SPEAKER_02 0:00

Welcome to the Human Mass podcast. Today I've got Phil. Now that sounds random just to say Phil, but as you probably know by now, I don't interview people based on their following or whatever. I don't think you're even on social media, are you? Not really, no. No. Um it's if I vibe with them and I want to chat to them, then I hope that you guys will also see the same interest and vibe that I'm seeing. So uh I've asked Phil, so I've met Phil outside of the internet world where a lot of guests I vibe on the internet with. I think, oh, I'll vibe with that person and invite them on or whatever. Uh Phil, I met him real the real world. And uh so that's how Phil ended up sat in front of me. It was a quick way of doing it. Um hi Phil. Hey, you alright? Yeah, thanks for coming. Yeah, no worries. Okay, now Phil wears many hats, um, as I discovered when I met you. Um and I don't know which one I want to ask you about first. I'm gonna probably hit side swipe you with one that you probably didn't realise I was gonna ask first, okay? Is when we were chatting, because just again, sorry to just I will talk to you in a second. Um, literally, like he's at me for eight years, massively into AI, uh views on um his physics, uh AI, the theories behind life, politics, religion, everything. So there's many different things that I could talk about with Phil. Um and I like Phil as well because your I'm gonna talk to you now, is um as I think I said to you, that your personality type is quite rare, I think, because there's not many people who can who like to research and can concentrate and do those things and and they're very computer orientated, but then secondary to that, they are I could do that my body language like they are open-minded and not and have a personality if you like. Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_01 1:56

Yeah, yeah, definitely. Yeah, like a lot of the people in computer sciences. Um I think I think like if you're on the spectrum, you often trend towards those things anyway, because there's like a a sense of control around what you can what you can do. Like uh and I actually think a lot of people fool themselves into thinking that computers are these uh deterministic machines that you can just feed some input to and get a predictable output from. Uh so I think people on the spectrum trend towards that, but that then sort of biases the field into uh definitely people who aren't like spiritually awakened or anything like that. Would you class yourself as spiritually awakened? I class myself as attempting to be spiritually awakened.

SPEAKER_02 2:34

That is a great answer. Right now, on the podcast, I ask one question that's set, and that's it. Okay, so before we get into the subjects, that I'm just picking which one in my head as we're talking. But there's a question that I wanted to ask you. The reason I gave that background before asking the question is because then I think the question Do you know what the question is? You know, don't you? People know now. Okay, so my question is Phil, who are you?

SPEAKER_01 2:58

It's funny because uh I know that you asked that question. I have no idea what the answer is. Um and I suppose the way that you introduced me is probably the best version of what the answer could have been because I just I feel like, well, I'm just Phil, right? I'm just like a normal guy, father of three nearly four. Um yeah, like just Phil. Uh yeah, uh it's difficult for me to really reason about anything more than that.

SPEAKER_02 3:26

Um with you being attempting to be spiritually awakened, yeah, you know there's more than that. So so you you let go and say what you really, really feel about not just maybe you, because you might be answering on behalf of because uh what I was I don't know if I did it with another guest. I went from who are you, and I switched to who are we then? See what I mean? So you could almost go down that road, you could, couldn't you? So who are you slash we then, Phil? Would that be more comfortable answering that one?

SPEAKER_01 3:55

Um I I think that for the most part we're all just uh I think most people uh and therefore myself included, uh just searching for some sort of meaning and purpose, whether that's subconsciously or consciously. I think maybe the differentiation is that uh you and I uh are searching for it more consciously and we're not really allowing our subconscious to just direct us quite as much. Yeah, uh or at least not not just controlling, but um I think if you allow your subconscious to direct you uh and you're not an active participant in that direction, then it can cause a lot of um like blind spots and conflicts and stuff. So yeah, I I think uh so who am I and uh who are people you know who who maybe are like me uh are probably people who are consciously um the searching for answers like in everyday things. Uh yeah. Conscious like always curious, probably.

SPEAKER_02 5:01

Yeah, consistently curious.

SPEAKER_01 5:03

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 5:03

And then what I always surprises me, I never really get the answer either, is what makes you or me or a certain breed of person decide to be consistently curious and completely aware, self-aware that we don't know everything to some people who just are happy. In fact, the higher echelons of the world that we don't know that goes on, it's you sometimes you hear they call they call us even and and everybody below them uh useful eaters. Have you heard that phrase before? Yeah, useful eaters. Um, so and everyone human behaviour is typically to judge and look down and look down and look down. I don't look down on anybody, everyone's we're all equal. But you're not equal in in some ways, obviously, like we're not at basketball before, for example. He's but better at basketball than me, he's better at football than me, and that's quite normal. Yeah, but as a soul level, we should be all equal. So uh I suppose what's the difference between if we were to look down, which we're not, but look down on the people that aren't searching and just blissfully unaware and going about life waiting to retire and die. What's it what's the makeup difference there, do you think? Where does that come from?

SPEAKER_01 6:03

Yeah, it's uh it's one that uh I've wondered about a lot because uh you know there are people in my life, there'll be people in your life who are um blissfully ignorant and they just go through life and whatever comes up in front of their face, they just treat it on its face value and and move on.

SPEAKER_02 6:20

It's who's wrong and who's right, because that's living the moment.

SPEAKER_01 6:23

And I'm envious of that. Um yeah, I think once you once you start down the rabbit hole of um of trying to understand the universe, uh there's there's so many elements of it that are so difficult to understand and and potentially impossible for us to understand that it can be maddening. And I think that's why it's like blissful to be ignorant of those things.

SPEAKER_02 6:45

But but then they haven't got the coping mechanisms. So, like a child, something's happening to them and they haven't got the coping mechanisms, then they it's full meltdown, and it's the biggest drama in the world. Yeah, and it could be something quite minor, yeah. But because it's wobbled them a little bit, because they're just blissfully going along like an MPC, yeah, and then something happens and that's it, the whole world's melted down. No, no, I'm I'm going over here. And that's the bit, I suppose, that's the difference as well, though, isn't it?

SPEAKER_01 7:09

Absolutely, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 7:09

And and you do see we can't be jealous of that, can we? Because then the whole world's imploded because of two words, maybe you're like, that's nothing.

SPEAKER_01 7:15

Yeah. I don't know though, because you're not in that mindset, so you don't know if you can't be jealous of it. Because from the outside looking in, it seems like their world's imploded and it's the worst thing in the world. But if they're not suffering any negative side effects, like if they're not getting anxiety from it or or any, you know, like negative mental health side effects from those seemingly minor disturbances to their routine, then perhaps the the the the weight of the blissful ignorance outweighs those minor bumps in the road. I don't know. You know, I get I get that. Not in their minds.

SPEAKER_02 7:45

But I think a lot of people bury things, so they they they're not as unaware as they think they are, and they're just burying, they're avoiding dealing with certain issues. Yes, and that's a different thing. So that they're they're forcing that blissfully unawareness, which then I believe, my personal belief only, is that can manifest itself in illness and things like that, and and and obviously maybe an action that they didn't really want to do, but because they've lashed out and that's caused that's obviously got a reaction, and so either illness or reactions are caused usually by somebody suppressing or not and not dealing with so forceful, blissfully unawareness.

SPEAKER_00 8:21

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 8:22

Yeah, there's I mean there's like two threads there that that are interesting to me. Like one of them is um once you are no longer uh blissfully ignorant, you realize how ignorant you currently are, which is which is uh uh self-referential. Um and that can send you down like a a negative feedback loop. Um, but also you can never go back. Like once once you start going down that feedback loop, you can never return to the blissfully ignorant state. Each new layer of knowledge that you acquire and understanding that you acquire, you can't very easily at least unacquire it. Um yeah, so that that was that was one of the the threads I think is is interesting to um to root down. Uh I can't remember the other one.

SPEAKER_02 9:07

So it was yeah, one was blissfully unaware and one was being aware but ignoring it, basically, wasn't it? I suppose.

SPEAKER_01 9:14

Yeah, oh and on the uh external, like the ex externalization of um of any of those suppressed, suppressed uh like emotions or uh or knowledge or feeling. That that externalization, I can't remember the name of the doctor, and he's been widely discredited. It was like in the 1930s, he wrote a book to say that all humans have only a limited number of ways of expressing illness, and the the cause has got nothing to do with that outward expression of illness, and that they're completely unrelated, and that the cause will just surface uh in in in your body wherever you may have, let's say, for example, some inflammation. So um so his hypothesis, which like I say, it has been widely discredited, and and we do a lot medical science presumably does a lot better job of uh finding causal links between symptoms and the root cause of the illness. But yeah, I think there's something interesting there as well. I I feel similar, where I think that you know, when you've got a temperature, for example, the immediate assumption is oh, you've got some sort of infection that you're fighting off. Whereas his hypothesis was no, a temperature is just one of the many ways that the human body expresses illness, what the root cause is could be completely unrelated. It's just that it's triggered some sort of effect, and the way that your body expresses that is through lightheadedness or temperature or you know, swelling or whatever, which I think is interesting because it's sort of similar to what you were saying when you're like if you suppress things too much, perhaps it comes out in a different way, like as as some sort of physical illness. But yeah, I think there's a lot there in um like all of all of medical science is just trying to connect cause and effect, um, and it does a really poor job at it. And I think there's things there that medical science is gonna be a long way off being able to prove. That's where spirituality comes back in.

SPEAKER_02 11:03

Yeah, because I think there's a bridge there, and and it's people that look believe in spirituality, like frequencies, energy, aura fields, these things that have been touched on in science. Yeah, but once what science gets there and explains them, yeah, and then does it take away the the spirituality of that person because now it's just a factual mathematical equation that science has proven. Yeah, I mean, it's interesting, isn't it? It yes, it is because they will prove it one day, won't they? Uh you can't see a Wi-Fi signal and there's there's so much we can't see. I agree with that.

SPEAKER_01 11:35

Yeah, I think to one level, you're totally right, you you will be able to prove like more and more. Um I think I think there's there's a almost a guarantee that everything we consider factually true today won't be. Like it isn't the truth. You reckon? Yeah, like I I think that um well I think if you look in history, everything that every uh generation of humanity, going back however old humanity is, always thought that what they were looking at was ground truth, and then humanity has evolved and proved that the majority of what they looked at is ground truth. And take any epoch and and that's the case, like there's very little, go back to the ancient Greeks where they thought that there was just four elements, and now, you know, like the the then we thought the periodic table was complete and then we end up discovering more new elements. So I think I think everything we consider factually true today is very unlikely to be factually true. I think that's the problem is that we we ended up going too far down that scientific cerebral route thinking that oh maths can explain everything, and then um what was his name? Girdle.

SPEAKER_02 12:35

Uh if you're familiar with Girdle's incomplete, no, you I've remembered that about you, that you're very good at remembering who said what, and I just know things. I don't know, I can't remember the source of them. So it's a different way we we do it.

SPEAKER_01 12:46

But like for me, it's like does so does in in that example, like does maths represent the ground truth? Is there a is there a ground truth that you can uncover through just like logical deduction and maths? Um, and that's been a conflict in philosophy science, maths, uh uh for for decades, probably centuries. Um, and uh there was a logistician called Goel, and this was the time of like Turing, um, von Neumann, Girdle, who it was like the golden age of mathematics. And uh and essentially, cutting a long story short, because it is a long story, Girdle managed to prove that there can be truths that are unprovable mathematically. And that's truths that are unprovable. Yeah, so so the way that maths, uh the foundations of like logic and maths work is that you're supposed to have an axiom, which is a uh verifiable, provable statement. So um an addition, like you could have an axiom around addition to say that when you add two things together, the sum is the whole of the two things. So that would be the axiom. Then you go around proving why that's the case. Um so what Girdle managed to prove is that there are some axioms that are true, but it's impossible to prove that they're true. Um Can you give an example or not? It's um there there are some like really uh shallow examples of um like No, just give a basic one so that everyone gets an understanding basically. Yeah, so uh so one example would be um is the answer to this question false? So as a logical statement, you could say, is the answer to this question false? And if you say yes, then that's false because you've said yes. So the answer to the question is in fact true. Because the answer to the question is actually what what what you soon find is that when you get to this sort of meta-level of of mathematics, it's very self-referential. It's all about that's what Alan Turing, who invented the modern computer, um, talked a lot about. And the Turing machines are all about can a machine like replicate itself, for example. Um, so they're always self-referential. And and when you get to that point of pure logic, that's when these It's imagination and logic, in it. And that's the amazing thing about I can't I can't imagine anyone coming to these sort of conclusions who wasn't already activated on a spiritual plane to some degree because you have to have you have to be able to step outside of the the world as you see it, like just like Einstein when he was sat in the patent. I know what star signs they were, these people. Yeah, that'd be interesting to find out.

SPEAKER_02 15:16

Yeah, that'd be that'd be do you think it's suppressed? Because from like governments and stuff, do you think they have then that they have and use a much wider knowledge base than what we're all allowed to see or whatever? Because like we know that we're made up of water, don't we? A lot of us, yeah? And we know, proven, that if you speak positively into water and freeze it and negative into water and freeze it, and you bring it out, they look completely different. And we know that the sound waves can affect water differently, yeah. And we're water, which is why healing frequencies, people do those uh sound frequency baths and because it's affecting your body, but it's not really used, the government don't push it. And then there's seeing them on it's such a daft one, this is, but on Facebook where they put the spoons and the battery and the batches are floating. Oh, yeah. Seeing them little mean videos that come through. And then I and then so there's that one, that one, and then another one I think of is when you're a kid, uh, do you ever use the sun to burn things? Yeah, right. So in my head, I think, well, that battery thing, just make that a million times bigger, and surely then we've got a a different power source. And the sun one, surely we just put a big thing in the sky and we could just now just terminate every country we want to I would bad, not in an aggressive way, but what I mean is isn't that the ultimate power on a space?

SPEAKER_01 16:22

Yeah, well that's a Dyson sphere, isn't it? So a Dyson sphere is where you you basically build uh a solar not it wouldn't be traditional solar panels, but you'd build some sort of solar collector around a star and you'd get infinite energy forever.

SPEAKER_02 16:34

So why don't we just why don't for example one of the countries just build a massive magnifying glass and just go on the room?

SPEAKER_01 16:40

That's what Archimedes did in in Syracuse. Really? Yeah. So when the um when the Romans uh attacked Syracuse, um Archimedes put supposedly uh had troops holding uh reflective concave mirrors on a beach to then focus the sun's energy to burn the boats. Uh and that's like two and a half thousand years ago or whatever. But uh yeah.

SPEAKER_02 17:03

Like the I think those are I'm not dumbed down this conversation, but what I'm trying to do is bring it back to go forward to say why aren't why why aren't the government as humans really going for this sort of thing? Why isn't it happening?

SPEAKER_01 17:14

I don't know whether it's the problem is you don't know whether it's uh a top-down um decision. Yeah, like an autocratic decision forced on people, or whether it's that classic uh, you know, if uh if a helicopter pilot is one degree off from his destination, um if he's travelling five hundred yards, it doesn't make a difference. But if he's travelling thirty miles, then when he reaches his destination, he's miles away from where he should be. And is it just that earlier on in in a like Yeah, we discovered that when you make this bigger, it doesn't work. Yeah, or no, not not that, but like if the evolution of human uh knowledge and intelligence just for some reason was adjusted off that course. I think when you look at ancient Egypt, there's so much going on in um in ancient Egypt that feels like it was on a completely different technological evolutionary course that might end might have ended us up in that kind of place that you're talking about where we are much more spiritual and attuned to energies around us. It seems to me like the ancient Egyptians were very much in that. How do people build pyramids?

SPEAKER_02 18:13

I was gonna hit you with that one randomly.

SPEAKER_01 18:14

Well, that's it, isn't it? What's your theory? Is it two and a half million blocks per pyramid?

SPEAKER_02 18:19

I was gonna do say the same thing. I've seen that. The math don't add up, do they? It doesn't add up. No. So the time frame they were built in 500 miles away. It just doesn't add up, does it? I I So why wasn't the government things deal with this and answer it?

SPEAKER_01 18:31

This is the big question because you know, like uh there's also um have you heard of the labyrinth of of Egypt? No.

SPEAKER_02 18:37

So uh underneath the pyramids.

SPEAKER_01 18:39

It's not underneath the pyramids, uh, it's not in the Giza Plateau, um, but there's uh there's an underground labyrinth, it's like five, five or six layers deep. Um and when they first started when the uh like when they first started excavating ancient Egypt in the 1800s, they discovered it. Um but it's since been flooded. Uh man-made flood as well, um, and it's like there's no efforts to excavate it. Uh, but someone's done ground penetrating radar scans of the labyrinth, and there's a lot of records about it. The ancient Greeks talked about it. The ancient Greeks said that the labyrinth of Egypt was greater than all of the Greek accomplishments combined. Like it's supposed to be a phenomenal hall, huge stone uh ceiling, like a apparently a single solid stone ceiling that's like four acres. It goes down, like I say, five levels. And the deeper you go, there's uh it's it's record keeping and and things like that. Anyway, the deeper you go, the the the priests, this is what was at least written um by the ancient Greeks, was that the uh the priests would only allow royalty to go to levels like four and five. This ground penetrating radar has found a 40-meter long, 40-foot long um uh like metal oval buried in this labyrinth. And you think, okay, that's pretty interesting, isn't it? Like, yeah, like like the Egyptians supposedly only had copper, but they wouldn't have that much copper to make such a large object. So what is it? And why is no one bothered about digging down there to find out? Like, is it an alien spaceship? Like, is it a portal? Is it just uh a geological feature? Who knows? Like a shovel, like yeah, let's go, let's start.

SPEAKER_00 20:16

Let's start.

SPEAKER_01 20:17

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But but they're not allowed, like the Egyptian authorities. That's what it means.

SPEAKER_02 20:20

This must be something because it's you've seen the high how'd you say glyphics? How'd you say the word? Hieroglyphics. Yeah, with like it clearly looks like a helicopter and a tank. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. What is it? What is it? Yeah, then that and that that's really and that's where I was going from. I I believe that we are not told half of what our history is, what our future could be, what the potential of us as humans are, what we could and I just don't understand why really. Just Yeah, I it's just for power's sake, for power then. Must be.

SPEAKER_01 20:52

I uh the my only I th I think it's a probably a a a bit of both. I think you've got uh some top-down oppression, and I also think that um that society is that misaligned from what it naturally should be that the that there's a lack of uh like curiosity in in the average.

SPEAKER_02 21:11

Is that because we're so well the generally people are just so um I'm doing this like a body language thing, just worried about work and bills and work and bills and it's just and that's it, and they can't see past that. But but isn't it crazy that I've been there, you just live in hand to mouth and you can't concentrate anything, but you've Yeah, like an animal, you're literally an animal, aren't you? You're there to breed, eat, go to work, and that's it.

SPEAKER_01 21:32

And yeah, but it it seems it it if you if you for me at least when I start to analyse what society has become, it seems insane and irrational. Like this is how we've all sort of decided to live, right? Like we're just gonna waste all of our all of our life screwing away.

SPEAKER_02 21:50

Send our children here and they're gonna be right in a brick building for these times and be taught by people that really haven't got much knowledge of the world anyway, because they've been taught in a brick building to constitute them in a brick building.

SPEAKER_01 22:00

It's so unnatural. It's so unnatural.

SPEAKER_02 22:02

Uh and uh Well that that feeds me lovely onto because there's the one that I said at the start that I was gonna ask it, you might not know I was gonna ask you about when we were having a chat uh when I met you was um you we ask we were talking about politics and theory and that sort of thing, and you said you are a anarchist. Yes. Yeah, I know I'm not labelling you like that, that's the bit anarchist says this. Um and uh and I um was like then curious because I was like, because I I know I don't know anything, everything. So I was like, anarchist, because the first thing that comes into mind when you think of an anarchist is riots and and down with everybody and and chaos. You think when you think anarchist, my mind went straight to chaos, yeah. So then I wanted to explain it because I thought this guy doesn't match that. So I said, can you explain it? Didn't I? Yeah, and so can you do that now for people who have thought the same thing that I've just thought when I first asked you?

SPEAKER_01 22:53

Yeah, yeah. So it's one anarchist. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, no, I just want to see everything burn. No, it's uh yeah, uh so uh it came from actually I was it was when I was training to um like I was doing a lot of running, a lot of training, half marathons and stuff, and uh I always just listen to to books whilst I'm whilst I'm running. Um I was listening to uh a book by an economist called Safety in a Mus. And um and that really started to open my eyes up to um number one, how like current the the current uh sort of formal planning of economies that they that that societies attempt to do is is mad, it's broken. It causes us to be in the state that we were just talking about of like work, work, work. You know, if you I think if you dial the clock back to before 1971 when uh Brenton Woods took the US off the gold standard, I think you see a better standard of living. And a lot of people would say, Oh yeah, but they didn't have iPhones in the 60s. It's like, no, but one um one family member could go out, uh work in 95 and earn enough money to have a nice car, a nice house, and a family of four. Can't do that today.

SPEAKER_02 24:03

And the kids get to see the mum because they think she shouldn't have to go to work. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 24:06

So like I think um I I think I think it I think society comes in peaks and troughs, and I think our local peak uh it was the sixties, actually. I think that's probably why if we did go to the moon, that's when we that's why we did it then and haven't done it since. Yeah, I don't even believe the moon is a is a rock at this point.

SPEAKER_02 24:24

Well let's come back to that one. Right, the moon, the moon, the moon, I can't forget about this.

SPEAKER_01 24:29

Um but so anyway, so this this book started to like unravel uh this history for me because you know I was born in the very late 80s, I'm almost 90s. Um but yeah, so uh it started to unravel a lot of this for me. So I started to dig into it and I found um I found the Austrian economists, and as you sort of alluded to, what I like to do when I approach a subject is just go straight to the core source materials and then build myself up from there.

SPEAKER_02 24:56

Yeah, he's referenced that, so I've gone find out for myself, and then yeah, yeah, exactly.

SPEAKER_01 25:00

So so I read like a lot of the original Austrian economists, they're called. Um, and this was uh sort of around World War I uh and then grew in popularity again around World War II, um, where tyranny uh you know, you could see what the extremes of tyranny would uh would cause. Um so the Austrian economists they believe uh basically in something called praxeology, which is human action, which you might uh appreciate with the human mask uh podcast. But um so human action says that uh economies are the um product of humans acting, and basically any sort of interference or top-down control causes significant negative side effects. Um that can all be like that there's plenty of examples of that kind of thing. Uh, and it's a very means-based approach instead of an ends-based approach. So the idea is that you focus on the uh ethics of a s of the action as opposed to the outcome of the action. Um so that all vibes with me, because I'm big into means-based ethics. If you're familiar with anything ethics, I like Immanuel Kant. I like I studied ethics and uh philosophy, and I I love like yeah, I love means-based ethical approaches. So that vibed with me.

SPEAKER_02 26:10

So simply put, for people, what's a means-based ethical approach? Uh so means-based as you explain it to a five-year-old, you know.

SPEAKER_01 26:17

Yeah, so so there's like a classic example of um uh is lying bad?

SPEAKER_02 26:22

Yes. Okay, so well, not in all, yeah, I know. There's the difference.

SPEAKER_01 26:26

Yeah. There's the difference, right there, in a nutshell. Yeah. Um that's a great example.

SPEAKER_02 26:30

Yeah. So that's a means-based, yeah, lying is always bad.

SPEAKER_01 26:33

Yeah. Right. Ends-based is depends what the outcome is. Uh so um It's usually to do with children, isn't it? You think there's no need to tell them. Yeah. But you always you always take uh you always you always try and take things to extremes to to really stress test ethics anyway. Uh but yeah, so uh Austrian economics is uh means-based. And essentially when you when you start taking um mixing ethics with economics, you end up um going down this route which it's called anarcho-capitalism, um, which is on the liberal end of the of the scale. So you're very um you don't believe that you need a government and top-down control. You think people should be able to just make their own decisions and get on with their own lives, essentially. You just leave people alone. Um as it happens, when you then run the game theory of how those um people who are left alone uh evolve, there's no reason why that ends up in a bad place.

SPEAKER_02 27:29

Because you always get, oh, what about police or army or you know, I was gonna go there because I did touch on it like when you first told me that, that's where I went, didn't I? I said, Well, who's protecting society?

SPEAKER_01 27:40

Yes, exactly.

SPEAKER_02 27:41

And you said, uh do you remember your answer?

SPEAKER_01 27:43

Well, there's the there are a couple of different uh a couple of different answers depending on which which form of protection, but at that time Okay, from crime and violence, yeah, like insurance, which is what it is anyway. Right? It's just not voluntary. And that's the big that's the big difference, is that um you you aren't you aren't volunteering to pay for the best possible police service. You get money taken off you, whether you like it or not, and it goes like one way or another, somehow, uh, through to yeah, through to uh a police service who don't have any direct obligation other than goodwill to work on your behalf, because they're gonna get paid anyway. Like if that police officer takes 20 minutes to see to see tier instead of the targeted time of 10 minutes, he's still gonna get his paycheck. Whereas if you're in a free market um and a company isn't offering the service that you want, well you just change service. You know, my phone provider wasn't offering me good signal in this area, I wasn't stuck with them, I could switch.

SPEAKER_02 28:38

So the thing is with that, the only thing I I like what you're saying, and and and and based on people generally being good, that would work. But for in that particular circumstance, let's pretend I was a really bad guy and I've run we're we're in a we're in a um um what's the word again? What's the word? The societal word we're talking about.

SPEAKER_01 28:58

Oh, like an anarchistic society. Um and capstan, they call it.

SPEAKER_02 29:02

And yeah, right, you're nearly above my pay grade, you are right. So so then um and I've I'm a security contractor, but I'm a bad guy. Right, yeah. And and I've scone to I'm I feel you're paying me, I'm protecting you, and and then you're out doing something and trading, and your wife's at home, and we're all nasty people, and we get a uh a feeling for your wife, and we go in and do some bad things to your wife and children. You're just gonna go to change my service, but it's all a bit too late, isn't it?

SPEAKER_01 29:28

Yeah, yeah, well, bad people still do bad things though.

SPEAKER_02 29:30

Yeah. Even today. Yeah, yeah. So I see what you're saying. That doesn't stop. Um has there been a successful society in history that's that's lived this way?

SPEAKER_01 29:42

This is the root well, okay. That's that's a big question, uh, because it depends it depends what you consider history. Like, you know, you you go back to was it six thousand years ago, uh or or maybe a little bit longer, six and a half thousand years ago, to the Sumerians, who was like the first ever civilization, supposedly, which I don't really believe. Iran way. Yeah, yeah. Uh which I I don't believe, but um but anyway, uh so you go back you know further than that, perhaps to nomadic tribes. Well, they certainly lived like that. There's no there was no um like the police force nomadic European government that controlled what what the tribes did. So it depends how far back you go, and then it also depends how you're measuring success. Are you measuring success that no bad things happen to anybody ever? Then of course not. Um but I I I think uh I think yeah, if you go back far enough, you'll find it. You could say that in modern times, uh Javier Millet in um Argentina, he he ran on a libertarian ticket as the president of Argentina, and he got overwhelming support for it, and he did start to reduce the size of the state. He quelled their in their rampant inflation. I mean, they had hundreds of percent of of hyperinflation almost, and he's quelled that down uh to like below 10%. So the the principles have definitely been applied. Um, but the problem is that uh in my mind, uh because I'm quite absolutist, I'd be like, you've embodied the principles and you've done it a little bit, but you haven't gone all the way. So it isn't really test. Yeah. The same way that there's been no true test of socialism, which would be the exact opposite of uh like anarcho-capitalism. Like socialism would be on the highly autocratic end of the scale, where you have to have massive governments, massive bureaucracies in order to evenly distribute uh resources.

SPEAKER_02 31:25

Do you what do you think about socialism? Are you a fan of socialism?

SPEAKER_01 31:27

No, I I think it's impossible to work.

SPEAKER_02 31:28

Uh I think Margaret Thatcher, didn't she? It's okay to run out of other people's money. Yeah, exactly.

SPEAKER_01 31:33

Margaret Thatcher had some brilliant quotes. Like I'm not very good at remembering who said what, but that was yeah, I do remember that one. Yeah, yeah. I wanted to get some t-shirts of her quotes printed, but I don't think that would have been very popular. But um but I get targets on the streets or something, especially in the north. But uh but yeah, so um See, my dad was a miner, but he he he he he thought she did good good stuff. Yeah, my dad my dad um he did his apprenticeship at the age of 15, left school at 12 with tuberculosis, um, then did an apprenticeship on steam trains at the age of 15 at Crew Loco Works. Like he was a you know a a a working man, um yeah, and he he liked Margaret Thatcher. Uh but yeah, so like the problem with socialism, it's called the so the the socialist calculation problem. There's um there's a paper written called i Pencil by an Austrian economist uh to highlight what the calculation problem is. Um I'll quickly explain it. Uh and it's it's it's a really nice essay around the amount of effort it takes to make a pencil. So you're saying like the pencil it's it's made of wood, it's painted, it's got graphite on the on the inside of it. Um let's say that for some reason there's a shortage of iron. How would the shortage of iron affect the price of pencils? Well, it means that the people who are cutting down the trees can no longer afford axes, or at least the price of axes has gone up. Not that they can no longer afford it, sorry, the price of axes have gone up. So the company that's making the axes puts the price up because there's a shortage, there's a shortage of raw materials. Um then the the uh workers who are cutting down the trees to make the pencils, that that business then realizes okay, our our prices have gone up, so we now need to charge a little bit more for pencils to cover the cost of the rise in prices of the axes. Uh so then me as a consumer at the end, I pick up the pencil and it was five pence and now it's six pence. I'm like, all right, fine, whatever. But that price of six pence, that extra penny, has done a lot of work because that's accounted for the uh popularity of that pencil. So how many people are buying those pencils determined how much the pencil seller put the price up by. Then that price is also communicated uh on the um the pencil manufacturer paying for the rise of raw material costs. Uh also perhaps then the rise of raw raw material costs, they then are using uh you know uh more workers to m to open up more iron mines, etc. So the price, that one penny change in price, has done a lot of communication. And what socialism tries to do is centrally plan all of that communication. Because there are no prices in the socialist, like um in a socialist economy, there should be no prices. My allowance of pencils doesn't change depending on the price of axes. My allowance of pencils is whatever it is, and if the price of axes goes or if the sorry the scarcity of iron for axes goes up, the socialists have to communicate that scarcity throughout the entire supply chain to every single pencil buyer or not buyer, every single pencil claimer. Yeah, um and prices do that communication much more efficiently. So if you look at just pure efficiency of systems, there's this problem in socialism where an entire economy needs to be planned, where you need to know exactly how many resources need to go where, and you need to be able to plan all that in one central place. If you distribute that planning, so if you put that planning into more and more distributed places, you're actually heading closer and closer to capitalism, which is that the the price is the communication of supply and demand. And that's for me, that was the the simplest argument for why capitalism as a system, and what we have today I wouldn't class as capitalism, because there's a lot of um there's a lot of government involvement to to promote certain businesses over others, for example. It's not a fair, it's not a fair, true open market. Um, but that's for me why capitalism uh seemed like a much more uh fair system than socialism, because you just allow the prices to communicate the supply and demand naturally and it's anything can disrupt it, a natural disaster, anything you can't plan those things, exactly.

SPEAKER_02 35:32

And everyone else just move with it, don't they?

SPEAKER_01 35:34

Like it was made really apparent during COVID pandemic where there was shortages of certain resources. But if you weren't to take that example, you just say like there's a natural disaster somewhere and there's a shortage of water. What happens today is that the government steps in and says, Right, no one is allowed to profiteer on water, they all have to sell water for a dollar. So what happens? Everyone stockpiles water because it's cheap, and and you're in a natural disaster, so then you get shortages of water. What a price is supposed to do is to fight the shortages. So if I'm a water reseller and I see there's been a natural disaster, I'm like, oh no, I will profiteer from this. I'm gonna bang the price up to ten dollars a bottle. But then people will only buy what they absolutely need because they don't want to spend all of their money on water, especially at that price, yeah. Exactly. Um so it actually levels out it it it it's a better way of distributing uh scarce goods to where they really need to go, um, if you have prices involved, than if you have suppression of markets. So that was that was the thread that they were the like the sort of threads of thought that took me from being actually when I was younger, I think most of us associates, was it Thomas Sowell, who said um, if you're a uh if you're not a socialist when you're younger, you have no heart, and if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no head.

SPEAKER_02 36:49

That's a good one. It's so true.

SPEAKER_01 36:51

Yeah, and and I went through that transition, and it was listening to these books on economics that that sent me through that transition.

SPEAKER_02 36:57

Well, I think it's amazing looking at history and things is that all the information that we could anybody can possibly want is found, especially nowadays with the internet. You can go and just find, but people just can't be bothered, can they, to really look at in subjects and really dig into them. But what they'd rather do is just have a quick surface opinion on something. Yeah, like you could wear that you said about you know, it'd be lynched for wearing a Margaret Thatter t-shirt. And there'd be no point you're debating it, would they? Because of the cognitive dissidence that's been put in place of no, no, no, she's bad, that's it. Yeah, and and and that goes right back full loop to the the useless ether thing. You know, what how'd you solve that? That people just do not want to educate themselves on spirituality, self-awareness, politics, anything, do they?

SPEAKER_01 37:44

No.

SPEAKER_02 37:44

And and there's no answer to that, is there? There is no real answer, is there? No, I think that's why when we first Unless they teach it in schools. But they don't want you to be that aware. Otherwise, they'd be teaching these things in schools, properly, debating it. But schools teach facts, not behaviours.

SPEAKER_01 37:58

Yeah, that's but they should. Like they should they should only teach behaviours. Yeah, yeah. Like I was um I was trying to explain to my To create a better society and a better community. Yeah, that's the one that's the that's the only important thing because the facts, like you said, they're at your fingertips. Like imagine where AI is today. Fast forward that 10 years when like my kids are looking for a job. Anything that they've learnt in school will be useless, other than the behaviours that they're they're being taught. That's the only thing that will carry them through their lives.

SPEAKER_02 38:24

But that again, I think, is the politicians, and I get it, like what a faff. We've got to change the whole school system here because it ain't gonna work going forward. Need to absolutely overhaul it. That's gonna take some real brave soul to do that.

SPEAKER_01 38:37

What you're arguing for there is uh Ankapistan. Really? Well, yeah, because what you're saying is that oh, the the entire education system adheres to this this bureaucracy and to change it is too much effort. But in a free market, if education was free, then this school over here would be good to start a school tomorrow.

SPEAKER_02 38:53

Exactly, right?

SPEAKER_01 38:54

If it was more successful, the market would decide and more people would come to our school.

SPEAKER_02 38:58

Yes, so I do agree with that one then. Yeah, well, it's like the BBC were forced to have that.

unknown 39:02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 39:03

You're forced to pay a TV license. I haven't got into it because I can't bother with the faff of getting letters and saying so. I I do pay it, but I don't want to pay, I don't watch it, I'm not bothered.

SPEAKER_00 39:11

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 39:11

And it but to me, that's wrong, isn't it? It should be a free market. If you think you're that good, go out into the free market. Go against Sky News and and GB News and all these different people then.

SPEAKER_01 39:20

Yeah, yeah. Everything should everything should have a free market test, I think. The problem is that when you and we're like still on the um anarcho-capitalist thread, is that when you start to look at some of the more extreme levels about like safety nets and uh healthcare and things like that, um, that's when a lot of emotion uh comes into it.

SPEAKER_02 39:39

Yeah, because if if the if the poor or if you're poor and you want decent healthcare for your mother or your child, you should be able to get in a good society. Exactly basic healthcare.

SPEAKER_01 39:49

Yes, and they're they're the much more difficult to argue fringes, like child protective services type fringes of how do you how do you But then as a community, if they knew that was going on back in the days we were talking about, or we as men of the community would go in and deal with it ourselves.

SPEAKER_02 40:04

That's exactly the answer.

SPEAKER_01 40:06

That's exactly the answer, isn't it?

SPEAKER_02 40:08

If it's proven, but then that's where that's when you go into the next thing, then proven, because then you could take a disliking to that bloke because the wife's looking at him funny, and you could stop creating rumours, and that poor bloke then without any proof has been lynched.

SPEAKER_01 40:20

Yeah, but you'd still have you'd still have a process, a community process. You'd have law and order. You can have law and order in a in anarcho-capitalist world, in an anarchist world. You don't need a government to have judges, right?

SPEAKER_02 40:32

So someone's appointed, he's a fair guy, he's got common sense, we'll make it. But it'd be a free market, wouldn't it? Yeah, yeah. So we voted for this guy.

SPEAKER_01 40:39

I want to be a judge, so I'm gonna start judging on cases. A couple of people come to me and I make terrible judgments. Everyone goes, No, you're not going to him again. Yeah. Right? Like everybody, it's in it's in the two parties who are going to the judge. It's in both of their best interests that it's a fair judge, right? Even if one of the parties is malicious.

SPEAKER_02 40:54

He's corrupt, I've already takes backhanders, don't you use him?

SPEAKER_01 40:56

Yeah. Yeah, exactly. So like if you had a free market of judges, which like the um UK comes.

SPEAKER_02 41:01

Is it a free market? We're not talking money then now, are we? In in your in this, like it's yours, like you own it. Uh in in the uh I'd pay a judge. Yeah, so it's still uh uh the economy is still based on actual physical money, not on swapping trade, for example.

SPEAKER_01 41:14

Well, money is um money is a medium of exchange.

SPEAKER_02 41:16

It replaces the still money's still got the part the part to play there. Yes, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 41:20

This is from um Carl Menger.

SPEAKER_02 41:21

Why do I keep going to Antichrist whenever I think of that's a good word? And I keep I keep it's anarchist. My brain goes anti-christ. No, anarchist, right? Okay. But yeah, it was Carl. God, God, god, go, God, let me get rid of the negativity.

SPEAKER_01 41:35

Carl Menger talked about um the role of money and and managed to again distill it down to its its core facets, but medium exchange is its main thing. It's like, you know, if you go back far enough and I've got goats and you've got melons, and you're a melon seller and I'm a goat seller. If I don't want melons, but you want goats, what do we do? Yeah. So that that's the role of money. Uh is to is to bridge that negotiation. Yeah, yeah. Um, and there's been all sorts of monies, they've been like shells with money in some societies. There's been all sorts of money. It doesn't have to be the physical cash that that we have today. Yeah. Gold is the best money, right? Like it's historically is there's only a limited amount of gold, though, isn't there?

SPEAKER_02 42:12

They're still finding new gold, or is it limited?

SPEAKER_01 42:13

They're still finding new gold. Isn't there some statistic of all the gold that has ever been mined fills two Olympic-sized swimming pools? Yeah, yeah. So it's scarce. But um, but yeah, that that comes to uh actually something called subjective marginal value theory, which is again part of that Austrian school of economics, which is what informs the um it's either called anarcho-capitalism or libertarianism. Uh the libertarianism, that is because it uh they used to consider themselves liberals, but the word liberal got mutated. So then they redefined it to libertarian just to to try and keep themselves different. Um but yeah, there's something called the subjective marginal value theory, which is like when it comes to trading goods, what you're trading on is uh subjective value. There is no such thing as inherent value. Talking about gold made me think of this, but um there's no such thing as inherent value. Nothing is valuable if you take the human out of the equation. That's why I think you'd like uh libertarianism or or Austrian economics, because it's all about humans. It's called praxeology, it's how humans act. But um yeah, if you if you think of an object, some gold, like there's no inherent value in gold. It doesn't like it. It's just a it's just a it's just a mineral. Yeah. Uh what gives it value is that you want it. It's it's just simply just supply and demand. Um in this society, if somewhat so I got near. No, it's it but like I I think that's something that uh a lot of people struggle with because they they go down this route of well, water is inherently valuable. Well, not if I've got a load of it. Right? If you're in a desert with no water, yeah, and I've got a tap that I can just turn on, who's gonna want the water more? And whoever wants it more is gonna give like give more for it. Um so yeah, there's there's these sort of very Really logical fundamentals to um anarcho-capitalism that I think and the people that are sorry, I'm really sorry because we're gonna is that the where does the care come in?

SPEAKER_02 44:09

Because there are, like we spoke about earlier, there are better there are people that are better and worse at different things, and the the level of society that are um intellectually not as aware or intellectual at all for whatever reason, we don't know the answer to this one, like we said before, they're not curious to do their and the DNA, whatever it is. So they're gonna suffer in this society more than others, aren't they? Do we is does the community in this in this theory look after and help these people? So is that down to the family, or do you know what I mean?

SPEAKER_01 44:40

Yeah, I do. I think I think the real mind shift that a lot of people struggle with is that you you've got to flip your mind from being top down to bottom up. So I mean you say, does the community look after this? I don't know, it's up to the community. Like, and if they're not looked after, maybe they'll go and find a different community. Um, it's all game theory. It's all just game theory. It's given these rules, you put these players in in into the world.

SPEAKER_02 45:04

Yeah, so my community's flourishing, we all look after each other, more people want to join my community like that. Yeah, exactly.

SPEAKER_01 45:10

Um, and you never know what might come out of it is something very similar to what we've got today in terms of a society, but just subtly different enough. Like that the a lot of the negative side effects of our current society aren't felt. Or maybe the opposite. Maybe like it's it's similar to our society, but there are still tyrannical rulers. Who knows? Um this is the problem when you're asking, has it ever been thoroughly tested? It's like, no, it hasn't. A lot of great thinkers have promoted it. That's why I got like all these uh Lord of the Rings tattoos on me, because J.R. Tolkien was an anarchist.

SPEAKER_03 45:41

Oh right.

SPEAKER_01 45:41

Um, like his my interpretation of his uh his writing is that the ring is state power, and uh the Sauron wants to use the one ring, the state power, to control everybody, and the free people of Middle Earth, which is the collection of all of the different societies who don't have anyone controlling them, are fighting to get freedom and destroy the the ability to control civilization.

SPEAKER_02 46:07

To come up, you know, to to explain it in that fashion. You know, for that the guy you know to write to jail talking to that.

SPEAKER_01 46:14

But then he he suffered through World War I. Like he wrote some of it in the Battle of the Somme. Uh you could, if you're faced with that sort of um like negative consequences of of power, you're gonna start questioning things, aren't you?

SPEAKER_02 46:26

Exactly. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 46:27

Yeah. Um but yeah, so I I think it's uh yeah, I think there are a lot of great thinkers who can see what the slippery slope ends up in.

SPEAKER_02 46:35

But you're not allowed to even do that, are you? So I say not allowed, I hate that being told what to do, but um like you couldn't decide tell you what, we'll pull our money together now, we'll buy a massive field and we'll just go and start our own computer right now. Right?

SPEAKER_01 46:46

It's nuts. No, you're right, you can't. But why not? Yeah, I think that's what I mean because of the ring, if you like. Exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's like I would like to just remove myself from whatever this is. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 46:57

Keep your BBC, yeah, keep your thing, we'll sort of.

SPEAKER_01 47:01

I'll look after my own health, I'll look after my family. Just let me go off into the woods and just be me. And just be me. And you can't. No.

SPEAKER_02 47:07

Because then I mean he's not far off like travellers who I'm yeah, that's the closest, isn't it? The closest thing at the moment is travellers, they just want to go and be themselves and not be part of the mainstream things. But yeah, well that's what But I think they've got one l one foot in, one foot out, haven't they really? But they've got to, haven't they?

SPEAKER_01 47:22

But like um Scott Adams, he was the guy who did the Dilbert comics, and I really like him, he's a motivational speaker, or was he passed away a few months ago. Um, and he had a phrase which was people would trade a lot for freedom. He said, if you give someone two options, a great life with no freedom, or a bad life with freedom, they'll pick the bad life with freedom. I think inherent in all of us is a desire for more freedom, at least most of us is a desire for more freedom. Um and then emotion comes in and we're like, oh yeah, but what if of fear?

SPEAKER_02 47:49

Yeah. Because the humours are really only driven by two emotions, really, the it's fear and love, really, isn't it?

unknown 47:55

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 47:55

Everything else is just piled on and messed up in between.

SPEAKER_00 47:58

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 47:58

Um, okay, I want to go, I want to go now from that um to I'm just gonna before we leave that subject actually, before we go to the other one, just so if you were to give I know you're too humble to feel like you could give advice to anybody, but um if you were to give advice to someone who is in that that when we did that body language like that right now, so missus, kids, work, busyness, stress, living hand to mouth, if you were to look at that person now, and the society is full of those people, I've I've been there myself. So what advice would you would you give to that person?

SPEAKER_01 48:33

I I can only frame it from my own personal experience. Which have you been there? Um yeah, definitely. Uh the reason I hesitated was I'm like, am I still there? Um But uh yeah.

SPEAKER_02 48:50

Well, yeah, I mean I saw a thing once that said, like, you know, millionaires, like a homeless person's here, and a millionaire's like here, yeah, and like a billionaire's here. And it's like the millionaires, yes, there's a gulf in terms of their choice and options, but really they're not far off from being homeless or whatever. Or someone with 500,000, I can't remember what the stat was, but on a graph, it didn't look you know, yeah. For true, true feed freedom, if you like.

SPEAKER_01 49:12

Yeah, yeah. But it for me it's just you've just got to be curious enough to then pick up that first podcast or that first book and and start. The the biggest problem is a lack of open-mindedness. That uh it's where we started this conversation, really, and it's what I've um drilled down as being the one trait that matters more than anything is open-mindedness. It's what I teach my kids. I I'm not bothered about anything else as long as they're open-minded enough because only then when you teach them not to judge as well, then.

SPEAKER_02 49:42

Do you teach them or do you not talk about judgment? Um comparison. Because comparison and comparison is the thief of joy. Comparison and judgment can really stop people's growth as well.

SPEAKER_01 49:51

Yeah, oh absolutely. Uh, I I agree with that. It's just not I'm not hard on on those threads, they're more soft, you know, when you're out and about and it's like, oh, what about them? It's like, oh, you don't know. I always I always like to try and bring the uh the opposite side of possibility to them. Like as soon as they do judge something, I'll uh I always for my whole family, my wife and my kids, I'll be like, ah yeah, but what if this is their situation? Would that change how you feel about them? Yeah. I do it, I I always throw moral dilemmas, especially at my eldest daughter, because she's uh she's eight years old and um she loves it. She says, Oh daddy, can you ask me questions? And what she means is, can I ask her moral dilemmas? I do it all. Uh okay, yesterday, last night before bed, I asked her, Is murder ever acceptable? Um and I I love I love about how she how she thought about it. She was saying, like, oh yeah, but if someone really did wrong or something, then or if you're in a war, that's what she went to, which I thought was interesting for an eight-year-old to go to that point. But I said, Okay, yeah, but what if daddy was in the war and someone was wanting to kill Daddy? And then she's like, Oh yeah, no, that's not right. But I I yeah, so I love trying to I love trying to create them new neural pathways, isn't it?

SPEAKER_02 51:05

And and things in the mind, yeah. Yeah, and I think that's because there's a science behind open-mindedness, there's a science behind being self-aware because it creates these new pathways in the brain, doesn't it?

SPEAKER_01 51:14

Yeah, which uh actually that to be fair, that goes into the diet bit a little bit, uh, because your brain's what like almost um 80% collagen. Is it really? No, not collagen, cholesterol, sorry. Yes, it is. It is and the cholesterol wraps the uh neural pathways and protects them. Um so uh yeah, if you and you can't your your body can't create cholesterol, the cholesterol that you're born with is what you have and you lose two percent a year. No way. So the only way to get cholesterol is like through diet. Um and uh that's the theory behind Alzheimer's and stuff, isn't it? Exactly. There was um a hypothesis that it's type 3 diabetes, Alzheimer's, because it it you you uh you starve yourself of the thing that protects your neurons, so then the neural pathways start to wear and disconnect. Um so then yeah, the more uh the more you can protect the neural pathways when they do form, they they remain. Um but yeah, I I I try, like I say, with my kids to to really stress them uh in terms of um Well I'm gonna start doing it.

SPEAKER_02 52:12

Yeah I'm gonna start doing it. Yeah. What's your answer to that?

SPEAKER_01 52:15

No, it's it's never right to kill somebody.

SPEAKER_02 52:17

Really?

SPEAKER_01 52:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 52:18

But I am like like I said before. You've just watched I'm gonna give you one then. You've just walked in. This is really sorry, it's dark, but so you know I'm gonna go, you know where I'm gonna go. Yeah. So you just walked in, you've witnessed it happen to your daughter. Yes. You have the means to end that guy's life. You've just seen him end your daughter's life.

SPEAKER_01 52:36

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 52:37

You've got the means to end his life. Yeah, so you would do it.

SPEAKER_01 52:42

I'm not saying it's right though.

SPEAKER_02 52:44

Ah, right, okay. So you've seen yeah, you're not saying you wouldn't do it. Yeah. I would definitely do it just so we're clear. Yeah, yeah. And I think exactly. And I think it's okay.

SPEAKER_01 52:52

But I don't think it's okay. I would I would accept I would accept capital punishment for doing it.

SPEAKER_02 52:58

So, okay, then let's go on further then. So the person you've just seen, you've you've restrained him, you've managed to restrain yourself, the police have come, he's gone to court, and he's got 25 years. So you know he's gonna be out maybe in 20.

SPEAKER_01 53:10

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 53:11

Are you okay?

SPEAKER_01 53:12

Um I'm okay with No, I I think um of course you're not gonna be okay.

SPEAKER_02 53:18

You've obviously your daughters not the neighborhood.

SPEAKER_01 53:20

Yeah, yeah, but I I I th I think um I think life in I I think life in prison should mean life in prison, or at least uh a life of banishment should mean a life of banishment. From society completely. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think you ostracize people from society who don't fit with with your societal rules.

SPEAKER_02 53:38

Uh and like they go back to the free market, they can go and find society that matches their ethics and rules or whatever it is. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 53:44

Exactly.

SPEAKER_02 53:44

And I think you I think Because that could loop into an immigration argument there as well, couldn't it, dead easily? So you get come to a different country's, but whichever country you're going to, yeah, you need to adhere to that country's values and morals. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 53:59

Yeah, yes, and no. Like you do you do yeah, you do need a period of adjustment to to get into that country's morals, like you say, and and and culture. Uh, but also what if you're bringing something that's better? Or if you're bringing a a set of morals and culture that's better. Um so it's also uh like a free market at least would um would self-correct. So if if people did come over uh into your society, into your community who had a uh a more efficient way of fishing, for example, then you'd adopt it. Of course you would. Yeah. So um yeah, it's a quid pro quo. But yeah, on back on the um on the on the morality uh situation, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 54:35

I think um why is it not okay?

SPEAKER_01 54:40

Why is murder not okay?

SPEAKER_02 54:42

In that scenario, in that particular scenario. Um I know why murder's not okay, obviously, but yeah.

SPEAKER_01 54:47

In that particular scenario Um Okay, so because so there's two reasons that I have for that one. Um one is that uh I think I think you have to take the action in isolation and then say, is this action ever okay? And if you can conceive of situations where it's not, uh then it isn't okay. Um and the other one is that just what we were talking about with the open-mindedness, it would be hypocritical to say uh that in that situation it's okay to kill that person when you don't know the other side of the situation. You you only know your perspective and internal.

SPEAKER_02 55:29

Or your daughter might have just killed his daughter.

SPEAKER_01 55:31

You just don't know, yeah, exactly. Yeah, there's there's that what you mean? Yeah, exactly. There's there's a lot of unknowns in that situation. You can keep stressing the example and constraining it. Um I you'll never get me to say it's it's moral, but that isn't that I wouldn't do it.

SPEAKER_02 55:45

Yeah, no, I like that. I like that as an answer I did because you more you you were real with it, yeah. Yeah, because I think you don't agree with it, but I can't say if I saw that situation and I've got the means to do it, I probably I might just like you say sort of usefully to do it.

SPEAKER_01 55:55

Yeah, yeah. Because um yeah, I think uh I think we're all hypocritical, and I think striving to not be hypocritical, although it's honourable, it's impossible. We're always going to be hypocritical. I think as long as you acknowledge when you're being hypocritical, that's the biggest step to say, like, yeah, no, I'm I I people really do like really dig in, don't they? Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 56:17

And instead of just going, Yeah, do you know what? I did that wrong, or I'm wrong, or I said that wrong, or I'm sorry, I made a mistake. It's just why can't people just do that bit? It would really because even just saying obviously I've done nothing wrong or anything, but just saying that now, you could feel like an energy release, can't you?

SPEAKER_01 56:31

Yeah, yeah. Just saying the words. Yeah, well, maybe that's what um like maybe that's the the core that spurs Catholicism, like the confession.

SPEAKER_02 56:40

It's um but yeah, I think uh because I was saying to somebody else, uh a lady that I've interviewed, the interview's not out yet, and um and we discussed that a little bit, we didn't go into it too much depth, but I said, Is religion really to her um Hi Mina, um is religion um really like a form of manifestation and um I say confession and the and um yeah these sort of things basically it's just which one is it? Chicken for chicken and the egg sort of thing. Do you see what I mean? Yeah, and is religion used as a as a lack of responsibility in a human? Does that make sense? So instead of taking responsibility, yes, you know, I'll put it in God's hands or it's what God wants, or uh you know, or oh I'm trying to solve this in my life, so I'll I'll go to church. Do you know what I mean?

SPEAKER_01 57:31

That is that case well it's it's multivariant though, isn't it? And it's different for each individual. So for some people it's definitely that.

SPEAKER_02 57:36

But if it saves and makes them better people or whatever, makes them better societal members, that's okay, isn't it?

SPEAKER_01 57:40

Yeah, it's a set of rules that can be a cheat code for life. Like it's if I just follow these rules, I'll probably be alright. I don't have to take like say responsibility to figure it out.

SPEAKER_02 57:48

If there's no risk involved, it might not be any excitement, but you'll get through it, okay? Yeah, like that you mean.

SPEAKER_01 57:52

Yes, yeah, yeah. And it's and it's okay. You give me this set of rules, you give me these, uh, this routine that I go through. Um, and like I now know that if I do this, like society will accept me and I'll be alright. Like, I'll probably be alright. I won't I won't be ostracized from society. Um, it's interesting because uh I think it's it's very similar to how we view like uh the state and government and laws today. I think um the difference is that with religion it's personal, like your interpretation of religion is free to be whatever you want it to be. Um your interpretation of laws in the UK are not free to not free to your interpretation, they're only free to a single judge's interpretation. So I think but there's there's definitely analogies there. Um but yeah, I think religions often become just like that, a cheat code. My my uh I I often wonder like, is there a game theory to religions?

SPEAKER_02 58:44

And um What do you mean by game theory? Just explain that to people, just uh You said that a couple of times, haven't you? Game theory.

SPEAKER_01 58:51

So yeah, so game theory is a is a field of study which is um like it it permeates most uh social sciences and it's uh essentially like given this set of rules permeate, permeate me. Uh permeate, so it's it's it's used in most social sciences. Um so yeah, most social sciences have uh like a game theory component to them. So uh economics would be uh an example which talked about earlier, but um yeah, like any social science, a game theory, which is is something that I think you'd be really interested in. It's given this set of rules and given these players, what's the likely outcome?

SPEAKER_02 59:30

So it's like an AI thing that simulates it, sort of thing. You can simulate it with AI, but it's been around for for sit around and discuss and they and they'll see the the the theory.

SPEAKER_01 59:39

Yeah, exactly. And um and the more you understand game theory, the more you understand people.

SPEAKER_02 59:44

Is there an AI thing now that because by the way, he's really he's he's AI is his thing. We haven't even gone there. Um so is there is there something where you can keep putting it into AI and it comes up with a theory? Could you put anything into the into is there a game theory game?

SPEAKER_01 59:56

Uh we created, yeah. Yeah, absolutely, yeah. But it that's um sorry, but you can go back now. I'll just wonder if it exists.

SPEAKER_02 1:00:02

I'll never play import, so never know.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:04

Yeah, you'd be out chat to any AI about game theory. AI is um like uh heavily game theoretical. But yeah, go on, sorry. Um so yeah, like a game theory, it's just uh a a process of thinking where you say, given these constraints and given these players, what happens? So there's like the So go to religion again then.

SPEAKER_02 1:00:21

I'll put that into context with religion.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:23

Okay, so um so the game theory of religion is given the constraints of uh you must follow these steps, like the commandments and uh you you go uh to mass and you know, like you follow this routine, the players would be um the religious leaders and the community around you, and then you as an individual. Uh, given those um variables, when you uh when you press play on this system, what's gonna happen? Uh do the does the individual player who you really like that that's the result you're interested in, does that player end up successful or not, for example? Like maybe that's the maybe that's the test in the game. Um so yeah, game theory is just like trying to constrain a set of interactions and uh a set of variables like um into a box and say, well, if if this was a computer game, for example, and I press play, what's gonna happen?

SPEAKER_02 1:01:15

And that's where it boggles my mind again, because going right back to what we said, we don't really know or understand what makes each individual human so individual.

unknown 1:01:24

Right.

SPEAKER_02 1:01:24

We're not all individual, but we are, if you know what I mean. Like a fingerprint, for example, scientifically we're individual, but a lot of people are in in this sheep bubble thing or whatever it is. So that's why a game theory is is difficult to try and do when you've got people popping their heads up that are just hang on, yeah, yeah. Hang on a minute, what's going on here? Yeah, absolutely. Questioning things, yeah. So you have to do it when you're doing a game theory, you're doing it based on the people that don't question things, I take it.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:51

No, no. So um absolutely. So there's a game called The Prisoner's Dilemma. Um, I don't remember the exact rules, but it'll give you a gist of it. So, and this was actually studied. So in the prisoner's dilemma, you get two groups of prisoners. Um, again, I can't remember the exact uh the exact rule, but it's something along the lines of um those those prisoners are in jail for let's pick an arbitrary number, like 10 years. Uh if this set of prisoners elect for this set of prisoners to leave jail, then um or to remain in jail, sorry, then this set get their term commuted, so they leave jail immediately. And this set have to stay for 20 years. Um if they both elect for each other uh to stay, then they both stay for 20 years. They can't talk to each other and there's a wall in between them, what happens? Like, do they end up?

SPEAKER_02 1:02:41

If they both say okay, they can go.

SPEAKER_01 1:02:43

And if if they if they yeah, if they both say they can go, then they're uh or if neither of them elect, sorry, their term is halved, so five years. So it's like uh group A and group B, if group A says group B stays, then group A gets to go free. If group A and B both say that they that the other group stays, then they both have to stay for 20 years. And if group A and group B refuse to answer, then they both get half. So the beauty of that is that it's trying to get into the human psychology of are you willing to sacrifice yourself? Like, what do you think the other people are gonna do? Do you think they're gonna kick you out if at which point you should kick them out? But if you both kick each other out, then you both stay for 20 years. Like, so it it's it's uh yeah, it's a really interesting um mental problem that that you try and solve, but then they just they can do the experiment, right? You can get people, put them in a room, make sure they don't talk to each other. Yeah, yeah, sure. And what was the I I don't remember the results of the game. That was the thing we want to know. But which bit which bit would you imagine? Like that they would they would likely both elect for the other to uh to stay and then end up both staying for 20 years, probably.

SPEAKER_02 1:03:44

But the the do they know all their rules?

SPEAKER_01 1:03:47

Yes. I think they'd both abstain. You think they'd both abstain answer to do? Yeah, but but the problem is you can't talk to the other side. So you can't risk it. Right? So I and this is a tough one, isn't it? This is the so this is the beauty of game theory. I need to what the answer was, I need to know. Jamie? Oh no, Ron Fakus does yeah, but my not be that um but yeah, uh this is the beauty of game theory is that it it teaches your mind to think think about um how uh humans interact with each other, um, but also uh it it gives you the ability to perform mental experiments. Um so I don't know if you know like the story of how Einstein came up with the theory of general relativity. He was he was working in a patent office and he was just looking out the window. And in Germany, there's um there's these uh roofers called Zimmermen who just like clean roofs and stuff. Anyway, these Zimmermen were on a roof, and he looks over and he's like, What would happen if one of them fell off the roof? And then he started to think about gravity and how it would affect the person falling off the roof, and then he's like, but what if we wrapped an elevator around them? Then they wouldn't know that they were falling off a roof because the elevator would be falling at the same speed as them. And through that, he started to unravel the mysteries of gravity and came up with whatever the next phase of our understanding of gravity was. And similarly, thinking about a train going past a platform and someone bouncing a ball on the train. So you're bouncing the ball and say the ball takes a second to return. So the ball travels a meter in a second. But as the train goes past you, the ball's actually traveling further than a meter because as you as the train's going past and you let go of the ball, the train is moving with the ball, so the ball's moving diagonally down and then diagonally back up again from the perspective of the person on the platform. Therefore, the ball's moved further than a meter, but still in that one second. So, how is it moved both a meter and further than a meter in a second? He he did that with light, and that's how he came up with the idea that um that light travels or that speed and light uh sorry, speed and space are uh are linked, um, and that uh as you travel faster in space, um time travels slower. But anyway, the point is that uh that through Through just introspection and through his own mind, he was able to unravel some of these uh next notch of the mysteries of the universe, and that's kind of what game theory teaches you to do as well. It teaches you to flex your own mind around problems to be able to uncover truths that perhaps lie underneath. That's so interesting.

SPEAKER_00 1:06:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:06:19

Right. Well, now we're gonna go. Now we're gonna go. Because I want to do that, thank you for that. Is go back to there's two things I want to just discuss. I'm alright for time. Um I've gone over, but it's fine. Um is sorry, Rich, everyone goes over. Um there's two things I really want to discuss with you. There's so much I want to discuss with you, but there's two. Um one is the moon. We'll go back to the moon, I haven't forgotten. And can we talk about the physics paper?

SPEAKER_00 1:06:43

Or not? Yeah. Yeah? Yeah, yeah. Okay. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:06:46

So this physics paper that you've done and created. Um, that was gonna say you about AI. What was I gonna say about AI? Oh, I had a thought I need to say that. Anyway, um you sent it to me. Yeah. I got let's say five words in. Okay. I realized that it was above my pay grade. Okay. So what I was gonna ask you was, is could you explain? Because obviously if any someone knows something properly, they should be able to explain it simply.

SPEAKER_00 1:07:16

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:17

So you don't need to go into complications because unless there's some top physicists watching this, which I doubt it, we're all gonna need to know it in a so I was gonna the background is Phil has used AI to come up with a theory on uh a particular physics.

SPEAKER_00 1:07:31

Uh-huh.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:32

That's right. Is that very in a very basic fashion? We're gonna keep it like that, okay? Um can you explain what your paper explains simply to me as a five-year-old, please?

SPEAKER_01 1:07:44

Yeah, sure.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:44

Um how you come about it.

SPEAKER_01 1:07:46

Yeah, so uh so as as time progresses, let's say, um there are certain decisions that you make and that you don't make. Uh what my hypothesis was is that um so as you make decisions, they become, let's say, encoded in the past. So you can't change the past. The future is nothing but possibility, and the past is nothing but facts. So as you're traveling through time, what you're essentially doing is converting the possibility into a fact.

SPEAKER_02 1:08:18

So slow it down, it's converting the possibility into a fact.

unknown 1:08:22

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:08:22

Yeah, because there's a possibility that I might touch that leaf. Yeah. I've touched that leaf.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:26

Now it's a fact. You can't go back in time and untouch the leaf. Okay. Yeah. Um keeping it really simple for myself and you lot. Yeah. So as as time progresses, um, what's happening in the universe, all over the universe, is that uh those possibilities are turning into facts. So every day, every second throughout the whole world. Every millisecond throughout the whole universe.

SPEAKER_02 1:08:46

Oh, universe, we're going that big, okay.

SPEAKER_01 1:08:47

Yes. Um Yeah. So uh in order for that to happen, there has to be a possibility associated with every possible next thing.

SPEAKER_02 1:08:58

I think it has to be achievable, you mean?

SPEAKER_01 1:09:00

No, but it has to no, it doesn't have to be achievable at all. But you touching that plant, the closer your finger gets to the plant, the more likely it is you're gonna touch the plant until you eventually touch it, and then the likelihood goes to 100% because you've touched it. Um the likelihood that an asteroid is gonna come and like hit your arm and stop you from touching the plant's pretty low, but it's not nothing. No. So there's there's like an infinite like mix of possible events that occur.

SPEAKER_02 1:09:24

If we're going to that level, there is literally an infinite number of things that could happen. Yeah. Um stop me touching that leaf.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:29

Yes, but the but the likelihood is overwhelming that that you are going to touch the uh touch the leaf. Okay, so um that feels to me like a very intuitive description of the of of the passing of time, as that time is actually the act of converting things that could happen into things that have happened.

SPEAKER_00 1:09:49

Yep.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:50

Right. Okay, so that's the one strand that you've got to try and hold on to for a minute.

SPEAKER_02 1:09:54

I'm gonna jump to the It's all about possibility turning into facts. Exactly. There's a quick one, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:09:58

Okay, so the next the next step on this journey is the idea that um that the only difference between uh possibilities is information. Yeah. So uh you've got one possibility of something occurring, um like you touching the leaf, that's gonna be the perennial example of this. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So you touching the leaf is one possibility, you not touching the leaf is another possibility, just to distill it down to two. The difference between them is the difference in percentage, let's say, of 99.99% you're gonna touch it, 0.01% you're not gonna touch it. So the difference between those two states is information.

SPEAKER_02 1:10:36

My hypothesis is that once As an observer or as the person touching uh as the universe.

SPEAKER_01 1:10:43

Okay. So the universe is holding that information somewhere. Yeah. That's my so my hypothesis is that those futures, that is held information.

SPEAKER_02 1:10:51

Which Oh, I like it, yeah, I get it. Yeah, right.

SPEAKER_01 1:10:53

So then when you actually do touch it, there's a collapse of information.

SPEAKER_02 1:10:58

Like like that, yeah, like um like guess who? Like it can't be. Yeah, yeah. Guess who's a brilliant example? He's got a mustache.

unknown 1:11:05

Yes.

SPEAKER_02 1:11:05

Yeah, he's got a mustache. Okay, get rid of everyone that's not got a mustache. Exactly. So the universe goes, Exactly. It's not gonna be any of them things now.

SPEAKER_01 1:11:11

Exactly. Yeah, okay. Something has to happen to that information. It can't disappear.

SPEAKER_02 1:11:15

You can't you can't the the information that it's not the guy with a mustache. Yes. The asteroid wasn't gonna hit me. Yes. Yeah, so what something has to happen to me. That information exists as a physical matter or as an energetical matter or as as energy that has a physical effect. Yeah, so there's the the energy. So is that like a um when people talk about different timelines? So is there somewhere where an asteroid does hit my arm and does stop me hitting the plant? Uh not in my exist. Not in my framework. Not in your framework, no, no. Okay, so go backwards then for because I can make it more complicated then. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:11:49

So the guess the guess who game was brilliant because like something when you folded all of those uh non-mustache wearing cards down, um my hypothesis is that something has to happen to that information. And the reason I have that hypothesis is that there was a physicist called Landauer who had the same hypothesis, so it's not mine, it's his hypothesis, it's just extended. So Landauer hypothesized the same thing that information has some sort of effect on the world. And he did, he was uh he worked at IBM and he did various experiments on uh basically deleting information from uh hard drives and then measuring the thermodynamic impact of the basically the physical impact of the information being removed. My hypothesis says that if you take that physical impact from a computer and assume that it happens to the universe, that there's then this leaking of information or this leaking of um physical effects from that information disappearing, basically.

SPEAKER_02 1:12:47

Go back because I just remembered something about that. The weight, there's a weight difference, wasn't there? He didn't mention it just then.

SPEAKER_01 1:12:51

Oh, that was a different that was a different experiment. Was it? But on the on the landauer effect. Oh yeah. So like if you if you had a they measured an iPad that was it had its storage full, an iPad that had its storage empty, and uh the iPad that had its storage full was microscopically heavier than the iPad that had its storage empty. Yes, because the electrons weigh something. So you're storing electrons in the street.

SPEAKER_02 1:13:14

So there is an energy and a physicality to it somewhere. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. When you can't see it or touch it, but it's there.

SPEAKER_01 1:13:20

Exactly. Yeah, there is a field um that you're that that you're interacting with. And yeah, so going back now, sorry. Yeah, but um so as as decisions are made, so to summarize, as decisions are made.

SPEAKER_02 1:13:32

So I'm Rick, I've got a question, sorry. Right. So the possibilities, right, are only within are they within so if a scorpion lion hybrid stopped me from touching that leaf, yeah, is that a possibility?

SPEAKER_01 1:13:46

Uh yeah, infinitesimal, but yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:13:48

What does that mean, infinitesimal?

SPEAKER_01 1:13:49

Like tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny.

SPEAKER_02 1:13:52

We don't know if that even exists, a lion scorpion hybrid. No, we'll get it. So what I'm saying is if I just decide something that doesn't even exist yet, that could exist in possibilities.

SPEAKER_00 1:14:01

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:01

So uh a mummified Egyptian mummy come alive, travel to crew, and stop discussing that leaf. Is that a possibility?

SPEAKER_01 1:14:08

I I would say that although it's counterintuitive, yes.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:12

It there's a possibility to anything basically. Yes, it's an infinite possibility. Yes, my imagination could perceive it.

SPEAKER_01 1:14:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:18

But if my imagination perceives it, has it got weight and energy to it in the future?

SPEAKER_01 1:14:23

Uh if your imagination perceives it, has it got weight and energy to it in the future? Uh no.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:28

See what I mean?

SPEAKER_01 1:14:29

Yeah, I know what you say. Is it one of the guests to you, people?

SPEAKER_02 1:14:31

Can you like is it one of the guests because you don't know what you don't know? So so the so the possibility that we use an asteroid, but is there something that we don't know that also exists in the future that could stop me touching that tree? Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_01 1:14:43

It does make sense. We don't even know. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, but but it would be that far off your path.

SPEAKER_02 1:14:49

So as like if you imagine Yeah, but just just because otherwise you're gonna get yeah, but it it could it's just my imagination is limited to what the possibilities of something stopping me touching that tree. Yeah, okay. Sorry, go back. I'm really sorry. That's okay. You know what you're talking about, isn't it? God lost my thread if I was you.

SPEAKER_01 1:15:05

Um Yeah, so uh so I was summarizing that like as as you walk down a uh a path of possibilities, you're converting something from being possible to it having happened. But by doing that, there has to be a release of energy the same way that inside not has to be. My hypothesis is that there is a release of energy the same way that inside of a computer, when a computer makes decisions, there's a release of energy. So I'm taking the model of that's factual and that's factual, that's measurable. Landauer equations are all well, it's I don't think anything is actually factual because I think it's all just uh a veneer on top of reality. But um but yeah but the but the Landauer equations currently show that there is that there is a physical effect of um of making uh computation. Uh so my hypothesis says okay, if you take that same physical effect, scale it to this decision tree of the universe, what happens? So I was chatting with AI about this. The idea actually came to me when I was thinking about entropy and machines aside of computers, which probably a different conversation. But um but anyway, so I was chatting to AI about this and uh and yeah, um about this hypothesis, yeah. And uh and I started to develop it um uh from the mathematical side with the AI, because when you get into that sort of deep physics maths, it's beyond me. Like I I it would take me a long time to to study and understand it. Um and the AI wanted to run uh the hypothesis against a couple of tests, and uh one of the tests is where they take um uh a universe of a known mass. So this is a dark matter test. So the AI was saying if that's true, because energy has mass due to E equals Mc squared, so energy is equal to mass times the universal constant squared. So if you can tell what the energy effect is of uh of releasing this information, you should be able to tell what the mass of the information releases because all energy has mass and mass has gravity. So you're able to then calculate a lot with that very fundamental equation. He ran a test against um a a makeshift galaxy of a known quantity, and it came out um predicting the mass of the galaxy to 99.3% accuracy, which means it accounted for all of the dark matter, and the dark matter was something that Einstein didn't account for. Um so that was like a a real goosebump moment for me when uh when I was when I was chatting to the AI about about this and I was running these uh these simulations and tests because uh my hypothesis has what's called just one free variable. So one free variable means when you when you come up with a hypothesis like that and you do the maths, sometimes the math doesn't work out, like at different scales. It's like the mass the maths might work out for a planet, you scale it up to a solar system and sudden suddenly the maths doesn't work. That's what happened to Newton.

SPEAKER_02 1:17:50

Yeah, similar we were going saying about the slight degree and thing, yeah. Exactly.

SPEAKER_01 1:17:54

The exact same thing happened to Newton. Newton got gravity nailed for Earth, then looks up at the planets and goes, they aren't doing what they're supposed to. Uh they should all just be falling out. No, but they were he thought they were looping back on themselves. Anyway, uh so yeah, so you you get the math right for one domain, but then you apply it to another and it doesn't work. So then you introduce what's called free variables, which are like little bits of equations to try and bridge the gap. Well, just make a number up. Um so uh so yeah, having like two or three made-up numbers, for example, is seemed deemed okay, but could be better. I had one made-up number, let's say, in this equation for calculating the mass of this uh this galaxy. So then I ran the same numbers against um hundreds of galaxies to try and see whether it was able to accurately predict the mass of those galaxies.

SPEAKER_02 1:18:42

So the different galaxies, these don't exist or do exist. They do exist.

SPEAKER_01 1:18:45

These are observation uh observational um data uh that is just free and open source that you can grab. You get the observational data, you can run your hypothesis against it and see what the numbers come out. And it came out uh five times more accurate than what is currently considered um like the the status quo, the conventional thinking around uh how the mass is accounted for. Um and all of that is the dark matter, and dark matter is this like 85% of the universe the universe weighs a lot more than what you can see. 85% of it we just don't know what it is, which is nuts. Like all the spacing is going to blow your mind, yeah. Um and this this hypothesis at least accounted for that, uh, and that's why it was very exciting to me. So I emailed it over to um the uh Information Physics Institute. Um, and then yeah, I I joined the Information Physics Institute off the back of that and have had various conversations with various physicists in there about it. And yeah, it's uh the thing what I tell you what I've uh noticed from that, it's very interesting, had some really engaging conversations.

SPEAKER_02 1:19:50

It's not like he wasn't part of it first, indeed.

SPEAKER_01 1:19:52

No, no, that's the great thing about the not in the Information Physics Institute because they talk a lot about things like simulation theory, DMT, like they are they are like they're they're serious physicists who are open-minded.

SPEAKER_02 1:20:03

Oh, that's fantastic. Brilliant. Yeah. And that's how you've got to move that's how society moves forward and uh humans move forward. Exactly.

SPEAKER_01 1:20:08

It's the only way. Um yeah. What was funny though is that AI didn't want me to get in touch with the or didn't want me to do that. AI didn't. Yeah, it didn't want me to post too much about this to the Information Physics Institute. I don't know. It's nuts. Did you ask it? Oh so it it's its first reasoning was that it'd be an echo chamber. Um what does that mean? So like I wouldn't get anything valuable out of it because everyone would just agree. Uh as it happens, like there's been some really fruitful conversations with other members of the uh have they said anything that's made you wobble on your theory or maybe uh What have they said to contribute or Well, so I I've I've been asked I've been asked by one to collaborate, um saying that their hypothesis, although similar, uh bridges dark energy where mine bridges dark matter, and they think that the two together could work quite well. Um so there's been some like call out for collaboration. Then there's just been a lot of I tell you what, they laser in on the weak points instantly, which was great. Um that's exactly what you want. Because I'm happy to throw the whole thing around.

SPEAKER_02 1:21:07

So the intent behind it is to cre not not to not to pull it down, but elegant. Yeah, to yeah, yeah, yeah. His intention there is important then, isn't it? Exactly, yeah. Not like that. It's like oh blah blah blah, you know, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:19

Exactly. Like, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:21:20

Um but yeah it's what what what was it? That one, the one variable you mean? Is that what they've picked on?

SPEAKER_01 1:21:25

Uh no, so um it it's a bit complicated around uh von Neumann energies uh and there is a there's a saying there's more the I they're basically saying there's more to it than just dark at dark matter.

SPEAKER_02 1:21:39

Yeah you're not taking into account this, this, this, and this.

SPEAKER_01 1:21:41

There's a small, there's a there's a small questionable leap that I make around uh fields um that I know is weak and I call out in the paper that it's weak, but that's what they zeroed in on to be like, well, how do we flesh this out more then? Um but yeah. So it's ongoing.

SPEAKER_02 1:21:57

Yeah, yeah. It's still being discussed and looked at and Yeah. Have you fed that back to the AI, what they're saying? Oh yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:22:04

What's the actually saying um it's now saying that it's brilliant that I engaged with them and this is the exact idea, Phil? Yeah, so like this is the ex exactly the kind of feedback you need.

SPEAKER_02 1:22:17

So what's amazing is that's your it's like me writing this this book. I can put a starter journey to self-awareness, for example. And it's to help people question themselves more, but really it becomes like a it's it's for me and for them, and it's like a you're kind of like outwardly having your thoughts outward, aren't you? Yes, almost do you know what I mean? Your interior thoughts and what's what is of of manifesting outwards, and this because it's a similar thing to like if I close my eyes and observe myself thinking and and all those sort of those side of things, who is it that's doing the observation? Where's the energy? What m mass or energy is the thing that's watching me? Yeah, isn't it? Like, what's that then? Is that the similar thing to what you're seeing in a way? Not not no, I mean like I mean sorry, not the not what you would I mean like the weight and the the physicality of it, sorry, not that side of it.

SPEAKER_01 1:23:16

Yeah, probably. Yeah, the problem is I very quickly went down the simulation theory. And you believe that, don't you?

SPEAKER_02 1:23:20

Yeah, so um explic uh explain then quickly to people what a simulation theory is, what is that?

SPEAKER_01 1:23:27

Yeah, so just to quickly uh finish off on the paper is that um sort of snuck within it is a is a a brief section on simulation theory because um the problem is that if Landauer's equations are correct and and do uh do uncover a physical truth that like computation creates a physical uh effect, then the universe is computational. Um and that then means that the likelihood of us being a simulation is probably quite high. But because everything's already mapped out and the possibilities are there. Uh because it's no because it's working through a computational process. Because it's like taking some input, doing some work, and giving some output, and that's what time is. And that maps very cleanly onto a computational process.

SPEAKER_02 1:24:11

But so simulation theory So that means we haven't got the free choice, we think we've got them in in the U.S.

SPEAKER_01 1:24:15

I I believe in uh soft determinism. So I believe that um what's going to happen like in the next few seconds is is highly determined. What's gonna happen in the next million years isn't. So um I think that depends on the level of time of decisions being made by everybody. Exactly. Yeah, there's like a gradient of determinism that uh the closer to now you are, the more determined something's going to happen, and the further away from now you are, the less determined it is to happen. Um but I think that's coherent with uh with a simulation theory view of the the universe anyway. Uh but simulation theory, yes, uh for me to explain it, but it's basically the idea that we're all inside of like a computer game, essentially. Um and if you For whose benefit and for why? The simulation runners are doing experiments. I don't know. We play computer games all the time. How many millions of hours a day are wasted on uh RPG computer games and like could be the same thing, could just be a game. There could be experiments that they're running. You don't know how long it's been running for. Right now, it could be the first millisecond that the game started, and you've had all of your memories back filled into you. So it's um it is it is m mind-bending. But the idea is that we're inside of a game, and it's it seems really that's some people if people really started to believe that.

SPEAKER_02 1:25:24

Couldn't they start to prove that theory by doing crazy things, walk down the streets naked today and violence and and then but then is that yeah, then you're gonna say it's that's part of it, aren't you?

SPEAKER_01 1:25:35

Yeah, and there are efforts to try and prove that we're in a mean you spoke about briefly, didn't we? Yes, the laser on the wall thing, yeah, taking laser.

SPEAKER_02 1:25:43

Taking DMT and then staring at the laser on the wall. Yes. But then people can disprove that by saying, Well, yeah, but you're you're drug-induced. Yeah, sure. They're not gonna say it's a thing, are they? Exactly. Doesn't everybody see the same thing? Is it a shared delusion? I believe so, yeah. Which is what makes it rare, isn't it? Yes, because I don't mean like just they actually see the same thing. Yeah, the same code, not just we see code in the red, it's yeah, we see the same code. So I'm back It's a shared delusion, a shared not delusion, a shared illusion. It's great is more common than you think, isn't it, with mushrooms and things like that.

SPEAKER_01 1:26:13

Absolutely. That's that's the that's the crazy thing about it, is are we actually seeing reality when we when we are in those uh valid states? Yeah, dream state. Yeah. So um so yeah, this this ties quite a few different threads together because if you take the game theory stuff that we were talking about, um and you look at like the the physics stuff that we briefly briefly touched on, um, and then you think about AI and you start tying all those things together, simulation theory becomes a lot less like kooky and and actually seems quite sensible or or logical. Because if you take the game theory of where we're at with AI and look at things like VR headsets, I I don't know if you ever played with VR headsets. It's crazy.

SPEAKER_02 1:26:51

I did one where I was in Pompeii and it was unreal.

SPEAKER_01 1:26:54

Yeah, right. Absolutely fantastic. And that's the infancy of this technology.

SPEAKER_02 1:26:57

So when yeah, because that was years ago, like 10 years ago I did that.

SPEAKER_01 1:27:00

Yeah, yeah, right. Like so, if you look at how technology evolves, you look at where AI's at today, and that it's it's um it's not at AGI levels, but it can it can sound and feel very human. Uh you you take things like VR headsets uh and other um digital experiences, and then you just roll that clock forward a thousand years. Yeah, God. Like, where are we? Where are we? Are we inside of oh are we banging on headsets, ready player one, going inside of simulations? Probably, right? Like the matrix is documentary.

SPEAKER_02 1:27:36

God, might have just lifted up your headset and then that wow, yeah. I was this guy called Alex, this happened to him, I did this, I did that, did it, and then he became a podcast host and did it, and then just coming out of it, where? So who are you?

SPEAKER_01 1:27:47

Yeah, so like if I I think if you just take the game theory of the variables we've got today, dial the clock forward a thousand years, we're in simulations anyway. So what's to say we aren't in one now?

SPEAKER_02 1:27:58

And that's looped into time travel a little bit. Little bit, doesn't it? Yeah, yeah, yeah. As well. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:02

Yeah, exactly. But it would it would also like it would explain why we can't pin down the fundamentals of our universe no matter how hard we try. And actually, the more we try, the weaker it gets.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:13

You're saying in the future almost like society just stops dead there because now we're just in a simulation. Yeah. So that's that's why.

unknown 1:28:19

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:20

It's so cool. So cool to think about that.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:22

But like I said, I think if you start tying those threads together, it it becomes less of a like a wild sort of thought and more very logical and probable.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:32

Um so that means like anything. So when we talk about ghosts and energies and things like that, if that chair moved in front of us, that's all just all part of the simulation.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:41

Just all part of the simulation. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:43

It's crazy, isn't it? Yeah, it is, but it's going back to that's like a matrix the Matrix film then, we're just doing pods.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:47

Yeah, the Matrix is basically a documentary in that world.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:50

Yeah, yeah. It is, in it. Yeah, I've seen that. Yeah, it's basically a documentary, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:28:53

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:28:53

Go back to the moon. I'm running out of time. Go back to go to the moon. Go back to the moon. I'm not forgotten.

SPEAKER_00 1:28:59

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:29:00

So I said, we've briefly said, because I don't believe the moon landings are possible. I don't believe he's picked up that phone and spoke to them, and and then we haven't managed to go back when the thing looks like a racketedy old car. How's it got? How's it got there? Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 1:29:13

And then you said I don't even believe the the moon is necessarily real. So like yeah, because because the problem is when you're open-minded enough, then you're you're willing to accept some very unorthodox views. Uh and you know, as soon as you say, I don't think the moon's necessarily like a a real satellite, um, then people start looking at you funny and wanting to get you sectioned and stuff. But so um I've never been, so I don't know. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah, yeah. Like uh I I don't know. I've never kicked the dust. Uh but the there's some weird stuff about the moon, isn't there? Like um, I can't remember whether it was Apollo 15 or something. It fired uh part of its lander back into the moon and it left seismographs on the surface of the moon, supposedly, if we ever went, and that's the other problem, isn't it? You don't know any of this. What I'm saying right now could all be fabrications as well, but supposedly it rang like a bell. So the moon is less dense inside, outside. I did hear that one. I did. Right. That's just not how planets should evolve. That's not how that's not how mass works, like the heavier stuff goes to the middle. Um, so that to start off with is weird. Uh also for the why would they release that information? Well, this is the the other thing as well, isn't it? Like you just like I said, I've never been. So uh but when you I suppose my point is that when you look at all of the information that is available, you're just like something weird is going on with the moon.

SPEAKER_02 1:30:35

Well, give me some more, give me some other bits.

SPEAKER_01 1:30:37

Well, outside of just like the the moon landings, so um like you say, the the video evidence that they released of the moon landings, some of it was fabricated, admittedly, and then some of it was real. It's like why would you mix it? Um but but also uh yeah, so then so the moon rang like a bell, uh, but also for the size of our planet, the moon is massive. Like there is no other moon planet scaled to that size in the solar system. She's like, well, why not? Why are we the only ones who have it? And also, isn't it just like too much of a coincidence that the moon is exactly from the perspective of the earth the same size as the sun? That doesn't happen anywhere else either. Yeah, if they're the moon eclipses, you mean yeah, it's 400 times smaller than the sun, and it's exactly 400 times closer than the sun, which means that from the perspective of the earth, the moon and sun are exactly the same size. There's all this weird stuff where you're like, shit, I think the moon might not be a lump of rock, or at least I'm open to the idea that the moon's not a lump of rock. It could be something else, or maybe it is a lump of rock that's been put there, but you just don't know. Like the universe, I think once you start to What's about what how'd you say about the I'm gonna just touch on one more thing now?

SPEAKER_02 1:31:46

You're gonna be flat Earth, are you?

SPEAKER_01 1:31:48

Oh no, like I have seen the curvature of the Earth.

SPEAKER_02 1:31:51

Yeah, so what's gonna say was then how do you explain the the the wave? Because they say it's the gravitational pull of the moon, don't they?

SPEAKER_01 1:31:56

Yeah. Oh yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:31:57

I mean the moon's there and has mass. Yeah, so that and that is you think that is still a grav causing the the tides.

SPEAKER_01 1:32:05

Yes, I think the I think the physics plays out beautifully with that because the um so the the moon is pulling the oceans away from the earth, and the earth is is revolving underneath the ocean, uh, which causes the tides, because the ocean's being lifted where the moon is, and then the earth, but it's also causing friction on the earth. So as as the earth is revolving underneath the ocean, it's slowing down. And because the earth is so there's um you know the conservation of of energy, so you can't destroy energy, energy always has to be conserved in a system. Okay, so the earth's slowing down, um but the earth and the moon are in a system. Uh so if the earth slows down, there's some energy that the earth is losing. So that energy has to go somewhere, and where it goes is in speeding up at the moon. But the moon when as it speeds up, it uh when I say speeding up, speeding up its low orbit, as its orbit speeds up, it moves further away from the earth. So the moon is moving four centimetres a year further away from the earth. Isn't that true? Yeah, and that's because of the gravitational effect that the the moon has on the ocean, slows the earth down, which makes the moon move further away. It's there's like this beautiful example of conservation of uh of of energy, but um but yeah, so I do believe that the the moon is causing tides.

SPEAKER_02 1:33:20

I think the And we're made up of water because I mean the amount of policemen I've spoken to that said on full moons or whatever, there seems to be more trouble and more things happening in the I I heard that a lot.

SPEAKER_01 1:33:31

I find that really difficult though, because the moon's still there.

SPEAKER_02 1:33:35

Yeah, and that well that that's ties in with back with the astrology side of things, though, full moons and and the energies behind full moons. Yeah, but we are made of water, and but you you ask you ask the emergency services people, they say it seems to be busier on you know something not right on a full moon.

SPEAKER_01 1:33:49

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I I have heard that anecdote a lot. Yeah, I just haven't been able to reason about it because even on new moons, the moon's still there. It's just it's under the shadow of the earth, so you can't see it. Yeah. Um so whether it's related to light as opposed to to gravity, but I went gravity because that in my head it's affecting water where water I went like that. But you still have tides on a on a new moon.

SPEAKER_02 1:34:10

Yes, yeah, yeah. But a stronger pull.

SPEAKER_03 1:34:13

I don't know.

SPEAKER_02 1:34:14

I don't know. I don't I have a clue. I was just trying to think I've heard it so many times. I have as well. From basically from policemen, from emergency services people that tell me full moons. Yeah, I I've heard the same thing. And I just I haven't looked into anything I've not researched, and my adjustment water, water, water like that.

SPEAKER_01 1:34:32

And that's what I love because that's how I think you get to the truth anyway. You don't necessarily look outward, you look inward. You try and like deduce the truth inside of your own mind instead of trying to find it in the outside world.

SPEAKER_02 1:34:42

Yeah, but like I say, like you, I'm open. So if you went, Oh, actually, I like da da da da. Oh brilliant, that's good. Yeah, like that.

SPEAKER_01 1:34:47

And that's where Yes, but that's in your mind that you're doing that are brilliant, that's that's good. Do you know what I mean? Like you you've received some external information, great, but uh you've only been able to in your own mind deduce the truth as you see it, right? Like the truth isn't external.

SPEAKER_02 1:35:03

Ooh, that's a good one. So yeah, but if you present me with something and then I now change my mind as to what I thought was true, and that you presented me with information, it has come from you, hasn't it?

SPEAKER_01 1:35:15

The information has, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And then you're saying that my so my background, my reality, my who I am is how I'll augment that information with what you now see the truth as being. Yeah. Yeah. For example Yeah, but facts are facts, aren't they? Never. No. No facts, there are I I don't even I don't know if there are any facts, right? Like actions a fact.

SPEAKER_02 1:35:40

I've just clapped. Agreed? No, I don't agree. You haven't clapped. What is a clap? What was the noise? What the hands, what the thing, and the crap. No, that's the that's the that's the mental thing about it, isn't it?

SPEAKER_01 1:35:51

Like, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:35:52

Do we agree that that society calls that a clap?

SPEAKER_01 1:35:55

I believe I saw you put your hands together, yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:35:57

Brilliant. What's going on? I mean, like what that you presented me with the information today, that really that information's already there, but it's got me thinking, like the guess who thing or whatever, such as in the plan, you know, that the possibilities of actions are there, and there's this percentage of probabilities of those actions, yeah. And as soon as I do an action, what are they there 99, 99, 99, 99, 100%? I've touched that book.

unknown 1:36:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:36:25

Now all the other possibilities of what could or should have happened have to the energy of those things have to exist somewhere. Exactly. Where does it go and what's happening with it?

SPEAKER_01 1:36:34

Yeah, it has to go somewhere. It has to go somewhere. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:36:36

So does it just Does it just keep going forward to my next my personal next possibility?

SPEAKER_01 1:36:43

Uh yeah, that's an interesting um that's an interesting thought. We've all got our own Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:36:50

That builds up into a big one.

SPEAKER_01 1:36:52

I hypothesized it as the energy gets released um into the universe, and it has uh it has a physical effect on the universe, um, but it's it's dark, and that's where the dark energy or dark matter, sorry, comes from.

SPEAKER_02 1:37:05

So it's not recycled into somebody else's possibility.

SPEAKER_01 1:37:08

No, but it it's not not in my current hypothesis, but it's a really interesting train of thought. Like, where does that go?

SPEAKER_02 1:37:14

That's like why black holes are so interesting because they're just churning up the universe, and it's like what happens to all of the energy that goes inside of them, and you know, Hawkin said that it leaks out again through Hawkin radiation, but it's a leaks back out, black hole back outwards, it goes in and it leaks out the same way, or it's somewhere else.

SPEAKER_01 1:37:31

Well, supposedly it leaks back out into our universe through radiation, which is called Hawkin radiation. Um, but yeah, it's uh I I think I think it's impossible just to put a bookend on that. I think it's I think it is impossible to wonder about anything to do with the universe without being spiritual because you'll be so far from the truth if you're not open-minded enough to accept it.

SPEAKER_02 1:37:52

Are you religious? But I've got to close this, I could talk to you another two hours. You're gonna tell me off, you can't I keep going over, and I said I won't go over anymore. And I am just are you let's just talk about religion quickly. Are you religious?

SPEAKER_01 1:38:05

Um you kind of dealt you kind of touched on it yourself, and then Yeah, like I I'm I'm more religious now than I was. Um, science has pushed you towards uh a god.

SPEAKER_02 1:38:18

Yeah, I don't you just know what you mean. Is that right?

SPEAKER_01 1:38:20

Yeah, because don't you just well I don't know if it's a god, a simulation runner, whatever, but um a something. Yes, because I don't know about you, but I could I could just sit there for half an hour thinking how absurd it is that we think that everything came from this nothingness and is then going to expand out into nothingness in one hit. It's just not just before that as well. What exists before that? What was it? Exactly. Like it doesn't it I can't wrap my mind around that.

SPEAKER_02 1:38:48

So your yeah, your logical brain has gone to an illogical thought to reason as to why we all exist, and it's saying that something, someone, some god, some somebody, master, has created it. Yeah, basically, yes, and that's why it runs so perfectly in some.

SPEAKER_01 1:39:08

Well, and that's why I think that's why off physics.

SPEAKER_02 1:39:10

That's why there's a yin and a yang, and there's a female, a feminine and a masculine, and there's a yeah, there's all this balance everywhere.

SPEAKER_01 1:39:15

Yes, and yeah, yeah, and who knows what reality really is, like and maybe taking psychedelics get you there, but so cool.

SPEAKER_02 1:39:23

Yeah, we need to talk longer, but I can't. Um, and um that was that what I need to close it, but I'm gonna close it on a question that I've been asking people, which is I ask, who are you? And we dissected that. But there's no there is no real answer, is there? You can't give an answer because it's quite unique to everybody else as well. Like you were saying about me receiving the information, that is a very unique question for everybody, and it's not a it's just whatever you think is right, really, isn't it? I suppose.

SPEAKER_03 1:39:50

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 1:39:50

Um and then we went like went to who are we, who are we then? So as a closing question, okay. I don't want the straight answer like a drink or a Ferrari. What do you want? What does Phil want? It's a difficult question as well, in a different way.

SPEAKER_01 1:40:07

Yeah, I I think it's just um it wouldn't be anything superficial. Uh and obviously, you know, like it's it's tempting to say something to do with your family or whatever. I think it's I think it's just more time to understand. I think that's like where I sort of lean towards like on this earth, yeah or on this simulation. Yeah. I'm not really bothered about you being on this earth.

SPEAKER_02 1:40:38

Do you mean more time to understand as in length as in years, or I'm too busy working, really all I want to do is delve into this information? Which which one did you mean?

SPEAKER_01 1:40:45

Well, they're both are kind of the same thing.

SPEAKER_02 1:40:46

Well, yeah, because if you have so if you won, let's pretend you've just found out now you've just won 50 million pounds. What does Phil do next? I'm gonna recomplete change the question. Uh so you've got all the time in the world, you've got all the freedom and resources now. Like you say, forget that you're gonna get a house with a swimming pool, you're gonna sort your kids out, okay, blah blah blah. So what's Phil as this human, this soul, this simulation guy, what what's what's he gonna do his next move with £50 million in the bank?

SPEAKER_01 1:41:15

Yeah, it's difficult, isn't it? Because like you've got all the altruistic ideas of I just want to be able to help all all the family and friends that you've got to do. Yeah, that's really all that all that the obvious sort of thing.

SPEAKER_02 1:41:27

No, it's just it's just because you would tick your own boxes first, of course you would. Yeah, it's and then what?

SPEAKER_01 1:41:31

It's it's to it's to try and just uh come to some piece of understanding, I think.

SPEAKER_02 1:41:38

How would that freedom and m the monetary f having that monetary freedom enable you to do that better?

SPEAKER_01 1:41:45

Um because you have the time to to uh indulge in um It's like a hobby for you, like you get enjoyment out of searching. Yeah, I get goosebumps when I when I think of a like a a connective piece of information. I'm like, that's awesome. Like it's it's euphoric at times. So cool. I think I think having time to do more of that. Yeah, I did have I had a moment in the car, I was just driving and like had this thought about um about my physics paper and a a problem that I was dealing with, and I got this really bizarre feeling in my in my mind, like a tingling sort of sensation that was like just really really new information, new idea or yeah, like I had this new idea, this new connection that I that I'd made, and I like like I said, it was almost euphoric. Um it just That's amazing. Yeah, it just buzzed. I can't wait. So where's that coming from?

SPEAKER_02 1:42:39

Where's where is that yeah, where did that live before that new thought came into your way you were driving? Where was it? Yeah, where was it?

SPEAKER_01 1:42:50

Yeah, buried in there somewhere.

SPEAKER_02 1:42:51

Yeah, but where was it? Did that have weight and and could that was that measurable? Was that in the future? It must be, yeah, yeah. And it's just somehow is that your subconscious working behind the scenes? What is it?

SPEAKER_01 1:43:00

Well undoubtedly, it like a lot of it is, right? Like you get a lot of those euphoric moments when you're unconscious.

SPEAKER_02 1:43:06

And have you I've got to stop talking. Have you have you done DMT, mushrooms, anything? No, nothing, no, never, Alex. Me neither. But I do believe it's one of my next steps. So when I do, are you ready to do it? If it's in the proper right environment and everything, if it all matches and then you'll have to do it with me.

SPEAKER_01 1:43:29

Will I? Is that my reality?

SPEAKER_02 1:43:31

If that's my reality, is it not yours? Okay, is there anything you you feel like you you wanted to say or you're gonna say that I didn't get around to asking, or that you wanted to, or something we just spoke about that you didn't want to finish off, or no, I don't think so. Are you happy?

SPEAKER_01 1:43:47

Yeah, I'd like I could chat with you for ages.

SPEAKER_02 1:43:49

So oh, we're gonna we're gonna, it's not gonna stop here, yeah. Um, thank you so much for coming. Yeah, I really appreciate the voice.