification of the human eye, okay? But it's not that great. But with this telescope this new invention, Galileo did amazing things.
First thing he did was he discovered
30:13that the Jupiter had moons. And this was revolutionary because it was assumed that everything revolved around the planet um Earth. But now he showed that moons revolved around Jupiter. He also recognized that um from the Earth, you're able to see um Venus spin around us. And that also was revolutionary because it was assumed that um Earth stood still and all the planets stood still.
Okay? So, he wrote this book and it was a sensation. He became like the court scientist to the Medici family and the Catholic Church thought this book was great, okay? But the thing about Galileo, which is very important, is that he was a very arrogant man. And because he was promoting the heliocentric model, he was coming into conflict with a lot of academics that were extremely well established who made their living off the geocentric model, okay?
So, they're having these arguments and Galileo's um arguments were very limited. Remember, this is a new idea. It's not really supported by mathematics. It's not really supported by a lot of data, okay? So, Galileo's entire logic was I speak to God.
I know the truth and you're all idiots, okay? That was basically how he spoke to his enemies. And as you can imagine, he had more and more enemies. And as you can also imagine, his enemies were devising ways to get at Galileo. One thing that Galileo was saying privately that he was should not have been saying is that people were saying to him, "Listen, um this heliocentric model, it's fine, but it goes against scripture, okay?
Let's look at scripture. Scripture says that um the Earth, it's firm and immovable, okay? That's what the Bible says. Also, if you look if you look at Genesis, it's
32:13clear that God created the Earth first and then he created the heavens, the sun and the moon and the stars. So, logically, everything should revolve around Earth. So, Galileo, how do you explain this conflict between your theory of uh the heliocentric model and scripture?" And Galileo's response was "It's my job to interpret scripture." And this, as you remember from last week, it's heresy. Okay? If you disagree with the church, that's not heresy.
That could just be ignorance, okay? But if you believe that you are above the church, if you refuse to accept the authority of the church, if you believe that I interpret the the Bible better than the church, that is heresy. Okay? So, Galileo was called before the Inquisition. He was explained asked to explain himself.
And Galileo was pretty confident, you know, he had the support of the Medicis. He was he was a very famous author. He was extremely intelligent. He thought that God loved him, okay? So, as you can imagine, it was a complete disaster.
Uh it was a disastrous meeting. The Inquisition told him to shut up, okay? You you can write anything you want privately, but do not promote your views anymore. And because if if you were guilty of heresy, you could be burned at the stake, Galileo had no choice but to follow this order, okay? That is until um 1632.
What happened in 1632? Well, the old Pope died and a new Pope, Urban the VIII, came into power. Who is Urban the VIII? Well, he was a very good friend of Galileo's. And Urban the VIII was a huge admirer of of Galileo's, okay?
So, Galileo felt he now had permission to get back at at his enemies. So, he wrote a book called Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. And it was it was basically like almost like a Platonic dialogue, okay? Where he presented his argument again
34:14for the heliocentric model. Not not only that, but he made fun of his enemies. So, it's a dialogue and the chief enemy of Galileo, his name was Simplicitus, okay? Simplicitus, Not only that, but he put into the mouth of Simplicitus a lot of the arguments from Pope Urban the VIII, okay? So, he was making fun of the Pope even though they were very good friends.
So, you can as you can imagine, the Pope was really pissed. At first, he banned this book. And what happens when you ban a book? You make it into a national bestseller, okay? So, everyone was reading this book.
So, now Urban the VIII was really angry and so he called for the Inquisition, okay? So, Galileo was hauled before the Inquisition and Galileo now had to explain himself. And Galileo was coming up with a lot of like really silly excuses. So, so he said is, "Listen, this book, it's it's a satire. It's a thought experiment.
I know that the heliocentric model is wrong. And so, I wrote this book to um as an intellectual exercise to see how wrong it could be and to see if it could be right, okay? So, so so so he's saying things same things like this." Didn't work. And they uh basically put him um under arrest, okay? At this point, um Galileo's friends pleaded with the Pope and the Pope said, "Fine, I'm a generous person.
I will commute his sentence to house arrest for the rest of his life, okay?" So, that is the story of Galileo. All right? So, you can make the argument that it was Galileo's personality that was just responsible for the trial for his trial and downfall. Cuz it was his hubris. It's a very classic classic uh Greek tragedy.
But
36:15um historically, that's not what how we remember this the story. The reason why is again, remember, there's a major conflict between the Protestants and the Catholics. So, the Protestants will use this trial as propaganda against the church. And the Protestants will say, "You see how anti-science the uh church is?" And Galileo will be will be remembered now as the father of modern science because he put science above religion. And even though Galileo um was disgraced during his time, eventually what will happen is the Florentines, the people of Florence, they will dig up his grave and put uh his body beside Michelangelo and Dante.
All right? That's how that's that's how they much they revered uh the contribution of Galileo. Okay. All right. So, um again, even though the theory of heliocentrism, it is correct, the mathematics didn't make any sense.
At this time in history, if you had a team of scientists go and look at the geocentric argument versus a heliocentric argument, they would say the geocentric argument makes more scientific sense, okay? It was not until Newton when the mathematics came into being that allowed for the heliocentric model to be widely accepted. Newton, as you know, he's the person who created calculus. The calculus you're learning in school, guess what? He was responsible for the creation of calculus.
Now, what's really interesting for us to know about Newton is Newton didn't really see himself as a mathematician mathematician or scientist. These were side hobbies. What he really was was a theolo- theologian, okay? So, he spent most of his time actually reading the Bible because he was convinced that within the Bible were the secrets of the universe. Specifically, he wanted to know when the world would end, okay?
And he and he spent his most of his life doing
38:15these calculations and he told us that the world will probably end, I don't know, 2060, okay? 2050, 2060, around there. So, he spent most of his time doing theology. This is important for us because even at this time, even as the scientific revolution is gaining steam, there's no separation between religion and science. People understood faith as a very important cornerstone of science.
Without faith, how could you have the energy and the inspiration to understand the mind of God? Okay? Um Newton is also famous for being an alchemist. So, he spent most of his time also doing these science experiments where he trying to combine different elements. Unfortunately, chemistry at this point, it's very primitive.
So, he's taking mercury, okay? He was convinced that mercury will lead to the philosopher's stone and he was eating it. He was tasting it. And as a result, he had a lot of mercury poisoning problems. He couldn't sleep.
He had delusions. His hair was falling out. Um he had mercury poisoning, okay? But at the same time, he had the inspiration to come up with the mathematics to prove the heliocentric model is correct, okay? Um the prin- the book he wrote is called the Principia.
Um at this time, Latin is the um universal language of of scientists, right? And also by the time also, guys, um at this time, they're not called scientists, they're called natural philosophers. All right? Science is considered part of philosophy. All right, so in 1687, they this debate ended with the publication of this book.
Newton used mathematics to prove once and for all um, this the the the heliocentric model. Uh, this is one page from the Principia. As you can see, there are a lot of mathematics, there are a lot of diagrams, okay? Um, in this book you also find his laws
40:16of motions. So, Newton's great insight was that the probably the laws of attraction, gravity, that govern this world probably govern the heavens as well, okay? So, before it was assumed that the heavens and the earth were separate. And now he's saying that, "No, these are combined together." And he created um, laws of planetary motion, okay? If he he figured out the mathematics that um, that told us relationship between the the size of the planets, the mass, and how they orbited, okay?
Now, the problem though, he had a huge problem. The problem is he had a correlation, he had the mathematical correlation, but he didn't know why the correlation existed. He didn't have the he couldn't solve the causation problem, okay? There's just no way that God would spend all his time moving the planets around. He was much too busy.
So, there had to be there had to be an underlying cause. He didn't know what it was though, okay? And and who figured it out? Well, Einstein figured it out, right? So, we So, at this point in 1905, we knew that there was a correlation between the size of the planet and how it moved, okay?
And gravity. But we didn't know why. And it was the genius of Einstein to figure it out. Now, you you remember Einstein because of his famous equation E equals MC squared, okay? What is What is this What does E equals MC squared mean?
It means that mass and energy are correlated. And this is a revolution. We we didn't we didn't understand this before, right? We just We just assumed that solids and vibrations are different. And what Einstein is saying is that in order for a solid to exist, there had to be vibrations in the first place.
And this this formula tells us that within all objects, there is almost an infinite amount of energy, okay? Because C is the speed of light.
42:17And why is this important? Because this formula will allow us to develop the nuclear bomb, right? By splitting the atom, you can create almost an infinite amount of energy in this world. Okay, so that's a major contribution of Einstein. But at his at at his time, he was mainly known for figuring out the causation problem in space, okay?
And what um, and how Einstein figured out is by developing a new idea called space-time. He believed that in the heavens, space there was a space-time curvature. And so, what was happening was this, a mass, a huge object, it would go into the space-time curvature and warp it. And because it warped it, it drew things into its orbit. And the and then these things would have to move around this solid, okay?
So, space-time curvature now helps us understand uh, the laws of planetary motion, first developed by Kepler and then by and then refined by Newton, okay? And what's amazing about about Einstein is and and this is like this will blow your mind, okay? But he did all this while sitting at a desk at a patent office in Switzerland. He was not allowed to court. He was not at a university.
He was just thinking by himself. He was daydreaming, okay? So, um, this was just an incredible achievement. Okay. And so, um, the mathematics is very complicated, okay?
But all you need you need to understand is that he figured out that there's a mathematical relationship between the mass of the object and the space-time curvature, okay? And this formula um, tells us what the relationship is. And the And why mathematics is important is it allows us to make predictions. And
44:17these predictions will tell us if the if the science actually works or not, okay? If the model, the theory makes sense or not. And so, Einstein's theory of relativity, space-time curvature, it is one of the most successful models in history because it predicts the black hole, okay? The black hole is almost um, solid that is infinitely um, massive and therefore it attracts everything into it and sucks everything into it, including light. Okay, so it predicts the idea of the uh, black hole.
And we discovered the black hole, all right? So, this um, confirms the theory of of relativity. The um, the theory of relativity also predicts the Big Bang because um, space-time The idea of space-time is that space is in motion, right? That's why you have time because it's in motion. Well, if it's in motion, then where did it start?
It had It had to be like a starting point. And that's why scientists, not Einstein, Einstein was actually against the idea of the Big Bang, but lots of scientists believe that you need a Big Bang, okay? And and so, we have a working model of the Big Bang. The problem with this model is that there's actually a lot of evidence against this, okay? So, so there are two examples.
The first example is using the Hubble telescope, the most advanced telescope in the world, which which is now in outer space, we've discovered that there are actually galaxies that came before they were due, okay? So, the idea of Big Bang is that it is massive energy explosion and so, the galaxies will develop later. But our data tells us the galaxies came before, much much earlier than we expected, okay? That's that's the first thing. Second problem that we have with the Big Bang model is that this universal expansion, it is not constant.
There are times when it actually speeds up, which makes no sense. Why would it speed up, okay? So,
46:19um, this Big Bang model, a lot of scientists are now trying to re-examine it. Okay, the problem is, and this is a huge problem, is we have we don't have a better theory. And so, to get around the problem of these sis sis mathematical inconsistencies in the model, scientists created a new concept called uh, dark energy. Dark energy. Now, you think to yourself, dark energy means we can't see it.
No, that's not what it means, okay? And you're like, "Well, dark energy means we can't measure it." No, that's not what it means. Dark energy means we don't know what it is, okay? Doesn't mean it exists and we can't see it. It just means we have no idea what it is.
We can't explain why the Big Bang is expanding really fast at certain points and really slow at other points. And so, we just say it must be dark energy, okay? Does that make sense, guys? So, dark energy dark energy is not something that you can't see. It's just something we don't have no idea what it is, okay?
All right. So, these are the theories, okay? But the person who was most responsible for the creation of the scientific method, his name is actually Francis Bacon. And he spent his entire life promoting the idea of scientific processes and methods. Um, he's most most well known for his book The New Atlantis.
So, uh, in the new new Atlantis, which is like a novel, the protagonist, he ends up in the on an island where they have the most advanced science in the world. And and what and the reason why they have the most advanced science in the world is because they turned science into a bureaucracy, a very specialized bureaucracy, okay? So, I'm not going to read all of it, all right? But there are different uh, offices, different bureaucracies for different functions. So, for example, we have three that try new experiments such as themselves think good.
These we call pioneers or miners, okay? So, you you have an office, a bureaucracy specifically to do
48:20experiments, which means that you have an office, a bureaucracy specifically come up with hypotheses to ask questions, okay? Also, um, we have three that take care out of them to direct new experiments of a higher light more penetrating into nature than the former. These we call lamps. So, you have a team to actually audit these experiments and figure out how to improve them, okay? And the and then um, lastly, we have three that raise the former discoveries by experiments into great observations, axioms, and aphorisms.
These we call interpreters of nature. So, these are theoreticians. They're the ones who take these this this experimental data and combine it into a theory. And so, Bacon is proposing a scientific bureaucracy. And guess what, guys?
We have basically achieved his vision today. If you look at science today, it's essentially a bureaucracy, all right? Now, one of the foundations of this bureaucracy was the founding of the Royal Society of London in 1660s in 1660, okay? Why is this important? Because for the first time, scientists are allowed to present their findings before a group of peers who will question and doubt them.
And this will enhance their research process, okay? So, the founding of the Royal Society was fun funda fundamental. As you can imagine what will come next is publications, magazines that will showcase a lot of these new new discoveries. Um the founding members of the Royal Society include Christopher Wren, who is a very famous architect, as well as Robert Hooke, who is a very famous um chemist. Okay.
So, that's a basic background in into the history of the scientific revolution. Um today we are asking ourselves a very deep question. So, the scientific revolution separated science from religion.
50:21And there's a lot of concern that this is is this has created a lot of ethical issues within science, okay? So, let's look at three major issues. The first major issue is the idea of artificial intelligence. Basically, we're trying to create God. And that's a huge concern.
What happens when the computers are much smarter than humans, okay? Second is the idea of nanotechnology, where we're trying to go into the atomic level and change the laws of nature, okay? We're trying to defy God. The third is the idea of genetics, where we are trying to change people's genetic blueprint so that we can have designer babies, so that babies will not will be free from cancer. Also, we're trying to develop immortality, okay?
We're looking for the exact the elixir immortality. Okay, so these are three massive ethical debates within science. And my argument to you today is that this is the wrong question to ask. Okay? This is the wrong question to ask.
These are not possible within the current scientific framework that we have today. In fact, I would make the argument that these three are essentially illusions. Hocus pocus, magic. Or you you you you can even go as far as to say they are deliberate scams. So, artificial intelligence is the example that we are most calm with that that we're most fam- familiar with, okay?
So, I'm sure you've all used ChatGPT. Is it any good? No, it's not. Will it get any better? No, it won't, okay?
So, but there's so much hype around it. Okay? Um I I I I I don't have time to go into artificial intelligence, but if you want to know more about artificial intelligence and why it's a scam, I can do so later on, okay? Just just ask me. All right.
So, the real problem is this. Okay, the real problem is this. Science has become an imperial bureaucracy.
52:22That's the real issue. All right? If you think about the world we live in today, the field that is most like the imperial bureaucracy of China um is science today. Science is above nation, it is above government, it does it does things by itself, okay? And what's science doing?
Science is promoting um its its own bureaucracy. There's if there's no accountability, if there's no responsibility, if scientists actually have to tell us what they're doing, then it's not that they will become God, it's more like they'll become corrupt bureaucrats. Does that make sense? It's more likely that they will take all these billions of dollars the government throw at them and they'll just waste it all. Okay?
Why? Because they can. It's much easier for people to be lazy, greedy, and corrupt than it is for them to become God, okay? All right. So, let me let me let me explain.
Okay. So, I I know this is a hard idea, but genius does not come from hard work. It does not come from scientific process or scientific method. It comes from intuition, imagination, and inspiration, okay? So, remember when Einstein, he was just daydreaming his theories.
Okay? Remember when Newton, he was working on theology, he was working on alchemy, and he and then he developed the ideas of calculus, okay? This is this is true consistently throughout history. This is a passage from the book The Cosmic Serpent by Jeremy Narby, okay? I'll just read it to you.
Many of science's central ideas seem to come from beyond the limits of rationalism. People do not logically deduce these ideas. Rene Descartes dreams of an angel who explains the basic principles of
54:24materialist rationalism to him. And this is no different from Muhammad, who was meditating in a cave and the angel Gabriel appeared before him. It's religious. Albert Einstein daydreams in a tram approaching another and conceives the theory of relativity. Right?
James Watson scribbles on a newspaper in a train, then rides his bicycle to reach the conviction that DNA has the form of a double helix. So, what gives rise to great science, to great ideas? It Well, imagination, intuition, and also faith that you are correct. Right? That's Galileo.
Galileo was actually convinced that he was right even though the science was very sloppy, okay? In fact, there's this very famous story where Einstein in the 1930s and '40s, he was having a huge argument with scientists who were arguing for quantum mechanics, specifically Niels Bohr. Okay? So, um if you look go go and look back in 1930s and '40s and you look at their arguments, what you will find is that Einstein was very clear, was very logical, and was very um scientific style, okay? And you will find that Niels Bohr was unclear, illogical, and very sloppy with science.
But Einstein was wrong, Niels Bohr was right. Today quantum mechanics is a science that underlies all the technology that we have today, including the computer, okay? The semiconductor, the transistor computer. All right? So, so that's a really important thing that we have to remember about science.
At first, it seems wrong, but because of the people who believe in it have so much conviction faith, they eventually triumph, okay? All right? So, that's how science develops. And this this is the argument of um Thomas Kuhn in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, okay? This is a book that I highly recommend.
56:24Um if you ever study the history of science, this is a book the first book that you will read. Because he goes into how science develops over the centuries. The central argument is that science does not develop like piecemeal and slowly and methodically, okay? It goes through revolutions and paradigm shifts. All right.
Okay, so um so I I know this is going to be a bit long, but it's really important that we read him, okay? Paradigms gain their status because they are more successful than their counter competitors in solving a few problems that the group of practitioners has come to recognize as acute. All right? So, Ptolemy first time was considered revolutionary because he solved the problem of why why is it the moon revolves around the Earth, okay? He he provided a cosmology that was simple and which fit into theology.
To be more successful is not, however, to be either completely successful with a single problem or not successful with any large number, okay? So, Ptolemy's solution only solved a few problems. It was not the complete solution. The success of a paradigm is at the start largely a promise of success discoverable in selected and still incomplete examples. Okay?
So, a the paradigm at first, it's actually promising, but it's not at all convincing. Normal science, okay? The science that we practice today consists in the actualization of that promise, an actualization achieved by extending the knowledge of those facts that the paradigm displays as particularly revealing, by increasing the extent of the match between those facts and the paradigm's predictions, and by further articulation of the paradigm itself. Okay, so this is really important, guys. Science is not about discovery, it's about refinement.
58:25Does that make sense? Science will not give us new ideas, science will take existing ideas and fine-tune them into something that we can believe and that we can use to drive technological innovation. Okay? All right, so let's look at another passage. Turn now to another, more difficult and more revealing aspect of the parallelism between puzzles and the problems of normal science.
If it is to classify as a puzzle, a problem must be characterized by more than an assured solution. There must also be rules that limit both the nature of acceptable solutions and the steps by which they are to be obtained. To solve a jigsaw puzzle is not, for example, merely to make a picture. Either child or a contemporary artist could do that by scattering selected pieces as abstract shapes upon some neutral ground. Okay, so this is really important.
What he's saying is this. Science today solves jigsaw puzzles. They're trying to take a larger model and fine-tune pieces that make the model much more elegant. It's not trying to reimagine the model. It's not trying to over-trim the model.
It's not trying to add new pieces to the model. All it's doing is fine-tuning existing pieces. It's like you take a jigsaw puzzle and and there's and there's one exactly one solution to the jigsaw puzzle. If you don't provide that solution, you're wrong. Okay?
Does that make sense? That's what science is. Nevertheless, such a picture would not be a solution, okay? So, what he's saying is if you come up with new picture to the jigsaw puzzle, you might be creative, um you might be interesting, you might be imaginative, but you're wrong. Okay?
Scientists cannot accept your solution. To achieve that, all the pieces must be used, the plain sides must be turned out, and they must be interlocked without forcing until no holes remain,
60:26okay? Those are among the rules that govern jigsaw puzzle solutions. So, if you are a scientist working today, you're literally solving a jigsaw puzzle. The solution Everyone knows the solution. If you If you provide something that goes against the accepted solution, you'll be You will not be accepted.
Okay? All right. So, he concludes, "But paradigm debates are not really about relative problem-solving ability, though for good reasons they are usually couched in those terms. Instead, the issue in which paradigm should in the future guide research on problems, many of which neither competitor can yet claim to resolve completely. A decision between alternate ways of practicing science is called for, and the circumstances that this that decision must be based less on past achievement than on future promise.
The man who embraces a new paradigm at an early stage must often do so in defiance of the evidence provided by problem-solving." Okay. So, this is hard for us to understand, but if you are to to be a true innovator, it's not that you come up with a new solution to a problem. It's that you must defy the basic premises of bureaucratic science. "He must, that is, have faith that the new paradigm will succeed with the many large problems that confront it, knowing only that the older paradigm has failed with few. A decision of that kind can only be made on faith." Okay.
So, this is why it's almost impossible to separate religion from science. If a new discovery is to be made, that person must believe that he is sent by God to tell us the truth. Okay? That's Galileo. Galileo, if you actually met the person, you would think this guy's a complete All right?
He's arrogant, he's obnoxious, all he does is make fun of you, okay? But he's driven by a divine mission to spread the truth. And because he created this conflict
62:27with the church, it became an national um controversy and focused attention of scientists and and they tried to resolve this issue. Okay? So, science scientific innovation genius, it's not a tea party, all right? It's a revolution. Okay.
So, um I'm going to summarize what we've discussed. Okay? Because because um this was a lot. Okay, but but but but I want to summarize what we did so that you have a basic framework to understand um what I'm I'm talking about because um there'll be other classes on these topics, all right? Um we'll we'll be discussing quantum mechanics at a future date.
So, I I I want to make sure that um we understand the argument. Okay. So, our argument is this. For most of history, science was part of religion. Science was about validating this um religion.
But this creates a problem we call confirmation bias. Confirmation bias. Meaning that we will only look at evidence that supports our claims. And we do this every single day, okay? We all want to be right, we all want to feel good, we all want to be con- by the world around us.
Okay? So, um there's a very famous experiment called the Dunning-Kruger. You've heard of this, right? Okay, Dunning-Kruger. The Dunning-Kruger experiment.
So, Dunning Kruger were two American psychologists, and they were teaching um an undergraduate class of foreign students. And they made these students do two things. The first thing is they made every student take an IQ test. Okay? The second thing is they asked
64:27student how they think they did on that IQ test. Were you in the top 5%? Were you in the bottom 5%? Were you average? Okay?
And it turned out that once they um looked at all the results, not one student predicted his or her class ranking. Those who did really well, the top 5%, it was pretty easy for them, so they assumed it was easy for everyone, okay? So, they underestimated their performance by about 10%. Those who did the worst didn't really know uh what was asked of them, okay? So, they overestimated their performance.
In fact, those who got the most wrong were the worst students. So, maybe they were top They were the bottom 10%, but they thought they were average, okay? And what this tells us is this. Doubt self-doubt it's really the mark of genius, okay? If you're able to doubt yourself, if you're able to question yourself, if you're if you're able to self-reflect, that's a sign of an excellent student, okay?
In fact, the best sign of of excellent student. So, the question then is, how do you take um how do you bring doubt into science? What you do is you separate science from religion and you create a bureaucracy around science in order to instill doubt in the scientific process, okay? That's the solution um proposed by Francis Bacon. And again, it is the most successful solution in human history, all right?
So, um the scientific process is hypothesis, experiment, um data analysis, um Okay? Replication. Okay? Does that make sense? You have a hypothesis, you you then test it out, if
66:27it works according to data, you then have to replicate the experiment to make sure that you are correct. Now, the beauty of this model is that you can actually um ch- you can actually make it into a bureaucracy, right? So, each department does its own thing. And so, what happens is that each department is inspecting and auditing the work of the previous department to make sure the results are accurate and correct. Okay, does that make sense?
And it turns out if you do this way, well, it's revolutionary. And it explains the world that we live in today. It explains why scientific progress has been so fast and uh so remarkable these past 300, 400 years, okay? But embedded in the system are lots and lots of other issues, okay? Which Which um I will discuss.
The first is the idea of political control. It takes a lot of resources to run this system, and as a result, you can allow politicians to come in and interfere with the science, okay? That's the first problem. Second problem is that over time, each department will over-specialize. Okay?
You have over-specialization, which means that these departments are now unable to communicate with with with each other because the underlying assumptions um the science under of of each of each department will be different, okay? So, if you want experiments, we use you usually have in- instruments, okay? All these instruments are so complicated that normal scientists don't really understand what you're doing. Okay? So, that's the second problem, over-specialization.
The um um third problem is um the idea of accountability. Okay? How do you know if each department is
68:28doing their job or not? Right? You you you can't because now they're over-specialized. The word we use is they are now um aloof. Okay?
So, there are many problems with this system. Another problem is insularity. Meaning that you have to spend like 20 years in school before you could even be even enter the system. Okay, in insularity creates gatekeeping, which means that only if you play by the rules, only if you've vetted you enter the system. Okay?
And as result, you no longer have any creativity. So, this is the great irony of science. Um science was initiated, inspired by the genius of Galileo, Newton, and Einstein. But today, science has developed to a point where it no longer welcomes Galileo, Newton, or Einstein. Okay?
Why? Because Galileo is an He doesn't get along with other people. They won't let him in. Newton is crazy, right? He's alchemist.
He He believes that the Bible will reveal the end of the world. He's crazy. They won't let him in. Einstein is really bad at mathematics. He doesn't He He would fail all these mathematics tests in order to get into the system.
He would probably He probably would not get into graduate school today. Right? So, this is the world we live in. So, don't worry about artificial intelligence. Don't worry about uh billionaires living forever.
Don't worry about nanotechnology, okay? Worry about the fact that we've come to a point in our in our civilization where we are now incapable of innovation.
70:29Okay? All right. So, that's it. Any questions? Okay.
Just to make just a small observation, sir. Okay. When you When you set up this lecture, you talked about pre-modern science and it relied on intuition, and faith, and imagination. I I was really getting ready to push back on you and say, "Hey, that's a lot of what makes science like modern science great." And and you you brought that in, you know, very nicely um in the later stages of the of the lecture there. Kind of inspired.
Okay. Well, thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.
Um great. A- Any questions? Okay. That's fine. Okay.
So, um I got a I got a light question. Okay. Great. Um I I didn't know about Newton's predictions about the end of the world. But uh if you're saying 2050, 2060, what do you think the chances are that he was right?
Okay. Um Okay. So, Newton. Okay. So, um what do we know that Newton um predic- predicted the end of the world.
Okay. The reason why is this. So, Newton didn't have any family. He didn't have a wife. He didn't have any children.
Um so, his entire estate was left to his nephews and his nieces. And um Newt- and Newton also left him a lot of money. Okay? These are aris- aristocrats. Newton is Newton is actually the first commoner, the first non-royal in English history to receive a state funeral.
He's the first commoner to be buried at West- Westminster Abbey, okay? So, he was a very big deal um um back then. Um and his relatives, obviously, were aristocrats. But the thing about aristocrats is that over time, they
72:30become poor. So, and what do you do when you become poor? Well, you sell off what is valuable. And so, Newton's papers Newton's papers all his notes were auctioned off in like I think the 1930s. I I I don't remember, okay?
But 1930s. And you would imagine that everyone would want these notes, right? Cuz like they reveal genius to you. But for whatever reason, um they didn't really sell over well. And and the in the in the sell was so bad, the auction was so bad that it was sold piecemeal, okay?
And one person who bought the notes was um John Keynes, the the economist, John Keynes, the economist. And he was so excited to read the papers of Newton. He was like, "Oh my god, there must be so much mathematics in these papers that will lead to new discoveries, right?" So, when he actually read the papers, he was actually aghast at what he discovered. It was alchemy, it was theology. And so, um what um Newton was trying to do was he was trying to read the Bible and look for secret code.
I mean, he was he was crazy, okay? Look for a secret code within the Bible that would tell him the future. He was actually convinced of something called the second coming. He was convinced that Jesus will return. I mean, these are all Christians at this point, right?
He was actually convinced that Jesus will return. And so, he wants to know when he would return and how he would return. Okay? So, I So, I think he made the the prediction 2060. But I can't I can't be sure.
But But he made a prediction when the world would end. What's more important for us is that he became what we know what we call a Christian Zionist. Okay? The idea of a Christian Zionist, and this is really important, is that
74:31once you predict the future and you know when Jesus is returning, you want to know how he returns. And Newt- uh became actually convinced that for Jesus to return, certain conditions had to be met in order to facilitate his return. One major condition was the return of the Jews to Jerusalem. Because at this point, um Jerusalem was being controlled by the Ottomans. Okay?
He was actually convinced that we had to get all the world's Jews and return them to Jerusalem. Okay? Only problem was, Jews didn't want to go back. Okay? And so, um Chris- I think Newton, and this is completely unknown about him, okay?
He's actually one of the founders of a movement called Christian Zionism is, let's figure out how to get all the Jews to go back to Jerusalem, and this was sort of process which will culminate with the return of Jesus. Okay? So, that's um Newton. Um and so, what this tells us, okay, and this is also something that is really important is he was part of a secret society with John Locke and some other really important individuals. And this secret society, I mean, like they were considered they considered themselves the true church.
Right? So, um Newton in his notes, he was very clear. He thought the Holy Trinity was nonsense. There's only one God. Okay?
And he was a representative of God on Earth. He was here on a divine mission. So, he's part of this secret society to try to achieve Christian Zionism and to discover when the second coming uh will happen. So, he makes this prediction 2060. So, when So, whether or not Newton is correct, that's not the issue.
The issue is that with his power, with his influence, he was heavily promoting Christian Zionism in England. And as we know, what will happen is these people will go to America. Okay? A lot of these people who are Christian Zionists, they will go to America
76:31believing that America is the new Jerusalem. Well, and then what will happen later on is um the Zionist Christian Zionists will link up and they will plot to um bring the Jews back to uh Jerusalem. And this And this leads to something called the Balfour Declaration. Right? Which is to say that after World World I, when the Ottoman Empire was defeated, um the British Empire um now gives permission to all the Jews in the world to return to Jerusalem, whether or not they want to.
Okay? So, this is why history is so important, because you cannot possibly understand what's happening in the Middle East today without first understanding all this history. Right? So, does that make sense? Okay.
All right. Great. So, odds are he was right. 2060, things are going to happen. Well, well well I I again, okay.
So, I'm just kidding. I'm So, 2060, again, that's not the issue. The issue is that there are very powerful people in this world who believe in this and who want who believe that it is their divine mission to make this come true. To use their power, to use their influence, to use their money to make this prediction come true. It's not really a prophecy, okay?
It's really a plan. This is what it is. It's a plan. It's like, how do we bring back Jesus? Because when Jesus returns, the world ends and everyone's happy.
Okay? That's heaven comes on Earth. But how do we make it happen? Well, here's the plan. Christian Zionism.
Right? So, that's that's that's that's my real concern. Whether or not the world ends in 2016, I don't know, okay? But the fact that there are really powerful people of the stature of I think Newton with like almost unlimited resources and unlimited power, they actually believe in this and they want to make this come true. That should be the major concern.
Right? Okay. So, I apologize for
78:33for going out on this tangent, okay? But um so, uh we don't have class on Thursday, but next Tuesday we'll start the Age of Exploration, okay?