亚当·弗兰克：外星文明与地外生命探索
Adam Frank: Alien Civilizations and the Search for Extraterrestrial Life
天体物理学家谈地外生命存在的概率、文明能否长久存续与技术痕迹，以及寻找它们的可行方式。
Adam Frank 和同事 Woody Sullivan 在 2016 年算过一笔账。他们想知道，宇宙历史上究竟产生过多少个处在宜居带的行星。答案是 10 的 22 次方，也就是一万亿亿个。
每一个这样的行星，都是一次被自然跑过的实验。从无机物到生命，从生命到智慧，从智慧到能发射无线电的技术文明，整个过程究竟能不能走通，答案就藏在这一万亿亿次重复里。
能走通的唯一反例，是每一次实验都失败了。这就给出了一个下限，Frank 把它叫做悲观线：只有当每颗宜居带行星孕育技术文明的概率低于 10 的负 22 次方，人类才是宇宙中唯一的存在。只要这个概率比它哪怕高一点点，那么在其他地方、在宇宙历史的某个时刻，一定已经有过别的文明。
这并没有告诉我附近有谁。银河系完全可能是一片死寂。它只告诉我一件事：除非大自然真的对文明有某种偏见，否则我们不是第一次发生这种事。（亚当·弗兰克）
这是天体生物学第一次把一个延续了两千五百年的争论，压缩成一个可以标定位置的坐标。在弗兰克之前，乐观主义者和悲观主义者互相攻击，最激烈的一次是 1600 年布鲁诺被烧死在罗马鲜花广场。没人知道“乐观”和“悲观”到底意味着什么。现在有了一个数字，问题就从哲学变成了科学。
每一颗恒星都有行星，这条消息曾经是革命性的
弗兰克在访谈里反复强调，德雷克方程里其实只有两个量被真正钉死了，但它们被钉得极其彻底。
第一个是 F sub P，有行星的恒星比例。答案是一。你晚上看到的每一颗恒星，都带着一个行星家族。
第二个是 N sub E，平均每颗恒星位于宜居带内的行星数量。答案是五分之一左右。你朝天上随便数五颗星，其中一颗的宜居带里，就有一颗类地行星。
两个数字背后是几十年的计算天体物理积累。1995 年，人类第一次在一颗类太阳恒星周围发现了行星，弗兰克说那一刻是“大坝崩了”。在那之前，二十世纪初的主流理论认为行星是两颗恒星近距离交错、被引力挤出来的产物，而这种事件稀有到一万亿颗恒星里才发生一次。如果真是那样，地球就是天文级别的孤本。结果恰恰相反，行星遍地都是。
模拟从一个百万倍太阳质量的星际气体云开始，气体湍流翻滚，某些区域密度够高，引力抓住它往下塌，原恒星开始点火。因为角动量守恒，下落物质旋转加速，摊成吸积盘。尘埃（弗兰克纠正说，更准确的说法是“烟”，最细小的固体颗粒）在盘里凝结成卵石，卵石撞成岩石，岩石撞成巨石，一路级联到行星胚胎，胚胎互撞，最终形成行星。
温度决定了这一切的化学。靠近恒星的地方只凝结得出金属，所以水星基本是一颗大铁球。往外走温度降到某条“雪线”之外，水才能冻结，所以太阳系四颗巨行星的卫星上冰多得惊人。木卫二上的水，比地球上所有海洋加起来的还多一倍。
宇宙里最常见的行星，太阳系一颗都没有
这是弗兰克抛出的一个让人愣住的点。他说，现在系外行星的统计已经足够做一次“人口普查”，能看出谁正常、谁古怪。结果发现，怪的是我们。
宇宙里最普遍的行星，质量在地球的一倍到十倍之间，分别叫超级地球和亚海王星。太阳系在这段质量区间里，干干净净，什么都没有。
这些行星的内部到底是什么状态，人类完全没有数据。那里的压强是地表的几千万倍，物质会被压成什么样，只能靠实验去猜。弗兰克参与的一个项目就在罗切斯特大学的激光能量学实验室，用巨型激光轰击微小的二氧化硅样品，模拟地球核心乃至超级地球核心的极端条件。这些细节决定了那颗行星有没有板块运动，而板块运动可能是复杂生命的关键。
他特别强调，这个思路本身就是天体生物学的一次转向。生命遭遇的是一整颗行星，行星是这个过程的主体。这句话他归功于 David Grinspoon 和 Sara Walker。你不能说“那儿有个温暖的池塘，池塘里发生了有趣的化学”，你必须把整颗行星的历史一起算进来。
地球曾经是平的，这件事对演化至关重要
弗兰克刚完成一篇关于“难步骤模型”（Hard Steps Model）的论文，里面有一个细节特别有意思。
地球早期只有很微弱的板块运动。大约十亿年前，这种运动突然加强了。加强之后，山脉才开始真正隆起。弗兰克开玩笑说，这是平地球论者唯一可以兴奋一秒钟的时刻，因为在那之前，地球真的相当“平”，没有喜马拉雅级别的大山脉。
山脉隆起带来风化，风化带来侵蚀，侵蚀把海量的营养元素冲进海洋，那是微生物最想要的东西。结果是什么呢？净初级生产力，也就是食物链最底端的光合作用产糖量，暴涨了将近一千倍。
板块运动在某种意义上给演化加了超级燃料。我们不确定具体是怎么发生的，但很清楚，生命活动的总量确实被这种新的、更有活力的板块运动大幅推高了。（亚当·弗兰克）
更早的时候，地球还经历过几次“雪球地球”，整颗星球被冰封，海洋全部冻住。如果不是板块运动带来的火山活动不断往大气里泵二氧化碳，行星完全可能永远卡在那个状态里。就算生命已经出现，也只能停留在微生物阶段，再也上不去。
这里有一个反直觉的推论：动荡本身是演化的燃料。地球历史上有一段被叫做“无聊的十亿年”，整整十亿年只有微生物。它们发明了发酵，功不可没，但再没有别的进展。直到大陆开始互相碰撞，新的生态位不断打开、旧的不断关闭，生物才被迫回应。寒武纪大爆发大致就发生在这个窗口。
弗兰克的说法是，生命和行星在共同演化，随时间推移，一扇扇“演化窗口”被打开。二十多亿年前，生命发明了能打碎水分子的新型光合作用，把氧气泵进大气。这件事永久改变了行星的化学，也打开了全新的可能性。你我这样的大脑袋生物需要富氧大气，因为氧气对代谢极其高效。行星形成后一亿年，绝无可能出现智慧生物。
难步骤模型的致命缺陷：物理学家没问生物学家
Brandon Carter 是一位极出色的物理学家，他用“人择推理”提出：智能出现在地球上的时间，几乎贴着太阳寿命的终点，这两条时间尺度没有理由重合，所以一定是通往智能的某一步难到离谱。他把这类步骤叫做“难步骤”，还推算出大概有五到六步。
这套理论统治了天体生物学几十年，衍生出无数论文。弗兰克那篇论文里有一张图，把所有基于难步骤的论文列在一起，每条都提出一套不同的步骤清单。有的是内共生，有的是复杂多细胞，有的是眼睛的前体，有的是陆地生态系统。
然后他们把这张表推翻了。
Carter 是个绝顶聪明的物理学家，这个想法本身非常漂亮。真正研究演化、研究这颗行星的人，从头到尾没被叫进来过。你去跟一个演化生物学家或生物地球物理学家讲这套，他们会看着你说：你们到底在干什么？（亚当·弗兰克）
问题出在两个地方。
第一，Carter 假设行星和生命各自独立演化，可以当成两条互不相干的线。可是生物地球物理学家早就完全接受：行星和生物圈是缠在一起演化的。弗兰克说这已经超出小分歧的范畴，整套模型的地基裂了。
第二，“难”这个字本身的判定标准有问题。所谓难，是指每一代繁衍都要掷一次骰子，看这个突变会不会发生。但有两种情况会让一个步骤看起来很难，实际却不然。
一种是信息丢失。有些创新发生在太久以前，化石记录里已经找不到别的谱系也做过同样尝试的证据。你只看到一次，但那可能只是因为证据没了。
另一种叫“抽梯子”。某个物种做出了某项创新，然后它太成功，把生态位占满了，别的谱系再没有空间去重复发明。它确实只发生过一次，原因也许就是先到先得。
弗兰克还讲了一个 XTC 漫画：一个人在白板上苦苦推导，旁边一个物理学家探头说，“哦，我刚写了个方程，你这问题我解了。你们这行有期刊吗？”副标题是“为什么大家都讨厌物理学家”。他说这话时带着自嘲：物理学家确实擅长砍掉细节抓住核心，但面对复杂系统时，这种砍法经常把真正该看的东西也一起砍没了。
费米悖论的两半，其中一半根本不存在
弗兰克对费米悖论的态度非常干脆：根本不存在费米悖论。
故事是这样的。1950 年，费米和同事在洛斯阿拉莫斯吃完午饭往食堂走，路上聊起《纽约客》一幅漫画，讲的是纽约垃圾桶神秘消失，漫画解释说是 UFO 干的（1947 年刚发生第一次 UFO 热潮）。他们笑着聊起星际旅行和推进方式，然后话题转开了。四十分钟后，费米在午餐桌上突然冒出一句：“那大家都在哪儿呢？”
他心算了一下：如果智慧生命很常见，那么即使以亚光速在恒星间跳跃，一个文明也能在几十万年内铺满整个银河系。所以，他们为什么现在不在这儿？
这是直接的费米悖论。1975 年 Hart 把它写成正式论文，论证是：现在这儿没人，所以哪儿都没人。
但 SETI 开始之后，另一种说法流行起来，弗兰克叫它间接的费米悖论：我们找了几十年信号，什么都没找到，所以外面什么都没有。
间接的费米悖论绝对不存在，理由非常平庸：没钱。SETI 从来没有过经费，一直都是研究者从别的项目里抠一点望远镜时间出来瞄一眼。（亚当·弗兰克）
他的合作者 Jason Wright 和学生们做过一项研究，把 SETI 的整个搜索空间想象成一片海洋。要看的恒星、要扫的射电频段、观测的时长和频率，全算进去。然后他们统计了历史上所有 SETI 搜索，把文献翻了个遍。结论是：我们舀出来的那点海水，大概相当于一个热水浴缸。你在浴缸里没捞到鱼，然后说海洋里没有鱼，这个推理不成立。
至于直接的费米悖论，出路多得可以编一本书，叫《费米悖论的 77 种解法》。弗兰克的团队做过一个真正的模拟，让探测器以亚光速在恒星间飞行、开采资源、继续前往下一颗。只要给文明设定一个有限寿命，比如一万年或十万年，整个银河系就进入一种稳态：文明不断死亡、不断重生、不断旅行。结果是会出现大片的空洞，某些区域可能几百万年都没有任何存在。
我们可能正好住在这样一个空洞里。他们来过，但那是一亿年前。
他和 Gavin Schmidt 写过一篇论文，结论是：如果一亿年前地球上存在过文明，无论那是恐龙还是外星人，我们都无法知道。化石记录太稀疏，绝大多数东西根本不会变成化石。唯一可能留下的线索是同位素地层，看有没有工业文明的痕迹。至于想找到 iPhone 或者倒塌的建筑，一亿年足够把一切磨平。这篇论文叫《志留纪假说》，名字来自《神秘博士》里那集蜥蜴人。
有人拿这篇论文问弗兰克是不是在暗示地球上有过史前文明。他强调了很多次：
我们从没说过存在过志留纪文明。我们说的是，如果存在过，你没法知道。Gavin 的问题非常漂亮：你怎么才能看出来？（亚当·弗兰克）
一万亿亿次实验，人类只舀了一个浴缸
回到开头的那个数字。弗兰克和 Sullivan 那篇 2016 年的论文，核心思路是：既然德雷克方程里两个天文项已经被钉死，那就把时间这一项从方程里去掉。
不问文明能活多久，只问一件事：在宇宙整个历史中，曾经出现过技术文明的概率是多少。
因为有一万亿亿颗宜居带行星，就等于有一万亿亿次实验被跑过。要让人类成为唯一，必须每一次都失败。所以悲观线是 10 的负 22 次方。
我们觉得这差不多是天体生物学的普朗克尺度。它给了你一个真实的数字。只要概率高于这条线，那别的文明就一定在宇宙历史上出现过。（亚当·弗兰克）
他说，这篇论文真正改变的是举证责任。两千五百年来，争论的双方都只有嘴。现在，举证责任在悲观主义者那边。
但弗兰克同时提醒，这个论证有它的边界。它说不出附近有没有人，银河系完全可能是 sterile 的。它只说，在宇宙历史的某个角落、某个时刻，这件事发生过不止一次。
生命可能很常见，文明可能很短命
弗兰克自己的判断是：傻生命，也就是微生物级别的生命，在宇宙里应该很常见。真正不确定的是两头，一头是生命起源本身有多难，另一头是技术文明能活多久。
关于第一头，他承认自己只有直觉：
看着地球的历史，我倾向于认为生命不难产生。基础生物学不难启动。这仍然是一个惊人的过程，我认为它要求我们重新思考“生命”这个概念本身，但我的直觉是，生命大概很容易制造。（亚当·弗兰克）
主持人的判断更激进：只要有了细菌，剩下的就是时间问题。中间那个“无聊的十亿年”确实费解，但一颗宜居行星有几亿到几十亿年的余量，等得起。
关于第二头，也就是 L 项，弗兰克觉得这是真正的大问题。人类造出射电望远镜只有一百年，就算再活十万年，放到银河系的尺度上也短得可以忽略。要让文明在银河系里足够稠密，需要的是上亿年乃至十亿年的文明。
那么问题来了：一个十亿年的技术文明，到底是什么样子？你要怎么系统地研究它？
他和 David Kipping、Caleb Scharf 做过一个贝叶斯计算，问：如果你探测到一个信号，那个文明比你年轻还是比你老？直觉上你会觉得五五开，但形式化算下来，答案是它大概率老得多。这意味着你不得不去思考，十亿年的文明会留下什么样的痕迹，会以什么形式存在。生物演化在那个尺度上早就面目全非，那社会形态呢？是连续的，还是崩了重建、重建再崩的断续演化？
他说这才是真正的前沿。这个尺度上，你被迫去“想象不可想象的东西”。
技术圈是个未成年：它正在拆掉自己脚下的地板
弗兰克和 Sara Walker、David Grinspoon 合写过一篇关于“行星级智能”的论文，核心概念借自神经生物学家 Francisco Varela 的“自创生”（autopoiesis）。Varela 给生命下的定义里有一条：自我创造、自我维持，不制造摧毁自己的条件。
从这个角度看，生物圈已经自创生了几十亿年。生命刚出现时，微生物太少，还形不成反馈，他们叫“不成熟的生物圈”。生命变得繁盛之后，它开始对行星施加反馈，把温度、大气成分维持在适合生命的状态，这就是“成熟的生物圈”。
然后，人类在最近几百年造出了技术圈。
我们在论文里论证的是，技术圈现在是不成熟的。因为气候变化，因为我们做的所有其他事情，技术圈正在摧毁自己赖以维持的条件。如果我们要在几十万、几百万年的地质尺度上存在，就必须成熟起来。就目前而言，我们不是自创生的。（亚当·弗兰克）
这里有一个容易被误读的地方。弗兰克明确说，“拯救地球”这个说法有点可笑，地球不是一只需要保护的小兔子。生物圈不会消失，人类做什么都灭不掉它。真正脆弱的，是人类赖以生存的那套条件。人类是从全新世这一万年的间冰期里长出来的，我们忍受不了差别太大的地球。
至于盖亚假说，他的评价很克制。1970 年代 Lovelock 和 Lynn Margulis 提出时，被新纪元运动拿去搞了不少盖亚舞蹈。核心其实很物理：生物圈能对行星状态施加反馈，让系统稳住。他说现在还不能确定存在“完整的盖亚反馈”，也就是说行星能被生物圈完全控制。但有一点是确定的：生物圈是地球历史上的主要玩家。
他举了一个很朴素的例子。外面一百华氏度，他走出去，体温不变。回到罗切斯特的冬天，零度，体温还是不变。这就是稳态。生物圈做的是类似的事，温度升了，它启动某些过程把温度压下来。
那么技术圈能不能也形成这种反馈？弗兰克说，这正是他那篇论文想说的：技术圈需要从不成熟走向成熟。而现在这一轮“大加速”，是技术圈诞生时对生物圈的一次巨大扰动。技术圈坐在生物圈上面，如果它为自身的存在条件去破坏生物圈，那就麻烦了。
人类现在连一级文明都不到，而且可能永远到不了
卡尔达肖夫在 1960 年代提出那个著名的三级尺度，逻辑完全是探测导向的：一个文明会依次掌握多大尺度的能量。
一级：用掉落在一颗行星上的全部星光。二级：用掉一整颗恒星的全部输出，也就是戴森球。三级：用掉一整个星系的全部星光。
人类现在处在对数尺度上的 0.7 级。有人算过，如果按现在的轨迹走，大约公元 2300 年能到一级。
但弗兰克指出卡尔达肖夫漏了一件事：热力学第二定律。卡尔达肖夫只想着能量获取，没想过当你使用能量时必然产生废热。你不可能百分百利用一箱汽油，剩下的必然去加热引擎。
所以我们很可能无法在不摧毁地球气候的前提下到达一级文明。这就是为什么太空变得重要。我们有个研究了一阵的想法叫“服务世界”：某个时刻，你得把大部分工业搬出行星。比如水星，水星上什么都没有，没有生命，为什么不把能量采集放在那儿？（亚当·弗兰克）
他说生物圈比人类强大。人类在地球上能采集多少能量去做功，是有上限的，超过这个上限就会严重伤害生物圈。想用十倍的能量，就别在地球上用。
这也回答了一个常见争论。应对气候变化的药方，指向更好的技术。弗兰克上一本书《星光》整本都在讲这个，他称之为“人类世的天体生物学”：把人类正在经历的这次转变，放进行星尺度天体生物学的框架里看。他们建模得出的结论是，几乎每一个技术文明都会触发自己的行星气候危机。真正的问题是，你有没有足够的聪明，去调整你的技术方式，让所有船一起浮起来，让生物圈变得更有生产力、更健康、更有韧性。
如果我们能熬过气候变化，终点的奖品是整个太阳系。我们将真正开始工程化太阳系。（亚当·弗兰克）
怎么找到一个文明：从氯氟烃到城市灯光
弗兰克说他已经不太喜欢用 SETI 这个词了，因为 SETI 的传统形象是朱迪·福斯特戴着耳机听信号，那需要假设对方想被找到，还得假设对方造了一个超强的信标对准我们。假设太多。
他更喜欢“技术标志”（technosignature）。系外行星革命带来了一件礼物：我们知道该往哪儿看，也知道该怎么看。于是可以去找文明在正常过日子时留下的被动痕迹，完全不用管它想不想被联系。
生物标志的例子是氧气。地球大气里的氧气完全来自生命，一旦生命消失，氧气和甲烷会迅速反应掉。所以如果在一颗行星上同时看到氧气和甲烷，那大概率有生物圈。
技术标志的例子是氯氟烃。人类当年误打误撞往大气里灌了大量氯氟烃，破坏了臭氧层。弗兰克的团队算过，这种分子在星际距离上是可以探测的。把一颗遥远行星的光送进光谱仪，看到氯氟烃的光谱指纹，那就只剩一种解释：那里有工业过程。因为自然界没有任何途径能造出这东西。
他是 NASA 第一个系外行星技术标志项目的首席研究员。这个项目要做的事，是建立人类第一份技术标志库。以前没人系统想过这个问题。
候选清单里，有太阳能板的反光，有一种特定的反射光谱跳变，跟材料无关。有城市灯光：如果一颗行星上有《星球大战》里科洛桑那种规模的都市，或者《基地》里的川陀，城市灯光的光谱印记在二三十光年外是可以看到的。晚上从远处看地球，钠灯的谱线会打到地面上再反射回来，仪器够灵敏就能识别。
还有更有意思的一类，叫“不可知标志”（agnostic biosignature）。它不依赖地球经验，只问：生命这件事，在一般意义上会留下什么印记？一个思路是化学反应网络的结构：生物产生的反应网络，和岩石、水之间的反应网络，拓扑结构完全不同。另一个思路是信息论：测一测大气里各化合物携带的信息量，如果信息量高得离谱，就不太可能只是岩石在起作用。
还有一个更朴素的判据：远离平衡。生命是远离平衡的系统，一旦死亡就回到平衡。你可以用吉布斯自由能去测一整个大气的失衡程度。如果一颗行星的大气严重失衡，说明有什么东西在持续往里泵气体，不让整个系统松弛下来。
一像素的照片，和二十四公里的分辨率
聊到望远镜，弗兰克对詹姆斯·韦布的态度很坦白：他当初是真怀疑。“行吧伙计们，你们说得都对。”
韦布真正重要的地方在光谱。弗兰克说光谱不性感，画面就是一条弯弯曲曲的线，但要找生命，就必须先找到有大气层的行星，然后做“表征”，看光谱指纹里有没有碳、二氧化碳、氧气、甲烷。这是当前最关键的一步。
他举了 K2-18b 的例子。那颗行星距离地球 120 光年，韦布拿到的光谱好到可以推测它可能是一类全新的宜居世界，叫“氢海洋世界”（hycean world）：质量约地球八倍，外面裹一层氢气大气。氢气是极强的温室气体，能把底下捂得足够暖，形成一片巨大的液态水海洋，水温可能只有六十摄氏度。甲烷的探测达到了五个 sigma，弗兰克说这是科学界的金标准。
再往前一步是直接成像。他解释得很清楚：即便下一代望远镜，拍到的也只是一个像素。那只是一个点，远远谈不上照片。你能拿到那个点的光，送进光谱仪，但没有分辨率。
然后是那个听起来像疯了的想法：太阳引力透镜望远镜。
广义相对论说大质量物体会弯曲时空，太阳就是一个巨大的透镜。方案是往奥尔特云方向发射一批望远镜，回头看太阳，让太阳把背后某颗系外行星的光聚焦到镜头上。距离大约是日地距离的五百倍。如果一切顺利，分辨率能到二十四公里，也就是说，你能在一颗系外行星上看见曼哈顿。
弗兰克说这个方案已经通过了 NASA 三轮评审，从“把最疯狂的想法交上来”到“告诉我们这玩意到底可不可行”。他说自己大概活不到那天，但主持人老了的时候，也许真能看到。
戴森球、克拉克带，和被证伪的外星巨构
1960 年，Freeman Dyson 提出那个著名的想法。他的出发点很实用：要找文明，得先想出一种能留下可探测痕迹的干法。文明越进步，需要的能量越多，太阳系里最大的能源就是那颗恒星。把恒星包起来采集全部光子，你就有能力重新工程化整个太阳系。
严格意义上，一个刚性的球是不稳定的，戴森本人想的其实是“swarm”，一大群独立的轨道采集结构。
这件事差点就有了候选。那颗著名的 Boyajian 星，光变曲线出现了极不规则的凹陷，一会儿一个“小恐龙的牙齿”，一会儿又没了，过一阵又来三个。论文里老老实实列了可能性：彗星、崩解的行星碎片，以及外星巨构。媒体只抓住了最后一条，第二天所有人的信息流都是“外星巨构被发现”。
后来证实，大概率是气体或尘埃云。
但这件事的价值在于，它证明这类东西是可以观测的。不需要直接成像，用凌日法就行。一颗行星从恒星前面过，光变曲线出现一个规整的凹陷。如果是成千上万个巨构，它们大部分时间会遮挡恒星，偶尔不遮挡，光变曲线就会变成“哔、哔、嘀、嘀、嘀”那种不规则信号。稳定的行星系统里只会有五到十颗行星，不可能出现这种密集的微凌日。
Jason Wright 那批人换了个思路找，找红外。热力学第二定律说，你采集了那么多星光，结构本身会升温，必然辐射红外废热。他们最近确实筛掉了大量候选，但留下了几个异常到“这就是它该有的样子”的目标。弗兰克强调，他们绝不会称之为“探测”，但那也不是“非探测”。
另一个候选叫“克拉克带”。地球同步轨道是一个非常特殊的轨道，天然过程不会把物质堆在那里。如果一个文明大量使用同步轨道，卫星带会密到在凌日信号里留下痕迹。它没有戴森 swarm 那么“巨型”，但已经是行星尺度。
我们舀了一浴缸的海水，然后说海里没有鱼
关于怎么找，弗兰克有一套很朴素的排序。
如果给他一万亿美元，问他是往天上找还是往地球上看，他的答案毫不犹豫：往天上找。
我总爱这么打比方。你要是说“亚当，我想找几个内布拉斯加人”，我说“好啊，咱们去喜马拉雅山”。你会问“为什么要去那儿”。我说“也许喜马拉雅山里也有几个内布拉斯加人”。你会说“不不不，咱们去内布拉斯加”。我们要找外星人，为什么不去他们住的外星行星上找？我们现在有那个技术了。（亚当·弗兰克）
他还给 UFO 现象准备了一个“远光灯论证”。假设有一个高级文明定期造访地球，他们不想被发现，技术超级强大，但他们用得实在太烂了，我们老是看见他们，然后他们又消失了。这套说法要成立，得先解释一个自相矛盾的世界。
他 2021 年在《纽约时报》写过一篇关于 UAP 的评论，反响巨大，很多人来找他聊。他说自己专门去看了信号情报和电子情报圈子的分析，那些人谈的根本不是 UFO，谈的是“纯粹国家对手”，也就是他学到的那个词。逻辑是：用简单的无人机技术故意往对手的电子设备里灌假信号，对方把雷达开到最大去寻找，你正好把他们先进雷达的电磁特征全部收下来。
他对 UAP 的立场很清楚：完全支持用开放、中立、透明的方式做科学调查，但目前没有任何一份证据够得上“非人类技术”这个结论所需的证据标准。
他花了不少篇幅解释什么叫证据标准。科学界内部互相极其凶狠，因为有一套花了四百年建立起来的判据，用来判断一份证据能不能支撑一个主张。手机能用，正是因为这套标准严格到变态，不然每一部手机都是一块砖。他说如果他的团队宣布发现了某颗系外行星上的技术标志，他们会被撕碎，而且他们预期如此。
UAP、UFO 社群也应该预期同样的待遇。你不能因为话题很酷就获得豁免。（亚当·弗兰克）
要真正把这件事做科学，他的方案是“向上看、向下看、四周看”。地面探测器，就是已经在建的那种监测流星的设备；天基探测器，装在卫星上，这是 NASA UAP 专家组讨论过的方向；还有飞机上的探测器，或者至少一个告警系统，飞行员看到不明现象，按一下红色按钮，触发地面和太空的数据采集。
最容易被忽略的环节在这里：你必须把数据来源的每一个环节都刻画到极致。相机在各个波段的行为、软件的极限、设备最近有没有返修，全都要有记录。如果你想宣称“我的天，我看到了一个东西以五马赫右转”，那你最好先把这些全钉死。
科学的盲点：我们忘了温度是从体感来的
访谈后半段转向了弗兰克和 Marcelo Gleiser、Evan Thompson 合著的《盲
访谈后半段转向了弗兰克和 Marcelo Gleiser、Evan Thompson 合著的《盲点》。这本书的核心比喻来自眼睛本身。
视神经是视觉能够发生的前提，没有它就没有视觉。但你的视野里恰好有一个小洞，就在视神经接入的地方，你对它完全盲。
科学也有这样一个结构。有一样东西，没有它科学根本不可能存在，但科学在自己的配置过程中把它推了出去，然后忘了自己推过。
那样东西叫经验。
我在这里指的不是“观察者”。关于它有很多词：直接经验、临在、存在、生活世界，这是现象学里的说法。它就是你无法摆脱的原始在场，直到你死去。在那之前，它一直在那儿。（亚当·弗兰克）
他讲了一个“温度的寓言”，这是全书最好懂的入口。
人类先有冷热的体感。我觉得热，你觉得冷。科学做的事情，是从这些体感里提取哲学家 Michel Bitbol 所说的“结构不变量”，也就是你我能够达成一致的部分。于是我们造出装水银的刻度管，热的东西液柱高，冷的东西液柱低，双方约定一套标准。然后有了测温术，有了热力学，有了今天早上你打开手机看到“今天六十华氏度，不错”。
问题在于，我们逐渐开始觉得六十度比冷热更真实，热力学的形式结构比“今天真冷啊”这句体感更真实。弗兰克把这个叫做“经验的失忆症”。
我们取出了这些极薄的东西，这些抽象，因为那是做科学的唯一方式。然后你以为，哦，我可以把经验塞回去，为经验提供一个解释。（亚当·弗兰克）
他把这个错误叫“偷偷替换”（surreptitious substitution），这个词来自胡塞尔。还有一个更好记的比喻：别把地图当成地形。此刻两人之间发生的事情，连同它的全部怪异，那是地形。地图是他能写在纸上的方程，能在实验室里拿来做实验。地图极其强大，需要被认真对待，但经验远远溢出地图的边界。
他认为这个盲点跟科学本身已经关系不大。它是一整套被粘在科学上的形而上学。具体包括几件东西：还原论，你不过是神经元，神经元不过是化学，一路往下到夸克；客观视角，科学给我们一个上帝视角的第三人称；物理主义，世界里只有物质，别的东西没什么好谈的；以及数学的物化，认为数学比经验更真实。
这套东西在历史上是合理的，弗兰克说“在当时它讲得通”。机械宇宙观、完美的钟表，很有说服力。但到了二十世纪初，科学自己开始反驳它，最明显的就是量子力学。
量子力学给了你薛定谔方程。你输入初始条件，它给你未来的预测，和牛顿物理一模一样。然后它又说：一旦进行测量，我另有一套规则，叫玻恩定则。弗兰克说，量子力学从一开始就在告诉你，测量很重要。
于是出现了各种诠释，其中很多拼命假装测量问题不存在。多世界诠释甚至不惜发明无穷多个不可观测的平行宇宙，只为了绕开量子力学正在告诉他们的事。（亚当·弗兰克）
他明确站 QBism，量子贝叶斯主义。这个诠释把玻恩定则放到中心，不问薛定谔方程推出的那些怪东西，比如薛定谔的猫，而是问：一个能动者对这个世界的行动，以及他从行动中获得的信息，如何更新他的先验。这就是 Quantum Bayesianism 里 Bayesian 的来源。
细胞沿着梯度爬，和量子测量，用的是同一套语法
让弗兰克兴奋的是，QBism 的语言和另一个领域高度重合。
他参与了一个坦普尔顿基金会资助的项目，研究语义信息在细胞这类生命系统里的作用。香农信息衡量一条消息的“意外程度”，是一个概率分布的事。语义信息衡量“意义”，而意义最基础的定义极其朴素：这份信息能不能帮这个生物活下去。你当然可以把意义谈得很哲学，但最底层就是这个。
于是一个细胞沿着化学梯度往上爬去找食物，和 QBism 里一个能动者对世界采取行动、获取信息、更新信念，在架构上有一种奇特的相似。都在讲一个主体，向世界施加一个动作，从世界拿到反馈，然后改变自己。
弗兰克说，这就是他想要的那种新物理学：把能动者、信息、经验放在中心，同时仍然是硬核的、可做实验的科学。科学凯旋主义的吸引力他很理解，我手上有一组方程，方程代表一个柏拉图式的理想，永恒地独立存在，某种意义上是你在读上帝的心智。另一条路在他看来同样激动人心：这里有一个我们，有一个世界，两者不可分离，而我们要研究的是这场共同创生。
他明确说了，这些物理定律极其重要，将来也需要被解释。需要的是一种把能动者留在故事中心的解释。
石头和细胞之间，横着一个没人回答的问题
这个思路往下推，会撞上一个更硬的问题：生命到底是什么。
弗兰克说，他做了一辈子天体物理，现在觉得物理学最重要的未解问题不在黑洞，不在暗物质，而在一块石头和一个细胞，本质区别在哪儿。
他描述问题时，把矛头引向了能动性。什么叫一个自主的能动者？这件事到底是怎么发生的？他明确表示自己不是还原论者，也不相信“把足够多的化学物质堆在一起，砰的一声，它就出现了”。他认为这个问题会迫使人类重新构想自然本身是什么。
为了说明难在哪儿，他讲了自创生的那个“怪圈”。细胞膜是理解这件事最好的入口：没有膜就没有细胞，膜选择性地让某些东西进、某些东西出。膜本身是细胞内部过程的产物，而细胞内部的过程又必须依赖膜才能发生。膜创造了自己。生命里总有这种循环，你找不到一条线性因果链的起点。
他提到理论生物学家 Robert Rosen 的工作。Rosen 提出“有效因闭合”（closure to efficient cause），认为生命系统在组织上闭合、在因果上闭合，因此不再依赖微观状态。他还有一个证明，争议极大，没人能确定它对不对：生命系统不是丘奇-图灵完备的，它不能被完全表示为形式系统，只能被算法部分捕捉。
弗兰克在这里的态度很谨慎。他说自己不打包票这个证明成立，他看重的是这个方向：一旦承认盲点存在，就会打开一整类全新的科学问题，而不是只能摊手说“不知道，没法谈”。
他还提到一篇自己很喜欢的论文，用 ε-machine 这类信息论工具论证：系统可以自我组织到与微观状态解耦的程度。宏观状态在描述自身、在陈述自身规律时，已经不需要微观状态了。这就是向下因果。还原论认为一切只取决于微观状态，知道标准模型的拉格朗日量就完事了。这个论证说，不对，宏观层面可以自己长出一套规律。
他写这一章时，小标题是“当时它讲得通”。这是对历史的理解：第三人称、上帝视角、决定论的世界观，在十七世纪是有道理的。机械宇宙，完美的钟表，非常自洽。问题是到了二十世纪，科学自己开始说“不”。
他还讲了自己读博时的经历。他做的是磁流体力学、恒星形成的数值模拟。给一个简化模型，写几个动力学方程，配上初始条件，他就很满足。这套办法有时候极其有效，物理学家擅长砍掉细节抓住核心。他自己承认，另一些时候这种砍法会把真正该盯着的东西一起砍没，尤其在涉及复杂系统的时候。
时间：我们拿地图替换了地形
这个话题自然引到时间。
弗兰克说，我们对时间的理解，是“偷偷替换”最典型的案例。人类把爱因斯坦那套极其优美、极其强大的形式系统，替换掉了对时间的实际经验。于是有了块状宇宙：下周二已经写在四维宇宙的块里了，所有事件都已经在那儿。
这套框架对做某些预测极其有效。但它不是被活着的时间。
他讲了那场著名的会面。二十世纪初最出名的哲学家柏格森和爱因斯坦对谈。柏格森一辈子研究时间，他要区分时间的科学图像和时间本身的地形，他用的词是“绵延”（duration）。绵延对人类来说是充实的，它被拉开，里面有一点点过去、一点点未来、一点点现在。
音乐是最好的例子。你听一段旋律的时候，既在预期接下来会发生什么，也在记住刚才发生了什么。这个现象学结构，和形式数学里的时间表示，根本不是一回事。
时钟不告诉我们时间。是我们用时钟去告诉时间。（亚当·弗兰克）
他说这块阵地特别值得争。如果能从能动者、信息、计算这个角度长出一套新物理学，那么时间问题可能是第一个被撬动的。现在的困境是：块状宇宙里下周二已经写好了，那自由意志往哪儿放？
他对自由意志的回答很干脆：自由意志是给定的。他引怀特海的话，科学和哲学的任务是解释抽象，具体就是那样摆在那儿，每天摆在你面前。你要解释当然可以，但解释不会给具体增添任何东西。
至于“自由意志是幻觉”这个说法，他的反驳是：幻觉是从哪儿看的？你要说它是幻觉，你已经把自己推到第三人称视角去了，而那个视角本身才是需要被解释的东西。
有人追问他，如果经验是幻觉呢？他的回答把问题顶了回去：那这个“幻觉”是对谁而言的？你总得在某处安放一个观察者。这就像层层叠叠的乌龟，你永远得在某个地方找到一个观察者。
他认为科学凯旋主义在骨子里带着一种宗教冲动，它想要那个上帝视角。那种感觉已经超出无神论，更接近某种隐蔽的一神论：真理永远在某个脱离肉身的视角里，等着被发现。
另一种哲学传统，从没进过这场讨论
弗兰克指出了一个有意思的空白。关于意识的公共讨论，用的语言几乎全部来自分析哲学传统。但在西方哲学内部，还有一整支现象学传统，胡塞尔、海德格尔、梅洛-庞蒂，他们全部的工作就是试图理解经验的结构，试图发展出一套能爬进经验这个圆圈内部的语言。
他调侃说，你几乎找不到一个视频，是某个著名科学家从现象学角度谈科学的，尽管那是哲学里极大的一支。
再往外，还有从其他文明核心生长出来的哲学。西方这一支从希腊、从犹太-基督教-伊斯兰传统长出来。印度和东亚是高度复杂的文明，它们对同样的问题发展出了自己的回应，而且因为长期有默观修行，它们非常专注于直接探查注意力和经验本身。
他点了两个名字：龙树和世亲。他说这两个人在那些传统里的地位，大致相当于柏拉图和亚里士多德。
他们的全部哲学、逻辑和论证，都从一个前提出发：我有这个经验，我出不去，那我该怎么从这里推理？所以有大量其他哲学传统可以借鉴。不必照搬，不是说要大家都变成佛教徒才能做这件事。（亚当·弗兰克）
他也承认现实的困难：在经验之上建立逻辑体系很难，在经验之上建立科学的严格性很难。他只是不认为这不可能，只是说这是下一代科学的活儿。
他还补充了一个对“客观性”的重新理解。通常人们说科学给出第三人称的客观视角。客观性还有另一种版本：我做这个实验，你做这个实验，我们互相讨论，对方法达成一致，各自得到相同的结果。这个版本的客观性本身就承认了能动者、承认了交流，而且它承认个体性是流动的。
他引了 David Krakauer 在圣塔菲研究所的一篇论文，用信息论的办法测量个体性，结果发现它是流动的。他的肝细胞是个体，但它其实是肝脏的一部分。肝脏是独立系统，但它其实是他的一部分。他是独立的，但没有整个语言使用者共同体，他连一个问题都提不出来。而这个共同体又嵌在活的生态系统里，生态系统又嵌在生物圈里。
他说，这跟那种原子化的科学视角正相反，那种视角最后会把你带到“缸中之脑”，或者“玻尔兹曼大脑”，一个漂浮在太空里的脑子。
他还提到康德。人们普遍认为是康德造了“有机体”这个词，而他注意到生命有一种奇怪的 organization，这种东西跟机器有本质区别。弗兰克说这可能是条出路：组织、架构、信息流的关系，本身需要被当作研究对象。它必须实现在物理之中，但它多出来的那一层，是约束与信息流之间的关系。
机器能有能动性吗
话题转到机器。弗兰克说他不会排除这个可能性。没有理由认为，那个自创生的怪圈不能在硅里发生。但他强调，那会和我们非常不同，不会是科幻片里那种“它跟我们一样，只是被造出来了”。它会有一套很不一样的体验性质。
他对现在的大语言模型态度保留。他引的是认知科学的 4E 理论：具身（embodied）、嵌入（embedded）、生成（enacted）、延展（extended）。核心意思是，认知不只发生在头颅里，它必须有身体，身体必须在环境里，还必须与其他生命系统延展耦合。
他讲了一个故事。还原论的大生物学家 Jonas Salk 和控制论学者 Gregory Bateson 对话。Bateson 爱挑事，他问 Salk：“你的心智在哪儿？”Salk 指指脑袋，说：“这儿。”Bateson 说：“不不不，在外面。”
经验在某种意义上不是你拥有的东西，是你做的事情。你几乎是在表演它。这就是为什么有一个身体、而且这个身体处在一个有其他身体的世界里，从这个角度看是至关重要的。（亚当·弗兰克）
有一个关于“缸中之脑”的论证，他的转述大意是：要让一个缸中之脑真的成立，你最终必须给它一个身体。可以是机器身体，但仍然得有身体。纯粹悬空的认知，在他看来不成立。
主持人在这里提了一个很有分量的反驳：人类婴儿本质上也是模仿机器，从出生开始就在学别人，靠模仿和模仿之间的张力长出人格和视角。弗兰克承认有可能，但他的立场是，光靠模仿拿不到那个怪圈。你必须嵌在一个世界里。
三十年的默观：我其实没那么重要
访谈走到这里，气氛变了。弗兰克主动交底：他在禅宗传统里做了三十年默观修行。他的原话是“我对着一堵墙看了三十年”。
主持人问他，作为一个观察者，你只有有限的时间存在于这个世界上，这件事会让你难过吗？
他说不会。
修行教给我的一件事是，我其实没那么重要。这个叫亚当·弗兰克的东西，很大程度上是一个构造。有一个过程在发生，我根本上属于它，这很酷，但它会过去。我不知道它从哪儿来，它会走，我并不真的需要它留下，然后天知道会怎样。（亚当·弗兰克）
他说禅宗里有个说法叫“超越生死”，意思跟轮回无关。意思是：老兄，你连生命是什么都没搞明白。在最核心的那层经验上，你对死亡的看法和那个一样，是不成形的。
他描述了一次完整禅七的体验。从早上七点坐到晚上九点，中间有休息。头半个小时，脑子里全是杂念：税、待办事项、那个人为什么穿那双鞋。他讲了一个特别具体的细节：第一次参加两天禅七，他脑子里从头到尾完整播放了一遍 Bruce Springsteen 的《Born to Run》专辑，连当年黑胶唱片上的停顿都放出来了。他说那一刻他真的看见了自己心智的运作方式。
然后他说，他曾经非常讨厌打坐，但还是坐着。坐上很久之后，心智会累，那层屋顶上的喋喋不休终于没东西可说了，人就无聊了。他说，那才是真正有意思的事情要开始的地方。
再往下，修行变得非常身体化。你做的只是跟着呼吸，骑着呼吸，变得非常安静。佛教的文献一直在说“不要思考”，但他们写了那么多东西，那些是指月的手指。
他描述了三个阶段。先是散乱，念头依然在，但你不在念头里，你甚至不去管它。然后是心的统一，自我脱落，只剩下一种原始的在場。那种喜悦常常从这儿涌出来。你也可能坐上整整一小时，只是沉浸在母亲去世的悲伤里。你就是在跟出现的任何东西一起坐着。
这就是为什么坐着这个动作本身很重要。你在做一个承诺：我要坐在这儿，不管出现什么，我不动。（亚当·弗兰克）
他说这真的会改变一个人。他的说法很自嘲：“我还是当年那个新泽西的混蛋，只是现在心里空间更大了。”
他讲公案的时候更来劲。公案是一千年前建立的禅宗教学方法，一本一本的题库。他举了一个例子：“让远处寺庙的钟声停下来。”他说每次老师给他这个，他都在想“你在说什么”。
公案的关键是你不能给答案。第一次参公案，老师说：“别告诉我答案，做给我看。”他当时懵了。但做了几年之后，他学会了那套语言。答案不在文字里。你给一百个人讲答案，他们都会一脸茫然。真正的东西是经验。
他说，随着修行年复一年地加深，那种关于“一切都在流动”的理解不再是嘴上说说，而是真的能感觉到，一呼一吸之间都能感觉到。
有时候会有一种感觉，这么说有点奇怪，就是纯粹的喜悦，它不依附于任何东西。那种一刻接一刻的、无限的流逝，那确实是事物本来的样子。而它是可以的。并非因为我希望它可以，它就是可以。（亚当·弗兰克）
主持人回应说，他也有那种无名的喜悦，但旁边总坐着一点忧郁，可能来自东欧的血统。喜悦关于经验的美，忧郁关于经验的有限，两者纠缠在一起，像一对分不开的兄弟。
弗兰克说他祖上也是东欧，他懂。“那就是它本来的样子。你不必去做什么，不必去操纵它，不必挪动它。”
最后那个问题：为什么我们在这儿
主持人问了最后那个问题。弗兰克说，幸好刚聊完上一段，因为他要给出的答案非常俗气。
是爱。
他马上补了一句：“我不是在开玩笑。”
他解释，佛教里有菩萨原则：你在这儿是为了帮忙，只是为了帮忙，这就是慈悲。他坦白自己刚开始修行的时候完全不买账，他的原话是：“我不在乎慈悲，我来是为了求知识。”他修行是因为痛苦，这是所有人走上这条路的常规理由，生活难，他当时正在经历一些事。但他也想要知识，想理解现实的根本性质。慈悲什么的，先放一边。
然后他发现，你拿不到那个东西。你走不到那个深度，除非有慈悲。不知道为什么，在这个过程里你会意识到，它真的是关于帮助一切有情众生。他说这听起来很老套，尤其对一个来自新泽西的人来说，那儿的人生第一要务是“混出头”。但那就是他找到的东西。
他描述了一种从修行里带出来的体验：对世界的一种感激，因为世界把一切都给你了。蓝天、呼吸，世界毫无保留地把自己完全交出来，什么都不留。
然后你会有一种感觉：我得帮上忙。因为有人没有得到这个。（亚当·弗兰克）
主持人问：所以就是对世界本然样子的爱？
弗兰克说：对世界，以及对所有正在受苦的众生。每个人都在受苦，包括你最难缠的政治对手，他们也在受苦。我们的任务就是放下自己的偏见和故事，去看生命发生的那个最底层的层面。
主持人收尾说，希望宇宙中那些外星文明也在走同样的旅程，从苦走向爱。
弗兰克说：“希望如此。要么就是他们来吃我们。”
主持人补了一句：“尤其是如果他们三级文明的话。”
弗兰克说：“对，而且他们枪还特别大。”
这三句玩笑收在整场对话的末尾，其实是有讲究的。前面三个小时聊的是概率、光谱、板块运动、禅七，最后落回到一个无法用望远镜验证的分岔：宇宙深处那些存在，究竟是在学着爱，还是在学着吃。弗兰克没有假装自己知道答案，他只是把两个可能性并排放在桌上，然后笑了。
如果这些讨论对你有点用
这期对话跨度从行星形成一路走到禅宗公案，信息密度很高。如果要挑出几件普通人真的能上手做的事，大概是这些。
- 下次看到“科学家发现外星文明”的标题，先看两件事：这是同行评议的论文，还是会议摘要或预印本；这个结论的统计显著性是多少。弗兰克反复提到的五个 sigma，能当一把尺子用。
- 理解费米悖论时，把“直接的”和“间接的”分开。间接那一半站不住脚，人类舀了一浴缸的海水就说海里没鱼。真正的谜题只在“他们现在为什么不在”，而这个问题有七十多种解法。
- 记住那个数字：一万亿亿颗宜居带行星。它证明不了附近有人，但它把“人类是宇宙唯一”这个主张的举证责任，推到了持孤独论的那一边。
- 听到“意识只是神经元的放电”这类说法时，可以追问一句：这个判断是从哪个视角做出的？弗兰克的立场并非反对科学，他要指出的是科学有一个自己看不见的盲点，那个盲点就是经验本身。
- 练习区分地图和地形。GDP、KPI、论文影响因子、手机上的气温数字，全是地图。地图极其有用，但地图不是地形。弗兰克说我们对温度犯的那个错，我们在别的领域天天都在犯。
- 关于气候和技术圈，他的框架可以直接借用：问题不在技术太多，而在于技术圈还处在未成年阶段，正在拆自己脚下的地板。成熟的标志是自创生，不制造摧毁自身的条件。
- 如果对冥想好奇，可以从他描述的那个顺序入手：先接受前半小时脑子里全是废话，这很正常。真正有意思的事情，发生在心智终于累得没词儿了、你开始觉得无聊的那一刻。
- 最后一条，也是最不像建议的一条。他花三十年对着一堵墙，最后想说的并非什么玄妙洞见，只是：你其实没那么重要，而这件事并不令人难过。世界的每一刻都在毫无保留地把自己交给你。剩下的，是想办法帮上别人的忙。
If we don’t ask how long they last, but instead ask what’s the probability that there have been any civilizations at all, now matter how long they lasted.
如果我们不问它们持续了多久，而是问文明存在的可能性有多大，那么无论它们持续了多久。
00:00 I’m not asking whether they exist now or not, I’m just asking in general about probabilities to make a technological civilization anywhere and at any time in the history of the university.
我不是问它们现在是否存在，我只是一般性地问在大学历史上任何地方、任何时间创造技术文明的可能性。
That, we’re able to constrain.
那，我们能够限制。
What we found was basically that there have been 10 billion trillion habitable zone planets in the universe.
我们发现基本上宇宙中已经有100亿万亿颗宜居带行星。
What that means is those are 10 billion trillion experiments that have been run.
这意味着已经进行了 100 亿万亿次实验。
The only way that we’re the only time that this whole process from abiogenesis to a civilization has occurred is if everyone one of those experiments failed.
我们是唯一一次从自然发生到文明的整个过程发生的唯一途径是如果每个实验都失败了。
00:51 Therefore, you could put a probability, we called it the Pessimism Line.
因此，你可以输入一个概率，我们称之为悲观线。
We don’t really know what nature sets for the probability of making intelligent civilizations, but we could set a limit using this.
我们真的不知道大自然为创造智能文明的可能性设定了什么，但我们可以利用它来设定一个限制。
We could say, look, if the probability per habitable zone planet is less than 10 to the minus-22, one in 10 billion trillion, then yeah, we’re alone.
我们可以说，看，如果每个宜居带行星的概率小于 10 到负 22，即百亿万亿分之一，那么是的，我们是孤独的。
If it’s anywhere larger than that, then we’re not the first.
如果它比这个大，那么我们就不是第一个。
It’s happened somewhere else.
它发生在其他地方。
To me, that was mind-blowing.
对我来说，这令人兴奋。
It doesn’t tell me there’s anybody nearby, the galaxy could be sterile.
它并没有告诉我附近有人，银河系可能是贫瘠的。
It just told me that unless nature’s really has some bias against civilizations, we’re not the first time this has happened.
它只是告诉我，除非大自然真的对文明有一些偏见，否则我们并不是第一次发生这种情况。
This has happened elsewhere over the course of cosmic history.
在宇宙历史的过程中，这种情况在其他地方也发生过。
The following is a conversation with Adam Frank, an astrophysicist interested in the evolution of star systems and the search for alien civilizations in our universe.
以下是与亚当·弗兰克的对话，他是一位对恒星系统演化和在宇宙中寻找外星文明感兴趣的天体物理学家。
01:36 This is The Lex Fridman Podcast.
这是莱克斯·弗里德曼播客。
To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description.
为了支持它，请在说明中查看我们的赞助商。
And now, dear friends, here’s Adam Frank.
现在，亲爱的朋友们，这是亚当·弗兰克。
01:58 You wrote a book about aliens.
你写了一本关于外星人的书。
The big question, how many alien civilizations are out there?
最大的问题是，到底有多少外星文明？
Yeah, that’s the question.
是的，这就是问题所在。
02:04 The amazing thing is that, after two-and-a-half millennia of people yelling at each other, or setting each other on fire occasionally over the answer, we now actually have the capacity to answer that question.
令人惊奇的是，在两千年来，人们互相大喊大叫，或者偶尔因为答案而互相火冒三丈之后，我们现在实际上有能力回答这个问题。
In the next 10, 20, 30 years, we’re going to have data relevant to the answer to that question.
在接下来的 10 年、20 年、30 年中，我们将获得与该问题答案相关的数据。
We’re going to have hard data finally that will, one way or the other …
我们最终将获得硬数据，不管怎样……
Even if we don’t find anything immediately, we will have gone through a number of planets.
即使我们没有立即找到任何东西，我们也已经走过了许多行星。
We’ll be able to start putting limits on how common life is.
我们将能够开始限制生活的普遍程度。
02:38 The one answer I can tell you, which was an important part of the problem, is how many planets are there?
我可以告诉你的一个答案是问题的重要组成部分：有多少颗行星？
Just like people have been arguing about the existence of life elsewhere for 2500 years, people have been arguing about planets for the exact same amount of time.
就像 2500 年来人们一直在争论其他地方是否存在生命一样，人们对于行星的争论也同样持续了同样长的时间。
You can see Aristotle yelling at Democritus about this.
你可以看到亚里士多德为此对德谟克利特大喊大叫。
You can see they had very wildly different opinions about how common planets were going to be, and how unique Earth was.
你可以看到他们对于行星的普遍性以及地球的独特性有着截然不同的看法。
And that question got answered.
这个问题得到了解答。
Which is pretty remarkable, that in a lifetime, you can have a 2500-year-old question.
这是非常了不起的，在一生中，你可以提出一个 2500 年前的问题。
The answer is they’re everywhere.
答案是它们无处不在。
There are planets everywhere.
到处都有行星。
03:14 It was possible that planets were really rare.
行星可能真的很稀有。
We didn’t really understand how planets formed.
我们并不真正了解行星是如何形成的。
If you go back to, say the turn of the 20th Century, there was a theory that said planets formed when two stars passed by each other closely, and then material was gravitationally squeezed out.
如果你回到20世纪初，有一种理论认为，行星是在两颗恒星近距离擦过时形成的，然后物质被引力挤出。
In which case, those kinds of collisions are so rare that you would expect one in a trillion stars to have planets.
在这种情况下，此类碰撞非常罕见，因此您预计万亿分之一的恒星会拥有行星。
Instead, every star in the night sky has planets.
相反，夜空中的每颗恒星都有行星。
One of the things you’ve done is simulated the formation of stars.
你所做的事情之一就是模拟恒星的形成。
03:42 How difficult do you think it is to simulate the formation of planet?
您认为模拟行星的形成有多困难？
Like simulate a solar system through the entire of the evolution of the solar system.
就像模拟一个太阳系一样，经历整个太阳系的演化过程。
This is a numerical simulation sneaking up to the question of how many planets are there.
这是一个数值模拟，旨在探讨有多少颗行星的问题。
That, actually, we’re able to do now.
事实上，我们现在就能做到。
04:01 You can run simulations of the formation of planetary system.
您可以运行行星系统形成的模拟。
If you run the simulation, really where you want to start is a cloud of gas, these giant interstellar clouds of gas that may have a million times the mass of the Sun in them.
如果你运行模拟，你真正想要开始的是气体云，这些巨大的星际气体云的质量可能是太阳的一百万倍。
You run a simulation of that, it’s turbulent.
你运行一个模拟，它是动荡的。
Gas is roiling and tumbling.
气体在翻滚翻滚。
Every now and then, you get a place where the gas is dense enough that gravity gets hold of it and it can pull it downward, so you’ll start to form a proto-star.
时不时地，你会遇到一个气体密度足够大的地方，重力会抓住它并将其向下拉，所以你会开始形成原恒星。
04:32 A proto-star is basically the young star, this ball of gas where nuclear reactions are getting started.
原恒星基本上是年轻的恒星，是核反应开始的气体球。
But it’s also a disc.
但它也是一张光盘。
As material falls inward because everything’s rotating, as it falls inward, it’ll spin up and then it’ll form a disc.
当物质向内落下时，因为一切都在旋转，当它向内落下时，它会向上旋转，然后形成一个圆盘。
The material will collect in what’s called an accretion disc or a proto-planetary disc.
这些物质将聚集在所谓的吸积盘或原行星盘中。
You can simulate all of that.
您可以模拟所有这些。
04:56 Once you get into the disc itself and you want to do planets, things get a little bit more complicated because the physics gets more complicated.
一旦你进入圆盘本身并且你想做行星，事情就会变得有点复杂，因为物理学变得更加复杂。
Now you got to start worrying about dust, because actually dust …
现在你必须开始担心灰尘，因为实际上灰尘......
Dust is the wrong word.
灰尘这个词用错了。
It’s smoke, really.
确实是烟。
These are the tiniest bits of solids.
这些是最小的固体。
They will coagulate in the disc to form pebbles, and then the pebbles will collide to form rocks.
它们会在圆盘中凝结成卵石，然后卵石会碰撞形成岩石。
And then the rocks will form boulders, et cetera, et cetera.
然后岩石会形成巨石，等等。
That process is super complicated.
这个过程超级复杂。
But we’ve been able to simulate enough of it to begin to get a handle on how planets form.
但我们已经能够模拟足够多的东西，开始了解行星是如何形成的。
How you accrete enough material to get the first proto-planets, or planetary embryos as we call them.
如何积累足够的物质来获得第一颗原行星，或者我们所说的行星胚胎。
05:37 The next step is those things start slamming into each other to form planetary-sized bodies.
下一步是这些东西开始相互撞击，形成行星大小的物体。
Then the planetary bodies slam into each other.
然后行星体相互撞击。
Earth, the Moon came about because there was a Mars-sized body that slammed into the Earth and basically blew off all the material.
地球、月球的出现是因为有一个火星大小的天体撞击了地球，基本上炸掉了所有的物质。
Then eventually formed the Moon.
然后最终形成了月球。
And all of them have different chemical compositions, different temperatures?
而且它们都有不同的化学成分、不同的温度？
Yeah.
是的。
06:00 The temperature of the material in the disc depends on how far away you are from the star.
圆盘中物质的温度取决于你离恒星的距离。
Got it.
知道了。
It decreases.
它减少了。
06:08 There’s a really interesting point.
有一个非常有趣的点。
Close to the star, temperatures are really high.
靠近恒星，温度非常高。
The only thing that can condense, that can freeze out, is going to be stuff like metals.
唯一可以凝结、可以冻结的东西就是金属之类的东西。
That’s why you find Mercury is this giant ball of iron, basically.
这就是为什么你会发现水星基本上是一个巨大的铁球。
Then as you go further out, stuff, the gas gets cooler.
然后，当你走得更远时，气体就会变冷。
And now you can start getting things like water to freeze.
现在你可以开始冷冻水之类的东西了。
There’s something we call the Snow Line, which is somewhere in our solar system, out around between Mars and Jupiter.
有一个东西我们称之为雪线，它位于太阳系的某个地方，位于火星和木星之间。
That’s the reason why the giant planets in our solar system, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, all have huge amounts of ice in them, or water and ice.
这就是为什么我们太阳系中的巨行星，木星、土星、天王星和海王星，都含有大量的冰，或者水和冰。
06:47 Actually, Jupiter and Saturn don’t have so much, but the moons do.
事实上，木星和土星没有那么多，但卫星有。
The moons have so much water in them that there’s oceans.
月球上有大量的水，因此有海洋。
We’ve got a number of those moons have got more water on them than there’s water on Earth.
我们有许多这样的卫星，其上的水比地球上的水还要多。
Do you think it’s possible to do that kind of simulation to have a stronger and stronger estimate of how likely an Earth-like planet is?
你认为是否有可能通过这种模拟来对类地行星的可能性有越来越强的估计？
06:58 Can we get the physics simulation done well enough to where we can start estimating what are the possible Earth-like things that could be generated?
我们能否将物理模拟做得足够好，以便我们可以开始估计可能生成的类地物体？
Yeah, I think we can.
是的，我想我们可以。
07:17 I think we’re learning how to do that now.
我想我们现在正在学习如何做到这一点。
One part is trying to just figure out how planets form themselves in doing the simulations.
一方面是试图在模拟中弄清楚行星是如何形成的。
That cascade from dust grains up to planetary embryos, that’s hard to simulate because you got to do both the gas, and you got to do the dust and the dust colliding, and all that physics.
从尘埃颗粒到行星胚胎的级联，这很难模拟，因为你必须同时处理气体、尘埃和尘埃碰撞，以及所有物理过程。
07:40 Once you get up to a planet-sized body, then you have to switch over to almost a different kind of simulation.
一旦你达到了行星大小的物体，那么你就必须切换到几乎不同类型的模拟。
Often what you’re doing is you’re assuming the planet this this spherical ball, and then you’re doing a 1D, a radial calculation.
通常，您所做的就是假设地球是球形的，然后进行一维径向计算。
You’re just asking, “All right, what is the structure of it going to be?
你只是问：“好吧，它的结构是什么？
Am I going to have a solid iron core, or am I going to get a solid iron core with a liquid iron core out around it?” Like we have on Earth.
我会拥有一个固体铁芯，还是会得到一个固体铁芯，周围有一个液体铁芯？”就像我们在地球上一样。
Then you get a silicate, rocky mantle, and then a crust.
然后你会得到硅酸盐、岩石地幔，然后是地壳。
All those details, those are beyond being able to do full 3D simulations from Ab Initio, from scratch.
所有这些细节都超出了 Ab Initio 从头开始进行完整 3D 模拟的范围。
We’re not there yet.
我们还没有到那儿。
How important are those details, like the crust and the atmosphere, do you think?
您认为这些细节（例如地壳和大气）有多重要？
Hugely important.
非常重要。
08:24 I’m part of a collaboration at the University of Rochester, where we’re using the giant laser.
我是罗彻斯特大学合作项目的一部分，我们在那里使用巨型激光器。
Literally, this is called the Laboratory for Laser Energetics.
从字面上看，这就是所谓的激光能量学实验室。
We got a huge grant from the NSF to use that laser to slam tiny pieces of silica to understand what conditions are like at the center of the Earth.
我们从美国国家科学基金会获得了巨额资助，使用激光撞击微小的二氧化硅碎片，以了解地球中心的情况。
Or even more importantly, the center of Super-Earths.
或者更重要的是，超级地球的中心。
08:47 This is what’s wild.
这就是疯狂的事情。
The most common kind of planet in the universe, we don’t have in our solar system.
宇宙中最常见的行星，我们的太阳系中没有。
Which is amazing, right?
这很神奇，对吧？
We’ve been able to study or observe enough planets now to get a census.
我们现在已经能够研究或观察足够多的行星来进行人口普查。
We have an idea of whose average, whose weird.
我们知道谁的平均值，谁的怪异。
Our solar system’s weird, because the average planet has a mass somewhere between a few times the mass of the Earth, to maybe 10 times the mass of the Earth.
我们的太阳系很奇怪，因为平均行星的质量在地球质量的几倍到地球质量的十倍之间。
That’s exactly where there are no planets in our solar system.
这正是我们太阳系中没有行星的地方。
09:20 The smaller ones of those we call Super-Earths, the larger ones we call Sub-Neptunes.
其中较小的我们称为超级地球，较大的我们称为亚海王星。
They’re anybody’s guess.
这是任何人的猜测。
We don’t really know what happens to material when you’re squeezed to those pressures, which is millions, tens of millions of times the pressure on the surface of the Earth.
我们真的不知道当你受到这些压力时材料会发生什么，这些压力是地球表面压力的数百万倍、数千万倍。
Those details really will matter of what’s on in there, because that will determine whether or not you have, say for example, plate tectonics.
这些细节确实对那里发生的事情很重要，因为这将决定你是否拥有板块构造。
09:44 We think plate tectonics may have been really important for life on Earth, for the evolution of complex life on Earth.
我们认为板块构造对于地球上的生命、对于地球上复杂生命的进化可能非常重要。
It turns out, and this is the next generation where we’re going with the understanding the evolution of planets and life.
事实证明，这是我们将要了解行星和生命演化的下一代。
It turns out that you actually have to think hard about the planetary context for life.
事实证明，你实际上必须认真思考生命存在的行星环境。
You can just be like, “Oh, there’s a warm pond,” and then some interesting chemistry happens in the warm pond.
你可以说，“哦，有一个温暖的池塘”，然后温暖的池塘里就会发生一些有趣的化学反应。
You actually have to think about the planet as a whole and what it’s gone through in order to really understand whether a planet is a good place for life or not.
实际上，你必须将地球作为一个整体来思考，以及它经历了什么，才能真正了解一个行星是否适合生命生存。
Why do you think plate tectonics might be useful for the formation of complex life?
为什么你认为板块构造可能有助于复杂生命的形成？
There’s a bunch of different things.
有很多不同的东西。
10:21 One is that the Earth went through a couple of phases of being a snowball planet.
一是地球经历了成为雪球星球的几个阶段。
We went into a period of glaciation where pretty much the entire planet was under ice.
我们进入了一个冰川时期，几乎整个地球都被冰覆盖了。
The oceans were frozen.
海洋结冰了。
10:36 Early on in Earth’s history, there was barely any land.
在地球历史的早期，几乎没有任何陆地。
We were actually a water world, with just a couple of Australia-sized cratons they called them, proto-continents.
我们实际上是一个水世界，只有几个澳大利亚大小的克拉通，他们称之为原始大陆。
10:48 We went through these snowball Earth phases.
我们经历了这些滚雪球般的地球阶段。
If it wasn’t for the fact that we had an active plate tectonics, which had a lot of vulcanism on it, we could have been locked in that forever.
如果不是因为我们有一个活跃的板块构造，上面有很多火山作用，我们可能会永远被困在其中。
Once you get into a snowball state, a planet can be trapped there forever.
一旦进入雪球状态，一颗行星就会永远被困在那里。
Which is maybe you already had life formed, but then because it’s so cold, you may never get anything more than just microbes.
也许你已经形成了生命，但由于天气太冷，你可能永远不会得到除了微生物以外的任何东西。
11:10 What plate tectonics does, because it fosters more vulcanism, is that you’re going to get carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere, which warms the planet up and gets you out of the snowball Earth phase.
板块构造的作用是，因为它会促进更多的火山活动，所以你会将二氧化碳泵入大气中，从而使地球变暖，并让你摆脱雪球地球阶段。
But even more, there’s even more really important things.
但更重要的是，还有更重要的事情。
11:26 I just finished a paper where we were looking at something called the Hard Steps Model, which is this model that’s been out there for a long time that purports to say intelligent life in the universe will be really rare.
我刚刚完成了一篇论文，其中我们正在研究一种称为“困难步骤模型”的模型，这个模型已经存在很长时间了，据称宇宙中的智慧生命将非常罕见。
It made all these assumptions about the Earth’s history, particularly about the history of life and the history of the planet have nothing to do with each other.
它使所有这些关于地球历史的假设，特别是关于生命历史和地球历史的假设彼此无关。
It turns out, and as I was doing the reading for this, that Earth probably, early on, had a more mild form of plate tectonics, and then somewhere about a billion years ago, it ramped up.
事实证明，当我为此进行阅读时，地球可能在早期有一种更温和的板块构造形式，然后在大约十亿年前的某个地方，它逐渐增强。
11:54 That ramping up changed everything on the planet, because here’s a funny thing.
这种增长改变了地球上的一切，因为这是一件有趣的事情。
The Earth used to be flat.
地球曾经是平的。
All the Flat Earthers out there can get excited for one second.
所有地平说支持者都会兴奋一秒钟。
Clip it.
夹住它。
12:04 It still is.
现在仍然如此。
What I mean by that is that there really weren’t many mountain ranges.
我的意思是，山脉确实不多。
12:08 The beginning of, I think the term is orogenesis, mountain building, the true Himalayan-style giant mountains, didn’t happen until this more robust form of plate tectonics, where the plates are really being driven around the planet.
我认为这个词的开始是造山运动，造山运动，真正的喜马拉雅风格的巨型山脉，直到这种更强大的板块构造形式才发生，其中板块真正被驱动绕地球运行。
That is when you get the crusts hitting each other, and they start pushing into these Himalayan- style mountains.
那时，地壳会互相撞击，它们开始推入这些喜马拉雅风格的山脉。
12:30 The weathering of that, the erosion of that puts huge amounts of nutrients, things that microbes want to use, into the oceans.
其风化、侵蚀将大量营养物质（微生物想要利用的东西）带入海洋。
And then what we call the net primary productivity, the bottom of the food chain, how much sugars they are producing, how much photosynthesis they are doing shot up by a factor of almost 1000.
然后我们所说的净初级生产力，即食物链的底部，他们生产的糖分和光合作用的数量猛增了近 1000 倍。
The fact that you had plate tectonics supercharged evolution in some sense.
事实上，板块构造在某种意义上加速了进化。
We’re not exactly sure how it happened, but it’s clear that the amount of life, the amount of living activity that was happening really got a boost from the fact that something there was this new vigorous form of plate tectonics.
我们不太确定它是如何发生的，但很明显，生命的数量、正在发生的生命活动的数量确实因为这种新的、充满活力的板块构造形式而得到了促进。
It’s nice to have turmoil.
有混乱是件好事。
13:10 In terms of temperature, in terms of surface geometries, in terms of the chemistry of the planet, turmoil.
就温度而言，就表面几何形状而言，就行星的化学性质而言，就是动荡。
Yeah, that’s actually really true.
是的，这确实是真的。
13:20 Because what happens is, if you look at the history of life …
因为如果你回顾一下生命的历史，会发生什么……
That’s an excellent point that you’re bringing up.
这是你提出的一个很好的观点。
If you look at the history of life on Earth, we get abiogenesis somewhere around at least 3.8 billion years ago.
如果你回顾一下地球上生命的历史，我们就会发现至少在 38 亿年前的某个地方就有了自然发生。
That’s the first microbes.
这是最早的微生物。
They take over enough that they really do, you get a biosphere.
他们确实接管了足够多的事情，你就得到了一个生物圈。
You get a biosphere that is actively changing the planet.
你会得到一个正在积极改变地球的生物圈。
13:40 But then you go through this period they called the Boring Billion, where it’s a billion years and it’s just microbes.
但随后你就会经历这个被他们称为“无聊的十亿年”的时期，这个时期有十亿年，而且只有微生物。
Nothing’s happening, it’s just microbes.
什么都没发生，只是微生物。
The microbes are doing amazing things.
微生物正在做一些令人惊奇的事情。
They’re inventing fermentation.
他们正在发明发酵。
Thank you very much, we appreciate that.
非常感谢，我们对此表示感谢。
But it’s not until you get probably these continents slamming into each other, you really get the beginning of continents forming and driving changes that evolution has to respond to.
但直到这些大陆相互撞击时，你才真正开始了解大陆的形成并推动进化必须做出反应的变化。
That on a planetary scale, this turmoil, this chaos is creating new niches, as well as closing other ones.
在全球范围内，这种动荡、这种混乱正在创造新的利基市场，并关闭其他利基市场。
Biology, evolution has to respond to that.
生物学、进化论必须对此做出回应。
14:15 Somewhere around there is when you get the Cambrian Explosion.
就在附近的某个地方，你会遇到寒武纪大爆发。
It’s when suddenly every body plan …
突然间，每个身体都开始计划……
Evolution goes on an orgy, essentially.
本质上，进化是在狂欢。
Yeah.
是的。
It does look like that chaos or that turmoil was actually very helpful to evolution.
看起来这种混乱或动荡实际上对进化非常有帮助。
I wonder if there is some extremely elevated levels of chaos, almost like catastrophes behind every leap of evolution.
我想知道是否存在某种程度极高的混乱，就像每一次进化飞跃背后的灾难一样。
14:31 You’re not going to have leaps.
你不会有飞跃。
In human societies, we have an Einstein that comes up with a good idea.
在人类社会中，我们有一个想出好主意的爱因斯坦。
But it feels like on an evolutionary timescale, you need some real big drama going on for the evolutionary system to have to come up with a solution to that drama.
但感觉就像在进化的时间尺度上，你需要一些真正的大戏上演，进化系统必须想出一个解决方案来解决这个戏剧。
An extra complex solution to that drama.
该剧的一个额外复杂的解决方案。
Well, I’m not sure if that’s true.
嗯，我不确定这是否属实。
15:01 I don’t know if it needs to be an almost extinction event.
我不知道这是否需要成为一场几乎灭绝的事件。
Right.
正确的。
Because it’s certainly true that we have gone through almost extinction events.
因为我们确实经历过几乎灭绝的事件。
15:05 We’ve had five mass extinctions.
我们已经经历过五次大规模灭绝。
But you don’t necessarily see that there was this giant evolutionary leap happening after those.
但你不一定会看到在那之后发生了巨大的进化飞跃。
15:18 With the comet impact, the K-T Boundary, certainly lots of niches opened up.
随着彗星的撞击，K-T 边界肯定会出现很多空位。
That’s why we’re here, because our ancestors were little basically rodents, rats living under the footsteps of the dinosaurs.
这就是我们在这里的原因，因为我们的祖先基本上是啮齿类动物，是生活在恐龙足迹下的老鼠。
It was that comet impact that opened the route for us.
正是那次彗星撞击为我们开辟了道路。
That still took another 65 million years.
这还需要 6500 万年。
It was like this thing immediately happened.
这件事就好像立刻就发生了一样。
15:42 But what we found with this Hard Steps Paper, because the whole idea of the Hard Steps Paper was it was one of these anthropic reasoning kinds of things.
但我们在这篇《困难步骤论文》中发现了什么，因为《困难步骤论文》的整个想法是，它是人类推理的一种。
Where Brandon Carter said, “Oh, look.
布兰登卡特说：“哦，看。
The intelligence doesn’t show up on Earth until about almost close to when the end of the Sun’s lifetime.” He’s like, “Well, there should be no reason why the Sun’s lifetime and the time for evolution to produce intelligence should be the same.” He goes through all this reasoning, anthropic reasoning.
直到太阳生命即将结束时，智慧才会出现在地球上。”他说：“好吧，太阳的寿命和进化产生智慧的时间应该没有理由相同。”他经历了所有这些推理，人为推理。
He ends up with the idea that, “Oh, it must be that the odds of getting intelligence are super-low, and so that’s the hard step.”
他最终得出这样的想法：“哦，获得情报的几率一定非常低，所以这是艰难的一步。”
16:21 There was a series of steps in evolution that were very, very hard.
进化过程中有一系列非常非常困难的步骤。
Because of that, you can calculate some probability distributions.
因此，您可以计算一些概率分布。
Everybody loves a good probability distribution, and they went a long way with this.
每个人都喜欢良好的概率分布，并且他们在这方面走了很长的路。
But it turns out that the whole thing is flawed because, when you look at it, of course the timescale for the Sun’s evolution and the timescale for the evolution on life are coupled, because the timescale for evolution of the Earth is coupled, is about the same timescale as the evolution of the Sun.
但事实证明，整个事情是有缺陷的，因为当你看它时，当然，太阳演化的时间尺度和生命演化的时间尺度是耦合的，因为地球演化的时间尺度是耦合的，与太阳演化的时间尺度大约相同。
It’s billions of years.
已经有数十亿年了。
The Earth evolves over billions of years.
地球演化了数十亿年。
16:53 Life and the Earth co-evolve.
生命与地球共同进化。
That’s what Brandon Carter didn’t see is that actually, the fate of the Earth the fate of life are inextricably combined.
但布兰登·卡特没有看到的是，实际上，地球的命运和生命的命运是密不可分的。
This is really important for astrobiology, too.
这对于天体生物学也非常重要。
Life doesn’t happen on a planet, it happens to a planet.
生命不是发生在一个星球上，而是发生在一个星球上。
This is something that David Grinspoon and Sara Walker both say, and I agree with this.
这是大卫·格林斯彭和萨拉·沃克都说过的话，我同意这一点。
It’s a really nice way of putting it.
这是一个非常好的表达方式。
17:19 Plate tectonics, the evolution of oxygen, of an oxygen atmosphere, which only happened because of life.
板块构造、氧气、含氧大气的演化，这一切都是因为生命而发生的。
These things, these are things that are happening where life and the planet are sloshing back-and-forth.
这些事情，这些事情发生在生命和地球来回晃动的地方。
Rather than, to your point about do you need giant catastrophes, maybe not giant catastrophes.
而不是，就你的观点而言，你是否需要巨大的灾难，也许不是巨大的灾难。
But what happens is, as the Earth and life are evolving together, windows are opening up, evolutionary windows.
但发生的事情是，随着地球和生命一起进化，窗户正在打开，进化的窗户。
17:46 For example, life put oxygen into the atmosphere.
例如，生命将氧气释放到大气中。
When life invented this new form of photosynthesis about 2.5 billion years ago, that broke water apart to work to do its chemical shenanigans.
大约 25 亿年前，当生命发明了这种新形式的光合作用时，它就会分解水来发挥其化学作用。
It broke water apart and pushed oxygen into the atmosphere.
它分解水并将氧气推入大气中。
That’s why there’s oxygen in the atmosphere.
这就是大气中存在氧气的原因。
It’s only because of life.
这只是因为生活。
18:07 That opened up huge possibilities, new spaces for evolution to happen.
这为进化开辟了巨大的可能性和新的空间。
But it also changed the chemistry of the planet forever.
但它也永远改变了地球的化学成分。
The introduction of oxygen photosynthesis changed the planet forever, and it opened up a bunch of windows for evolution that wouldn’t have happened otherwise.
氧气光合作用的引入永远改变了地球，它为进化打开了许多窗口，否则这些窗口就不会发生。
Like for example, you and I, we need that amount of oxygen.
例如，你和我，我们需要那么多的氧气。
Big-brained creatures need an oxygen-rich atmosphere because oxygen is so potent for metabolism.
大脑生物需要富含氧气的大气，因为氧气对于新陈代谢非常有效。
You couldn’t get intelligent creatures 100 million years after the planet formed.
地球形成一亿年后你不可能再出现智慧生物。
So really, on a scale of a planet when there’s billions and trillions of organisms on a planet, they can actually have planetary scale impact.
因此，实际上，在行星规模上，当行星上有数十亿和数万亿生物体时，它们实际上可以产生行星规模的影响。
Yeah.
是的。
The chemical shenanigans of an individual organism when scaled out to trillions can actually change a planet.
当单个有机体的化学恶作剧扩大到数万亿时，实际上可以改变一个星球。
Yeah.
是的。
18:59 We know this for a fact now.
我们现在已经知道了这一点。
19:00 There was this thing, Gaia Theory, which James Lovelock introduced in the ’70s.
詹姆斯·洛夫洛克 (James Lovelock) 在 70 年代提出了盖亚理论。
And then, Lynn Margulis, the Biologist Lynn Margulis together.
然后，林恩·马古利斯，生物学家林恩·马古利斯在一起。
This Gaia Theory was the idea that life takes over a planet, life hijacks a planet in a way that the sum total of life creates these feedbacks between the planet and the life, such that it keeps the planet habitable.
盖亚理论的观点是，生命接管了一颗行星，生命劫持了一颗行星，生命的总和在行星和生命之间创造了这些反馈，从而使行星保持适宜居住。
It’s kind of a homeostasis.
这是一种体内平衡。
19:29 I can go out …
我可以出去……
Right now outside, it’s 100-degrees.
现在外面气温是 100 度。
And I go outside, but my internal temperature is going to be the same.
我走到外面，但我的内部温度会是一样的。
I can go back to Rochester, New York in the winter, and it’s going to be zero-degrees, but my internal temperature is going to be the same.
我可以在冬天回到纽约州罗切斯特，那里的气温将为零度，但我的内部温度将保持不变。
That’s homeostasis.
这就是体内平衡。
19:42 The idea of Gaia Theory was that life, the biosphere exerts this pressure on the planet or these feedbacks on the planet, that even as other things are changing, the planet will always stay in the right kinds of conditions for life.
盖亚理论的想法是，生命、生物圈对地球施加这种压力或对地球施加这些反馈，即使其他事物正在发生变化，地球也将始终保持在适合生命存在的条件下。
Now when this theory came out, it was very controversial.
现在这个理论一出来，引起了很大的争议。
People were like, “Oh my God, what are you, smoking weed?” There were all these Gaian Festivals with Gaian dances.
人们就像是，“天啊，你在吸什么大麻？”所有这些盖安节日都有盖安舞蹈。
It became very popular in the New Age community.
它在新时代社区中非常流行。
20:09 But Lovelock actually, they were able to show that no, this has nothing to do with the planet being conscious or anything.
但洛夫洛克实际上，他们能够证明，不，这与地球的意识或任何东西无关。
It was about these feedbacks, that the biology, the biosphere can exert these feedbacks.
正是关于这些反馈，生物学、生物圈才能发挥这些反馈。
We’re still unclear whether there are true Gaian feedbacks, in the sense that the planet can really exert complete control.
我们仍然不清楚是否存在真正的盖亚反馈，从某种意义上说，地球确实可以发挥完全的控制作用。
But it is absolutely true that the biosphere is a major player in Earth’s history.
但生物圈确实是地球历史上的一个重要角色。
The biosphere fights for homeostasis on Earth.
生物圈为地球的稳态而战。
Okay.
好的。
20:39 What I would say right now is I don’t know if I can say that scientifically.
我现在想说的是，我不知道我这样说是否科学。
I can certainly say that the biosphere does a huge amount of the regulation of the planetary state.
我可以肯定地说，生物圈对行星状态进行了大量的调节。
And over billions of years, has strongly modified the evolution of the planet.
数十亿年来，强烈改变了地球的演化。
A true Gaian feedback would be exactly what you said.
真正的盖安反馈就是你所说的。
20:57 The biosphere is somewhere …
生物圈在某个地方……
Sara Walker, and David Grinspoon, and I actually did a paper on this about the idea of planetary intelligence, or cognition across a planetary scale.
萨拉·沃克（Sara Walker）、大卫·格林斯彭（David Grinspoon）和我实际上写了一篇关于行星智慧或跨行星尺度认知的论文。
I think that actually is possible.
我认为这实际上是可能的。
It’s not conscious, but there is a cognitive activity going on.
它不是有意识的，但正在进行认知活动。
The biosphere, in some sense, knows what is happening because of these feedbacks.
从某种意义上说，生物圈通过这些反馈知道正在发生什么。
It’s still unclear whether we have these full Gaian feedbacks, but we certainly have semi-Gaian feedbacks.
目前还不清楚我们是否有这些完整的盖亚反馈，但我们肯定有半盖亚反馈。
21:24 If there’s a perturbation on the planetary scale, temperature, insulation, how much sunlight’s coming in, the biosphere will start to have feedbacks that will damp that perturbation.
如果行星尺度、温度、绝缘、阳光进入量等方面出现扰动，生物圈将开始产生反馈来抑制这种扰动。
Temperature goes up, the biosphere starts doing something, temperature comes down.
温度升高，生物圈开始做某事，温度下降。
Now I wonder if the technosphere also has a Gaian feedback or elements of a Gaian feedback?
现在我想知道技术圈是否也有盖亚反馈或盖亚反馈的元素？
21:39 Such that the technosphere will also fight to some degree for homeostasis.
这样一来，技术圈也将在某种程度上为稳态而战。
Open question, I guess.
我猜是开放式问题。
Well, I’m glad you asked that question.
嗯，我很高兴你问这个问题。
21:51 Because that paper that David, and Sara, and I wrote, what we were arguing was is that over the history of a planet …
因为大卫、萨拉和我写的那篇论文，我们争论的是，在一个行星的历史上……
When life first forms, 3.8 billion years ago, it’s thin on the ground.
38 亿年前，当生命首次形成时，地面上的生命体很薄弱。
You’ve got the first species, these are all microbes.
你已经有了第一个物种，这些都是微生物。
There are not enough of them to exert any kind of these Gaian feedbacks.
它们的数量不足以发挥任何类型的盖亚反馈。
We call that an immature biosphere.
我们称之为不成熟的生物圈。
But then as time goes on, as life becomes more robust and it begins to exert these feedbacks keeping the planet in the place where it needs to be for life, we call that a mature biosphere.
但随着时间的推移，随着生命变得更加强大，它开始发挥这些反馈作用，使地球保持在生命需要的地方，我们称之为成熟的生物圈。
I’m sure later on, we’re going to talk about definitions of life and such.
我确信稍后我们会讨论生命的定义之类的。
There’s this great term called autopoiesis that Francisco Varela, the Neurobiologist Francisco Varela came up with.
神经生物学家弗朗西斯科·瓦雷拉 (Francisco Varela) 提出了一个伟大的术语，叫做“自创生”。
He said, “One of the defining things about life is this property of autopoiesis,” which means self-creating and self-maintaining.
他说，“生命的一个决定性因素就是自创生的属性”，这意味着自我创造和自我维持。
Life does not create the conditions which will destroy itself.
生命不会创造会毁灭自己的条件。
It’s always trying to keep itself in a place where it can stay alive.
它总是试图让自己保持在一个可以生存的地方。
The biosphere, from this Gaian perspective, has been autopoietic for billions of years.
从盖亚的角度来看，生物圈已经自创生了数十亿年。
23:02 Now we just invented this technosphere in the last couple of hundred years.
现在我们在过去的几百年里刚刚发明了这个技术领域。
What we were arguing in that paper is that it’s an immature technosphere.
我们在那篇论文中争论的是，这是一个不成熟的技术圈。
Because right now, with climate change and all the other things we’re doing, the technosphere right now is destroying the conditions under which it needs to maintain itself.
因为现在，随着气候变化和我们正在做的所有其他事情，技术圈正在破坏它维持自身所需的条件。
The real job for us if we’re going to last over geological timescales, if we want a technosphere that’s going to last tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of years, then we’ve got to become mature.
如果我们想要在地质时间尺度上持续下去，如果我们想要一个能够持续数万年、数十万年、数百万年的技术圈，那么我们真正的工作就必须变得成熟。
Which means to not undermine the conditions, to not subvert the conditions that you need to stay alive.
这意味着不要破坏条件，不要破坏你生存所需的条件。
As of right now, I’d say we’re not autopoietic.
截至目前，我想说我们还不是自创生的。
Wow.
哇。
23:44 I wonder if we look across thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of years, that the technosphere should create perturbations as a way for developing greater and greater defenses against perturbations.
我想知道我们是否会纵观数千年、数万年、数十万年，技术圈应该创造扰动，作为开发越来越强大的扰动防御措施的一种方式。
Which sounds like a ridiculous statement.
这听起来像是一个荒谬的说法。
But basically, go out and play in the yard and hurt yourself, to strengthen.
但基本上就是出去到院子里玩弄伤自己，来强化。
Or drink water from the pond.
或者喝池塘里的水。
From the pond.
来自池塘。
24:13 Yeah, right.
是的，对。
Get sick a few times.
生病几次。
To strengthen the immune system.
增强免疫系统。
Yeah.
是的。
24:18 Well, you know it’s interesting with the technosphere, we can talk about this more.
嗯，你知道技术领域很有趣，我们可以更多地讨论这个问题。
We’re just emerging as a technosphere, in terms of as an interplanetary technosphere.
就星际技术圈而言，我们刚刚成为一个技术圈。
That’s really the next step for us.
这确实是我们的下一步。
David Grinspoon talks about it.
大卫·格林斯彭谈到了这个问题。
I love this idea of anti-accretion.
我喜欢这个反吸积的想法。
This amazing thing that, for the first time over the entire history of the planet, stuff is coming off the planet.
这是地球历史上第一次有东西从地球上脱落，这是一件令人惊奇的事情。
It used to be everything just fell down, all the meteorites fell down.
以前都是一切都掉下来了，所有的陨石都掉下来了。
But now we’re starting to push stuff out.
但现在我们开始推出一些东西。
The idea of planetary defense or such, we are actually going to start exerting perturbations on the solar system as a whole.
行星防御之类的想法，我们实际上将开始对整个太阳系施加扰动。
We’re going to start engineering, if we make it.
如果我们成功的话，我们将开始工程。
I always like to say that if we can get through climate change, the prize at the end is the solar system.
我总是喜欢说，如果我们能够应对气候变化，最终的奖品就是太阳系。
We’ll be literally engineering the solar system.
我们将真正设计太阳系。
25:06 But what you can think of right now with what’s happening with the Anthropocene, the great acceleration that is the technosphere, is the creation of it, that is a giant perturbation on the biosphere.
但是你现在可以想到人类世正在发生的事情，即技术圈的巨大加速，是它的创造，这是对生物圈的巨大扰动。
The technosphere sits on top of the biosphere, and if the technosphere undermines the biosphere for its own conditions of habitability, then you’re in trouble.
技术圈位于生物圈之上，如果技术圈因其自身的宜居条件而破坏了生物圈，那么你就有麻烦了。
The biosphere is not going away.
生物圈不会消失。
There’s nothing we could do.
我们无能为力。
The idea that we have to save the Earth is a little ridiculous.
我们必须拯救地球的想法有点荒谬。
The Earth is not a furry little bunny that we need to protect.
地球不是我们需要保护的毛茸茸的小兔子。
But it’s the conditions for us.
但这是我们的条件。
Humanity emerged out of the Holocene, the last 10,000 years interglacial period.
人类诞生于全新世，即最后一万年的间冰期。
We can’t tolerate very different kinds of Earths.
我们不能容忍截然不同的地球。
That’s what I mean about a perturbation.
这就是我所说的扰动。
Before we forget, I got to ask you about this paper.
在我们忘记之前，我得问你关于这篇论文的事。
Right.
正确的。
It’s pretty interesting.
这很有趣。
25:56 There’s an interesting table here about hard steps.
这里有一个关于困难步骤的有趣表格。
Abiogenesis, glucose fermentation to propionic acid, all kinds of steps, all the way to homo sapiens, animal intelligence, land ecosystems, endoskeletons.
自然发生、葡萄糖发酵成丙酸，各种步骤，一直到智人、动物智力、陆地生态系统、内骨骼。
Eye precursor, so formation of the eye.
眼先兆，故形成眼。
Yeah.
是的。
Complex multicellularity.
复杂的多细胞性。
That’s definitely one of the big ones.
这绝对是最重要的事情之一。
Yeah.
是的。
26:18 Interesting.
有趣的。
What can you say about this chart?
对于这张图表你有什么想说的？
There are all kinds of papers talking about, what, the difficulty of these steps?
各种论文都在讲，什么，这些步骤的难度？
Right.
正确的。
26:26 This was the idea.
这就是想法。
What Carter said was, “We’re using anthropic reasoning.” He said, “There must be a few very hard steps for evolution to get through to make it to intelligence.” Some steps are going to be easy, so every generation, you roll the dice.
卡特说的是，“我们正在使用人择推理。”他说：“进化必须经历一些非常艰难的步骤才能达到智能。”有些步骤很容易，所以每一代人都需要掷骰子。
Yeah, it won’t take long for you to get that step.
是的，用不了多久你就能迈出这一步。
But there must be a few of them, and he said you could even calculate how many there were, five, six, in order to get to intelligence.
但肯定有几个，他说你甚至可以计算出有多少个，五个，六个，以便获得情报。
26:54 This paper here, this plot is all these different people who’ve written all these papers.
这里的这篇论文，这个情节是所有这些不同的人写的所有这些论文。
This is the point, actually.
事实上，这就是重点。
You can see all these papers that were written on the hard steps.
你可以看到所有这些论文都是在艰难的步骤上写成的。
Each one proposing a different set of what those steps should be.
每个人都提出了一套不同的步骤。
There’s this other idea from biology of the major transitions in evolution, MTEs, that those were the hard steps.
生物学中关于进化的重大转变（MTE）还有另一个想法，那就是这些是艰难的步骤。
27:13 But what we actually found was that none of those are actually hard.
但我们实际发现，这些其实都不难。
The whole idea of hard steps, that there are hard steps, is actually suspect.
困难步骤的整个想法，即存在困难步骤，实际上是值得怀疑的。
What’s amazing about this model is it shows how important it is to actually work with people who are in the field.
这个模型的惊人之处在于它显示了与该领域的人们实际合作是多么重要。
Brandon Carter was a brilliant physicist, the guy who came up with this.
布兰登·卡特是一位杰出的物理学家，他是这个想法的提出者。
And then lots of physicists and astrophysicists like me have used this.
然后很多像我这样的物理学家和天体物理学家都使用了这个。
But the people who actually study evolution and the planet were never involved.
但真正研究进化论和地球的人却从未参与其中。
27:43 If you went and talked to an evolutionary biologist or a bio-geophysicist, they’d look at you when you explained this to them and they’d be like, “What?
如果你去和进化生物学家或生物地球物理学家交谈，当你向他们解释这一点时，他们会看着你，然后他们会说，“什么？
What are you guys doing?” It turns out, none of the details, or none of the conceptual structure of this matches with what the people who actually study the planet and its evolution.
你们在做什么？事实证明，其中的任何细节或概念结构都不与实际研究地球及其演化的人们相匹配。
Is it mostly about the fact that there’s not really discrete, big steps?
主要是因为没有真正离散的、大的步骤吗？
28:06 Is this a gradual, continual kind of process?
这是一个渐进的、持续的过程吗？
Well, there’s two things.
嗯，有两件事。
28:12 The first most important one was that the planet and the biosphere have evolved together.
第一个最重要的一点是地球和生物圈是一起进化的。
Together.
一起。
That’s something that most bio-geophysicists completely accept.
这是大多数生物地球物理学家完全接受的。
28:17 It was the first thing that Carter rejected.
这是卡特拒绝的第一件事。
He said, “No, that’s probably not possible.” And yet, if he’d only had more discussions with this other community, he would have seen, no, there are actually windows that open up.
他说：“不，这可能是不可能的。”然而，如果他与其他社区进行更多讨论，他就会发现，不，实际上有一些窗口可以打开。
28:34 Then the next thing is this idea of whether a step is hard or not.
接下来的事情是关于一步是否困难的想法。
Because for hard, what we mean by a hard step is, like I said, every time there’s a generation, every time there’s a next generation born, you’re rolling the dice on whether this mutation will happen.
因为对于困难来说，我们所说的困难一步是指，就像我说的，每当有一代人，每次有下一代出生时，你就在掷骰子决定这种突变是否会发生。
The idea of something being a hard step, there’s two ways in which something might even appear as a hard step and not be.
某件事是艰难的一步的想法，有两种方式可以使某件事看起来像是艰难的一步，但实际上并非如此。
Or actually not be a hard step at all.
或者实际上根本不是困难的一步。
28:56 One is that you see something that has occurred in evolution that has only happened once.
一是你看到进化中只发生过一次的事情。
Let’s take the opposite, we see something that’s happened multiple times.
让我们反其道而行之，我们看到一些事情已经发生了多次。
Like wings, lots of examples of wings over lots of different evolutionary lineages.
就像翅膀一样，有很多不同进化谱系的翅膀例子。
Making wings is not a hard step.
制作翅膀并不是一件难事。
29:12 There’s certain other things that people say, “No, that’s a hard step.” Oxygen, the oxygen photosynthesis.
人们还会说“不，这是艰难的一步”。氧气，光合作用产生的氧气。
But they tend to be so long ago that we’ve lost all the information.
但它们往往是很久以前的事了，以至于我们失去了所有的信息。
There could be other things in the fossil record that made this innovation, but they’re just gone now so you can’t tell, so there’s information loss.
化石记录中可能还有其他东西促成了这一创新，但它们现在已经消失了，所以你无法分辨，所以存在信息丢失。
29:32 The other thing is the idea of pulling up the ladder.
另一件事是拉上梯子的想法。
That somebody, some species makes the innovation, but then it fills the niche and nobody else can do it again.
有人、某些物种进行了创新，但随后它填补了空白，其他人无法再次做到这一点。
Yeah, it only happened once but it happened once because basically, the creature was so successful it took over, and there was no space for anybody else to evolve it.
是的，它只发生了一次，但它发生了一次，因为基本上，这个生物是如此成功，以至于它接管了，并且没有空间让其他人进化它。
29:49 Yeah.
是的。
The interesting thing about this was seeing how much, once you look at the details of life’s history on Earth, how it really shifts you away from this hard steps model.
有趣的是，一旦你了解了地球上生命历史的细节，你就会发现它是如何真正让你远离这种艰难的步骤模型的。
It shows you that those details, as we were talking about with do you have to know about the planet, do you have to know about plate tectonics?
它向您展示了这些细节，正如我们所讨论的，您是否必须了解地球，您是否必须了解板块构造？
Yeah, you’re going to have to.
是的，你必须这样做。
To be fair to Carter on the first point, it makes it much more complicated if life and the planet are co-evolving.
公平地说，在第一点上，如果生命和地球共同进化，事情就会变得更加复杂。
30:07 Because it would be nice to consider the planet as a static thing that sets the initial conditions.
因为最好将地球视为一个设定初始条件的静态物体。
Yeah.
是的。
And then we can, from an outside perspective, analyze planets based on the initial conditions they create.
然后我们可以从外部的角度根据行星创造的初始条件来分析它们。
30:24 Then there’s a binary yes or no at will it create life.
然后有一个二元的是或否，它可以随意创造生命。
But if they co-evolve, it’s a really complex dynamical system, the way everything is …
但如果它们共同进化，那就是一个非常复杂的动力系统，一切都是这样的……
Because it’s much more difficult from the perspective of settee.
因为从沙发的角度来看，这要困难得多。
Of looking out there and trying to figure out which ones are actually producing life.
向外观察并试图找出哪些是真正在产生生命的。
But I think we’re at the point now, now there may be other kinds of principles that actually …
但我认为我们现在正处于这个阶段，现在可能还有其他类型的原则实际上......
30:50 Co-evolution actually has its own.
共同进化实际上有它自己的。
Not deterministic, you’re done with determinism.
不是确定性的，你已经受够了确定性。
Yeah.
是的。
But complex systems have patterns.
但复杂的系统是有模式的。
Yeah.
是的。
Complex systems have constraints.
复杂的系统是有约束的。
31:03 That’s actually what we’re going to be looking for, are constraints on them.
这实际上就是我们要寻找的，是对它们的限制。
31:10 Again, nothing against Carter.
再说一次，我没有反对卡特。
It was a brilliant idea.
这是一个绝妙的主意。
But it just goes to show you …
但它只是向你展示……
I’m a theoretical physicist.
我是一名理论物理学家。
Give me a simplified model, with dynamical equations and some initial conditions, I’m very happy.
给我一个简化的模型，带有动力学方程和一些初始条件，我很高兴。
But there’s this great XTC comic, where somebody’s working something out on the board, and this physicist is looking over and saying, ” Oh, oh, I just wrote down an equation for that.
但是有一部很棒的 XTC 漫画，有人正在黑板上计算一些东西，而这位物理学家正在查看并说，“哦，哦，我刚刚写下了一个方程式。
I solved your problem.
我解决了你的问题。
Do you guys even have a journal for this?” The subtitle is Why Everybody Hates Physicists.
你们有这方面的日记吗？”副标题是为什么每个人都讨厌物理学家。
Yeah.
是的。
Sometimes that approach totally works.
有时这种方法完全有效。
Yeah.
是的。
Sometimes physicists, we can be very good at zooming in on what is important and casting the details aside so you can get to the heart of an issue.
有时，作为物理学家，我们可以非常擅长放大重要的内容，而将细节放在一边，这样您就可以抓住问题的核心。
31:40 That’s very useful sometimes.
有时这非常有用。
Other times, it obfuscates.
其他时候，它会令人困惑。
Other times, it clouds over actually what you needed to focus on, especially when it comes to complexity.
其他时候，它实际上掩盖了您需要关注的内容，尤其是在复杂性方面。
Speaking of simplifying everything down to an equation, let’s return back to the question of how many alien civilizations are out there and talk about the Drake Equation.
说到将一切简化为方程式，让我们回到外星文明有多少的问题，谈谈德雷克方程。
Yeah.
是的。
Can you explain the Drake Equation?
你能解释一下德雷克方程吗？
People have various feelings about the Drake Equation.
人们对德雷克方程有不同的感受。
32:15 It can be abused.
它可能被滥用。
The story actually is really interesting.
这个故事实际上非常有趣。
32:23 Frank Drake in 1960 does the first ever astrobiological experiment.
1960 年，弗兰克·德雷克 (Frank Drake) 进行了有史以来第一个天体生物学实验。
He gets a radio telescope, points it at a couple of stars, and listens for signals.
他拿了一架射电望远镜，将其对准几颗星星，并监听信号。
That was the first time anybody had done any experiment about any kind of life in the history of humanity.
这是人类历史上第一次有人对任何一种生命进行实验。
He does it, and he’s waiting for everybody to make fun of him.
他做到了，他正在等待每个人都取笑他。
Instead, he gets a phone call from the government and says, “Hey, we want you to do a meeting on interstellar communications.” He’s like, “Okay.”
相反，他接到政府打来的电话，说：“嘿，我们希望你召开一次关于星际通信的会议。”他说：“好吧。”
32:51 They organized a meeting with just eight people.
他们组织了一次只有八人的会议。
A young Carl Sagan is going to be there as well.
年轻的卡尔·萨根也将出席。
The night before, Drake has to come up with an agenda.
前一天晚上，德雷克必须制定一个议程。
How do you come up with an agenda for a meeting on a topic that no one’s ever talked about before?
你如何为一个以前没有人谈论过的话题制定一个会议议程？
What he does, what’s so brilliant about the Drake Equation, is he breaks the problem of how many civilizations are there out there into a bunch of sub-problems.
他所做的，德雷克方程的出色之处在于，他将世界上有多少文明的问题分解为一堆子问题。
He breaks it into seven sub-problems.
他将其分解为七个子问题。
Each one of them is a factor in an equation that, when you multiply them all together, you get the number of civilizations out there that we could communicate with.
它们中的每一个都是一个方程中的一个因素，当你将它们全部相乘时，你就得到了我们可以与之交流的文明的数量。
33:28 The first term is the rate at which stars form.
第一项是恒星形成的速率。
The second term is the fraction of those stars that have plants, F-sub-P.
第二项是那些拥有植物的恒星的比例，F-sub-P。
The next term is the number of planets in the habitable zone, the place where we think life could form.
下一项是位于宜居带（我们认为生命可能形成的地方）的行星数量。
The next term after that is the fraction of those planets where actually an abiogenesis event, life forms, occurs.
下一个术语是那些实际上发生自然发生事件（生命形式）的行星的一部分。
The next one is the fraction of planets on which you start to get intelligence.
下一个是你开始获得智慧的行星的比例。
After that, it’s the fraction of planets where that intelligence goes on to create a civilization.
之后，只有一小部分行星的智慧继续创造了文明。
Then finally, the last term, which is the one that we really care about, is the lifetime, have a civilization and how long does it last.
最后，最后一项，也是我们真正关心的一项，是寿命，有一个文明，它能持续多久。
When you say we, we humans?
当你说我们时，我们人类？
We humans, because we’re staring at multiple guns pointing at us.
我们人类，因为我们盯着多把枪指着我们。
Yeah.
是的。
Nuclear war, climate change, AI.
核战争、气候变化、人工智能。
34:14 How long in general does civilizations last?
文明一般能持续多久？
34:20 Now each one of these terms, what was brilliant about what he did was, what he was doing was he was quantifying our ignorance.
现在，这些术语中的每一个，他所做的事情的精彩之处在于，他正在做的事情是他正在量化我们的无知。
By breaking the problem up into these seven sub-problems, he gave astronomers something to do.
通过将问题分解为这七个子问题，他为天文学家提供了一些工作要做。
This is always with a new research field, you need a research program or else you just have a bunch of vague questions.
这总是与新的研究领域有关，你需要一个研究计划，否则你只会遇到一堆模糊的问题。
You don’t even know really what you’re trying to do.
你甚至不知道自己到底想做什么。
34:41 The star people could figure out how many stars were forming per year.
恒星人们可以算出每年有多少颗恒星形成。
The people who were interested in planets could go out and find techniques to discover planets, et cetera, et cetera.
对行星感兴趣的人可以出去寻找发现行星的技术等等。
These are their own fields.
这些都是他们自己的领域。
34:50 Essentially by creating this equation, he’s launching new fields.
本质上，通过创建这个方程式，他正在开创新的领域。
Yeah.
是的。
34:56 That’s exactly …
那正是……
He gave astrobiology, which wasn’t even a term then, a roadmap.
他为当时还不是一个术语的天体生物学提供了路线图。
“Okay, you guys go do this, you go do that.”
“好吧，你们去做这个，你们去做那个。”
35:03 And then, a roadmap like, “Okay, you guys go do this, you go do that, you go do that.” And it had such far-reaching effect on astrobiology because it did break the problem up in a way that gave useful marching orders for all these different groups.
然后，制定路线图，“好吧，你们去做这个，你们去做那个，你们去做那个。”它对天体生物学产生了如此深远的影响，因为它确实以一种为所有这些不同群体提供有用的前进命令的方式解决了这个问题。
For example, it’s because of the Drake equation in some sense that people who were involved in SETI pushed NASA to develop the technologies for planet hunting.
例如，从某种意义上来说，正是因为德雷克方程，参与 SETI 的人们才推动 NASA 开发行星搜寻技术。
There was this amazing meeting in 1978, two meetings, 1978 and 1979, that were driven in some part by the people who were involved in SETI getting NASA together to say, “Look, okay, look, what’s the roadmap for us to develop technologies to find planets?”
1978 年召开了一次令人惊叹的会议，分别是 1978 年和 1979 年的两次会议，这在一定程度上是由那些参与 SETI 的人们推动的，他们让 NASA 聚集在一起说：“看，好吧，看，我们开发寻找行星技术的路线图是什么？”
35:45 So, the Drake equation is absolutely foundational for astrobiology, but we should remember that it’s not a law of nature.
因此，德雷克方程绝对是天体生物学的基础，但我们应该记住，它不是自然法则。
It’s not equal to MC squared.
它不等于 MC 平方。
And so, you can see it being abused in some sense.
因此，你可以看到它在某种意义上被滥用了。
Yeah, it’s generated a trillion papers.
是的，它产生了数万亿篇论文。
Some of those papers are good, I’ve written some of those.
其中一些论文很好，其中一些是我写的。
And some of those papers are bad, I’m not sure where my paper fits in on those.
其中一些论文很糟糕，我不确定我的论文适合这些论文。
I’m saying one should be careful about what you’re using it for.
我是说人们应该小心你使用它的用途。
But in terms of understanding the problem that astrobiology faces, this really broke it up in a useful way.
但就理解天体生物学面临的问题而言，这确实以一种有用的方式打破了它。
We could talk about each one of these, but let’s just look at exoplanets.
我们可以逐一讨论，但我们只看看系外行星。
Yeah.
是的。
So, that’s a really interesting one.
所以，这是一个非常有趣的事情。
36:25 I think when you look back hundreds of years from now, was it in the 90s when they first detected the first-
我想当你回顾数百年后，是在 90 年代，他们第一次发现了第一个——
Yeah.
是的。
36:32 ’92 and ’95.
’92和’95。
’95 to me was really, that was the discovery of the first planet orbiting a sun-like star.
95 年对我来说确实是发现了第一颗绕类太阳恒星运行的行星。
To me, that was the water, the dam being broken.
对我来说，那就是水，大坝被破坏了。
I think that’s one of the greatest discoveries in the history of science.
我认为这是科学史上最伟大的发现之一。
I agree.
我同意。
36:45 I agree.
我同意。
Right now, I guess nobody’s celebrating it too much because you don’t know what it really means.
现在，我想没有人过度庆祝它，因为你不知道它的真正含义。
36:46 But I think once we almost certainly will find life out there, it will obviously allow us to generalize across the entire galaxy of the entire universe.
但我认为，一旦我们几乎肯定会在那里找到生命，它显然将使我们能够推广到整个宇宙的整个星系。
So, if you can find life on a planet, even in the solar system, you can now start generalizing across the entire universe.
因此，如果你能在一颗行星上找到生命，甚至在太阳系中，你现在就可以开始在整个宇宙中进行推广。
You can, all you need is one.
你可以，你只需要一个。
37:12 Right now, our understanding of life, we have one example.
现在，我们对生活的理解，有一个例子。
We have N equals one example of life.
我们有 N 等于生活中的一个例子。
So, that means we could be an accident.
所以，这意味着我们可能是一场意外。
It could be that we’re the only place in the entire universe where this weird thing called life has occurred.
我们可能是整个宇宙中唯一发生这种被称为生命的奇怪事物的地方。
Get one more example and now you’re done, because if you have one more example, now you don’t have to find all the other examples.
再获取一个示例，现在就完成了，因为如果再有一个示例，现在您就不必查找所有其他示例。
You just know that it’s happened more than once, and now you are from a Bayesian perspective, you can start thinking like, “Yeah.
你只知道这种事发生了不止一次，现在你从贝叶斯的角度来看，你可以开始思考，“是的。
Life is not something that’s hard to make.”
生活并不是什么难事。”
Well, let me get your sense of estimates for the Drake equation.
好吧，让我了解一下您对德雷克方程的估计。
37:43 You’ve also written a paper expanding on the Drake equation, but what do you think is the answer?
您还写了一篇扩展德雷克方程的论文，但您认为答案是什么？
So, there was this paper we wrote, Woody Sullivan and I in 2016, where we said, “Look, we have all this exoplanet data now.” So, the thing that exoplanet science and the exoplanet census I was talking about before have nailed is F sub P, the fraction of stars that have planets, it’s one.
因此，我和伍迪·沙利文在 2016 年写了一篇论文，其中我们说：“看，我们现在拥有所有这些系外行星数据。”所以，我之前谈到的系外行星科学和系外行星普查已经确定的是 F sub P，即拥有行星的恒星的比例，它是一个。
37:51 Every fricking star that you see in the sky hosts a family of worlds.
你在天空中看到的每颗该死的星星都承载着一个世界大家庭。
I mean, it’s mind-boggling because those are all places, right?
我的意思是，这令人难以置信，因为这些都是地方，对吧？
They’re either gas giants, probably with moons, so the moons are places you can stand and look out.
它们要么是气态巨行星，可能有卫星，所以卫星是你可以站立和眺望的地方。
Or they’re like terrestrial worlds where even if there’s not life, there’s still snow falling and there’s oceans washing up on shorelines.
或者它们就像陆地世界，即使没有生命，仍然会下雪，海岸线上也会有海洋冲刷。
38:33 It’s incredible to think how many places and stories there are out there.
想想外面有多少地方和故事，真是令人难以置信。
So, the first term was F sub P, which is how many stars have planets.
所以，第一项是 F sub P，即有多少颗恒星拥有行星。
The next term is how many planets are in the habitable zone on average, and it turns out to be one over five, so around 0.2.
下一项是平均有多少颗行星位于宜居带，结果是五分之一，所以大约是 0.2。
So, that means you just count five of them go out at night and go one, two, three, four, five.
所以，这意味着你只要数一下其中有五个人晚上出去，然后去一、二、三、四、五。
One of them has an Earth-like planet in the habitable zone, like, whoa.
其中一个在宜居带中有一颗类似地球的行星，就像，哇。
So, what defines a habitable zone?
那么，什么定义了宜居区呢？
Habitable zone is an idea that was developed in the 1958 by the Chinese American astronomer, Xu Sheng, and it was a brilliant idea.
宜居带是1958年由美籍华裔天文学家徐升提出的一个想法，这是一个绝妙的想法。
39:02 It said, “Look, I can do the simple calculation.
它说：“看，我可以做简单的计算。
If I take a planet and just stick it at some distance from a star of what’s the temperature of the planet?
如果我把一颗行星放在离恒星一定距离的地方，那么行星的温度是多少？
What’s the temperature of the surface?” So now, give it a standard Earth-like atmosphere and ask, “Could there be liquid water on the surface?” We believe that liquid water is really important for life.
表面温度是多少？”那么现在，给它一个标准的类似地球的大气层，然后问：“表面可能有液态水吗？”我们相信液态水对于生命来说确实很重要。
There could be other things that’s happening fine, but if you were to start off trying to make life, you’d probably choose water as your solvent for it.
可能还有其他事情发生得很好，但如果你要开始尝试创造生命，你可能会选择水作为它的溶剂。
39:41 So basically, the habitable zone is the band of orbits around a star where you can have liquid water on the surface.
所以基本上，宜居带是围绕恒星的轨道带，在那里表面可以有液态水。
You could take a glass of water, pour it on the surface, and it would just pull up.
你可以拿一杯水，倒在表面上，它就会向上拉起。
It wouldn’t freeze immediately, which would happen if your planet is too far out and it wouldn’t just boil away if your planet’s too close in.
如果你的行星离你太远，它不会立即冻结，如果你的行星离你太近，它也不会立即沸腾。
So, that’s the formal definition of the habitable zone.
这就是宜居带的正式定义。
So, it’s a nice strict definition, there’s probably way more going on than that, but this is a place to start.
所以，这是一个很好的严格定义，可能还有更多的事情发生，但这是一个起点。
Well, we should say it’s a place to start, I do think it’s too strict of a constraint.
好吧，我们应该说这是一个起点，我确实认为它的限制太严格了。
I would agree.
我同意。
We’re talking about temperature where water can be on the surface.
我们谈论的是水可以出现在表面的温度。
40:12 There’s so many other ways to get the aforementioned turmoil where the temperature varies, whether it’s volcanic, so interaction of volcanoes and ice and all of this on the moons of planets that are much farther away, all this kind of stuff.
还有很多其他方法可以在温度变化的情况下产生上述的混乱，无论是火山，还是火山和冰的相互作用，以及所有这些在距离更远的行星的卫星上，所有这些东西。
Yeah.
是的。
40:33 Well, for example, we know in our own solar system we have, say Europa, the moon of Jupiter, which has got a hundred-mile-deep ocean under 10 miles of ice.
举例来说，我们知道在我们自己的太阳系中，有木星的卫星木卫二，它在 10 英里的冰层下有 100 英里深的海洋。
That’s not in the habitable zone, that is outside the habitable zone, and that may be the best place.
那不是在宜居带内，那是在宜居带之外，那可能是最好的地方。
It’s got more water than Earth does, all of its oceans.
它的水量比地球上所有的海洋还要多。
It’s twice as much water on Europa than there is on Earth.
木卫二上的水量是地球上的两倍。
So, that may be a really great for life to form, and it’s outside the habitable zone.
所以，这可能非常适合生命的形成，而且它位于宜居带之外。
So, the habitable zone is a good place to start and it helps us.
因此，宜居带是一个很好的起点，它对我们有帮助。
And there’s reasons why you do want to focus on the habitable zone, because like Europa, I won’t be able to see from across telescopic distances across light years.
你确实想关注宜居带是有原因的，因为像木卫二一样，我无法从跨越光年的望远镜距离看到它。
41:12 I wouldn’t be able to see life on Europa because it’s under 10 miles of ice.
我无法在木卫二上看到生命，因为它位于 10 英里的冰层之下。
So, with the important thing about planets in the habitable zone is that we’re thinking they have atmospheres.
因此，对于位于宜居带的行星来说，重要的是我们认为它们有大气层。
Atmospheres are the things we can characterize across 10, 50 light years and we can see biosignatures as we’re going to talk about.
大气是我们可以在 10、50 光年范围内描述的东西，我们可以看到我们将要讨论的生物特征。
So, there is a reason why the habitable zone becomes important for the detection of extra solar life.
因此，宜居带对于探测太阳系外生命变得重要是有原因的。
But for me, when I look up at the stars, it’s very likely that there’s a habitable planet or moon in each of the stars, habitable defined broadly.
但对我来说，当我抬头仰望星星时，每颗恒星中很可能都有一颗宜居行星或卫星，宜居的定义很广泛。
Yeah, I think that’s not unreasonable to say, especially since the formal definition, you get one in five, right?
是的，我认为这样说并不是没有道理，特别是自从正式定义以来，你得到了五分之一，对吧？
41:47 One in five is a lot, there’s a lot of stars in the sky.
五分之一就很多了，天上有很多星星。
So yeah, saying that in general, when I look at a star, there’s a pretty good chance that there’s something habitable orbiting it.
所以，是的，总的来说，当我观察一颗恒星时，很有可能有一些适合居住的东西围绕它运行。
It is not a unreasonable scientific claim.
这并不是一个不合理的科学主张。
To me, it seems like there should be alien civilizations everywhere.
对我来说，似乎到处都应该有外星文明。
42:06 Why the Fermi paradox?
为什么会出现费米悖论？
Why haven’t we seen them?
为什么我们没有看到他们？
Okay, the Fermi paradox.
好吧，费米悖论。
42:17 I love talking about the Fermi paradox because there is no Fermi paradox.
我喜欢谈论费米悖论，因为不存在费米悖论。
Dun dun, dun dun.
咚咚，咚咚。
Yeah, so the Fermi paradox, let’s talk a about the Fermi paradox and the history of it.
是的，所以费米悖论，让我们谈谈费米悖论及其历史。
So, Enrico Fermi, it’s 1950, he’s walking with his friends at Los Alamos nuclear weapons lab to the Cantina, and there had been this cartoon in the New Yorker, they all read the New Yorker.
那么，恩里科·费米，那是 1950 年，他和他的朋友们在洛斯阿拉莫斯核武器实验室步行到小酒馆，《纽约客》上刊登了这幅漫画，他们都读了《纽约客》。
And the cartoon was trying to explain why there had been this rash of garbage cans being disappearing in New York.
这部漫画试图解释为什么纽约的垃圾桶大量消失。
And this cartoon said, “Oh, it’s UFOs.” Because it’s 1950, the first big UFO craze happened in ’47.
这部漫画说：“哦，这是不明飞行物。”因为那是 1950 年，第一次 UFO 热潮发生在 47 年。
42:55 So, they were laughing about this as they’re walking, and they started being physicists, started talking about interstellar travel, interstellar propulsion.
所以，他们边走边笑，他们开始成为物理学家，开始谈论星际旅行、星际推进。
Conversation goes on for a while, conversation turns to something else, they’ve gone to other things.
谈话持续了一段时间，谈话转向其他事情，他们又转向其他事情。
About 40 minutes later, over lunch, Fermi blurts out, “Well, where is everybody?” Typical Fermi sort of thing.
大约 40 分钟后，午餐时，费米脱口而出：“那么，大家都在哪里？”典型的费米之类的事情。
He’d done the calculation in his head and he suddenly realized that, look, if intelligence is common, that even traveling at sub lights speeds a civilization could cross, hop from one star system to the other and spread it out across the entire galaxy in a few hundred thousand years.
他在脑子里做了计算，突然意识到，看，如果智慧是普遍的，即使以亚光速旅行，一个文明也可以在几十万年内穿越，从一个恒星系统跳到另一个恒星系统，并将其传播到整个银河系。
43:34 And he realized this, and so he was like, “Why aren’t they here now?” And that was the beginning of the Fermi paradox.
他意识到了这一点，所以他想，“为什么他们现在不在这里？”这就是费米悖论的开始。
It actually got picked up as a formal thing in 1975 in a paper by Hart where he actually went through this calculation and showed and said, “Well, there’s nobody here now, therefore, there’s nobody anywhere.” Okay, so that is what we will call the direct Fermi paradox, why aren’t they here now?
实际上，哈特在 1975 年的一篇论文中将其作为正式内容，他实际上进行了计算，并表示：“好吧，现在这里没有人，因此，任何地方都没有人。”好吧，这就是我们所说的直接费米悖论，为什么它们现在不在这里？
But something happened after SETI began, where people started to, there was this idea of the great silence.
但在 SETI 开始后发生了一些事情，人们开始出现这种巨大的沉默的想法。
People got this idea in their head that like, “Oh, we’ve been looking for decades now for signals of extra-terrestrial intelligence that we haven’t found any.
人们的脑海中浮现这样的想法：“哦，我们几十年来一直在寻找外星智慧生物的信号，但我们还没有找到任何信号。
Therefore, there’s nothing out there.
因此，那里什么也没有。
44:12 So, we’ll call that the indirect Fermi paradox and there absolutely is no indirect Fermi paradox for the most mundane of reasons, which is money.
因此，我们将其称为间接费米悖论，而绝对不存在间接费米悖论，因为最常见的原因是金钱。
There’s never been any money to look.
从来没有钱可以看。
SETI was always done by researchers who were scabbing some time, some extra time from their other projects to look a little bit at the sky where the telescope, telescopes are expensive.
SETI 总是由研究人员完成，他们从其他项目中抽出一些额外的时间来观察天空，那里的望远镜非常昂贵。
So, Jason Wright, one of my collaborators, he and his students did a study where they looked at the entire search space for SETI, and imagine that’s an ocean.
所以，杰森·赖特（Jason Wright），我的合作者之一，他和他的学生做了一项研究，他们观察了 SETI 的整个搜索空间，并想象那是一片海洋。
All the different stars you have to look at, the radio frequencies you have to look at, how when you look, how often you look.
你必须观察的所有不同的星星，你必须观察的无线电频率，你何时观察的方式，你观察的频率。
44:49 Then they summed up all the SETI searches that had ever been done, they went through the literature.
然后他们总结了所有已完成的 SETI 搜索，并查阅了文献。
And what they found was if that search space, if the sky is an ocean and you’re looking for fish, how much of the ocean have we looked at, and it turns out to be a hot tub.
他们发现，如果那个搜索空间，如果天空是一片海洋，而你正在寻找鱼，我们已经观察了多少海洋，结果发现它是一个热水浴缸。
That’s how much of the ocean that we’ve looked up.
这就是我们所仰望的海洋的面积。
We’ve dragged a hot tub’s worth of ocean water up and there was no fish in it, and so now are we going to say, “Well, there’s no fish in the ocean.” So, there is absolutely positively no indirect Fermi paradox, we just haven’t looked, but we’re starting to look.
我们把一个热水浴缸的海水拖了上来，里面没有鱼，所以现在我们要说，“好吧，海洋里没有鱼。”所以，绝对不存在间接费米悖论，我们只是还没有研究过，但我们已经开始研究了。
So finally, we’re starting to look, that’s what’s exciting.
所以最后，我们开始寻找，这就是令人兴奋的。
45:25 The direct Fermi paradox, there are so many ways out of that.
直接的费米悖论，有很多方法可以解决。
There’s a book called 77 Solutions to the Fermi Paradox that you can pick your favorite one.
有一本叫做费米悖论的 77 个解决方案的书，你可以选择你最喜欢的一本。
It just doesn’t carry a lot of weight because there’s so many ways around it.
它只是没有太大的重量，因为有很多方法可以解决它。
We did an actual simulation, my group, Jonathan Carroll, one of my collaborators, we actually simulated the galaxy and we simulated probes moving at sub light speed from one star to the other, gathering resources heading to the next one.
我们做了一个实际的模拟，我的团队，乔纳森·卡罗尔，我的合作者之一，我们实际上模拟了银河系，我们模拟了探测器以亚光速从一颗恒星移动到另一颗恒星，收集前往下一颗恒星的资源。
And so, we could actually track the expansion wave across the galaxy, have one IA biogenesis event, and then watch the whole galaxy get colonized or settled.
因此，我们实际上可以追踪整个星系的膨胀波，进行一次 IA 生物发生事件，然后观察整个星系被殖民或定居。
And it is absolutely true that wave crosses, Hart was right, Fermi was right, that wave crosses very quickly.
波的交叉是绝对正确的，哈特是对的，费米是对的，波的交叉速度非常快。
But civilizations don’t last forever, so one question is when did they visit?
但文明不会永远存在，所以一个问题是它们何时到来？
When did they come to Earth?
他们什么时候来到地球的？
So, if you give civilizations a finite lifetime, let them last 10,000, 100,000 years, what you find is you now have a steady state.
所以，如果你给文明一个有限的寿命，让它们持续一万年、十万年，你会发现你现在已经有了一个稳定的状态。
Civilizations are dying, they’re coming back, they’re traveling between the stars.
文明正在消亡，它们又回来了，它们在星际之间旅行。
What you find then is you can have big holes opened up.
然后你会发现你可以打开大洞。
You can have regions of space where there is nobody for millions of years.
你可以拥有数百万年无人居住的太空区域。
And so, if we’re living in one of those bubbles right now, then maybe we revisited but we revisited 100 million years ago.
因此，如果我们现在生活在其中一个泡沫中，那么也许我们会重访，但我们重访了一亿年前。
46:39 And there was a paper that Gavin Schmidt and I did that showed that if there was a civilization, whether it was dinosaurs or aliens that was here a 100 million years ago, there’s no way to tell, there’s no record left over, the fossil record is too sparse.
我和加文·施密特（Gavin Schmidt）写的一篇论文表明，是否存在文明，无论是一亿年前的恐龙还是外星人，都无法判断，没有留下任何记录，化石记录太稀疏了。
The only way maybe you could tell is by looking at the isotopic strata to see if there was anything reminiscent of an industrial civilization.
也许你能判断的唯一方法是通过观察同位素地层，看看是否有任何让人想起工业文明的东西。
But the idea that you’d be able to find iPhones or toppled buildings after 100 million years is there’s no way.
但一亿年后你还能找到 iPhone 或倒塌的建筑物的想法是不可能的。
So, if there was an alien camp here, an alien village, a small civilization, maybe even large civilizations?
那么，如果这里有一个外星人营地，一个外星人村庄，一个小文明，甚至可能是一个大文明呢？
Even a large civilization, even if it was-
即使是一个大型文明，即使它是——
100 million years ago?
一亿年前？
And it lasted 10,000 years, fossil record’s not going to have it.
它持续了一万年，化石记录不会有它。
47:20 Yeah, the fossil record is too sparse, most things don’t fossilize.
是的，化石记录太稀疏了，大多数东西都不会变成化石。
Yeah.
是的。
And 10,000 years is a blink in the eye of geological time.
而一万年对于地质时间来说只是一眨眼的功夫。
47:28 So, Gavin called this the Silurian Hypothesis after the Doctor who episode with the lizard creatures, the Silurians.
因此，加文根据与蜥蜴生物志留纪人的故事，将其称为志留纪假说。
And so, that paper got a lot of press, but it was an important idea, and this was really Gavin’s, I was just helping with the astrobiology.
所以，那篇论文得到了很多媒体的关注，但这是一个重要的想法，这确实是加文的，我只是在帮助天体生物学。
That to recognize that like, “Yeah, we could have been visited a long time ago there just would be no record.” Yeah, it’s mind-blowing.
认识到这一点，就像，“是的，我们可能很久以前就被拜访过，只是没有记录。”是的，这令人兴奋。
It’s really mind-blowing.
这真是令人兴奋。
Yeah.
是的。
And it’s also a good reminder that intelligent species have been here for a very short amount of time.
这也很好地提醒我们，智慧物种存在的时间很短。
Very short amount of time.
时间非常短。
48:05 Yeah.
是的。
This is not to say that there was, so I was on Joe Rogan for exactly this paper, and I had to always emphasize, we’re not saying there was a Silurian, but we’re just saying that if there was, that’s why I love Gavin’s question.
这并不是说有，所以我在乔·罗根的这篇论文中，我必须总是强调，我们并不是说有志留纪，但我们只是说如果有的话，这就是为什么我喜欢加文的问题。
Gavin’s question was just like, “How could you tell”?
加文的问题就像是“你怎么知道的”？
It was a very beautifully scientific question.
这是一个非常美妙的科学问题。
That’s what we were really showing is that unless you did a very specific kind of search, which nobody’s done so far, there’s not an obvious way to tell that there could have been civilizations here earlier on.
这就是我们真正要展示的是，除非你进行了一种非常具体的搜索（到目前为止还没有人做过），否则没有一种明显的方法可以告诉你这里更早之前可能存在文明。
I’ve actually been reading a lot about ancient civilizations, and it just makes me sad how much of the wisdom of that time is lost and how much guessing is going on, whether it’s in South America, what happened in the jungle.
事实上，我读了很多有关古代文明的书，这让我感到悲伤，那个时代的智慧有多少消失了，有多少猜测正在进行，无论是在南美洲，还是在丛林中发生的事情。
Like the Amazon, that was the conquistadors came and wiped everybody out, and especially just even the plague may have decimated.
就像亚马逊河一样，征服者到来并消灭了所有人，尤其是连瘟疫也可能造成大量人员伤亡。
48:57 So yeah, how much of that civilization.
是的，这种文明有多少。
And there’s a lot of theories, and because of archaeology only looks at cities, they don’t really know the origins of humans.
有很多理论，而且由于考古学只关注城市，所以他们并不真正了解人类的起源。
Yeah.
是的。
And there’s a lot of really interesting theories, and there are of course controversial and there’s a lot of controversial people in every discipline, but archaeology is a fascinating one because we know so little.
有很多非常有趣的理论，当然也有争议，每个学科都有很多有争议的人，但考古学是一门令人着迷的学科，因为我们知之甚少。
49:19 They’re basically storytellers, you’re assembling the picture from just very few puzzle pieces, and it’s fascinating.
他们基本上是讲故事的人，你只需用很少的拼图拼凑出图片，这很有趣。
It’s humbling and it’s sad that there could be entire civilizations, ancient civilizations that are either almost entirely or entirely lost.
整个文明、古代文明要么几乎完全消失，要么完全消失，这令人感到羞愧和悲伤。
Yeah.
是的。
49:48 Well, the indigenous peoples of North America, there could have been millions and millions.
嗯，北美的土著人民，可能有数百万。
We get this idea that like, oh, the Europeans came and it was empty.
我们的想法是，哦，欧洲人来了，但它是空的。
But it may have only been empty because the plague gets swept up from what happened in Mesoamerica, and they didn’t really build cities.
但它可能只是空的，因为瘟疫被中美洲发生的事情席卷了，而且他们并没有真正建造城市。
They didn’t build wooden or stone cities, they built wooden cities.
他们没有建造木制或石头城市，他们建造的是木制城市。
Everybody seems to be building pyramids and they’re really damn good at it.
似乎每个人都在建造金字塔，而且他们真的非常擅长。
50:13 I don’t know-
我不知道-
What it is up with a pyramid.
金字塔是怎么回事。
50:17 Why does that apply?
为什么这适用？
What archetype in our brain is that?
我们大脑中的原型是什么？
And it is also really interesting, speaking of archetypes, is that independent civilizations formed and they had a lot of similar dynamics like human nature when it builds up hierarchies in a certain way, it builds up myths and religions in a certain way, it builds pyramids in a certain way.
说到原型，这也很有趣，独立的文明形成了，它们有很多类似的动力，就像人性一样，当它以某种方式建立等级制度时，它以某种方式建立神话和宗教，它以某种方式建造金字塔。
50:22 It goes to war, all this kind of stuff independently, which is fascinating.
战争是独立发生的，这很有趣。
Santa Fe Institute, the stuff the Santa Fe Institute does on these as complex systems, the origin of hierarchies and such.
圣达菲研究所，圣达菲研究所在复杂系统、等级制度的起源等方面所做的工作。
50:48 Very cool.
非常酷。
Yeah, Santa Fe folks, complexity in general is really cool.
是的，圣达菲的朋友们，总体来说复杂性真的很酷。
Really cool.
真的很酷。
What phenomena emerge when a bunch of small things get together and interact?
当一堆小东西聚集在一起相互作用时会出现什么现象？
51:00 Going back to this paper, a new empirical constraint on the prevalence of technological species in the universe.
回到这篇论文，对宇宙中技术物种的流行提出了一个新的经验约束。
This paper that expands on the Drake equation, what are some interesting things in this paper?
这篇论文对 Drake 方程进行了扩展，这篇论文中有哪些有趣的事情？
Well, so the main thing we were trying to do with this paper is say, “Look, we have all of this exoplanet data.” It’s got to be good for something, especially since two of the terms that have been nailed down empirically are two terms in the Drake equation.
好吧，所以我们在这篇论文中试图做的主要事情是说，“看，我们拥有所有这些系外行星数据。”它一定对某些事情有好处，特别是因为根据经验确定的两项是德雷克方程中的两项。
51:16 So, F sub P, that’s the second term, fraction of stars that have planets, and then N sub E, the average number of planets in the habitable zone.
所以，F sub P，这是第二项，拥有行星的恒星的比例，然后是 N sub E，宜居带中行星的平均数量。
Those are the second and third term in the Drake equation.
这是德雷克方程中的第二项和第三项。
So, what that means is all the astronomical terms have been nailed.
所以，这意味着所有的天文术语都已经确定了。
And so, we said, “Okay, how do we use this to do something with the Drake equation?”
所以，我们说，“好吧，我们如何用它来处理德雷克方程呢？”
51:46 And so, we realized is, “Well, okay, we got to get rid of time.” The lifetime thing, we can’t say anything about that, but if we don’t ask how long do they last but instead ask, “What’s the probability that there have been any civilizations at all?” No matter how long they lasted, I’m not asking whether they exist now or not, I’m just asking in general about probabilities to make a technological civilization anywhere and at any time in the history of the universe and that we were able to constrain.
所以，我们意识到，“好吧，我们必须摆脱时间。”关于有生之年的事情，我们对此无话可说，但如果我们不问它们能持续多久，而是问“曾经存在过文明的可能性有多大？”无论它们持续了多久，我不是在问它们现在是否存在，我只是在一般性地询问在宇宙历史上任何地方、任何时间建立技术文明的可能性，以及我们能够限制的可能性。
And so, what we found was basically that there have been 10 billion trillion habitable zone planets in the universe.
所以，我们发现，宇宙中基本上有100亿万亿颗宜居带行星。
And what that means is that those are 10 billion trillion experiments that have been run.
这意味着已经进行了 100 亿万亿次实验。
52:35 And the only way that we’re this whole process from a biogenesis to a civilization has occurred is if every one of those experiments failed.
而我们从生物起源到文明的整个过程发生的唯一途径就是这些实验中的每一个都失败。
So therefore, you could put a probability, we called it the pessimism line.
因此，你可以输入一个概率，我们称之为悲观线。
We don’t really know what nature sets for the probability of making intelligent civilizations, but we could set a limit using this.
我们真的不知道大自然为创造智能文明的可能性设定了什么，但我们可以利用它来设定一个限制。
We could say, “Look, if the probability per habitable zone planet is less than 10 to the minus 22, 1 in 10 billion trillion, then yeah, we’re alone.” If it’s anywhere larger than that, then we’re not the first, it’s happened somewhere else.
我们可以说，“看，如果每个宜居带行星的概率小于 10 的负 22，即 100 亿万亿分之一，那么是的，我们是孤独的。”如果它比这个大，那么我们不是第一个，它已经发生在其他地方。
And to me, that was mind-blowing.
对我来说，这令人兴奋。
It doesn’t tell me there’s anybody nearby, the galaxy could be sterile.
它并没有告诉我附近有人，银河系可能是贫瘠的。
53:17 It just told me that unless nature’s really has some bias against civilizations, we’re not the first time this has happened.
它只是告诉我，除非大自然真的对文明有一些偏见，否则我们并不是第一次发生这种情况。
This has happened elsewhere over the course of cosmic history.
在宇宙历史的过程中，这种情况在其他地方也发生过。
10 billion trillion experiments.
100亿万亿次实验。
Yeah, that’s a lot of experiments.
是的，这是很多实验。
That’s a lot.
就这么多了。
Right.
正确的。
1,000 is a lot.
1,000 已经很多了。
Yeah.
是的。
100 is a lot.
100 已经很多了。
Yeah.
是的。
If we, normal humans saw 100 experiments, and we knew that at least one time there was a successful human civilization built we would say for sure, in 100 you’ll get another one.
如果我们普通人看到了 100 次实验，并且知道至少有一次成功建立了人类文明，我们可以肯定地说，100 次之后你就会得到另一个。
Yeah.
是的。
53:55 So, that’s why these kinds of arguments you have to be careful of what they can do.
所以，这就是为什么你必须小心这些争论的后果。
But I felt like what this paper showed was that the burden of proof is now on the pessimists.
但我觉得这篇论文表明，举证责任现在落在了悲观主义者身上。
So, that’s why we called it the pessimism line.
所以，这就是为什么我们称之为悲观主义路线。
Throughout history, there’s been alien pessimists and alien optimists, and they’ve been yelling at each other, that’s all they had to go with.
纵观历史，有外星人的悲观主义者和外星人的乐观主义者，他们一直互相大喊大叫，这就是他们不得不忍受的一切。
And with Giordano Bruno in 1600, they burned the guy at the stake for being an alien optimist.
1600 年，佐丹奴·布鲁诺 (Giordano Bruno) 被他们烧死在火刑柱上，因为他是一个外星乐观主义者。
But nobody really knew what pessimism or optimism meant.
但没有人真正知道悲观主义或乐观主义意味着什么。
We thought this was like the plank length, this was the plank length of astrobiology.
我们认为这就像木板长度，这是天体生物学的木板长度。
54:27 Gave you an actual number that if you could somehow calculate what the probability of forming a technological civilization was, this thing shows you where the limit is.
给你一个实际的数字，如果你能以某种方式计算出形成科技文明的概率是多少，这个东西就会告诉你极限在哪里。
As long as you’re above 10 to the minus 22, then you actually absolutely, it has occurred in the history.
只要你在10的负22以上，那么你实际上绝对，它已经在历史上发生过。
Other civilizations have occurred in the history of the universe.
宇宙历史上曾出现过其他文明。
So, to me, at least, the big question is FE, which is basically a biogenesis.
所以，至少对我来说，最大的问题是有限元，它基本上是一个生物起源。
54:47 How hard is it for life to originate in a planet?
生命在行星上起源有多难？
Because all the other ones seem very likely, everything seems very likely.
因为所有其他的看起来都很有可能，所以一切看起来都很有可能。
The only open question to me is how hard is it for life to originate?
对我来说唯一悬而未决的问题是生命的起源有多难？
There’s lots of ways to, again, we don’t know unless we look, and you had Sarah Walker around not too long ago, she’s very interested in origins of life.
有很多方法，再说一次，除非我们看，否则我们不知道，不久前莎拉·沃克也在附近，她对生命的起源非常感兴趣。
55:03 So, lots of people are working on this.
所以，很多人都在做这方面的工作。
But I think it’s hard looking at the history of the Earth, and again, you can do Bayesian arguments on this.
但我认为回顾地球的历史是很困难的，而且，你可以对此进行贝叶斯论证。
But yeah, forming life I don’t think is hard.
但是，是的，我认为形成生命并不难。
Getting basic biology started, I don’t think is hard.
我认为开始基础生物学并不难。
It’s still wild, it’s an amazing process that actually I think requires some deep rethinking about how we conceptualize what life is and what life isn’t.
它仍然很疯狂，这是一个令人惊奇的过程，实际上我认为需要深入思考我们如何概念化什么是生活以及什么不是生活。
That’s one of the things I like about Sarah’s work, we’re pursuing on a different level about life as the only system that uses information.
这是我喜欢莎拉工作的原因之一，我们在不同的层面上追求生活作为唯一使用信息的系统。
But still, regardless of all those kinds of details, life is probably easy to make.
但尽管如此，不管这些细节如何，生活可能还是很容易创造的。
That’s my gut feeling.
这是我的直觉。
Day by day, this changes for me, but I just see that once you create bacteria, it is off to the races.
日复一日，这种情况对我来说发生了变化，但我只是看到，一旦创造了细菌，它就开始了。
55:55 You’re going to get complex life as long as you have enough time.
只要你有足够的时间，你就会过上复杂的生活。
That boring billion, but I just can’t imagine a habitable planet not having a couple of billion to spare.
那无聊的十亿美元，但我无法想象一个宜居星球没有几十亿美元的闲置资金。
Yeah, a couple billion years to spare.
是的，还有几十亿年的时间。
56:15 There is a mystery there about why did it take so long with the Cambrian explosion, but that may be again, about these windows.
关于为什么寒武纪大爆发花了这么长时间，这是一个谜，但对于这些窗户来说，这可能又是一个谜。
That it couldn’t happen until the window, the planet and the life had evolved together enough that they together opened the window for the next step.
直到窗户、行星和生命共同进化到足以共同为下一步打开窗户时，这一切才会发生。
Intelligent life and how long intelligent, technological civilizations, I think there’s a big question about how long those last.
智能生命以及智能技术文明能持续多久，我认为存在一个很大的问题，那就是它们能持续多久。
And I’m hopeful, but in terms of just, I think life is absolutely going to be common, pretty common in the universe.
我充满希望，但就我而言，我认为生命绝对会在宇宙中变得普遍，相当普遍。
Yeah.
是的。
56:52 I think, again, if I were to bet everything, even in advanced civilizations are common.
我想，如果我赌一切，即使在先进文明中也是很常见的。
So, to me then the only explanation is the L.
所以，对我来说唯一的解释就是L。
Our galaxy is a graveyard of civilizations.
我们的银河系是文明的墓地。
Yeah.
是的。
57:09 You think about it, we’ve only been around, truly when we think about in Drake’s definition, you had to have radio telescopes, that’s been 100 years.
你想一想，我们才真正存在，当我们考虑德雷克的定义时，你必须拥有射电望远镜，那已经有 100 年了。
And if we got another 10,000, 100,000 years of history, for us, it’d be pretty amazing.
如果我们能再拥有一万年、十万年的历史，对我们来说，那就太神奇了。
But that still, that wouldn’t be long enough to really pop up the number of civilizations in the galaxy.
但这仍然不够长，不足以真正统计出银河系中文明的数量。
So, you really need it to be hundreds of millions of years.
所以，你确实需要数亿年。
And that raises a question, which I am very interested in, which is how do we even talk about, I call it the billion-year civilization.
这就提出了一个我非常感兴趣的问题，那就是我们如何谈论，我称之为十亿年文明。
How do we even begin to hypothesize or think about in any kind of systematic way, what happens to a technological civilization across hundreds of millions to a billion years?
我们如何开始以任何系统的方式假设或思考，数亿到十亿年的技术文明会发生什么？
Yeah.
是的。
57:52 How do you even simulate the trajectories as civilizations can take across that kind of timescale?
您如何模拟文明可以跨越这种时间尺度的轨迹？
Yeah.
是的。
When all the data we have is just for the 10,000 years or so, 20,000 years that humans have been building civilizations.
当我们拥有的所有数据只是人类建立文明一万年左右、两万年的数据时。
Yeah.
是的。
And I don’t know what you put it at, but maybe 100 years that we’ve been technological?
我不知道你说的是什么，但也许我们科技化已经有 100 年了？
And we’re ready to blow ourselves to bits or drive ourselves off the planet.
我们已经准备好把自己炸成碎片，或者把自己赶出地球。
58:12 Yeah, no, it’s really interesting.
是的，不，这真的很有趣。
But there’s got to be a way that I think that’s really a frontier.
但我认为一定有一种方式确实是一个前沿。
So, you had David Kipping on not too long ago, and David and I did a paper and Caleb Scharf, David really drove this.
所以，不久前你邀请了大卫·基平（David Kipping），大卫和我做了一篇论文，凯莱布·沙夫（Caleb Scharf），大卫确实推动了这一点。
Where it was a Bayesian calculation to ask the question, “If you were to find a detection, if you were to find a signal or a techno signature, would that come from a civilization that was younger your age or older?” And you could see, this is not hard to do, but it was great.
这是贝叶斯计算提出的问题，“如果你要找到一个探测，如果你要找到一个信号或技术签名，它会来自比你年龄更小的文明还是比你年龄更大的文明？”你可以看到，这并不难做到，但非常棒。
The formalism, the formalism was hard.
形式主义，形式主义很难。
It’s intuitive, but the formalism was hard to show that, yeah, they’re older, probably much older.
这是直观的，但形式主义很难表明，是的，他们更老，可能更老。
58:49 So, that means you really do need to think about like, “Okay, how do billion-year civilizations manifest themselves?
所以，这意味着你确实需要思考，“好吧，十亿年的文明如何表现自己？
What signatures will they leave?” And yeah, what’s so cool about it, it’s so much fun because you have to imagine the unimaginable.
他们会留下什么签名？”是的，它有什么酷的，它是如此有趣，因为你必须想象难以想象的事情。
Obviously biological evolution can happen on those kinds of timescales, so you wouldn’t even really be the same thing you started out as.
显然，生物进化可以在这样的时间尺度上发生，所以你甚至不会真正成为你开始时的样子。
But social forms, what kind of social forms can you imagine that would be continuous over that?
但是社会形式，你能想象什么样的社会形式能够持续下去？
Or maybe they wouldn’t be continuous, should get they drop out, they destroy themselves, and then they come back.
或者也许他们不会持续下去，应该让他们退出，他们毁掉自己，然后再回来。
So, maybe it’s a punctuated evolution, but this is the fun part we have to work this out.
所以，也许这是一个间断的演变，但这是我们必须解决这个问题的有趣部分。
Well, one way to approach that question is what are the different ways to achieve homeostasis is you get greater and greater technological innovation.
好吧，解决这个问题的一种方法是，实现体内平衡的不同方法是获得越来越大的技术创新。
59:31 So, if you expand out into the universe and you have up to Kardashev scale, what are the ways you can avoid destroying yourself?
那么，如果你扩展到宇宙并且达到卡尔达肖夫尺度，你可以采取什么方法来避免毁灭自己呢？
Just achieve stability while still growing.
只要在保持增长的同时实现稳定即可。
That’s an interesting question, I think it’s probably simulatable?
这是一个有趣的问题，我认为它可能是可以模拟的？
Could be, agent-based modeling you could do it with.
可能是，您可以使用基于代理的建模来做到这一点。
1:00:00 So, our group has used agent-based modeling to do something like the Fermi paradox that was agent-based modeling.
因此，我们的团队使用基于代理的建模来完成类似费米悖论的基于代理的建模。
But you can also do this.
但你也可以这样做。
People at Santa Fe have done this, other groups have done this to do use agent-based modeling to track the formation of hierarchies, the formation of stable hierarchies.
圣达菲的人们已经这样做了，其他小组也这样做了，使用基于代理的建模来跟踪层次结构的形成，稳定层次结构的形成。
So, I think it’s actually very doable, but understanding the assumptions and principles that are going into it and what you can extract from those, that is what is the frontier.
所以，我认为这实际上是非常可行的，但是理解其中的假设和原则以及你可以从中提取什么，这就是前沿。
Do you think if humans colonize Mars, the dynamic between the civilization on Earth and Mars will be fundamentally different than the dynamic between individual nations on Earth right now?
你认为如果人类殖民火星，地球和火星文明之间的动态会与目前地球上各个国家之间的动态有根本不同吗？
1:00:32 That’s a thing to load into the agent-based simulation we’re talking about.
这是要加载到我们正在讨论的基于代理的模拟中的东西。
Yeah.
是的。
1:00:50 If we settle it, Mars will very quickly want to become its own nation.
如果我们解决了这个问题，火星很快就会想要成为自己的国家。
Well, no, there’s already going to be nations on Mars that’s guaranteed-
好吧，不，火星上已经有国家了——
Yeah.
是的。
1:00:58 And they’re there on-
他们在那里——
2 million people.
200万人。
1:00:59 The moment you have 1 million people, there’s going to be two tribes.
当你有 100 万人口时，就会有两个部落。
Right.
正确的。
And then they’re going to start fighting.
然后他们就会开始战斗。
Right.
正确的。
And the question is, interplanetary fighting.
问题是，星际战斗。
1:01:06 How quickly does that happen and does it have a different nature to it because of the distances?
这种情况发生的速度有多快？由于距离的原因，它的性质是否有所不同？
Are you a fan of The Expanse?
您是《苍穹浩瀚》的粉丝吗？
1:01:14 Have you watched The Expanse?
你看过《无垠》吗？
Great show, I highly recommend to everybody.
很棒的表演，我强烈推荐给大家。
It’s based on a series of books that are excellent.
它基于一系列优秀的书籍。
It’s on Prime, six seasons, and it’s basically about the settled solar system.
它在 Prime 上播出，共六季，基本上是关于定居的太阳系。
It takes place about 300 years from now, and the entire solar system is settled, and it is the best show about interplanetary politics.
故事发生在大约300年后，整个太阳系尘埃落定，是关于星际政治的最佳表演。
The first season, actually, the journal, what was it?
第一季，实际上，日记，是什么？
Foreign Affairs said the best show on TV about politics it takes place is interplanetary.
《外交事务》称，有关政治的最佳电视节目是《星际》。
So yeah, I think human beings being human beings, yes, there will be warfare and there will be conflict.
所以，是的，我认为人类就是人类，是的，将会有战争，将会有冲突。
1:01:49 And I don’t think it’ll be necessarily all that different because really I think within a few hundred years we will have lots of people in the solar system, and it doesn’t even have to be on Mars.
我认为这不一定会有所不同，因为我真的认为在几百年内我们将在太阳系中有很多人，甚至不必在火星上。
We did a paper where we look based on, because I always wanted to know about whether an idea in The Expanse was really possible.
我们写了一篇论文，我们以此为基础进行研究，因为我一直想知道《苍穹浩瀚》中的想法是否真的可行。
In The Expanse, the asteroid belt, what they’ve done is they have colonized the asteroid belt by hollowing out the asteroids and spinning them up and living on the inside because they have the Coriolis force.
在无垠的小行星带中，他们所做的就是通过挖空小行星并将它们旋转并居住在小行星带内部来殖民小行星带，因为它们具有科里奥利力。
And I thought like, “Wow, what a cool idea.”
我想，“哇，多酷的主意啊。”
1:02:17 And when I ran the blog for NPR, actually talked to the guys and said, “Did you guys calculate this to see whether it’s possible?” Sadly, it’s not possible.
当我为 NPR 运营博客时，实际上与这些人交谈并说：“你们计算过这个，看看这是否可能吗？”遗憾的是，这是不可能的。
The rock is just not strong enough that if you tried to spin it up to the speeds you need to get one third gravity, which is what I think the minimum you need for human beings.
岩石的强度不够，如果你试图将其旋转到需要获得三分之一重力的速度，我认为这是人类所需的最低重力。
The rock would just fall apart, it would break.
岩石就会四分五裂，就会破碎。
But we came up with another idea, which was that if you could take small asteroids, put a giant bag around them, a nanofiber bag and spin those up, it would inflate the bag.
但我们提出了另一个想法，那就是如果你可以拿走小行星，在它们周围放一个巨大的袋子，一个纳米纤维袋，然后旋转它们，它就会使袋子膨胀。
And then even a small couple of kilometer wide asteroid would expand out to, you could get a Manhattan’s worth of material inside.
然后，即使是几公里宽的小行星也会膨胀到，你可以在里面得到相当于曼哈顿的物质。
1:02:54 So, forget about even colonizing Mars space stations or space habitats with millions of people in them.
因此，甚至忘记殖民火星空间站或居住着数百万人的太空栖息地。
So anyway, the point is that I think within a few hundred years, it is not unimaginable that there will be millions, if not billions of people living in the solar system.
所以无论如何，我认为在几百年内，太阳系中将有数百万甚至数十亿人生活，这并非不可想象。
You think most of them will be in space habitats versus on Mars on the planetary surface?
你认为它们中的大多数将在太空栖息地而不是在火星的行星表面？
It’s a lot easier on some level.
在某种程度上，这要容易得多。
1:03:16 It depends on how with nanofabrication and such, but getting down to gravity well is hard.
这取决于纳米加工等如何进行，但要很好地理解重力是很困难的。
So, there’s a certain way in which it’s a lot easier to build real estate out of the asteroids, but we’ll probably do both.
所以，有某种方式可以更容易地在小行星上建造房地产，但我们可能会两者兼而有之。
I think what’ll happen is the next, should we make it through climate change and nuclear war and all the other, and AI?
我认为接下来会发生的事情是，我们是否应该度过气候变化、核战争和所有其他问题，以及人工智能？
The next 1,000 years of human history is the solar system.
人类历史的下一个1000年是太阳系。
And so, I think we’ll settle every nook and cranny we possibly can, and what I love about, what’s hopeful about it is this idea you’re going to have all of these pockets, and I’m sure there’s going to be a Mormon space habitat.
所以，我想我们会尽可能解决每一个角落和缝隙，我喜欢的、充满希望的就是你将拥有所有这些口袋，而且我确信将会有一个摩门教太空栖息地。
1:03:57 Whatever you want, a libertarian space habitat, everybody’s going to be able to create, there’ll be lots of experiments in human flourishing.
无论你想要什么，一个自由主义的太空栖息地，每个人都能够创造，将会有很多关于人类繁荣的实验。
And those kinds of experiments will be really useful for us to figure out better ways for us to interact and have maximum flourishing, maximum wellness, maximum democracy, maximum freedom.
这些实验对我们来说非常有用，可以帮助我们找到更好的互动方式，并获得最大程度的繁荣、最大程度的健康、最大程度的民主和最大程度的自由。
Do you think that’s a good backup solution to go out into space, so to avoid the possibility of humans destroying themselves completely here on Earth?
你认为这是进入太空的一个很好的备份解决方案，以避免人类在地球上彻底毁灭自己的可能性吗？
Well, I think I want to be always careful with that, because like I said, it’s centuries that we’re talking about.
好吧，我想我要对此始终保持谨慎，因为就像我说的，我们正在谈论几个世纪。
1:04:24 So, the problem with climate change, and same thing with nuclear war, it’s breathing down our necks now.
因此，气候变化问题以及核战争问题现在正困扰着我们。
So, trying to establish a base on Mars it’s going to be so hard that it is not even going to be close to being self-sufficient for a couple a century at least.
因此，试图在火星上建立基地将会非常困难，以至于至少在几个世纪内都无法实现自给自足。
So, it’s not like a backup plan now, we have to solve the problem of climate change, we have to deal with that.
所以，这不像是现在的后备计划，我们必须解决气候变化问题，我们必须应对它。
There’s still enough nuclear weapons to really do horrific things to the planet for human beings.
仍然有足够的核武器对地球上的人类造成可怕的影响。
1:04:59 So, I don’t think it’s a backup plan in that way, but I do think, like I said, it’s the prize.
所以，我不认为这是一个备用计划，但我确实认为，就像我说的，这是奖品。
If we get through this, then we get the entire solar system to play around and experiment with and do really cool things with.
如果我们能解决这个问题，那么我们就可以在整个太阳系中进行探索和实验，并做一些非常酷的事情。
Well, I think it could be a lot less than a couple of centuries if there’s a urgency, a real urgency, like a catastrophe.
好吧，我认为如果有紧急情况，真正的紧急情况，比如一场灾难，那可能会比几个世纪短得多。
1:05:11 Maybe a small nuclear war breaks out where it’s like, holy shit, this is for sure a bigger one is looming.
也许会爆发一场小型核战争，天哪，一场更大的核战争肯定即将来临。
Maybe if geopolitically the war between China and the United States escalates where there’s this tension that builds and builds and builds and it becomes more obvious that we need to really, really [inaudible 01:05:39].
也许，如果从地缘政治角度来看，中美之间的战争升级，紧张局势不断加剧，那么我们确实需要这样做，这一点变得更加明显[听不清 01:05:39]。
Yeah.
是的。
1:05:39 I think my only dilemma with that is that I just think that a self-sufficient base is so far away.
我认为我唯一的困境是我认为自给自足的基地还很遥远。
That say you start doing that and then there is a full-scale nuclear exchange that base is, it’s not going to last because the self-sufficiency requires a kind of economy.
也就是说，你开始这样做，然后就会有一个全面的核交换基地，它不会持续下去，因为自给自足需要一种经济。
Literally a material economy that we are so far from with Mars that we are centuries from.
从字面上看，我们与火星的物质经济相距数百年之遥。
Like I said, three centuries, which is not that long, two to three centuries.
就像我说的，三个世纪，其实并没有那么长，两到三个世纪。
Look at 1820, nobody had traveled faster than 60 miles an hour unless they were falling off a cliff.
看看 1820 年，没有人能以超过每小时 60 英里的速度行驶，除非他们从悬崖上掉下来。
And now we routinely travel at 500 miles an hour, but it is centuries long.
现在我们通常以每小时 500 英里的速度行驶，但这已经有几个世纪了。
1:06:17 So, that’s why I think we’d be better off trying to solve these problems than I just think the odds that we’re going to be able to create a self-sufficient colony on Mars before that threat comes to head is small.
所以，这就是为什么我认为我们最好尝试解决这些问题，而不是我认为在威胁到来之前我们能够在火星上建立一个自给自足的殖民地的可能性很小。
So, we’d have to deal with the threat.
因此，我们必须应对威胁。
That’s an interesting scientific and engineering question of how to create a self-sufficient colony on Mars or out in space as a space habitat where Earth entirely could be destroyed, you could still survive.
这是一个有趣的科学和工程问题，即如何在火星或太空中创建一个自给自足的殖民地作为太空栖息地，在那里地球可能被完全摧毁，但你仍然可以生存。
Yeah.
是的。
1:06:47 Because it’s really what about, thinking about complex systems?
因为这实际上是关于复杂系统的思考？
A space habitat would have to be as robust as an ecosystem.
太空栖息地必须像生态系统一样强大。
As the kind of thing, you go out and you see a pond with all the different webs of interactions.
作为一种事情，你走出去，你会看到一个池塘，里面有各种不同的相互作用网络。
That’s why I always think that if this process of going out into space will help us with climate change and with thinking about making a long-term sustainable version of human civilization.
这就是为什么我一直认为，进入太空的过程是否有助于我们应对气候变化，并思考建立一个长期可持续的人类文明版本。
Because you really have to think about these webs, the complexity of these webs and recognize the biosphere has been doing this forever.
因为你真的必须考虑这些网，这些网的复杂性，并认识到生物圈一直在这样做。
The biosphere knows how to do this.
生物圈知道如何做到这一点。
1:07:23 And so, A, how do we build a vibrant, powerful technosphere that also doesn’t mess with the biosphere, mess with the biosphere’s capacity to support our technosphere?
那么，A，我们如何建立一个充满活力、强大的技术圈，同时又不会扰乱生物圈，扰乱生物圈支持我们技术圈的能力？
So, by trying to build space habitats, in some sense, you’re thinking about building a small-scale version of this.
因此，从某种意义上说，通过尝试建造太空栖息地，你正在考虑建造一个小型版本。
So, I think the two problems are going to feedback on each other.
所以，我认为这两个问题将会相互反馈。
Well, there’s also the other possibility of the movie Darren Aronofsky’s Postcard from Earth, where we can create this life gun that just shoots as opposed to engineering everything.
好吧，电影达伦·阿罗诺夫斯基的《来自地球的明信片》还有另一种可能性，我们可以创造出这把生命之枪，它只会射击，而不是设计一切。
1:07:44 Basically, seeding life on a bunch of places and letting life do its thing, which is really good at doing it seems like.
基本上，在很多地方播种生命，让生命做它自己的事，这看起来真的很擅长。
So, as opposed to with a space habitat, you basically have to build the entire biosphere and technosphere, the whole thing-
因此，与太空栖息地相反，你基本上必须建造整个生物圈和技术圈，整个事情 -
The whole thing.
整个事情。
…
……
1:08:13 by yourself.
靠你自己。
If you just, hey, the aforementioned cockroach with some bacteria, place it in Europa, I think you’d be surprised what happens.
如果你只是，嘿，前面提到的带有一些细菌的蟑螂，把它放在木卫二上，我想你会对发生的事情感到惊讶。
Yeah.
是的。
Honestly, if you put a huge amount of bacteria, a giant number of organisms from Earth into on Mars, on some of these moons of the other planets in the solar system, I feel like some of them would actually find a way to survive.
老实说，如果你把大量的细菌、大量来自地球的生物体放入火星、太阳系其他行星的一些卫星上，我觉得其中一些实际上会找到生存的方法。
The moon is hard, the moon may be really hard.
月亮很硬，月亮可能真的很硬。
1:08:45 But I wonder if somebody must’ve done these experiments.
但我想知道是否一定有人做过这些实验。
Because we know they’re extremophiles, we know that you can go down 10 miles below the Earth’s surface.
因为我们知道它们是极端微生物，所以我们知道您可以潜入地球表面以下 10 英里的地方。
And there are things where there’s no sunlight, the conditions are so extreme and there’s lots of microbes having a great time living off the radioactivity in the rocks.
有些地方没有阳光，条件非常极端，有很多微生物靠岩石中的放射性生存。
But they had lots of time to evolve to those conditions, so I’m not sure if you dumped a bunch of bacteria, so somebody must’ve done these experiments.
但它们有很多时间进化到这些条件，所以我不确定你是否丢弃了一堆细菌，所以一定有人做过这些实验。
How fast could microbial evolution occur in under harsh conditions that you maybe get somebody who figures out, ” Okay, I can deal with this.”
在恶劣的条件下，微生物的进化速度有多快，你可能会发现，“好吧，我可以处理这个问题。”
1:09:30 I think the Moon’s too much because it’s so sterile.
我认为月球太多了，因为它太贫瘠了。
But Mars, I don’t know, maybe.
但火星，我不知道，也许吧。
I don’t know, but it’s an interesting idea.
我不知道，但这是一个有趣的想法。
I wonder if somebody has done those experiments.
我想知道是否有人做过这些实验。
Yeah, you think somebody would, let’s take a bunch of microbes-
是的，你认为有人会，让我们拿一堆微生物——
The harshest possible condition of all different kinds, temperature, all this kind of stuff.
所有不同类型的最恶劣的条件，温度，所有这些东西。
Right, pressure, salinity, and then just dump a bunch of things that are not used to it, and then just see, does everybody just die?
对啊，压力啊，盐度啊，然后就扔一堆不习惯的东西，然后你看看，是不是人都死了？
1:09:46 That’s it.
就是这样。
The thing about life, it flourishes in a non-sterile environment where there’s a bunch of options for resources, even if the condition is super harsh-
关于生命的事情，它在一个非无菌的环境中蓬勃发展，那里有很多资源可供选择，即使条件非常恶劣——
1:10:03 …
……
Options for resources, even if the condition is super harsh.
资源的选择，即使条件超级恶劣。
In the lab, I don’t know if you can reconstruct harsh conditions plus options for survival.
在实验室里，我不知道你是否可以重建恶劣的条件以及生存的选择。
You know what I mean?
你知道我的意思？
You have to have the huge variety of resources that are always available on a planet somehow, even when it’s a super harsh condition.
你必须以某种方式拥有星球上始终可用的各种各样的资源，即使是在极其恶劣的条件下。
So that’s actually not a trivial experiment and if somebody did that experiment in the lab, I’d be a little bit skeptical because I could see bacteria doesn’t survive in this kind of temperature.
所以这实际上不是一个微不足道的实验，如果有人在实验室里做了这个实验，我会有点怀疑，因为我可以看到细菌在这种温度下无法生存。
But then I’d be like, “I don’t know.
但后来我会说：“我不知道。
I don’t know.”
我不知道。”
Right.
正确的。
1:10:38 Are there other options?
还有其他选择吗？
Is the condition rich enough?
条件够丰富吗？
Rich enough, yeah.
够有钱了吧
There’s an alternative view though, which is, there’s this great book by Kim Stanley Robinson called Aurora.
不过，还有另一种观点，那就是金·斯坦利·罗宾逊（Kim Stanley Robinson）写了一本很棒的书，名叫《极光》（Aurora）。
1:10:42 So there’s been 1,000,000 sentry ship stories where Earth sends out a generation ship or sentry ship, and it goes to another planet and they land and they colonize.
因此，有 1,000,000 个哨兵船的故事，地球派出一艘代船或哨兵船，它前往另一个星球，然后登陆并殖民。
And on this one, they get all the way there and they think the planet’s going to be habitable.
在这颗行星上，他们一路走到了那里，他们认为这个星球将适合居住。
And it turns out that it’s not habitable for earth life.
事实证明，这里不适合地球生命居住。
There’s bacteria or prions actually, that just kill people in the simplest way.
实际上有细菌或朊病毒，它们以最简单的方式杀死人。
And the important thing about this book was the idea that life is actually very tied to its planet.
这本书的重要一点是生命实际上与其星球紧密相连。
It may not be so easy.
这可能没那么容易。
I just thought it was a really interesting idea.
我只是觉得这是一个非常有趣的想法。
I’m not saying necessarily supporting it, but that actually, life reflects the planetary conditions…
我并不是说一定支持它，但实际上，生命反映了行星的状况……
Not the planetary, the planet itself, the whole lineage, the whole history of the biosphere.
不是行星，而是行星本身，整个谱系，生物圈的整个历史。
And it may not be so easy to just be like, “Oh, just drop it over here and it’ll…”
可能并不那么容易，“哦，只要把它扔到这里，它就会……”
1:11:35 Because the bacteria, even though they’re individual examples of life, and I believe this the true unit of life, it’s not DNA, it’s not a cell, it’s the biosphere.
因为细菌，尽管它们是生命的个体例子，而且我相信这是生命的真正单位，它不是DNA，不是细胞，而是生物圈。
It’s the whole community.
这是整个社区。
Yeah.
是的。
1:11:46 That’s actually an interesting field of study is how when you arrive from one planet to another…
这实际上是一个有趣的研究领域，当你从一个星球到达另一个星球时......
So we humans arrive to a planet that has a biosphere, maybe a technosphere, what is the way to integrate without killing yourself or-
所以我们人类到达了一个有生物圈，也许是技术圈的星球，有什么方法可以在不自杀的情况下融入世界，或者——
Or the other one?
还是另外一个？
Or the other one?
还是另外一个？
1:12:06 Let’s stick to biology.
让我们坚持生物学。
That’s an interesting question.
这是一个有趣的问题。
I don’t know if we have a rigorous way of investigating that.
我不知道我们是否有严格的方法来调查这一点。
Because everything on life has the same lineage.
因为生命中的一切事物都有相同的血统。
1:12:18 We all come from LUCA, the last universal common ancestor.
我们都来自卢卡，最后一个普遍的共同祖先。
And what you see is often in science fiction, people will do things like, “Oh, well, it’s okay,” because that metabolism, that biochemistry is so different from ours that we can coexist because they don’t even know each other.
你经常在科幻小说中看到，人们会做这样的事情，“哦，好吧，没关系”，因为新陈代谢、生物化学与我们的非常不同，我们可以共存，因为他们甚至彼此不认识。
Right.
正确的。
And then the other version is you get there, you land, and instantly, the nose bleeds and you’re dead.
然后另一个版本是你到达那里，着陆，然后立即流鼻血，你就死了。
1:12:37 So it’s-
所以这是——
Unfortunately, I think it’s the latter.
不幸的是，我认为是后者。
Yeah, it feels like the alien kind of thing.
是啊，感觉就像外星人一样。
So as we look out there, according to the Drake equations we just discussed, it seems impossible to me that there’s not civilizations everywhere.
因此，当我们观察到那里时，根据我们刚刚讨论的德雷克方程，对我来说，不可能到处都没有文明。
1:12:48 So how do we look at them, this process of SETI?
那么我们如何看待他们，SETI的这个过程呢？
I have to put on my scientist hat and just say, my gut feeling is that dumb life, so to speak, is common.
我必须戴上科学家的帽子，然后说，我的直觉是，可以说，愚蠢的生活很常见。
1:12:59 I can see ways in which intelligent civilizations may be sparse, but until…
我可以看到智能文明可能稀疏的方式，但直到……
We got to go look, it’s all armchair astronomy.
我们得去看看，这都是纸上谈兵的天文学。
That’s from a rigorous scientific perspective.
这是从严格的科学角度来看的。
1:13:15 From my bro science perspective, it seems, again, smoking the aforementioned weed-
从我兄弟的科学角度来看，似乎又吸了前面提到的杂草——
Smoking the weed, yeah.
抽大麻，是的。
1:13:24 After the bong hit, it seems so.
烟枪敲响后，似乎是这样。
Honestly, it really just seems impossible to me that there’s not potentially dead, but advanced civilizations everywhere in our galaxy.
老实说，在我看来，我们银河系中到处都有先进的文明，而且没有可能死亡，这对我来说确实是不可能的。
Yeah, yeah.
是啊是啊。
1:13:37 The potentially dead part, I think, right.
我想，潜在死亡的部分是对的。
It could be that making civilizations is easy, they just don’t last long.
也许创造文明很容易，但它们不会持续太久。
So when we went out there, we’d find a lot of extinct civilizations.
所以当我们去那里时，我们会发现很多灭绝的文明。
Extinct civilizations.
灭绝的文明。
1:13:45 Yeah.
是的。
Apex predators don’t survive.
顶级掠食者无法生存。
They get better, better, better.
他们变得更好、更好、更好。
Right.
正确的。
And they die, kill themselves all somehow.
他们死了，以某种方式自杀了。
1:13:51 Anyway.
反正。
So just how do we find them?
那么我们如何找到它们呢？
Yeah.
是的。
1:13:56 So SETI, Search for Extraterrestrial Technology is a term that I am not fond of using anymore.
所以SETI，寻找外星技术是我不再喜欢使用的一个术语。
Some people in my field are.
我所在领域的一些人是。
So I’m sorry folks, but what I really like is the idea of technosignatures because I think to me, SETI is the…
所以我很抱歉各位，但我真正喜欢的是技术签名的想法，因为我认为对我来说，SETI 是……
First of all, intelligence.
首先，智力。
We’re not really looking for intelligence.
我们并不是真的在寻找情报。
We’re looking for technology, and SETI, the classic idea of SETI is the radio telescopes and contact, Jodie Foster with the headphones.
我们正在寻找技术，而 SETI，SETI 的经典理念是射电望远镜和联系人，朱迪·福斯特带着耳机。
That whole thing is still part, it’s still active, there’s still great things going on with it, but suddenly, this whole new window opened up.
整个事情仍然是一部分，它仍然活跃，仍然有伟大的事情发生，但突然间，这个全新的窗口打开了。
When we discovered exoplanets, we now found a new way to look for intelligence civilizations or life in general in a way that doesn’t have any of the assumptions that had to go into the classic radio SETI.
当我们发现系外行星时，我们现在找到了一种新的方法来寻找智慧文明或一般生命，而无需任何经典无线电 SETI 中的假设。
And specifically, what I mean is we’re not looking for somebody sending us a beacon.
具体来说，我的意思是我们并不是在寻找向我们发送信标的人。
You really needed that with a classic model, for a bunch of different reasons.
出于多种不同的原因，你确实需要一个经典模型。
You have to assume they wanted to be found and they were sending you a super powerful beacon.
你必须假设他们想要被发现，并且他们正在向你发送一个超级强大的信标。
1:14:56 Now, because we know exactly where to look and we know exactly how to look, we can just go about looking for passive signatures of the civilization, going about its civilizationing business, without asking whether they want to be contacted or not.
现在，因为我们确切地知道在哪里寻找，我们确切地知道如何寻找，所以我们可以继续寻找文明的被动签名，开展其文明事业，而无需询问他们是否愿意与我们联系。
So this is what we call a biosignature or a technosignature.
这就是我们所说的生物特征或技术特征。
It is an imprint in the light from the planet of the activity of a biosphere or a technosphere, and that’s really important.
它是地球上生物圈或技术圈活动的印记，这非常重要。
That is why the whole Gaia idea ends up being astrobiological, that biospheres and technospheres are so potent, they change the entire planet, and you can see that from 20 light years.
这就是为什么整个盖亚的想法最终都是天体生物学的，生物圈和技术圈是如此强大，它们改变了整个地球，你可以从 20 光年之外看到这一点。
1:15:36 So let’s give an example of a biosignature to start off with, which would be a signature of a biosphere, oxygen.
因此，让我们首先举一个生物特征的例子，它是生物圈的特征，即氧气。
Right?
正确的？
On earth at least, we know that oxygen is only in the atmosphere because life put it there.
至少在地球上，我们知道氧气只存在于大气中，因为生命将它放在那里。
If life went away, the oxygen, and particularly oxygen and methane, that pair, they would disappear very quickly.
如果生命消失，氧气，特别是氧气和甲烷，它们会很快消失。
They’d react away.
他们会做出反应。
They’d all be gone.
他们都会消失。
So if you find a planet with oxygen and methane, that’s a good bet that there’s a biosphere there.
因此，如果你发现一颗含有氧气和甲烷的行星，那么很有可能那里存在生物圈。
Okay, what about technospheres?
好吧，那么技术圈呢？
Technospheres, so I’m the principal investigator on the first grant NASA has ever given to do these exoplanet technosignatures.
技术圈，所以我是美国宇航局为进行这些系外行星技术签名而提供的第一笔拨款的首席研究员。
For reasons we can talk about, NASA had gotten pretty gun-shy about funding anything about intelligent life, but okay.
由于我们可以谈论的原因，美国宇航局对资助任何有关智能生命的事情都非常犹豫，但是没关系。
What’s an example of a technosignature?
技术签名的示例是什么？
Well, one could be atmospheric, “Pollution.” I’m going to put, “Pollution,” in quotes here because it doesn’t have to be pollution, but gases like chlorofluorocarbons.
好吧，其中一个可能是大气，“污染”。我要在这里把“污染”加上引号，因为它不一定是污染，而是像氯氟烃这样的气体。
1:16:33 So we dumped a huge amount of chlorofluorocarbons into the atmosphere by mistake.
所以我们错误地将大量的氯氟烃倾倒到大气中。
It was affecting the ozone, but we put so much in there that actually, this is one of the things we did, we did a paper where we showed, you could detect it across interstellar distances.
它正在影响臭氧，但我们在那里放了太多东西，实际上，这是我们所做的事情之一，我们做了一篇论文，其中我们展示了，你可以跨越星际距离检测到它。
You could look at the atmosphere, look at the light coming from a distant planet, pass the light through a spectrograph and see the spectral lines, the fingerprint, the spectral fingerprint of chlorofluorocarbons in an atmosphere.
你可以观察大气层，观察来自遥远行星的光，让光穿过光谱仪，然后看到大气中氯氟烃的光谱线、指纹、光谱指纹。
And that would for sure tell you that there was a technological civilization there, because there’s no other way to make chlorofluorocarbons except through some kind of industrial process.
这肯定会告诉你那里有一个技术文明，因为除了通过某种工业过程之外，没有其他方法可以制造氯氟烃。
So in the case of the biosphere, you’re looking for anomalies in the spectrograph?
那么就生物圈而言，您正在寻找光谱仪中的异常情况吗？
I wouldn’t necessarily call these anomalies.
我不一定称这些为异常。
1:17:17 For biosignature, I’m looking for things that a geosphere, right?
对于生物特征，我正在寻找地质圈的东西，对吗？
That just rock and air wouldn’t produce on its own.
仅仅岩石和空气是不会自行产生的。
What kind of chemicals would life produce?
生命会产生什么样的化学物质？
Right.
正确的。
1:17:29 And that’s the interesting thing.
这就是有趣的事情。
So we can use earth as an example.
所以我们可以用地球来举例。
We can say, look, oxygen.
我们可以说，看，氧气。
We know there would be no oxygen in the atmosphere if it wasn’t for dimethyl sulfide, which is a compound that phylloplankton dump into the atmosphere, a lot of it, that’s sometimes mentioned.
我们知道，如果没有二甲硫醚，大气中就不会有氧气，二甲硫醚是浮游生物倾倒到大气中的一种化合物，有时会提到，其中有很多。
And there was a paper that somebody wrote where it was like, “Well, we’re not saying we see it, but there’s a bunch of noise in the spectra right there.” So there’s a whole list of things that earth has done that are in the atmosphere that might be biosignatures, but now we’re reaching an interesting point.
有人写了一篇论文，其中写道：“好吧，我们并不是说我们看到了它，但光谱中存在一堆噪音。”因此，地球在大气中所做的事情有一整套可能是生物特征的清单，但现在我们到达了一个有趣的点。
The field has matured to the point where we can start asking about agnostic biosignatures, things that have nothing to do with earth’s history, but we think that would still be indications of this weirdness we call life.
这个领域已经成熟到我们可以开始询问不可知论的生物特征，那些与地球历史无关的东西，但我们认为这仍然是我们称之为生命的奇怪现象的迹象。
What is it in general that life does that leaves an imprint?
一般来说，生活留下的印记是什么？
1:18:20 So one of these things could be the structure of the network of chemical reactions that biology always produces very different chemical networks, who’s reacting with who, than just rock and water.
因此，其中之一可能是化学反应网络的结构，生物学总是产生非常不同的化学网络，谁与谁发生反应，而不仅仅是岩石和水。
So there’s been some proposals for networked biosignatures.
因此，有人提出了一些网络生物签名的建议。
Information theory, you can try and look at the information that is in the different compounds that you find in the atmosphere, and maybe that information shows you like, “Oh, there’s too much information here.
在信息论中，你可以尝试查看大气中不同化合物中的信息，也许这些信息会告诉你，“哦，这里的信息太多了。
There must’ve been biology happening.
一定有生物学发生。
It’s not just rock.” Same thing for techno.
这不仅仅是摇滚。”对于科技来说也是如此。
That’s what we’re working on right now, for technosignatures as well.
这就是我们现在正在努力的事情，对于技术签名也是如此。
So how do you detect technosignatures?
那么如何检测技术签名呢？
Okay.
好的。
1:19:01 So with technosignatures, I gave the example of chlorofluorocarbons.
因此，对于技术特征，我给出了氯氟烃的例子。
So that would be an example of, and again, that one is a non-agnostic one, because we sort of like, “Oh, we produced chlorofluorocarbons.
因此，这将是一个非不可知论的例子，因为我们有点喜欢，“哦，我们生产了氯氟烃。
Maybe they will.” And there’s solar panels.
也许他们会的。”还有太阳能电池板。
The glint off of solar panels will produce the way the light is reflected off of solar panels, no matter what it’s made out of actually.
太阳能电池板的闪烁会产生太阳能电池板反射光的方式，无论它实际上是由什么制成的。
There was a paper that Manasvi Lingam and Avi Loeb did in…
Manasvi Lingam 和 Avi Loeb 发表了一篇论文……
I think it was 2017.
我认为那是2017年。
We’ve just followed up on it.
我们刚刚跟进此事。
That actually could act as a technosignature.
这实际上可以充当技术签名。
You’d be able to see in the reflected light this big jump that would occur because of…
你可以在反射光中看到这种大的跳跃，这是因为……
City lights, artificial illumination.
城市灯光，人工照明。
If there’s really large scale cities like Coruscant and Star Wars or Trantor in the foundation, those city lights would be detectable, the spectral imprint of those across 20, 30 light years.
如果地基中确实存在像科洛桑、星球大战或川陀这样的大型城市，那么这些城市的灯光将是可检测到的，即跨越 20、30 光年的光谱印记。
1:19:55 So our job in this grant is to develop the first ever library of technosignatures.
因此，我们在这笔赠款中的工作是开发第一个技术签名库。
Nobody’s really ever thought about this before.
以前没有人真正考虑过这个问题。
So we’re trying to come up with all the possible ideas for what a civilization might produce that could be visible across interstellar distances.
因此，我们正在努力想出所有可能的想法，说明文明可能会产生什么可以在星际距离之外看到的东西。
And are these good ones or are these ones going to be hard to detect or such?
这些是好的还是很难被发现之类的？
City lights.
城市灯光。
1:20:17 So if a planet is all lit up with artificial light across 20 to 30 light years, we can see it.
因此，如果一颗行星在 20 到 30 光年范围内全部被人造光照亮，我们就可以看到它。
Yeah.
是的。
1:20:25 If you looked at earth at night from a distance, looked at spectra and you had sensitive enough instruments, you’d be able to see all the sodium lights and the reflected light off of.
如果你在晚上从远处观察地球，观察光谱，并且你有足够灵敏的仪器，你就能够看到所有的钠灯和反射光。
They bounce off the ground, the light bounces off the ground.
它们从地面反弹，光从地面反弹。
So you’d convolve the sodium lamps with the reflected spectra from the ground.
因此，您可以将钠灯与地面反射光谱进行卷积。
And yeah, you’d be able to see that there’s city lights.
是的，你会看到城市的灯光。
Now, increase that by a factor of 1,000 if you had a trantor, and you’d be able to detect that across interstellar distances.
现在，如果你有一个 trantor，那么将其增加 1,000 倍，你就能够跨越星际距离检测到它。
Thomas Beatty did this work, who’s now working with us.
托马斯·比蒂做了这项工作，他现在和我们一起工作。
What do you think is the most detectable thing about earth?
你认为地球上最容易被察觉的东西是什么？
Wow, this is fun.
哇，这很有趣。
1:21:01 We just have Sophia Sheikh, who’s part of our collaboration, just did a paper.
我们的合作伙伴索菲亚·谢赫 (Sophia Sheikh) 刚刚写了一篇论文。
We did earth from earth.
我们从地球做地球。
If you were looking at earth with earth technology for a bunch of different technosignatures, how close would you have to be to be able to detect them?
如果你用地球技术观察地球，寻找一堆不同的技术特征，你需要距离多近才能检测到它们？
And most of them turn out to be…
而他们中的大多数结果都是……
You’d have to be pretty close, at least out to the Oort cloud, but actually, it is our radio signatures still, that is still most detectable.
你必须非常接近，至少到奥尔特云，但实际上，我们的无线电信号仍然是最容易检测到的。
By the way, when you said you had to be pretty close and then you said the Oort cloud, that’s not very close.
顺便说一句，当你说你必须非常接近，然后你说奥尔特云时，那不是很接近。
1:21:23 But you mean from an interstellar perspective.
但你的意思是从星际角度来看。
Interstellar distance, because we really want to know is I’m sitting here on earth, I’m looking at these exoplanets, the nearest star is four light years away.
星际距离，因为我们真正想知道的是我坐在地球上，我正在看着这些系外行星，最近的恒星距离我们有四光年。
1:21:29 So that’s the minimum distance.
所以这就是最小距离。
So if I’m looking at exoplanets, what kind of signals could I see?
那么，如果我观察系外行星，我会看到什么样的信号？
What is detectable about earth with our current technology from our nearest solar system?
以我们目前的技术，从距离我们最近的太阳系可以探测到地球的什么？
Oh my God, there’s all kinds of stuff.
天哪，有各种各样的东西。
1:21:49 Well, like the chlorofluorocarbons, you can see earth’s pollution, and I think city lights, you had to be within the solar system.
嗯，就像氯氟烃一样，你可以看到地球的污染，我认为城市的灯光，你必须在太阳系内。
If they do direct imaging of earth-
如果他们对地球进行直接成像-
They’re going to need much more powerful, but let me tell you, let’s talk about direct imaging for a moment because I just have to go on, this is such a cool idea.
他们需要更强大的功能，但让我告诉你，让我们暂时谈谈直接成像，因为我必须继续，这是一个很酷的想法。
1:22:04 So what we really want, and the next generation of space telescopes and such is we’re trying to do direct imaging.
所以我们真正想要的是下一代太空望远镜等，我们正在尝试进行直接成像。
We’re trying to get an image of a planet separated from its star to be able to see the reflected light or the actual emission from the planet itself.
我们正在尝试获取一颗行星与其恒星分离的图像，以便能够看到反射光或行星本身的实际发射。
By the way, just to clarify, direct imaging means literally a picture?
顺便说一句，为了澄清一下，直接成像实际上意味着一张图片？
A picture, but the problem is that even with the thing that’s going to come after JWST, it’s going to be a pixel.
一张图片，但问题是，即使 JWST 之后出现的东西，它也将是一个像素。
1:22:29 You’re not going to get any kind of resolution.
你不会得到任何解决方案。
You’ll be able to get the light from it, which you’ll be able to pass through a spectrograph, but you’re not going to be able to take a picture.
你将能够从中获取光线，你将能够通过光谱仪，但你将无法拍照。
But there is this idea called the solar gravity lens telescope, I think that’s what it is.
但有一个想法叫做太阳引力透镜望远镜，我认为就是这样。
And the idea is insane.
这个想法太疯狂了。
So their general relativity says, “Look, massive bodies distort space.
所以他们的广义相对论说：“看，巨大的物体扭曲了空间。
They actually curve space-time.” So the sun is a massive body, and so that means that the light passing through the sun gets focused like a lens.
它们实际上弯曲了时空。”所以太阳是一个巨大的物体，这意味着穿过太阳的光会像透镜一样聚焦。
So the idea is to send a bunch of telescopes out into the Oort cloud, and then look back towards the sun towards an exoplanet that is behind…
所以我们的想法是将一堆望远镜发送到奥尔特云中，然后回头看太阳，看看后面的一颗系外行星......
Not directly behind the sun, but is in the direction of the sun.
不是在太阳的正后方，而是在太阳的方向。
1:23:16 And then let the sun act like a lens and collect, focus the light onto the telescope and you would be able to get, and they’ve done…
然后让太阳像透镜一样收集，将光线聚焦到望远镜上，你就能得到，他们已经做到了……
It’s amazing.
太棒了。
This idea is insane.
这个想法太疯狂了。
They’d be able to get, if everything works out, 24 kilometer resolution.
如果一切顺利的话，他们将能够获得 24 公里的分辨率。
You’d be able to see Manhattan on an exoplanet.
你将能够在系外行星上看到曼哈顿。
And this thing, it sounds insane, but actually, NASA, the team has already gotten through three levels of NASA…
而这件事，听起来很疯狂，但实际上，NASA，团队已经闯过了NASA的三个关卡……
There’s the NASA program for, “Give us your wackiest idea.” And then the ones that survive that are like, “Okay, tell us whether that wacky idea is even feasible?” And they’re marching along.
美国宇航局有一个计划，“给我们你最古怪的想法。”然后那些幸存下来的人会说，“好吧，告诉我们这个古怪的想法是否可行？”他们正在前进。
And the idea is that they even have plans for how you’d be able to get these probes out into the Oort cloud on relatively fast time scales.
他们的想法是，他们甚至制定了如何以相对较快的时间尺度将这些探测器送入奥尔特云的计划。
You need to be about 500 times as far from the sun as earth is, but right now, the idea seems to hold together.
你需要距离太阳的距离大约是地球距离太阳的 500 倍，但现在，这个想法似乎站得住脚。
1:24:10 So probably when I’ll be dead, but when you’re an old man, it’s possible that something like this…
所以可能当我死了的时候，但是当你是个老人的时候，可能会发生这样的事情……
Could you imagine having that kind of resolution, a picture of an exoplanet down to kilometers?
你能想象拥有这样的分辨率，一张低至千米的系外行星图片吗？
So I’m very excited about that [inaudible 01:24:26].
所以我对此感到非常兴奋 [听不清 01:24:26]。
I can only imagine having a picture like that, and then there’s some mysterious artifacts that you’re seeing.
我只能想象有一张这样的照片，然后你会看到一些神秘的文物。
Yeah.
是的。
It’s both inspiring and almost heartbreaking that we can see.
我们所看到的这既鼓舞人心又几乎令人心碎。
1:24:34 I think we would be able to see a civilization where there’s a lot of scientists agree that this is very likely something and then we can’t-
我认为我们将能够看到一个有很多科学家都同意这很可能发生的文明，但我们不能-
We can’t get there.
我们无法到达那里。
1:24:49 But again, this is the thing about being long-lived.
但话又说回来，这就是长寿的意义所在。
We’ve got to get to the point where we’re long-lived enough that…
我们必须达到足够长寿的地步……
Let’s imagine that we find, say 10 light years away, we find a planet that looks like it’s got technosignatures.
让我们想象一下，我们发现，比如说 10 光年外，我们发现了一颗看起来有技术特征的行星。
Righ?
对吗？
It doesn’t end there.
事情还没有结束。
That would be the most important discovery in the history of humanity, and it wouldn’t be like, “Well, okay, we’re done.” The first thing we do is we build bigger telescopes to try and do those imaging.
这将是人类历史上最重要的发现，而且不会是“好吧，好吧，我们完成了”。我们做的第一件事是建造更大的望远镜来尝试进行这些成像。
And then the next thing after that, we plan a mission there.
接下来，我们计划在那里执行任务。
We would figure out, with Breakthrough Starshot, there was this idea of trying to use giant lasers to propel small spacecrafts, light sails, almost to the speed of light.
我们会发现，通过《突破摄星》，我们有这样的想法：尝试使用巨型激光器来推动小型航天器、光帆，使其几乎达到光速。
So they would get there in 10 years and take pictures.
所以他们会在十年内到达那里并拍照。
So if we actually made this discovery, there would be the impulse.
所以如果我们真的做出了这个发现，就会有这种冲动。
There would be the effort to actually try and send something to get there.
需要付出努力来实际尝试发送一些东西才能到达那里。
1:25:42 Now, we probably couldn’t land, so maybe we take 30 years to build, 10 years to get there, 10 years to get the picture back.
现在，我们可能无法着陆，所以也许我们需要 30 年的时间来建造，10 年的时间才能到达那里，10 年的时间才能恢复图片。
Okay, you’re dead, but your kids are…
好吧，你死了，但你的孩子们……
You know what I mean?
你知道我的意思吗？
So it becomes now this multi-generational project.
所以现在它变成了这个多代人的项目。
How long did it take to build the pyramids?
建造金字塔花了多长时间？
How long did it take to build the giant cathedrals?
建造巨型大教堂花了多长时间？
Those were multi-generational projects, and I think we’re on the cusp of that kind of project.
这些是多代人的项目，我认为我们正处于此类项目的风口浪尖。
I think that would probably unite humans.
我认为这可能会让人类团结起来。
I think it would play a big role.
我认为这将发挥很大的作用。
1:26:09 I think it would be helpful.
我认为这会有帮助。
Human beings are a mess, let’s face it.
人类是一团糟，让我们面对现实吧。
That’s why I always say to people, discovery of life, of any kind of life, even if it was microbial life, it wouldn’t matter, that to know that we’re not an accident, to know that there is probably…
这就是为什么我总是对人们说，发现生命，发现任何一种生命，即使是微生物生命，也没关系，要知道我们不是偶然的，要知道可能有……
If we found one example of life, we’d know that we’re not an accident and there’s probably lots of life and that we’re a community.
如果我们找到一个生命的例子，我们就会知道我们不是偶然的，可能有很多生命，而且我们是一个社区。
We’re part of a cosmic kind of community of life, and who knows what life has done?
我们是宇宙生命共同体的一部分，谁知道生命做了什么？
All bets are off with life.
所有的赌注都与生命有关。
Since we’re talking about the future of telescopes, let’s talk about our current super sexy, awesome telescope, the James Webb Space Telescope, that I still can’t believe actually worked.
既然我们谈论的是望远镜的未来，那么我们就来谈谈我们目前超级性感、令人敬畏的望远镜，詹姆斯·韦伯太空望远镜，我仍然不敢相信它真的有用。
I can’t believe it worked either.
我也不敢相信它有效。
1:26:46 I was really skeptical.
我真的很怀疑。
I was like, “Okay, guys.
我当时想，“好吧，伙计们。
All right, sure.”
好吧，当然。”
We only got one shot for this incredibly complicated piece of hardware to unfold.
我们只有一次机会来展示这个极其复杂的硬件。
1:26:51 So what kind of stuff can we see with it?
那么我们可以用它看到什么样的东西呢？
I’ve been just looking through different kinds of announcements that have been detected.
我只是浏览了已检测到的不同类型的公告。
There’s been some direct imaging-
有一些直接成像-
Yes, like a single pixel.
是的，就像单个像素一样。
The kinds of exoplanets were able to direct image I guess would have to be hot.
我猜那些能够直接成像的系外行星一定很热。
Hot, reasonably far away from the star.
炎热，距离恒星相当远。
1:27:13 I think JWST is really at the hairy edge of being able to do much with this.
我认为 JWST 确实处于能够在这方面做很多事情的边缘。
What’s more important I think, for JWST is the spectra.
我认为对于 JWST 来说更重要的是光谱。
And the problem with spectra is that there’s not sexy pictures.
光谱的问题在于没有性感的图片。
It’s like, “Hey, look at this wiggly line,” but be able to find and characterize atmospheres around terrestrial exoplanets is the critical next step.
就像，“嘿，看看这条蜿蜒的线”，但能够找到并描述类地系外行星周围的大气是关键的下一步。
That’s where we are right now.
这就是我们现在的处境。
In order to look for life, we need to find planets with atmospheres.
为了寻找生命，我们需要寻找有大气层的行星。
And then we need to be able to do this thing called characterization, where we look at the spectral fingerprints for what’s in the atmosphere.
然后我们需要能够进行称为表征的事情，即我们通过光谱指纹来了解大气中的物质。
Is there carbon?
有碳吗？
Is there carbon dioxide?
有二氧化碳吗？
Is there oxygen?
有氧气吗？
Is there methane?
有甲烷吗？
And that’s the most exciting thing.
这是最令人兴奋的事情。
1:27:54 For example, there was this planet K2-18b, which they did a beautiful job getting the spectra, and the spectra indicated it may be an entirely new kind of habitable world called a hycean world, hycean meaning hydrogen ocean world.
例如，有一颗行星 K2-18b，他们在获取光谱方面做得非常出色，光谱表明它可能是一种全新的宜居世界，称为 hycean 世界，hycean 的意思是氢海洋世界。
And that is a kind of planet that it would be in the super earth, sub-Neptune domain we were talking about, maybe eight times the mass of the earth.
这就是我们所说的超级地球、海王星亚域中的一种行星，质量可能是地球的八倍。
But it’s got a layer of hydrogen, of an atmosphere of hydrogen.
但它有一层氢，一层氢气氛。
Hydrogen is an amazing greenhouse gas.
氢气是一种令人惊奇的温室气体。
So hydrogen will keep the planet underneath it warm enough that you could get liquid water, you can get a giant ocean of liquid water, and that’s an entirely different kind of planet.
因此，氢将使它下面的行星保持足够的温度，这样你就可以获得液态水，你可以获得液态水的巨大海洋，这是一个完全不同类型的行星。
That could be habitable planet.
那可能是宜居星球。
It could be a 60 degree warm ocean.
它可能是一个60度的温暖海洋。
1:28:41 So the data that came out of JWST for that planet was good enough to be able to indicate like, “Oh yeah, you know what?
因此，来自 JWST 的该行星数据足以表明，“哦，是的，你知道吗？
From what we understand with the models, this looks like it could be a hycean world.”
根据我们对模型的了解，这看起来可能是一个 hycean 世界。”
And it’s 120 light years away from earth.
而且距离地球120光年。
And so isn’t that amazing?
这不是很神奇吗？
1:28:57 It’s 120 light years away, but we can see into the atmosphere.
它距离我们120光年，但我们可以看到大气层。
We can see to the atmosphere so well that we can be like, “Oh, look, methane.” Methane was a five sigma detection.
我们可以如此清楚地观察大气，以至于我们可以说，“哦，看，甲烷。”甲烷是五西格玛检测。
You knew that the data were so good that it was the gold standard of science.
您知道这些数据非常好，是科学的黄金标准。
What about detecting maybe through direct imaging or in other ways, megastructures, that the civilizations build?
通过直接成像或其他方式探测文明建造的巨型结构怎么样？
You know what’s great about megastructures is first of all, it’s fun to say, who doesn’t want to say megastructure?
你知道巨型建筑的伟大之处首先是，说起来很有趣，谁不想说巨型建筑呢？
1:29:24 Alien, megastructure, right?
外星人，巨型建筑，对吧？
Every morning, I’m looking for an opportunity to say that.
每天早上，我都在寻找机会说这句话。
So the err example of this is the Dyson sphere, which is amazing because it was literally 1960 that this idea came up.
戴森球就是一个错误的例子，这很令人惊奇，因为这个想法实际上是在 1960 年提出的。
Can you explain the Dyson sphere?
你能解释一下戴森球吗？
Yeah, the Dyson sphere.
是的，戴森球。
1:29:40 So Freeman Dyson, one of the greatest physicists ever, who was very broad-minded and thought about a lot of different things.
弗里曼·戴森（Freeman Dyson）是有史以来最伟大的物理学家之一，他心胸开阔，思考了很多不同的事情。
He recognized that as civilizations progress, what they’re going to need is ever more energy to do ever more amazing things.
他认识到，随着文明的进步，他们将需要更多的能量来完成更令人惊奇的事情。
And what’s the best energy source in a solar system?
太阳系中最好的能源是什么？
It’s the star.
这是明星。
Right?
正确的？
So if you surrounded the star with solar collecting machines, sunlight collecting machines…
因此，如果你用太阳能收集器、阳光收集器包围恒星……
Anyway, the limit of this would actually build a sphere, an actual sphere around your star that had all solar panels on the inside.
不管怎样，这个极限实际上会建立一个球体，一个围绕你的恒星的实际球体，里面有所有的太阳能电池板。
You could capture every photon the star produced, which is this insane amount of light.
你可以捕获恒星产生的每一个光子，也就是如此疯狂的光量。
You would have enough power now to do anything to re-engineer your solar system.
你现在将有足够的力量去做任何事情来重新设计你的太阳系。
So that was a Dyson sphere.
这就是戴森球。
1:30:25 It turns out that a Dyson sphere doesn’t really work, it’s unstable, but a Dyson swarm, and that’s really what he meant, this large collection of large orbiting structures that were able to collect light.
事实证明，戴森球并没有真正起作用，它不稳定，而是戴森群，这就是他真正的意思，这是一个能够收集光线的大型轨道结构的大集合。
So he didn’t actually mean a rigid sphere structure.
所以他实际上并不是指刚性的球体结构。
Right.
正确的。
He basically meant a swarm.
他基本上指的是一群。
1:30:42 So like you said, then the limit basically starts to look-
所以就像你说的，那么极限基本上开始看起来-
People started to say, “Yeah, it was like a sphere.” And we actually almost thought we might’ve found one of these back with a Bajoyan star.
人们开始说：“是的，它就像一个球体。”事实上，我们几乎以为我们可能已经发现了其中一颗带有巴乔扬星的东西。
1:30:48 The way we detect planets is through the transit method where the planet passes in front of the star and there’s a dip in the starlight.
我们探测行星的方式是通过凌日法，即行星从恒星前面经过，星光会减弱。
It’s a little eclipse basically, and we know exactly what they should look like.
这基本上是一个小日食，我们确切地知道它们应该是什么样子。
And then with this one star, there were these really weird transits where it was like this little dragon’s tooth, and then there’d be another one and another one and another one, and then nothing, and then three more.
然后，对于这一颗恒星，有一些非常奇怪的凌日，就像这条小龙的牙齿，然后会有另一颗、另一颗、另一颗，然后什么都没有，然后又是三颗。
And in the paper that was written about this, they went through the list of, it could be comets, it could be chunks of a broken up planet, and it could also be an alien megastructure.
在有关此事的论文中，他们列出了以下内容：它可能是彗星，它可能是破碎行星的碎片，也可能是外星巨型结构。
And of course, the news picked up on this and everybody’s newsfeed the next day, “Alien megastructures discovered.”
当然，第二天，新闻和每个人的新闻提要都报道了这一点：“发现了外星巨型结构。”
1:31:31 Turns out, sadly, they were not alien megastructures.
遗憾的是，事实证明它们并不是外星巨型建筑。
They were probably gas or dust clouds, but it raised the possibility like, “Oh, these are observable.” And people have worked out the details of what they would look like.
它们可能是气体或尘埃云，但它提出了这样的可能性：“哦，这些是可观察到的。”人们已经弄清楚了它们的外观细节。
You don’t really need direct imaging.
您实际上并不需要直接成像。
You can do transits, right?
可以转机的吧？
They’re big enough that when they pass in front of the star, they’re going to produce a little blip of light because that’s what they’re supposed to.
它们足够大，当它们经过恒星前面时，它们会产生一点光点，因为这就是它们应该做的。
They’re absorbing starlight.
它们正在吸收星光。
So people have worked out like, “Well, a square one or a triangular one.”
所以人们的想法是，“好吧，方形的还是三角形的。”
But that wouldn’t be a distance sphere.
但这不是一个距离球体。
1:31:55 That would be like one object.
那就像一个物体。
One object, right.
一个物体，对吧。
1:31:58 If it’s a swarm, you’d expect the light to be blinking in and out as these things pass in front of…
如果是一群，当这些东西从前面经过时，你会期望灯光会闪烁。
If you’ve got thousands of these, much of the time, they’ll be blotting out the star.
如果你有数千个这样的东西，大多数时候，它们会遮住星星。
Sometimes they won’t be.
有时他们不会。
Right?
正确的？
And so you’re going to get an irregular transit signal.
所以你会收到不规则的交通信号。
One you wouldn’t expect from a star that doesn’t have anything.
你不会想到一颗什么都没有的恒星会出现这样的情况。
Exactly.
确切地。
1:32:18 Or just a planet or a couple of planets.
或者只是一个行星或几个行星。
There’d be so many of these that it would be like, “Beep, beep, blip, blip, blip, blip, blip.”
这样的声音太多了，就像“嘟嘟嘟，嘟嘟嘟，嘟嘟嘟，嘟嘟嘟，嘟嘟嘟”。
And that usually doesn’t happen in a star system because there’s only just a handful of planets.
这通常不会发生在恒星系统中，因为恒星系统中只有少数行星。
That’s exactly what it is.
就是这样。
1:32:31 Everything’s coagulant.
一切都是凝固剂。
In a stable solar system, you get a handful of planets, five, 10, that’s it probably, and nothing else.
在一个稳定的太阳系中，你会得到一些行星，五颗、十颗，可能就是这样，没有别的了。
So if now suddenly you see lots of these little micro transits telling you there’s something else that’s big enough to create a transit, but too many of them, and also, within a regular shape, the transit itself, that these could be megastructures.
所以，如果你现在突然看到很多这样的小微凌日，告诉你还有其他东西足够大来创造一个凌日，但它们太多了，而且，在规则的形状内，凌日本身，这些可能是巨型结构。
How many people are looking for megastructures now?
现在有多少人在寻找巨型建筑？
Well, the main groups looking for megastructures are again, Jason Wright at Penn State, and collaborators.
嗯，寻找巨型建筑的主要团体又是宾夕法尼亚州立大学的贾森·赖特（Jason Wright）及其合作者。
1:32:58 The way they’re looking for it though is for infrared light because the second law of thermodynamics says, “Look, if you capture all of this starlight, your thing’s going to warm up and emit an infrared.” It’s going to be waste heat, waste heat and waste light from this.
他们寻找的方式是红外光，因为热力学第二定律说：“看，如果你捕获所有这些星光，你的东西就会变暖并发射红外线。”这将是废热、废热和废光。
That feels like a louder, clearer way to detect it.
这感觉像是一种更响亮、更清晰的检测方式。
Right.
正确的。
1:33:25 And that’s actually why Dyson proposed it.
这实际上就是戴森提出它的原因。
He wasn’t really proposing it because he was saying, “This is what civilizations are going to do.” He proposed it because he was like, “Oh, we want to start looking for alien civilizations.
他并不是真正提出这个建议，因为他是说，“这就是文明要做的事情。”他提出这个建议是因为他想，“哦，我们想开始寻找外星文明。
Here’s something that would have a detectable signature.” So Jason and company have done pretty good searches, and recently, they made news because they were able to eliminate a lot of places.
这是具有可检测签名的东西。”杰森和他的公司做了相当不错的搜索，最近，他们成为了新闻，因为他们能够消除很多地方。
“No, these are not Dyson Spheres,” but they did have a couple that were anomalous enough that they’re like, “Well, this is what it would look like.” It’s not a detection.
“不，这些不是戴森球，”但他们确实有几个非常异常，以至于他们会说，“好吧，这就是它的样子。”这不是检测。
They were saying they would never say it’s a detection, but they were not non-detections.
他们说他们永远不会说这是一次检测，但他们并不是没有检测到。
And they’re potential candidates.
他们是潜在的候选人。
Potential candidates, yeah.
潜在的候选人，是的。
Love it.
爱它。
1:34:02 We have megastructure candidates.
我们有巨型结构候选者。
That’s inspiring.
这很鼓舞人心。
What other megastructures do you think that could be?
您认为还有哪些其他巨型建筑？
So Dyson Sphere is about capturing the energy of a star.
所以戴森球的目的是捕获恒星的能量。
Yeah.
是的。
There could be other-
可能还有其他——
Well, there’s something called the Clark Belt.
嗯，有一种东西叫做克拉克腰带。
1:34:14 So we have a bunch of satellites that are in geosynchronous orbit.
所以我们有一堆在地球同步轨道上的卫星。
Nothing naturally is going to end up in geosynchronous orbit.
没有任何东西自然会最终进入地球同步轨道。
Geosynchronous orbit is one particular orbit that’s really useful if you want to beam things straight down, or if you want to put a space elevator up.
地球同步轨道是一种特殊的轨道，如果你想将物体直接向下发射，或者如果你想把太空电梯升上来，那么它非常有用。
Right?
正确的？
So there’s this idea that if a civilization becomes advanced enough that it’s really using geosynchronous orbit, that you actually get a belt, something that would actually be detectable from a distance via a transit.
所以有这样的想法，如果一个文明变得足够先进，它真的在使用地球同步轨道，那么你实际上会得到一条带，实际上可以通过凌日从远处探测到。
There’s been a couple papers written about the possibility of these Clark Belts, densely occupied Clark Belts being a megastructure.
有几篇论文讨论了这些克拉克带的可能性，人口稠密的克拉克带是一个巨型结构。
It’s not as mega as a Dyson swarm, but it’s planetary scale.
它不像戴森群那么庞大，但它的规模达到了行星规模。
You think it’s detectable, Clark Belt?
你认为它可以被检测到吗，克拉克·贝尔特？
It could be.
可能是。
1:34:58 In our list of technosignatures, it would be down there, but it would be…
在我们的技术签名列表中，它会在那里，但它会是……
Again, if you had an advanced enough civilization that did enough of this, you’d have a Clark Belt.
再说一次，如果你有一个足够先进的文明，在这方面做得足够多，你就会拥有克拉克腰带。
And the question is whether or not it’s detectable?
问题是它是否可以被检测到？
Yeah, probably Dyson sphere is the…
是的，戴森球可能是……
1:35:11 That’s the more exciting thing too.
这也是更令人兴奋的事情。
That’s the go-to one.
这是首选。
1:35:14 Yeah.
是的。
Speaking of the Dyson Sphere, let’s talk through the Kardashev scales.
说到戴森球，我们先来谈谈卡尔达肖夫尺度。
Right.
正确的。
What is the Kardashev scale and where are humans on it?
什么是卡尔达肖夫等级以及人类在其中的位置？
Right.
正确的。
1:35:24 So the Kardashev scale was at the same time.
所以卡尔达肖夫规模是在同一时间。
This is this golden age of SETI, like ’59 to ’65 when it just starts.
这是 SETI 的黄金时代，就像 59 年到 65 年它刚刚开始时一样。
Frank Drake has done his first experiment.
弗兰克·德雷克做了他的第一个实验。
People are like, “Oh my God, this is even possible.” And so people are just throwing out these ideas and as I said in the book, science is conservative.
人们会说：“天哪，这甚至是可能的。”所以人们只是抛弃这些想法，正如我在书中所说，科学是保守的。
And what I mean by that is it holds onto its best ideas.
我的意思是它坚持最好的想法。
So Kardashev comes up with this idea that, “Look, if we’re…” Again, it’s always about detectability.
因此，卡尔达肖夫提出了这个想法：“看，如果我们……”同样，这始终与可检测性有关。
“If we’re looking for civilizations, we should think about what are the, “Natural,” stages,” natural in quotes, “That a civilization goes through?” And he was thinking in terms of energy use, like a good physicist.
“如果我们正在寻找文明，我们应该考虑什么是‘自然’阶段，”自然的引号，“文明经历了什么？”他像一位优秀的物理学家一样从能源使用的角度思考。
So he said, “Look, the first hurdle in terms of energy or threshold that a civilization will go through is using all the starlight that falls onto a planet.” He called that a type one civilization.
所以他说，“看，文明将要经历的第一个能量或门槛障碍是利用落在行星上的所有星光。”他称之为第一类文明。
In whatever way you’re doing it, some large fraction of the starlight that falls on your planet, you’re using for your own ends.
无论你以何种方式做这件事，落在你们星球上的星光的很大一部分，都是为了自己的目的而使用的。
1:36:24 The next would be to use all the starlight there is from that star.
下一步是利用那颗恒星的所有星光。
Right?
正确的？
So that’s the Dyson sphere.
这就是戴森球。
So Dyson had already proposed his idea of the swarm and Kardashev was picking up.
因此，戴森已经提出了他的蜂群想法，而卡尔达舍夫正在接受。
So that’s a type two civilization.
所以这是第二类文明。
Type three is galactic scale, a civilization that could use all the starlight in a galaxy.
第三类是银河级文明，可以利用银河系中所有星光的文明。
So where are we now?
那么我们现在在哪里？
Remarkably, on a log scale.
值得注意的是，在对数尺度上。
We’re at 0.7 of a type one.
我们的第一类比例为 0.7。
So we’re not even type one?
那么我们甚至不是第一类？
No, no, no.
不，不，不。
1:36:50 We’re not even type one, but according to…
我们甚至不是第一类，但根据……
There was a paper written by a group that said, “Can we continue on our path?
有一个团体写的一篇论文说：“我们可以继续走我们的路吗？
We’ll be at a type one at around 2300.”
我们将在 2300 点左右进入第一型。”
2300.
2300.
1:37:02 So this is on a log scale?
那么这是在对数尺度上吗？
Yeah.
是的。
So 0.7.
所以0.7。
1:37:08 So type one is about 10 to the 16th watts.
所以类型一大约是 10 到 16 瓦。
Type two is 10 orders of magnitude larger than that, 10 to the 26th watts, and I think estimate for the galaxy is another 10 orders of magnitude.
第二种类型比这个大10个数量级，10到26瓦，我认为对银河系的估计又是10个数量级。
Yeah, because there’s a 100,000,000,000 star of order, 100,000,000 stars.
是的，因为有一个100,000,000,000颗恒星，100,000,000颗恒星。
So that’s a lot.
就这么多了。
That’s a lot energy.
这是很大的能量。
Do you think humans ever get to type one?
你认为人类能够打字吗？
I think that there’s a problem with type one, which is that we already know about climate change.
我认为第一类有一个问题，那就是我们已经了解气候变化。
1:37:30 The effects of our harvesting energy to do the work of civilization is already changing the climate state, and that’s something that Kardashev couldn’t have recognized.
我们收集能源来完成文明工作的影响已经在改变气候状况，这是卡尔达肖夫无法认识到的。
There’s the first law of thermodynamics, which is just about the different forms of energy.
热力学第一定律涉及不同形式的能量。
Then there’s the second law, which is about when you use that energy, Kardashev wasn’t thinking about the second law.
然后是第二定律，即当你使用这种能量时，卡尔达肖夫没有考虑第二定律。
If you get all that energy and you use it, there is waste heat.
如果你获得所有这些能量并使用它，就会产生废热。
You don’t get to use it all.
你无法全部使用它。
Right?
正确的？
Second law tells you that if I have a tank of gasoline, I can only use a certain fraction of the energy in that tank, and the rest is going to go to heating up the engine block.
第二定律告诉你，如果我有一箱汽油，我只能使用该箱中的一部分能量，其余的将用于加热发动机组。
So that second law tells you that you can only use so much energy before the climate state is like, “Uh-oh, sorry, it’s going to change on you.”
因此，第二定律告诉你，在气候状态出现“呃哦，抱歉，你的情况会发生变化”之前，你只能使用这么多的能源。
1:38:25 So there’s a way in which we probably can’t get to a type one without devastating the earth’s climate.
因此，有一种方法，我们可能无法在不破坏地球气候的情况下达到第一型。
The most important thing actually here is probably, this is why space becomes…
实际上这里最重要的事情可能是，这就是为什么空间变得……
So the colonization or settlement of space.
因此，空间的殖民或定居。
If we have an idea that we’ve been working on for a while called service worlds, that at some point you probably move a lot of your industry off world.
如果我们有一个已经研究了一段时间的想法，称为服务世界，那么在某个时候，您可能会将很多行业移出世界。
We’ve got Mercury, for example.
例如，我们有水星。
There’s nothing on Mercury, there’s no life on Mercury.
水星上没有任何东西，水星上没有生命。
Why don’t you put your energy harvesting there?
你为什么不把能量收集放在那里呢？
Because you can’t mess with the biosphere.
因为你不能扰乱生物圈。
The biosphere is more powerful than you are.
生物圈比你更强大。
And so there’s limits to how much energy we can harvest to do work on the earth without really adversely affecting the biosphere.
因此，在不对生物圈产生真正不利影响的情况下，我们在地球上工作所能获取的能量是有限的。
It does seem that the best response to the climate change is not to use less technology, but to invent better technology and to invent technology that avoids the destructive effects.
看来，应对气候变化的最佳对策不是使用更少的技术，而是发明更好的技术，并发明避免破坏性影响的技术。
This is the frontier where you are, and that was the topic of my last book, Light of the Stars.
这就是你所在的前沿，这也是我上一本书《星星之光》的主题。
1:39:25 It’s like you have to do the astrobiology of the Anthropocene.
就像你必须研究人类世的天体生物学一样。
You have to see the transition that we’re going through now of the Anthropocene on a planetary astrobiological framework.
你必须在行星天体生物学框架上看到我们现在正在经历的人类世的转变。
And that paper we were talking about with a 10 billion trillion worlds, that was actually in service of the work I was doing for this other book where I wanted to know how often do you go through an…
我们正在谈论的那篇论文涉及 100 亿万亿个世界，它实际上是为我为另一本书所做的工作服务的，我想知道你多久经历一次……
Does every technological civilization trigger its own planetary crisis, its own climate Anthropocene crisis?
每个技术文明都会引发自己的地球危机、人类世气候危机吗？
And the answer we actually came up from doing models was like, yeah, probably.
我们从做模型中得到的答案实际上是，是的，可能。
And then the question is, are you smart enough to figure out how to readjust what you’re doing technologically so that all boats rise?
那么问题是，你是否足够聪明，能够弄清楚如何重新调整你正在做的技术，以便所有的船都能上升？
You want to figure out how to do this so that the biosphere becomes even more productive and healthy and resilient.
你想知道如何做到这一点，使生物圈变得更加富有成效、健康和有弹性。
1:40:15 So yeah, right.
所以是的，对。
It’s the kind of technology.
这就是一种技术。
I think there’s probably absolutely limits on how much energy you can use, but how do you use that energy?
我认为你可以使用多少能量可能是绝对有限的，但是你如何使用这些能量呢？
And then also, getting off planet eventually.
然后，最终离开地球。
If you want to use 10 times more energy than that, you’re going to not going to do it on world.
如果你想使用比这多 10 倍的能量，你在世界上就不会这么做。
So how do we detect alien type one, two, and three civilizations?
那么我们如何探测外星一类、二类、三类文明呢？
1:40:33 So we’ve been kind of talking about basically type one civilization detection.
所以我们一直在谈论基本上第一类文明的探测。
Yeah.
是的。
1:40:43 Right,
对了，
Maybe with the Dyson sphere, you start to get a little bit more type two, but it feels like if you have a type two civilization, it won’t be just the Dyson sphere.
也许有了戴森球，你开始得到更多的第二型文明，但感觉如果你有第二型文明，它就不仅仅是戴森球了。
Right.
正确的。
It feels like that.
感觉就是这样。
1:40:55 Just for the same reason you mentioned climate change, but now at the star system level, they’re probably expanding, right?
就像你提到气候变化一样，但现在在恒星系统层面，它们可能正在扩张，对吗？
So how would you detect a type two?
那么如何检测第二类呢？
How about propulsion plumes?
推进羽流怎么样？
1:41:08 Right?
正确的？
If you’re expanding…
如果您正在扩展...
No, no.
不，不。
Yeah, that’s great.
是的，那太好了。
1:41:12 That’s great.
那太棒了。
I literally just put in a NASA proposal now.
我现在刚刚提交了 NASA 的提案。
Thomas Beatty, who’s joined us, he’s at the University of Wisconsin, has an idea to look for plumes.
威斯康星大学的托马斯·比蒂加入了我们，他有一个寻找羽状物的想法。
Right?
正确的？
If you have a solar system-wide civilization and you got space truckers going back and forth from Mars to…
如果你有一个覆盖整个太阳系的文明，并且有太空卡车司机往返于火星和……
They’re doing the insettlest run, they’re accelerating and decelerating the whole way there.
他们正在进行最不稳定的跑步，一路上一直在加速和减速。
If you want to get to Mars in a couple of weeks, you have your fusion drive on the entire way out there.
如果你想在几周内到达火星，那么你就可以在整个旅程中使用聚变驱动器。
You flip and burn and have it on.
你翻转并燃烧并戴上它。
So you also always have gravity.
所以你也总是有重力。
You have thrust gravity.
你有推力重力。
So would those plumes be detectable?
那么这些羽流可以被检测到吗？
Because now you’ve got spaceships going all over the place and the odds that the plume is going to cross your field of view could become pretty high.
因为现在宇宙飞船到处都是，羽流穿过你视野的可能性可能会变得相当高。
So yeah, I think that’s one idea of looking for large-scale interplanetary, which is like when you’re getting to a type two.
所以，是的，我认为这就是寻找大规模星际行星的想法之一，就像你正在寻找第二类星际行星一样。
1:42:11 Another possibility is looking for the tailings of asteroid mining.
另一种可能性是寻找小行星采矿的尾矿。
This was an idea, it was a group at Harvard Smithsonian, that to be able to look for…
这是一个想法，是哈佛史密森学会的一个小组，能够寻找……
If you’re really chewing up asteroids to build space habitats, there’d be dust particles left around and would they look different from just say the dust from just regular collisions?
如果你真的要咀嚼小行星来建造太空栖息地，周围会残留尘埃颗粒，它们看起来会与普通碰撞产生的尘埃有所不同吗？
So pollution of all different kinds.
所以各种不同类型的污染。
Pollution of all different kinds
各种不同类型的污染
And trash also?
还有垃圾？
Okay, so trash is an interesting idea when you come to the actual solar system.
好吧，当你来到实际的太阳系时，垃圾是一个有趣的想法。
1:42:34 There’s a whole other field of technosignatures, which are things in the solar system.
还有一个完全不同的技术特征领域，那就是太阳系中的事物。
What if somebody came by 1,000,000 years ago and left some stuff?
如果有人在一百万年前来到这里并留下了一些东西怎么办？
So the earth has been showing biosignatures for billions of years.
因此地球数十亿年来一直显示出生物特征。
A species like us, at our level, looking at earth, would’ve been able to know that earth had life on it, had a biosphere for billions of years.
像我们这样的物种，在我们的水平上，观察地球，应该能够知道地球上有生命，有生物圈数十亿年。
So maybe somebody sent something by a half a billion years ago.
所以也许有人在五亿年前发送了一些东西。
So this idea of looking say at the Moon for artifacts that have been there for a long time is something that a number of people are doing.
因此，许多人正在做的事情就是在月球上寻找长期存在的文物。
We’re just working on a paper where we just calculated, this was super fun.
我们正在写一篇刚刚计算过的论文，这非常有趣。
We calculated how long would the lunar lander exist on the Moon before micrometeorites just chewed it down?
我们计算了月球着陆器在微陨石将其吞噬之前会在月球上存在多久？
How long would you be able to land on the Moon and go, “Oh, look, somebody was here and left some debris.”
你多久才能登陆月球并说：“哦，看，有人在这里留下了一些碎片。”
1:43:34 So there’s this process called gardening, which is just the micrometeorite, constant rain of micrometeorites, and that’s where you get the lunar regolith.
所以有一个叫做园艺的过程，这就是微陨石，微陨石的持续降雨，这就是你得到月球风化层的地方。
That fine powder on the Moon is because of this gardening.
月球上的细粉就是因为这种园艺。
And it turns out it is literally hundreds of millions to billions of years-
事实证明，这实际上是数亿到数十亿年——
Oh, nice.
哦，不错。
That the lunar lander will be visible.
月球着陆器将是可见的。
Oh, so we should be able to find artifacts.
哦，所以我们应该能够找到文物。
If there are artifacts on there, and people have proposed doing this with artificial intelligence.
如果那里有文物，人们建议用人工智能来做这件事。
1:43:58 The Moon has been mapped down to a couple of meters with various probes and all that data is sitting there.
月球已经被各种探测器绘制成几米的地图，所有的数据都在那里。
So why not use machine learning to look through all those things and look for anything that looks not like the lunar surface?
那么为什么不使用机器学习来检查所有这些东西并寻找任何看起来不像月球表面的东西呢？
And they did a test program where they gave the computer, I don’t know, 50 miles around the Apollo 11 or maybe it was Apollo 17 site, and it instantly was able to pull out the lander.
他们做了一个测试程序，让计算机（我不知道）位于阿波罗 11 号周围 50 英里，或者可能是阿波罗 17 号站点，它立即能够拉出着陆器。
The whole task of looking for anomaly, something that looks not like the lunar surface.
整个任务就是寻找异常现象，即看起来不像月球表面的东西。
1:44:27 You make it sound obvious, but it’s not exactly obvious.
你让它听起来很明显，但实际上并不明显。
Detect something that doesn’t look right about this room?
发现这个房间有什么不对劲的地方吗？
Yeah.
是的。
It’s actually really difficult.
其实真的很难。
Really difficult.
真的很难。
1:44:44 It’s really difficult.
这真的很难。
And what’s cool, it’s a really information theoretic kind of proposal.
很酷的是，这是一个真正的信息论提案。
You really have to use information theory to say, “What’s the background?” How do I define something that I can say, “That looks weird?”
你真的必须用信息论来问，“背景是什么？”我如何定义我可以说“这看起来很奇怪”的东西？
Yeah, maybe when you’re looking at a spectrograph or something, it’s still like…
是的，也许当你看摄谱仪或其他东西时，它仍然像……
1:45:00 [inaudible 01:45:00] or something, it’s going to look really weird potentially.
[听不清 01:45:00] 或者其他什么，它看起来可能会很奇怪。
We’re hypothesizing all the things that humans would build and how do we detect that.
我们正在假设人类将建造的所有东西以及我们如何检测到它。
Right.
正确的。
But that could be really weird stuff.
但这可能真的很奇怪。
That’s why there’s this emphasis now on these agnostic signatures.
这就是为什么现在如此强调这些不可知论的签名。
1:45:15 So, actually disequilibrium is a nice one.
所以，实际上不平衡是一件好事。
One way to define life is it is a system that is far from equilibrium, it’s alive, because as soon as it dies, it goes back to equilibrium.
定义生命的一种方法是，它是一个远离平衡的系统，它是活着的，因为一旦它死亡，它就会回到平衡。
And so, you can look at all chemicals in an atmosphere, even if you don’t know whether these could be chemicals that you have no idea whether or not they have anything to do with life.
因此，您可以查看大气中的所有化学物质，即使您不知道这些化学物质是否与生命有关。
But the degree of disequilibrium, the degree to which they show that that atmosphere has not, the chemicals have not all just gone down to, they’ve all reacted away to an equilibrium state.
但是不平衡的程度，它们表明大气没有达到平衡的程度，化学物质并没有全部下降到平衡状态。
You can actually tell that in very general ways using what’s called the Gibbs free energy, and that’s a signature.
实际上，您可以使用所谓的吉布斯自由能以非常普遍的方式来判断这一点，这就是一个签名。
1:45:56 If you see an atmosphere that is wildly out of equilibrium that indicates that there’s something happening on that planet biosphere or technosphere that is pumping gases into the atmosphere, that is keeping the whole system from relaxing.
如果你看到大气层严重失衡，这表明该行星生物圈或技术圈正在发生某些事情，正在将气体泵入大气中，这会导致整个系统无法放松。
So, is it possible we can detect anomalies in spacetime?
那么，我们有可能检测到时空异常吗？
Well, you could detect, and there’s been some work on this with the Alcubierre drive, these proposals for warp drives, and we can talk about that later, I’m skeptical of those.
好吧，你可以发现，阿尔库别尔驱动器已经在这方面做了一些工作，这些关于曲速驱动器的建议，我们可以稍后再讨论，我对这些表示怀疑。
1:46:17 Because it may really be possible, you just can’t go faster than the speed of light.
因为这可能真的是可能的，只是你不能跑得比光速更快。
But people have done work on what would be the signature of an Alcubierre drive?
但人们已经研究过阿尔库别尔驱动器的特征是什么？
What would be the signature?
签名是什么？
Could you detect if you’re using a drive like that, then you certainly are distorting spacetime, which means any light that’s passing by, its trajectory has gotten altered because it had to pass through the distorted spacetime.
你能检测到如果你使用这样的驱动器，那么你肯定会扭曲时空，这意味着任何经过的光，它的轨迹都会改变，因为它必须穿过扭曲的时空。
1:46:51 So yeah, there are possibilities along with that.
所以是的，还有一些可能性。
One of the funny things, I don’t know if they’ve gotten past this, but somebody calculated the problem with the Alcubierre drive or this warp drive was that if you dropped out of warp, there would be this spray of gamma rays that would sterilize any planet in front of you.
有趣的事情之一，我不知道他们是否已经克服了这一点，但有人计算了阿尔库别雷驱动器或曲速驱动器的问题是，如果你脱离曲速，就会有伽马射线喷射，可以消灭你面前的任何行星。
So, it’s like, “Well yeah, you probably don’t want to do that,” but that would be a great bios or techno signature, another planet obliterated.
所以，就像，“是的，你可能不想这样做，”但这将是一个伟大的BIOS或技术签名，另一个星球被抹去了。
So, you think it’s not possible to travel fast than the speed of light?
那么，您认为不可能超越光速吗？
I wouldn’t say that.
我不会这么说。
1:47:17 I wouldn’t say that, but what I think, if you look at the physics, we understand, every possibility for faster than light travel really relies on something that doesn’t exist.
我不会这么说，但我认为，如果你看看物理学，我们就会明白，超光速旅行的每一种可能性实际上都依赖于不存在的东西。
So, the cool thing is Einstein’s field equations, you can actually play with them, the equations are right there.
所以，最酷的是爱因斯坦的场方程，你实际上可以使用它们，方程就在那里。
You can add things to the right or left-hand side that allow you to get something like the Alcubierre drive.
您可以在右侧或左侧添加一些东西，从而获得类似 Alcubierre 驱动器的东西。
That was a metric that showed you like, “Oh, it’s a warped bubble.” It’s a warping of spacetime that moves through spacetime faster than the speed of light.
这个指标会让你觉得，“哦，这是一个扭曲的泡沫。”这是一种时空扭曲，时空移动速度超过光速。
1:47:52 Because nothing can move across space faster than the speed of light, but spacetime itself can move faster than the speed of light.
因为没有任何东西可以以比光速更快的速度穿越空间，但时空本身可以以比光速更快的速度移动。
But here’s the problem with all of those proposals is they all need something.
但所有这些提案的问题是它们都需要一些东西。
The thing you added, the little fictional term you added into the equations is something called exotic matter and it doesn’t exist.
你添加的东西，你添加到方程中的小虚构术语是一种叫做奇异物质的东西，但它并不存在。
It’s really just something we dreamed up to make the equation to do what we wanted them to do.
这实际上只是我们梦想的东西，为了让方程式做我们希望他们做的事情。
So, it’s a nice fiction but really right now, we live in this weird moment in history of the great acceleration where the technology we used now is completely different from the technology we used 10 years ago is remarkably different from the technology from 100 years ago.
所以，这是一个很好的小说，但实际上现在，我们生活在历史上这个巨大加速的奇怪时刻，我们现在使用的技术与我们 10 年前使用的技术完全不同，与 100 年前的技术显着不同。
1:48:38 But I remember playing Assassin’s Creed where everybody’s like, “What is it, it’s 1200?” And everybody’s like, “Stab, stab, stab.” And I was like, “Yeah, it’s a great game.” And then I got Assassin’s Creed II and it was 300 years later and everybody’s like, “Stab, stab, stab.” And it was like 300 years and the technology hadn’t changed and that was actually true for most of human history.
但我记得玩《刺客信条》时，每个人都会说，“这是什么，是 1200？”每个人都会说：“刺，刺，刺。”我当时想，“是的，这是一场很棒的比赛。”然后我拿到了《刺客信条 II》，那是 300 年后的事了，每个人都在说，“刺，刺，刺。”大约 300 年过去了，技术并没有改变，这在人类历史的大部分时间里都是如此。
You used your great-grandfather’s tools because there was no need to have any other new tools and you probably did his job.
您使用曾祖父的工具，因为不需要任何其他新工具，而且您可能完成了他的工作。
So, we could be fooled into thinking like, “Oh, technology’s going to go on forever, we’re always going to find new advances.”
因此，我们可能会被愚弄，产生这样的想法：“哦，技术将永远持续下去，我们总是会发现新的进步。”
1:49:14 As opposed to sometimes things just flatten out for a long time.
与有时情况相反的是，事情会在很长一段时间内变得平淡。
So, you have to be careful about that bias that we have living in this time of great acceleration.
因此，你必须小心我们生活在这个飞速发展的时代所存在的偏见。
Yeah.
是的。
1:49:23 But also, it is a great acceleration and we also are not good at predicting what that entails if it does keep accelerating.
而且，这是一个巨大的加速，我们也不擅长预测如果它继续加速会带来什么。
So, for example, somebody like Eric Weinstein often talks about we underinvest in theoretical physics research.
例如，像埃里克·韦恩斯坦这样的人经常谈论我们对理论物理研究的投资不足。
Basically, we’re trying too hard for traditional chemical propulsion on rockets versus trying to hack physics, warp drives and so on.
基本上，我们对火箭上的传统化学推进过于努力，而不是试图破解物理、曲速驱动器等。
Yeah.
是的。
Because it’s really hard to do space travel, and it seems like in the long arc of human history, if we survive the way to really travel across long distances is going to be some new totally new thing.
因为进行太空旅行确实很困难，而且似乎在人类历史的长河中，如果我们能幸存下来，真正长途旅行的方式将是一些全新的事情。
Right.
正确的。
So, it’s not going to be an engineering problem, it’s going to be a physics problem-
所以，这不会是一个工程问题，而是一个物理问题——
A fundamental physics problem.
一个基本的物理问题。
Fundamental physics problem.
基本物理问题。
Yeah.
是的。
1:50:15 I agree with that in principle, but I think there’s a lot of ideas out there.
我原则上同意这一点，但我认为还有很多想法。
String theory, people have been playing with string theory now for 40 years, it’s not like there hasn’t been a lot of effort.
弦理论，人们研究弦理论已经有40年了，并不是没有付出很多努力。
And again, I’m not going to predict, I think it’s entirely possible that there’s incredible boundaries of physics that have yet to be poked through, in which case then all bets are off.
再说一次，我不会预测，我认为完全有可能存在令人难以置信的物理学边界尚未被突破，在这种情况下，那么所有的赌注都会失败。
Once you get fast interstellar travel, whoa, who knows what can happen?
一旦你开始快速星际旅行，哇，谁知道会发生什么？
But I tend to be drawn to science fiction stories that take the speed of light seriously.
但我倾向于被严肃对待光速的科幻故事所吸引。
What kind of civilization can you build where it takes 50 years to get to where you’re going and a 50 years back?
你能建立什么样的文明，需要 50 年才能到达你要去的地方，又需要 50 年呢？
1:50:59 So, I don’t know.
所以，我不知道。
Yeah, there’s no way I’m going to say that we won’t get warp drives.
是的，我绝不会说我们不会得到曲速驱动器。
But as of right now, it’s all fictional.
但目前来看，这一切都是虚构的。
It’s barely even a coherent concept.
这甚至不是一个连贯的概念。
Well, it’s also a really exciting possibility of hacking this whole thing by extending human lifespan or extending our notion of time and maybe as dark as to say, but the value of an individual human life versus the value of life from the perspective of generations.
好吧，通过延长人类寿命或延长我们的时间概念来破解整个事情也是一个非常令人兴奋的可能性，也许可以说是黑暗的，但个人生命的价值与从几代人的角度来看生命的价值。
Yeah.
是的。
So, you can have something like a generational ship that travels for hundreds of thousands of years and you’re not sad that you’ll never see the destination because you have the value for the prolonged survival of humanity versus your own individual life.
所以，你可以拥有一艘像世代相传的船一样航行了数十万年的东西，你不会因为永远看不到目的地而悲伤，因为相对于你自己的个人生命，你拥有人类长期生存的价值。
Yeah.
是的。
1:51:45 It’s a wild ethical question, isn’t it?
这是一个疯狂的道德问题，不是吗？
That book I told you about Aurora, I love the book because it was such a inversion of the usual.
我告诉你关于奥罗拉（Aurora）的那本书，我喜欢这本书，因为它与平常完全相反。
Because I love science fiction, I’ve read so many generation ship stories.
因为我喜欢科幻小说，所以我读了很多世代飞船的故事。
And they get to that planet, the planet turns out to be uninhabitable.
当他们到达那个星球时，发现这个星球不适合居住。
It’s inhabited, but it’s uninhabitable for Earth because again, he has this idea of life is particular to their planets.
它有人居住，但对地球来说不适合居住，因为他再次认为生命是他们的行星所特有的。
So, they turn around and they come back, and then when they land, the main character goes, there’s still people who are arguing for more generation ships, and she goes, and she punches the guy out because she spent her whole life in a tube with this.
所以，他们转身回来，然后当他们着陆时，主角走了，仍然有人在争论更多的一代船，她走了，她把那个人打了出去，因为她一生都在管子里度过。
1:52:20 I thought that was a really interesting inversion.
我认为这是一个非常有趣的反转。
The interesting thing about, we were talking about these space habitats.
有趣的是，我们正在谈论这些太空栖息地。
Yes.
是的。
But if you really had a space habitat, not some super cramped, crappy, usual version of a century ship.
但如果你真的有一个太空栖息地，而不是一些超级狭窄、蹩脚、普通版本的百年船。
1:52:26 But if you had these space habitats that were really like the O’Neill cylinders, they’re actually pretty nice places to live, put a thruster on those.
但如果你有这些像奥尼尔圆柱体一样的太空栖息地，它们实际上是非常适合居住的地方，在上面安装推进器。
Why keep them in the solar system?
为什么要把它们留在太阳系里？
Maybe space is full of these traveling space habitats that are in some sense, they’re worlds in and of themselves.
也许太空中充满了这些旅行太空栖息地，从某种意义上说，它们本身就是一个世界。
There’s the show Silo, which raises the question of basically, if you are putting on a generational ship, what do you tell the inhabitants of that ship?
有一个节目《Silo》，它提出了一个问题：如果你要登上一艘世代相传的船，你会告诉船上的居民什么？
1:52:49 You might want to lie to them.
你可能想对他们撒谎。
Yeah.
是的。
You might want to tell them a story that they believe.
您可能想告诉他们一个他们相信的故事。
Right.
正确的。
Because there is a society, there’s human nature.
因为有社会，就有人性。
1:53:04 It’s like how do you maintain a homeostasis of that little society?
就像你如何维持那个小社会的动态平衡？
That’s a fascinating technical question, the social question, the psychology question
这是一个令人着迷的技术问题、社会问题、心理学问题
The generation ship too, which I talked about in the book, the idea of also you talked about the extending human lifetimes or the stasis, the cryostasis, which is a mainstay of science fiction that you can basically put in suspended animation and such.
我在书中谈到了一代船，你也谈到了延长人类寿命或停滞、冷冻的想法，这是科幻小说的支柱，你基本上可以将其放入假死等。
1:53:17 None of these things we know are possible.
我们所知道的这些事情都是不可能的。
But what’s so interesting, and this is why I love science fiction, the way it seeds ideas, all these ideas we’re going to talk about because they’ve been staples of science fiction for 50 years.
但有趣的是，这就是为什么我喜欢科幻小说，它孕育想法的方式，我们将要讨论的所有这些想法，因为它们在 50 年来一直是科幻小说的主要内容。
The whole field of cryogenics.
整个低温学领域。
Yeah.
是的。
1:53:45 Where are we at with that?
我们现在处于什么阶段？
Yeah.
是的。
1:53:47 I wonder what the state of the art is for complex organism.
我想知道复杂有机体的最新技术水平是什么。
Can you freeze?
你能冷冻吗？
How long can you freeze?
你能冷冻多久？
And then unfreeze maybe with bacteria you could do freeze.
然后用可以冷冻的细菌解冻。
Oh, bacteria can last.
哦，细菌可以持续存在。
1:53:56 This is the thing about panspermia, how long can a bacteria survive in a rock that’s been blasted?
这就是有生源论的问题，细菌在被炸毁的岩石中能存活多久？
If there’s a comet impact across interstellar distances, that does seem to actually be possible.
如果彗星撞击跨越星际距离，这似乎确实是可能的。
People have done those kinds of calculations, it’s not out of the realm of possibility.
人们已经做过这样的计算，这并非不可能。
But a complex organism or multi-systems, with organs and such.
而是一个复杂的有机体或多系统，有器官等。
Also, what makes an organism?
另外，什么构成了有机体？
1:54:20 Which part do you want to preserve?
您想保留哪一部分？
Because maybe for humans, it seems like what makes a personality?
因为也许对于人类来说，似乎是什么造就了个性？
It feels like you want to preserve a set of memories.
感觉就像你想保留一组记忆。
If I woke up in a different body with the same memories, I pretty much, I would feel like I would be the same person.
如果我在不同的身体中醒来并具有相同的记忆，我几乎会觉得我是同一个人。
Altered Carbon, that’s a great series.
《副本》，这是一个很棒的系列。
1:54:43 I think it’s on Netflix, that’s a really great series where that’s exactly the idea of sleeves.
我认为 Netflix 上有一部非常棒的剧集，这正是袖子的理念。
Everybody’s able to, you can re-sleeve in another body, and it raises exactly this question.
每个人都可以，你可以重新套在另一个身体里，这恰恰提出了这个问题。
It’s not the greatest cyberpunk, but it’s pretty good, it’s got some great action sequences too.
它不是最伟大的赛博朋克，但它相当不错，它也有一些很棒的动作序列。
As we get better and better advancements in large language models that are able to be fine-tuned on you, it raises a question because to me, they’ve already passed the Turing test as we traditionally have defined it.
随着我们在能够对你进行微调的大型语言模型方面取得越来越好的进步，它提出了一个问题，因为对我来说，它们已经通过了我们传统上定义的图灵测试。
1:55:01 So, if there’s going to be an LLM that’s able to copy you in terms of language extremely well, it’s going to raise ethical and I don’t know, philosophical questions about what makes you, you.
因此，如果有一个法学硕士能够在语言方面非常出色地模仿你，那么它将引发道德上的、我不知道的哲学问题，即是什么让你成为了你。
If there’s a thing that can talk exactly like you, what is the thing that makes you?
如果有一个东西可以像你一样说话，那么是什么东西造就了你？
It’s going to speak about your memories very effectively.
它将非常有效地讲述你的记忆。
This leads us to, if we’re going to get to the blind spot.
如果我们要到达盲点，这会引导我们。
1:55:41 I am of the opinion, heretical in some camps that the brain is not the minimal structure for consciousness, it’s the whole body.
我认为，在某些阵营中，大脑不是意识的最小结构，而是整个身体，这是异端邪说。
It’s embodied and may actually, in some sense, it’s communities actually.
从某种意义上说，它实际上是社区的体现。
So yeah, I could be wrong, but this is what this whole work that I did with Marcelo Gleiser and Evan Thompson, the philosophy of science.
所以，是的，我可能是错的，但这就是我与马塞洛·格莱泽和埃文·汤普森一起完成的科学哲学工作。
Which is interesting, because it leads to this question about, “Oh, maybe we should just download ourselves into computers.” That’s another story that one tells.
这很有趣，因为它引出了这样一个问题：“哦，也许我们应该把自己下载到计算机中。”那是另一个故事。
I’m super skeptical about those, but that’s one of the narratives about interstellar travel.
我对此非常怀疑，但这是关于星际旅行的叙述之一。
1:56:20 And that anybody we meet is going to be a machine anyway, whether it’s downloaded bodies or it’s just going to be artificial intelligence.
无论如何，我们遇到的任何人都将是一台机器，无论是下载的身体还是人工智能。
There’s the whole idea of how long does biological evolution last?
生物进化能持续多久？
Maybe it’s a very short period before everybody goes to, or the machines take over and kill you, or it’s some hybrid.
也许在很短的时间内每个人都会去，或者机器接管并杀死你，或者它是某种混合体。
What do you think aliens look like?
你认为外星人长什么样？
1:56:39 So, we talked about all the different kinds of bio signatures that might leave or techno signatures, but what would they look like when we show up?
所以，我们讨论了可能留下的所有不同类型的生物签名或技术签名，但是当我们出现时它们会是什么样子？
Are they going to have arms and legs?
他们会有胳膊和腿吗？
Are they going to be recognizable at all?
他们会被认出来吗？
Are they going to be carbon-based?
它们会是碳基的吗？
Yeah.
是的。
1:56:57 So, great question, and this question gets to the heart of thinking about life, about what life is.
所以，这是一个很好的问题，这个问题触及了思考生命的核心，思考生命是什么。
And this is the physical part of that, there’s also the informational part of it.
这是物理部分，还有信息部分。
But let’s just talk about the physical part of it, which is anything that we’re going to call life is probably going to work on Darwinian evolution.
但我们只谈谈它的物理部分，也就是我们所说的生命的任何东西都可能适用于达尔文进化论。
That’s the nice thing about Darwinian evolution, just like we know the laws of physics are general, the laws of Darwinian evolution are this logic, this basic logic that anything we’d reasonably call life probably has to operate under these kinds of principles.
这就是达尔文进化论的好处，就像我们知道物理定律是普遍的一样，达尔文进化论的定律就是这种逻辑，这种基本逻辑，我们合理地称之为生命的任何东西都可能必须在这些原则下运作。
1:57:32 And so, evolution’s about solving problems to survive that the environment presents.
因此，进化就是解决环境中存在的生存问题。
And the environment’s always going to present these problems in physical and chemical terms, so that you’d expect a balance between what we call convergence, evolutionary convergence and evolutionary contingency.
环境总是会以物理和化学的形式呈现这些问题，因此你会期望我们所说的趋同、进化趋同和进化偶然性之间达到平衡。
So, if you’ve got to move along a surface, a hard surface and air, then the idea of some kind of jointed stick legs makes sense that you’re probably going to trigger that.
所以，如果你必须沿着一个表面移动，一个坚硬的表面和空气，那么某种有关节的棍腿的想法是有道理的，你可能会触发它。
If you look at Earth’s history multiple times, multiple lineages that had nothing to do with each other are going to solve the problem of getting towards energy sources using some kind of stick-like apparatus.
如果你多次回顾地球的历史，就会发现多个彼此无关的谱系将解决使用某种棒状装置获取能源的问题。
So, that’s about movement?
那么，这与运动有关吗？
Yeah.
是的。
1:58:19 So, that’s one problem that has to be solved.
所以，这是必须解决的一个问题。
The one problem that has to be solved is I got to get to food, right?
必须解决的一个问题是我必须得到食物，对吗？
Yeah.
是的。
Another problem is they got to get away from predators.
另一个问题是它们必须远离掠食者。
1:58:22 You’ve seen wings, we’ve seen wings, the line that went through dinosaurs to birds involved wings, insects evolved wings, mammals evolved wings.
你见过翅膀，我们也见过翅膀，从恐龙到鸟类都涉及翅膀，昆虫进化了翅膀，哺乳动物进化了翅膀。
If the gas is dense enough that a curved surface, if you move through the curved surface, it’s going to produce lift.
如果气体的密度足以形成曲面，那么当你穿过曲面时，就会产生升力。
Yeah, there you go, evolutionary trip on that.
是的，就这样，进化之旅。
So, I think you can expect certain classes of solutions to the basic problems that life is going to be presented with stay alive, reproduce.
所以，我认为你可以期待某些类别的解决方案来解决生命将面临的生存和繁殖的基本问题。
But one of the weird things about with the UFO things is that you always see like, “Oh, they all look like humans, they’re just basically humans with triangular heads.” And that’s where we get to contingency.
但关于不明飞行物的奇怪之处之一是，你总是会看到，“哦，他们看起来都像人类，他们基本上只是长着三角形头部的人类。”这就是我们遇到意外情况的地方。
1:59:06 So, what we’ve been talking about is convergence.
所以，我们一直在谈论的是融合。
You expect that evolution will converge on wings multiple times when presented with the problems that wings can solve.
当遇到翅膀可以解决的问题时，你期望进化会多次收敛于翅膀。
But contingency is accidents that you’ve got something that’s evolving a certain kind of wing, a leathery wing.
但偶然性是指你有某种东西正在进化出某种翅膀，皮革翅膀。
And then the climate changes and they all die out, end of story or an asteroid, total accident, asteroid hits.
然后气候发生变化，它们都灭绝了，故事结束或小行星，完全事故，小行星撞击。
And so, contingency accidents play also a huge role in evolution.
因此，偶然事件在进化中也发挥着巨大的作用。
And one of the things that lots of evolutionary biologists have talked about is the idea that if you ran the tape of Earth’s history over again, would you get the same creatures?
许多进化生物学家谈论的一件事是，如果你重新播放地球历史的磁带，你会得到同样的生物吗？
Now, Stephen Jay Gould was of the opinion that no way, you wouldn’t find anything on Earth that resembled any species today.
现在，斯蒂芬·杰伊·古尔德认为，不可能，你在地球上找不到任何与当今任何物种相似的东西。
1:59:52 They’ve done experiments actually on this with E.
他们实际上已经用 E 做了这方面的实验。
coli.
大肠杆菌。
You take a bunch of E.
你拿了一堆E。
coli, you let them evolve for a while, you take a bunch of them out, freeze them, let one, let that population continue to evolve, the other one’s frozen.
大肠杆菌，你让它们进化一段时间，你取出一堆，冷冻它们，让其中一个继续进化，另一个被冷冻。
Now, started over again with the frozen.
现在，再次从冷冻开始。
And it seems to be that contingency tends to win.
似乎偶然性往往会获胜。
At least from what we can tell, that’s not a hard result, but in those experiments, what you find is that accidents really do matter.
至少从我们所知，这不是一个硬性的结果，但在这些实验中，你会发现事故确实很重要。
And this is important, so yes, you should expect legs or jointed sticks, how many joints they’re going to be?
这很重要，所以是的，你应该期待腿或有关节的棍子，它们有多少个关节？
Anybody’s guess.
任何人的猜测。
2:00:27 Do you expect humanoids, things with a sensing apparatus on top of a shoulder with two arms and two legs?
您是否期望类人生物，即肩膀上有感应装置、有两条手臂和两条腿的东西？
That’s probably a pretty random set of occurrences that led to that.
这可能是一组相当随机的事件导致的。
I guess what is a brain versus the nervous system?
我猜大脑与神经系统是什么？
2:00:39 Where is most of the cognition competition going on?
大多数认知竞争发生在哪里？
Yeah.
是的。
You could see that in organisms.
你可以在生物体中看到这一点。
2:00:47 Actually, I don’t know how the brain evolved.
事实上，我不知道大脑是如何进化的。
Why does it have to be in one place?
为什么它必须在一个地方？
It doesn’t have to be.
不一定是这样。
2:00:56 So, my favorite word, word of the day is liquid brains.
所以，我最喜欢的词，今天的词是液体大脑。
This idea of distributed cognition, which fascinating idea, and we’ve come to understand how much distributed cognition there is.
分布式认知的想法，这是一个令人着迷的想法，我们已经开始了解分布式认知有多少。
Obviously, you social animals like termites, and ants, that’s an example of distributed cognition, the organism is the whole colony.
显然，像白蚁和蚂蚁这样的社会性动物，这是分布式认知的一个例子，有机体是整个群体。
This is one thing that’s been really interesting in the state of the study for aliens, is that when we’ve come to recognize that human intelligence, the kinds of things that go into intelligence are distributed all across the biosphere.
在对外星人的研究中，一件非常有趣的事情是，当我们开始认识到人类智慧时，进入智慧的事物分布在整个生物圈中。
Lots of different examples of things show various pieces of what we have.
许多不同的例子展示了我们所拥有的不同部分。
Jason Wright described it as a deck of cards.
杰森赖特将其描述为一副纸牌。
The cards are all there, we got the hand that actually led to the technological progress that we see.
底牌都在那里，我们拿到的牌实际上带来了我们所看到的技术进步。
But the basic idea of using tools, the basic idea of recognizing each other eye to eye, all the things that we define as intelligence.
但是使用工具的基本思想，面对面识别彼此的基本思想，所有这些我们定义为智能。
You can find many places in many other places across many other lineages across the earth.
你可以在地球上许多其他血统的许多其他地方找到许多地方。
So, they could be very, very different with something like, yeah, maybe the hive mind idea or bacterial colonies that actually managed to come to their own version of high cognition.
所以，它们可能非常非常不同，比如，是的，也许蜂巢思维的想法或细菌菌落实际上成功地达到了自己版本的高认知能力。
Well, I wonder if we stretch out time across 10s, 20 billion years, whether there’s an Darwinian evolution stops working at some point in terms of the biology or the chemistry of the organisms, and it switches to ideas for example.
好吧，我想知道如果我们把时间拉长到 10 秒、200 亿年，达尔文进化论是否会在生物体的生物学或化学方面在某个时刻停止发挥作用，并转向思想等方面。
2:02:10 It’s much more rapidly you’re operating maybe, I guess it’s a kind of Darwinian evolution on the space of memes or whatever, as [inaudible 02:02:36]-
也许你的操作速度要快得多，我想这是模因空间或其他领域的一种达尔文式进化，如[听不清02:02:36]-
Technology seems to operate, but certainly markets can operate in ways that look very Darwinian.
技术似乎在运作，但市场当然可以以看起来非常达尔文主义的方式运作。
So, basically a planet is working hard to get to the first kind of organism that’s able to be a nice platform for ideas to compete.
因此，基本上，一个星球正在努力寻找第一种能够成为思想竞争平台的有机体。
Yeah.
是的。
And then it stops evolving there, and then these ideas that take off.
然后它就停止了发展，然后这些想法就起飞了。
Right.
正确的。
2:02:57 Because yeah, cultural Lex it’s true.
因为是的，文化莱克斯确实如此。
It’s amazing that cultural evolution totally disconnects from the Darwinian process.
令人惊讶的是，文化进化与达尔文进程完全脱节。
But I’d be careful to say that a planet is working hard to do this.
但我要小心地说，有一个星球正在努力做到这一点。
Because really looking at us, what we think of as ideas and culture, and it’s quite possible we’re going to make it another 200 years, and this is gone because it actually wasn’t a very good idea long-term, we just don’t know.
因为真正看看我们，我们所认为的思想和文化，我们很可能会再活 200 年，但这种情况已经消失了，因为从长远来看，这实际上不是一个很好的想法，我们只是不知道。
So, maybe the idea generation organism is actually the thing that destroys.
所以，也许想法产生有机体实际上是破坏性的东西。
Not the biosphere, because again, but it destroys itself.
不是生物圈，因为它又会自我毁灭。
2:03:26 It may not be very long- term, it may be very potent for a short period of time but that it’s not sustainable.
它可能不是很长期，它可能在短时间内非常有效，但它是不可持续的。
It doesn’t become, like we were talking about before, mature.
它并没有像我们之前谈论的那样变得成熟。
It’s very hard to make it into integrated into a mature bio/technosphere.
使其融入成熟的生物/技术圈是非常困难的。
And of course, evolution that is not working for anything.
当然，进化是没有任何作用的。
Well, here’s the actually interesting thing, so people are very much evolutionary biologists will get their hair will stand on end if you start talking about evolution, having a purpose or anything.
嗯，这才是真正有趣的事情，所以人们都是进化生物学家，如果你开始谈论进化，有一个目的或任何东西，他们会感到毛骨悚然。
2:03:53 But the very interesting thing about purpose is that once you do get to a idea generating species or collective organism, yeah, then all bets are off and there is goals, there is teleology.
但关于目的的非常有趣的事情是，一旦你确实有了一个产生物种或集体有机体的想法，是的，那么所有的赌注都消失了，有了目标，就有了目的论。
Now suddenly, absolutely, there’s a direction implied.
现在突然之间，绝对有一个隐含的方向。
So that’s a cool interesting thing that once you get to that, evolution stops being goalless and directionless and suddenly, yeah, we’re the ones who supply or any kind of creature like us has an absolute direction that way they decide on.
所以这是一件很酷很有趣的事情，一旦你做到了这一点，进化就不再是无目标和无方向的，突然之间，是的，我们是供应者，或者任何像我们这样的生物都有一个他们决定的绝对方向。
Although you could argue that from a perspective of the entire human civilization, we’re also directionless.
尽管你可能会说，从整个人类文明的角度来看，我们也是没有方向的。
2:04:26 We have a sense that there’s a direction in this cluster of humans.
我们感觉这群人有一个方向。
Yeah.
是的。
And then there’s another cluster has a different sense of direction, there’s all kinds of religions that are competing.
然后还有另一个集群有不同的方向感，有各种各样的宗教在竞争。
2:04:37 There’s different ideologies that are competing.
有不同的意识形态在相互竞争。
Yeah.
是的。
And when you just zoom out across, if we survive across thousands of years, it will seem directionless.
当你把目光放远时，如果我们生存了数千年，就会显得没有方向。
2:04:45 It will seem like a pinball.
它看起来像一个弹球。
It’s an unholy mess.
这是一团糟。
2:04:55 But at some point, the expansion into the solar system say, that would be both direction.
但在某种程度上，向太阳系的扩张意味着，这将是双向的。
Depending on how you look at it, it was directional.
这取决于你如何看待它，它是有方向性的。
There was a decision that the collective of human beings made to like anti-accrete, to start spreading out into the solar system.
人类集体做出了一个决定，喜欢反共生，开始向太阳系扩散。
So, that was definitely a goal there that may have been reached in some crazy nonlinear way, but it still a goal was set and it was achieved.
所以，这绝对是一个目标，可能已经以某种疯狂的非线性方式达到了，但它仍然是一个目标，并且已经实现了。
If there’s advanced civilizations out there, what do you think is the proper protocol for interacting with them?
如果那里存在先进文明，你认为与他们互动的正确协议是什么？
2:05:25 Do you think they would be peaceful?
你认为他们会平静吗？
Do you think they would be warlike?
你认为他们会好战吗？
What do we do next?
接下来我们做什么？
We detect the civilizations through all the technosignatures we’ve been talking about, maybe direct imaging, maybe there’s really strong signal.
我们通过我们一直在谈论的所有技术特征来探测文明，也许是直接成像，也许有非常强的信号。
We come up with a strategy of how to actually get there.
我们提出了如何真正实现这一目标的策略。
Yeah.
是的。
But then the general says, they always do, the military industrial complex-
但随后将军说，他们总是这样做，军事工业综合体——
We’ve watched that movie.
我们看过那部电影。
What kind of rockets and do we bring rockets?
什么样的火箭以及我们带火箭吗？
Right.
正确的。
2:06:02 Well, this general question also leads to many messaging, extraterrestrial intelligence, and I’m definitely of the opinion of you should be very careful.
嗯，这个普遍的问题也导致了许多消息传递、外星智慧，我绝对认为你应该非常小心。
I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad idea to have your head below the grass.
我认为把头埋在草地下面不一定是个坏主意。
The people who advocate like, “Oh yeah, we should be sending powerful messages that are easily detectable into interstellar space.” I’m like, “Why would you?” Because we just don’t know, I’m not going to say they are warlike.
倡导者喜欢说：“哦，是的，我们应该向星际空间发送易于检测的强大信息。”我想，“你为什么要这么做？”因为我们不知道，所以我不会说他们好战。
I’m not going to say they’re not warlike, I have no idea.
我不会说他们不好战，我不知道。
But we sure as hell, well, first of all, who gets to decide that?
但我们非常确定，首先，谁来决定呢？
The idea that a bunch of astronomers who happen to have a radio telescope, Who Speaks for Earth, which I think was a great book somebody wrote.
一群碰巧拥有射电望远镜的天文学家，《谁为地球说话》，我认为这是一本很棒的书。
2:06:44 So, definitely we should be cautious, I would say, because we just have zero information.
所以，我想说，我们绝对应该谨慎，因为我们的信息为零。
And the idea, you used to have this idea of, well, if they’re advanced, they’ve managed to survive.
你曾经有过这样的想法，如果他们很先进，他们就能生存下来。
So of course, they’re going to be wearing togas and be singing kumbaya, but I just wouldn’t assume that.
所以当然，他们会穿着长袍并唱着 kumbaya，但我只是不这么认为。
It’s also possible though that their cognitive structure is so different that we’re not even living in the same universe in a certain way.
但也有可能他们的认知结构如此不同，以至于我们甚至不以某种方式生活在同一个宇宙中。
I think we have to be prepared for that.
我认为我们必须为此做好准备。
We may not even be able to recognize each other in some way as cognizing beings.
我们甚至可能无法以某种方式认识到对方是有认知的存在。
One of my favorite movies is Arrival, I don’t know if you’ve ever seen that one.
我最喜欢的电影之一是《降临》，不知道你是否看过那部。
2:07:18 I really love that one because they literally, they have a different language.
我真的很喜欢那个，因为他们确实有一种不同的语言。
They have a different cognitive structure in terms of their language, and they’re literally living in a different physics.
他们在语言方面有不同的认知结构，而且他们实际上生活在不同的物理环境中。
Different physics, different language, different everything.
不同的物理学，不同的语言，一切都不同。
2:07:25 But in the case of Arrival, it can at least recognize that they’re there.
但就到达而言，它至少可以识别出他们在那里。
And they managed to cross the language barrier.
他们成功地跨越了语言障碍。
2:07:34 Yeah.
是的。
But that’s, both sides have an interest in communicating, which you suppose that an advanced civilization would have a curiosity.
但那就是，双方都有交流的兴趣，你认为先进的文明会有这种好奇心。
2:07:38 Because how do you become advanced without curiosity about the mysteries about the other.
因为如果不对他人的奥秘产生好奇心，你怎么能进步呢？
But also, if they’re long-lived, they may just be like, “We’re not even interested.
而且，如果他们寿命很长，他们可能会说，“我们甚至不感兴趣。
2:07:54 Say 10 million years ago, we were really interested in this, in communicating with you youngins, but now we’re not at all.” And that’s just one of the beauties of this again, is how to think about this systematically because you’re so far past the hairy edge of our experience of what we know that you want to think about it.
比如说一千万年前，我们真的对此很感兴趣，想与你们年轻人交流，但现在我们根本不感兴趣了。”这又是它的美妙之处之一，就是如何系统地思考这个问题，因为你已经远远超出了我们所知道的经验的毛茸茸的边缘，你想要思考它。
You don’t want to be like, “Don’t know, can’t say anything,” because that’s not fun.
你不想说“不知道，什么也不能说”，因为那并不有趣。
But you also have to systematically go after your own biases.
但你也必须系统地追随自己的偏见。
So, one of the things I loved about Arrival too was Carl Sagan always had this idea, “We’ll teach them math, we’ll teach them our math, then they’ll teach us their math, and then we’ll be telling each other, knock-knock jokes and swapping cures for cancer.”
所以，我也喜欢《降临》的一件事是卡尔·萨根总是有这样的想法，“我们教他们数学，我们教他们我们的数学，然后他们教我们他们的数学，然后我们会互相讲笑话，交换癌症的治疗方法。”
2:08:42 And in the movie, they send a Carl Sagan guy in and a linguist, and the Carl Sagan guy fails immediately.
在电影中，他们派了一个卡尔·萨根人和一名语言学家进来，卡尔·萨根人立即失败了。
And it’s the linguist who understands that language is actually embodied.
语言学家才明白语言实际上是具体化的。
Language is not just something that happens in your head, it’s actually the whole experience and she’s the one who breaks through.
语言不仅仅是发生在你脑海中的事情，它实际上是整个经历，而她是突破的人。
And it just points to the idea that how utterly different the cognitive structures of a different species should be.
它只是指出了不同物种的认知结构应该有多么不同的想法。
So somehow, we have to figure out how to think about it, but be so careful of our biases or figure out a systematic way to break through our biases and not just make science fiction movies.
因此，无论如何，我们必须弄清楚如何思考它，但要小心我们的偏见，或者找出一种系统的方法来突破我们的偏见，而不仅仅是拍科幻电影。
You know what I mean?
你知道我的意思？
Yeah.
是的。
2:09:17 Speaking of biases, do you think aliens have visited Earth?
说到偏见，你认为外星人来过地球吗？
You’ve mentioned that they could have visited and started civilizations and we wouldn’t even know about it if it was 100 million years ago.
你提到过，他们可能已经造访并开启了文明，但如果是在一亿年前，我们甚至都不会知道。
How can we even begin to answer this question, whether-
我们如何才能开始回答这个问题，是否——
Got to look, got to figure out ways to look.
必须去看，必须找出看的方法。
2:09:32 So, it’s not high on my list of things that I think are probable, but it certainly, it needs to be explored.
所以，它在我认为可能发生的事情清单上并不靠前，但它确实需要探索。
And unless you look, you never know.
除非你看，否则你永远不会知道。
So, looking on the moon, where would we find if aliens had passed through the solar system anytime in the last 3 billion years, where might we find artifacts?
那么，在月球上，如果外星人在过去 30 亿年中的任何时候穿过太阳系，我们会在哪里找到文物？
Where might artifacts still be around?
文物可能还在哪里？
Earth?
地球？
Probably not because of weathering and resurfacing.
可能不是因为风化和重铺。
The moon’s a good place.
月亮是个好地方。
Certain kinds of orbits, maybe they parked a probe in an orbit that was stable.
某些类型的轨道，也许他们将探测器停在稳定的轨道上。
So, you got to figure out which orbits actually you could put something there and it’ll last for a billion years.
所以，你必须弄清楚你实际上可以在哪些轨道上放置一些东西，并且它可以持续十亿年。
2:10:10 So, those are the kind of questions.
所以，这些就是这类问题。
Like I said, it’s not high on my list of thinking this could happen, but it could happen.
就像我说的，我认为这可能发生的可能性并不高，但它确实有可能发生。
Unless you look, you don’t know.
除非你看，否则你不知道。
Speaking of biases, what about if aliens visiting Earth is the elephant in the room?
说到偏见，如果访问地球的外星人是房间里的大象呢？
2:10:20 Meaning the potential of aliens, say seeding life on earth?
意思是外星人的潜力，比如说在地球上播种生命？
You mean in that directed panspermia, [inaudible 02:10:33]-
你的意思是在定向有生论中，[听不清 02:10:33]-
Directed panspermia.
定向有生论。
Yeah.
是的。
Or seeding some aspect of the evolution.
或者为进化的某些方面播下种子。
Like 2001.
就像2001年一样。
Yeah.
是的。
Yeah.
是的。
2:10:41 It’s a great story, but always with Occam’s razor or whatever with science.
这是一个很棒的故事，但总是与奥卡姆剃刀或其他科学相关。
If I can answer that question without that extra very detailed hypothesis, then I should.
如果我可以在没有额外非常详细的假设的情况下回答这个问题，那么我应该这样做。
And the idea that evolution is a natural process, that’s what I would go for first.
进化是一个自然过程，这就是我首先追求的观点。
That just seems it’s so much easier to do it that way than adding, because it’s kind of a duo sex machina thing of like, “Oh, then the aliens came down and they solved that problem that you’re trying to solve by just coming down and putting their finger on the scales.”
这样做似乎比添加要容易得多，因为这有点像双性机器，“哦，然后外星人下来了，他们解决了你试图解决的问题，只需下来并把手指放在秤上。”
So, to you, the origin of life is a pretty simple thing that doesn’t require an alien?
那么，对你来说，生命的起源是一件非常简单的事情，不需要外星人？
I wouldn’t say that, it’s not a simple thing.
我不会这么说，这不是一件简单的事情。
2:11:19 Because all you’re doing is kicking the can down the road.
因为你所做的只是把罐子踢到路上。
The aliens formed, right?
外星人诞生了，对吗？
So, you’re just saying like, ” All right, I’m just kicking the can down the road to the aliens.
所以，你只是说，“好吧，我只是把罐子踢向外星人。
What was their abiogenesis event?
他们的自然发生事件是什么？
Well, so from a different perspective, I’m just saying, it seems to me that there’s obviously advanced civilizations everywhere throughout the galaxy and through the universe from the Drake equation perspective.
嗯，所以从不同的角度来看，我只是说，在我看来，从德雷克方程的角度来看，整个银河系和整个宇宙显然都存在先进的文明。
2:11:35 And then if I was an alien, what would I do?
如果我是外星人，我会做什么？
I’ve gotten a chance to learn about the uncontacted tribes in the Amazon.
我有机会了解亚马逊地区与世隔绝的部落。
I recently went to the Amazon, and you get to understand how they function and how the humans in the Amazon, they’re in contact with the civilized world, how they interact with the uncontacted tribes.
我最近去了亚马逊，你可以了解它们如何运作，以及亚马逊的人类如何与文明世界接触，如何与未接触的部落互动。
First of all, the uncontacted tribes are very violent towards the outside world, but everybody else tried to stay away from them.
首先，未接触部落对外界非常暴力，但其他人都试图远离他们。
They try to protect them, don’t talk about them, don’t talk about their location and all this kind of stuff.
他们试图保护他们，不谈论他们，不谈论他们的位置和所有这些东西。
2:12:19 And I’ve begun to internalize and understand that perspective of why you’re doing that.
我已经开始内化并理解你为什么这样做的观点。
And if I was an alien civilization, I probably would be doing a similar kind of thing.
如果我是外星文明，我可能会做类似的事情。
And of course, there’s always the teenager or the troll who’s going to start messing with this stuff or the scientists.
当然，总有青少年或巨魔会开始搞乱这些东西或科学家。
Yeah, right.
是的，对。
And so, from our perspective, yes.
所以，从我们的角度来看，是的。
2:12:35 And if you’re in the Truman Show like Occam’s razor, but also the Occam’s razor from the perspective of the alien civilization, we have to have the humility to understand that that interaction will be extremely difficult to detect, that it would not be obvious.
如果你像《杜鲁门秀》中的奥卡姆剃刀一样，而且从外星文明的角度来看也是奥卡姆剃刀，我们必须谦虚地理解，这种相互作用将极难察觉，也不会很明显。
Right.
对。
2:12:57 I understand the logic of what you’re saying, but the problem for me with that is that first you have to assume that alien civilizations are common, which I’m not sure about it, that most of them may be dead or they’re not.
我理解你所说的逻辑，但对我来说，问题是首先你必须假设外星文明是普遍存在的，对此我不确定，他们中的大多数可能已经死亡，也可能没有。
While I think that life is common, and again, this is just my biases.
虽然我认为生活很平常，但这只是我的偏见。
So now, the problem is how do we sort out the biases we’re bringing or the assumptions we’re bringing in from the causal chain that comes out of that?
所以现在的问题是我们如何理清我们带来的偏见或我们从由此产生的因果链中带来的假设？
I would first want to try and do this without, if we’re looking at the origin of life or the evolution of life on Earth.
如果我们正在研究生命的起源或地球上生命的进化，我首先想尝试这样做。
I’d want to do it just on its own without asking for this other layer because it requires a bunch of these other assumptions which also have their own breaking of causal chains.
我想自己做这件事，而不要求其他层，因为它需要一堆其他假设，这些假设也有自己的因果链断裂。
2:13:44 Because the idea that when you ask, what would you do if you were an alien?
因为当你问，如果你是外星人你会怎么做？
But again, alien minds could be so unbelievably different that they wouldn’t even recognize the question you just posed.
但同样，外星人的思想可能是如此令人难以置信的不同，他们甚至不会认识到你刚才提出的问题。
Right.
对。
Because it’s just like we have a very particular cognitive structure or cognitive, and we’re very governed by, even if you went and talked to, this is an interesting thing to think about.
因为这就像我们有一个非常特殊的认知结构或认知，我们非常受其控制，即使你去交谈，这是一件值得思考的有趣的事情。
2:13:56 If I could suddenly magically appear 100,000 years ago and talked to a hunter-gatherer about their worldview and their motivations, I might find something that, or no resemblance to things that I think are sort of, “Oh, that’s what naturally humans do.”
如果我能突然神奇地出现在 10 万年前，并与一个狩猎采集者谈论他们的世界观和动机，我可能会发现一些与我认为不相似的东西，“哦，这就是人类自然会做的事情。”
Well, let me ask you this question.
好吧，让我问你这个问题。
2:14:20 Let’s together do the thought experience.
我们一起来做一下思想体验吧。
Yeah.
是的。
If we either create a time machine that allows us to travel back and to talk to them.
如果我们要么创造一个时间机器，让我们能够回到过去并与他们交谈。
Yeah.
是的。
Or we discover maybe a primitive alien civilization on a nearby star system, what would we do?
或者我们在附近的恒星系统上发现了原始的外星文明，我们会怎么做？
Yeah.
是的。
2:14:37 I think that’s a great question.
我认为这是一个很好的问题。
It’s interesting how that even brings up the ethical questions.
有趣的是，这甚至引发了道德问题。
Let’s say that we’d have to first sort out what are the consequences for them and what do we feel our ethical responsibilities are to them?
假设我们必须首先弄清楚对他们造成的后果是什么以及我们认为我们对他们的道德责任是什么？
And also, sorry, from a capitalist perspective, what are we to gain from this interaction?
而且，抱歉，从资本主义的角度来看，我们能从这种互动中得到什么？
Right.
对。
2:14:56 You look at the way the missionaries, missionaries had these interactions because they thought converting them to whatever religion they were was the most important, that’s what the gain was.
你看看传教士进行这些互动的方式，因为他们认为将他们转变为任何宗教是最重要的，这就是收获。
So, from our perspective, we’d have to sort that out.
因此，从我们的角度来看，我们必须解决这个问题。
I think given if we’re doing this thought experiment, we are curious, and I think eventually we’d want to reach out to them.
我认为，如果我们正在进行这个思想实验，我们会很好奇，并且我认为最终我们会想要接触他们。
I think when you say we, let’s start with the people in this room, right?
我想当你说我们时，让我们从这个房间里的人开始吧？
Yeah.
是的。
I wonder who the dominant forces are in the world, because I think there’s a lot of people, the military they’ll probably move first so they can steal whatever advantage they can from this new discovery so they can hurt China or China hurt America.
我想知道世界上的主导力量是谁，因为我认为有很多人，他们可能会首先移动军队，这样他们就可以从这个新发现中窃取任何优势，这样他们就可以伤害中国或中国伤害美国。
2:15:25 That’s one perspective.
这是一种观点。
Then there’s the capitalist school will see how the benefits and the costs here, and how can I make money off of this?
那么资本主义派就会看到这里的收益和成本如何，我怎样才能从中赚钱？
There’s opportunity here, there’s gold in them hills.
这里有机会，山里有黄金。
And I wonder, and I think the scientist is just not going to, unlike the movies-
我想知道，我认为科学家不会像电影那样——
We’re not going to get much say.
我们不会有太多发言权。
They’re going to put them-
他们会把它们——
“Hey guys, wait a minute.”
“嘿，伙计们，等一下。”
They would engage probably.
他们可能会参与。
2:16:03 Just as a human society as we are now, we would engage and we would be detectable, I think.
我认为，就像我们现在的人类社会一样，我们会参与进来，并且我们会被察觉。
In our engagement.
在我们的订婚中。
In our engagement.
在我们的订婚中。
Yeah, probably.
是的，可能是。
So, using that trivial bias logic, it just feels like aliens would need to be engaging in a very obvious way.
因此，使用这种微不足道的偏见逻辑，感觉外星人需要以一种非常明显的方式参与进来。
2:16:15 Just brings up that old direct for me paradox for me.
只是为我带来了那个古老的直接悖论。
What do you make of all the UFO sightings?
您对所有 UFO 目击事件有何看法？
I am all in favor of an open, agnostic, transparent, scientific investigation of UFOs and UAPs.
我完全赞成对 UFO 和 UAP 进行公开、不可知、透明的科学调查。
2:16:32 But the idea that there’s any data that we have that links UFOs and UAPs to non-human technology, I just think the standards, none of what is claimed to be the data lives up to the standards of evidence.
但我们拥有的任何数据都将不明飞行物和不明飞行物与非人类技术联系起来，我只是认为标准，没有一个所谓的数据符合证据标准。
So, let’s just take a moment on that idea of standards of evidence, because I made a big deal about this both in the book and elsewhere whenever I talk about this.
所以，让我们花点时间讨论一下证据标准的想法，因为每当我谈论这个问题时，我都会在书中和其他地方对此进行大讨论。
So, what people have to understand about science is we are really, our scientists, we are really mean to each other, we are brutal to each other.
所以，人们对科学必须了解的是，我们确实是我们的科学家，我们对彼此真的很刻薄，我们对彼此很残酷。
2:17:10 Because we have this thing that we call standards of evidence, and it’s the idea of you have a piece of evidence that you want to link to a claim.
因为我们有一个称为证据标准的东西，它的想法是你有一个证据，你想将其与一个主张联系起来。
And under what conditions can you say, “Oh, look, I’ve got evidence of this claim X, Y, and Z.” And in science, we are so mean to each other about whether or not that piece of evidence lives up to the standards that we have.
在什么条件下你可以说：“哦，看，我有证据证明这个说法 X、Y 和 Z。”在科学领域，我们对于证据是否符合我们现有的标准彼此非常刻薄。
And we spent 400 years determining what those standards are, and that is why cell phones work.
我们花了 400 年的时间来确定这些标准是什么，这就是手机工作的原因。
If you didn’t have super rigorous standards about what you think that’s, “Oh, this little antenna, I’ve invented a new kind of antenna that I can slip into the cell phone and I can show you that it works.”
如果你对你的想法没有超严格的标准，那就是，“哦，这个小天线，我发明了一种新型天线，我可以将它放入手机中，我可以向你展示它的工作原理。”
2:17:50 If you didn’t have these standards, every cell phone would be a brick.
如果没有这些标准，每部手机都将是一块砖头。
And when it comes to UFOs and UAPs, the evidence you have and the claim that though this shows that we are being visited by non-human, advanced civilization just doesn’t even come close to the same standards.
当谈到不明飞行物和不明飞行物时，你所掌握的证据和声称虽然这表明我们正在受到非人类的先进文明的访问，但甚至没有达到相同的标准。
I’m going to have to obey or whatever live under.
我将不得不服从或无论生活在什么之下。
If my team, the group I work with is one of them says, “Look, we’ve discovered and he wants to announce that, oh, we’ve discovered a technosignature on an alien planet.” We’re going to get shredded as we expect to be, we expect to be beaten up.
如果我的团队，即与我合作的团队之一说，“看，我们已经发现了，他想宣布，哦，我们在外星球上发现了一个技术签名。”正如我们所预料的那样，我们会被撕碎，我们预计会被殴打。
And the UAP, UFO community should expect the same thing.
UAP、UFO 社区也应该期待同样的事情。
You don’t get a pass because it’s a really cool topic.
你得不到通过是因为这是一个非常酷的话题。
2:18:32 So, that’s where I am right now.
所以，这就是我现在的处境。
I just don’t think any of the evidence is even close to anything that could support that claim.
我只是认为没有任何证据可以支持这一说法。
Well, I generally assign a lot of value to anecdotal evidence from pilots.
嗯，我通常非常重视飞行员的轶事证据。
2:18:39 Not scientific value, but just like it’s always nice to get anecdotal evidence as a first step.
没有科学价值，但就像第一步获得轶事证据总是好的一样。
Because I was like, “I wonder if there’s something there.” But unfortunately, with this topic, there’s so much excitement around that there’s a lot of people that are basically trying to make money off of it.
因为我想，“我想知道那里是否有什么东西。”但不幸的是，这个话题让人兴奋不已，以至于很多人基本上都想从中赚钱。
There’s hoaxes all this kind of stuff.
诸如此类的事情都是骗局。
So, even if there’s some signal, there’s just so much noise it’s very difficult to operate with.
因此，即使有一些信号，噪音也很大，很难操作。
So, how do we get better signal?
那么，如何获得更好的信号呢？
So, you’ve talked about if we wanted to really search for UFOs on Earth and maybe detect things like weird physics, what kind of instruments would we be using?
那么，你谈到如果我们真的想在地球上寻找不明飞行物，并可能探测到奇怪的物理现象，我们会使用什么样的仪器？
Yeah, so in the book, I talked about the idea that this is really stupid, but you want to look up, you want to look down and you want to look all around.
是的，所以在书中，我谈到了这样的想法：这真的很愚蠢，但是你想要向上看，你想要向下看，你想要环顾四周。
I think that’s brilliant.
我认为这太棒了。
2:19:31 It’s simple, not stupid.
这很简单，并不愚蠢。
It’s like literally.
就像字面意思一样。
Yeah, right.
是的，对。
2:19:35 So, you want to do ground-based detectors, upward-looking, ground-based detectors of the kind we’re already building for meteors, for tracking meteors.
所以，你想做地面探测器，我们已经为流星建造的那种向上看的地面探测器，用于跟踪流星。
You want to have space-based detectors, put them on satellites, this is what the NASA UAP panel was thinking about.
你想要天基探测器，把它们放在卫星上，这就是 NASA UAP 小组正在考虑的事情。
And then probably on, we have lots of people in the sky there should be detectors on the planes, or at least some kind of alert system that if a pilot says, “Oh, look, I’m seeing something I don’t understand.” Boop presses the red button, and that triggers the ground.
然后可能，我们天空中有很多人，飞机上应该有探测器，或者至少有某种警报系统，如果飞行员说，“哦，看，我看到了一些我不明白的东西。”布普按下红色按钮，触发地面。
2:20:03 I’m seeing something I don’t understand.
我看到一些我不明白的东西。
Boop.
噗。
Presses the red button and that triggers the ground-based and space-based data collectors.
按下红色按钮，就会触发地基和天基数据收集器。
And then the data collectors themselves, this is something that people really don’t understand and it’s so important.
然后是数据收集者本身，这是人们真正不理解的事情，但它非常重要。
In order to actually do science with anything, the data you have, you have to understand where it came from down to the nth degree.
为了真正用任何东西（你拥有的数据）进行科学研究，你必须彻底了解它的来源。
You have to know how that camera behaves in a bunch of different wavelengths.
您必须了解相机在多种不同波长下的表现。
You have to have characterized that.
你必须已经描述了这一点。
You have to know what the software does, what the limits of the software are possible.
您必须知道该软件的用途以及该软件可能存在的限制。
You have to know what happened to the camera.
你必须知道相机发生了什么。
Was it refurbished recently?
最近翻新过吗？
In every spectral wavelength in all of its data collection and processing, you have to know all of those steps and have them all characterized because especially if you want to claim like, “Oh my God, I saw something, take a right-hand turn at Mach-500.” Right?
在所有数据收集和处理的每个光谱波长中，您必须了解所有这些步骤并对其进行全部表征，因为特别是如果您想声称“天哪，我看到了一些东西，请以 500 马赫数右转。”对吗？
2:20:51 You better have all of that nailed down before you make that kind of claim.
在你做出这样的声明之前，你最好先把所有这些都搞清楚。
So we have to have characterized detectors looking up, down, and maybe on planes themselves, we need a rational search strategy.
所以我们必须有向上、向下看的特征探测器，也许在飞机本身上，我们需要一个合理的搜索策略。
So let’s say you want to lay out these ground-based detectors.
假设您想要布置这些地面探测器。
Where do you put them?
你把它们放在哪里？
Right?
对吗？
There’s only so much money in the world, so do you want to put them near places where you’ve seen a lot of things beforehand or do you want to have them try and do sparse coverage of the entire country?
世界上的钱就这么多，所以你想把它们放在你之前见过很多东西的地方，还是想让它们尝试对整个国家进行稀疏覆盖？
2:21:17 And then you need the data analysts analysis, right?
然后你需要数据分析师分析，对吗？
You’re going to have so much data, so many false positives or false triggering that you need a way of sorting through enormous amounts of data and figuring out what you’re going to throw out and what you’re going to keep, and all of these things we’re used to doing in other scientific enterprises.
您将拥有如此多的数据、如此多的误报或错误触发，以至于您需要一种方法来对大量数据进行排序，并弄清楚您将丢弃什么以及您将保留什么，以及我们在其他科学企业中习惯做的所有这些事情。
And without that, if we don’t do that, we’re going to be having the same damn argument about these things for the next 100 years.
如果没有这一点，如果我们不这样做，我们将在接下来的 100 年里对这些事情进行同样的该死的争论。
But if I asked you, I give you $1 trillion and asked you to allocate to one place looking out, SETI or looking at Earth, should you allocate it?
但如果我问你，我给你 1 万亿美元，并要求你分配给一个向外看的地方，SETI 或观察地球，你应该分配吗？
Oh God, looking out.
天啊，看出来了。
2:21:52 Looking out.
向外看。
Because that’s the, as I always like to say, here’s my codification of this.
因为正如我总是喜欢说的那样，这是我对此的编纂。
If you said, “Hey, Adam, I’d like to find some Nebraskans.” And I said, “Oh, good, let’s go to the Himalayas.” You’d be like, “Why am I going there?” I’m like, “Well, maybe there’s some Himalayas, some Nebraskans in Himalayas.” You’d say, “No, no.
如果你说：“嘿，亚当，我想找一些内布拉斯加人。”我说：“哦，好，我们去喜马拉雅山吧。”你会说，“我为什么要去那里？”我想，“好吧，也许有一些喜马拉雅山，喜马拉雅山里有一些内布拉斯加人。”你会说：“不，不。
Let’s go to Nebraska.” If we’re looking for aliens, why don’t we look on alien planets where they live?
我们去内布拉斯加州吧。”如果我们要寻找外星人，为什么不去他们居住的外星球上寻找呢？
We have that technology now as opposed to the bucket of assumptions that you have to come up with in order to say like, “Oh, they’re here right now.
我们现在拥有这项技术，而不是你必须提出一系列假设才能说：“哦，他们现在就在这里。
They just happen to be here right now.” And also the very important thing, I called this the high beam argument to deal with the UFO stuff, you have to answer these weird, irrational things that are happening.
他们只是碰巧现在就在这里。”还有非常重要的事情，我称之为处理 UFO 问题的远光争论，你必须回答这些正在发生的奇怪的、非理性的事情。
2:22:36 Like, okay, there’s an advanced civilization that is visiting Earth regularly.
就像，好吧，有一个先进的文明定期访问地球。
They don’t want to be detected.
他们不想被发现。
They’ve got super powerful technology, but they really suck at using it because we keep seeing them, we keep seeing them, but then they disappear.
他们拥有超级强大的技术，但他们真的不擅长使用它，因为我们不断看到它们，我们不断看到它们，但随后它们就消失了。
I mean, explain to me what rational world that works under.
我的意思是，向我解释一下理性世界是如何运作的。
So there’s that whole sort of argument.
所以就有了这样的争论。
You’ve got to explain why if they want to stay hidden, are they so bad at it?
你必须解释为什么如果他们想隐藏起来，他们会这么不擅长吗？
So that’s why I take that level of difficulty and then I put it on top of where should I look?
所以这就是为什么我选择这个难度级别，然后把它放在我应该看的地方之上？
I should look at where they’re from.
我应该看看他们来自哪里。
That makes me want to look at do the telescopic stuff.
这让我想看看做伸缩式的东西。
Yeah, I think the more likely explanation is either the sensors are not working correctly or it’s secret military technology being tested.
是的，我认为更可能的解释是传感器无法正常工作，或者正在测试秘密军事技术。
Absolutely.
绝对的。
2:23:27 I mean, listen, that’s why again, I think UAP, absolutely UAP should be studied scientifically, but if I had to make a bet and it’s just a bet, I would say this is pure state adversary stuff.
我的意思是，听着，这就是为什么，我认为 UAP，绝对应该对 UAP 进行科学研究，但如果我必须打赌，而这只是一个赌注，我会说这是纯粹的国家对手的东西。
When I did, I did a New York Times op-ed for this in 2021, which blew up, and so I had a lot of people talking to me.
当我这样做的时候，我在 2021 年为此发表了一篇《纽约时报》专栏文章，这篇文章引起了轰动，所以有很多人跟我说话。
While I was doing that.
当我这样做的时候。
I sort of looked at the signals intelligence people, the SIGINT and EINT, electronic intelligence communities, and what they were saying about the New York Times articles and the various videos, and really none of them were talking about UFOs.
我查看了信号情报人员、SIGINT 和 EINT、电子情报社区，以及他们对《纽约时报》文章和各种视频的看法，实际上他们都没有谈论 UFO。
They were all talking about pure state.
他们都在谈论纯粹的状态。
That’s why I learned the word pure state adversaries, how even simple drone technologies and you purposely want to do this.
这就是为什么我学到了纯粹国家对手这个词，即使是简单的无人机技术，你也故意想要这样做。
You want to fake signals into the electronics of their adversary, so they crank it up so then you can just soak up all the electromagnetic radiation and know exactly what those advanced radars can do.
你想将信号伪造到对手的电子设备中，所以他们会加大信号强度，这样你就可以吸收所有的电磁辐射，并准确地知道这些先进雷达的功能。
That said, I’m not saying that’s what this is.
也就是说，我并不是说事情就是这样。
2:24:25 If I was the head of an alien civilization and I chose not to minimize the amount of contact I’m doing, I would try to figure out what would these humans, what would these aliens like to see?
如果我是一个外星文明的领导者，并且我选择不减少我正在做的接触，我会尝试弄清楚这些人类、这些外星人希望看到什么？
That’s why the big heads in the humanoid form, I mean, that’s kind of how I would approach communication.
这就是为什么人形形态的大脑袋，我的意思是，这就是我进行交流的方式。
If I was much more intelligent, I would observe them enough.
如果我更聪明的话，我就会充分观察它们。
It’s like, all right, if I wanted to communicate with an ant colony, I would observe it long enough to see what are the basic elements of communication.
好吧，如果我想与蚁群交流，我会观察它足够长的时间，看看交流的基本要素是什么。
And maybe I would do a trivial thing, do a fake ant in there.
也许我会做一件小事，在那里做一只假蚂蚁。
Right.
对。
2:25:07 A robot ant.
一只机器人蚂蚁。
A robot ant, but then it’s not enough to just do a robot ant.
一个机器蚂蚁，但仅仅做一个机器蚂蚁是不够的。
2:25:08 You have to do a robot ant that moves in the way they do, and maybe aliens are just shitty at doing the robot ants.
你必须做一个像他们一样移动的机器人蚂蚁，也许外星人在做机器人蚂蚁方面很糟糕。
But no, I just wanted to make the case for that,
但不，我只是想证明这一点，
This is the plot actually of a great science fiction book called Eon by Greg Baer, and the idea was these sort of, this is actually where my first, I became sort of more than agnostic, anti-medy, because the idea is that yes, our aliens come, they sort of make their arrival and really their point is to get rid of us.
这实际上是格雷格·贝尔（Greg Baer）写的一本名为《永恒》（Eon）的伟大科幻小说的情节，其想法是这样的，这实际上是我的第一次，我变得不仅仅是不可知论者、反医学者，因为这个想法是，是的，我们的外星人来了，他们的到来，他们的目的实际上是摆脱我们。
2:25:21 It’s the dark forest hypothesis.
这就是黑暗森林假说。
And what they do is they literally, the way they present themselves is in this sort of classic UFO thing, and they do it and they arrive at, this was during the Soviet Union.
他们所做的就是他们字面上的，他们展示自己的方式是在这种经典的不明飞行物中，他们这样做了，他们到达了，这是在苏联时期。
They arrive at the USSR, they arrive in China, and they’re kind of faking us out so that we never can organize ourselves against…
他们到达苏联，他们到达中国，他们有点欺骗我们，这样我们就永远无法组织起来反对……
So it was really, they did exactly what you’re talking about, but for nefarious purposes.
所以，他们确实做了你所说的事情，但出于邪恶的目的。
Okay, let me ask the pothead question.
好吧，我来问一下脑残粉的问题。
2:26:03 Yet another pothead-
又一个笨蛋——
Another pothead.
又一个瘾君子。
2:26:07 The whole conversation-
整个对话——
I’m sorry.
对不起。
Boggs before breakfast.
早餐前的博格斯。
It’s signs and pothead questions back and forth.
这是来来回回的迹象和傻瓜问题。
2:26:11 Okay, what if aliens take a form that’s unlike what we kind of traditionally envision in analyzing physical objects?
好吧，如果外星人的形态与我们在分析物理对象时传统上设想的形态不同怎么办？
What if they take the form of say ideas?
如果他们采取想法的形式怎么办？
What if real pothead, if it’s consciousness itself, like the subjective experience as an alien being, maybe ideas and is an easier one to visualize?
如果真正的瘾君子，如果它是意识本身，就像作为一个外星人的主观体验，也许是想法，而且更容易想象，那又怎么样？
Because we can think of ideas as entities traveling from human to human.
因为我们可以将思想视为在人与人之间传播的实体。
I made the claim that the most important, that finding life any kind of life would be the most important discovery in human history.
我声称最重要的是，找到任何一种生命都将是人类历史上最重要的发现。
2:26:44 And one of the reasons is, again, as I said, that life, if we’re not an accident and there’s other life, then there’s probably lots of other life.
正如我所说，原因之一是，生命，如果我们不是偶然，并且存在其他生命，那么可能还有很多其他生命。
And because the most significant thing about life is it can innovate, right?
因为生命最重要的事情就是它可以创新，对吧？
If I give you a star and tell you the mass and the composition, you can basically pretty much use the laws of physics, tell exactly what’s going to happen to that star over its entire lifetime.
如果我给你一颗恒星并告诉你质量和成分，你基本上可以使用物理定律，准确地告诉你这颗恒星在其整个生命周期中会发生什么。
Maybe not the little tiny details, but overall it’s going to be a white dwarf, if it’s going to be a black hole end of story.
也许不是那些微小的细节，但总的来说，如果它是一个黑洞的话，它将会是一颗白矮星。
If I gave you a single cell and said, “What’s going to happen in a few billion years?” You’d never be able to predict a giant rabbit that can punch you in the face, right?
如果我给你一个细胞并说：“几十亿年后会发生什么？”你永远无法预测一只巨大的兔子会打你的脸，对吧？
Yeah.
是的。
A kangaroo.
一只袋鼠。
2:27:26 So life has this possibility of innovating, of being creative.
所以生活有创新、有创造力的可能性。
So what it means is, and that’s kind of a fundamental definition of what it means to be alive.
所以它的意思是，这就是活着的基本定义。
It goes past itself.
它超越了它自己。
So give life enough time and what are the end result?
那么给生命足够的时间，最终的结果是什么？
That’s why I love science fiction so much.
这就是我如此喜爱科幻小说的原因。
At some point, does life reach a point where it climbs into the laws of physics itself.
在某些时候，生命是否会达到物理定律本身的程度。
It becomes the laws of physics or these sort of lie at the extreme limits of thinking about what we mean by reality, what we mean by experience.
它成为物理定律，或者说，这些定律处于思考我们所说的现实、我们所说的经验的极限。
But I’m not sure there was much we can do with them scientifically, but they’re open-ended question about the open-ended nature of what it means to be alive and what life can do.
但我不确定我们能从科学上对它们做些什么，但它们是关于活着意味着什么以及生命可以做什么的开放式本质的开放式问题。
Since you said it’s the biggest question, which is an interesting thought experiment, what is the biggest scientific question we can possibly answer?
既然你说这是最大的问题，这是一个有趣的思想实验，那么我们可以回答的最大的科学问题是什么？
2:28:14 Some people might say about what happened before the Big Bang, some big physics questions about the universe.
有些人可能会说大爆炸之前发生的事情，一些关于宇宙的重大物理问题。
I could see the argument for how many alien civilizations or if there’s other life out there?
我可以看到关于有多少外星文明或者是否存在其他生命的争论？
You want to speak to that a little bit?
你想谈谈这个吗？
Why is it the biggest question in…
为什么这是最大的问题......
Why is it number one in your top five?
为什么它在你的前五名中排名第一？
I’ve evolved in this, right?
我在这方面已经进化了，对吗？
2:28:43 I started off as a theoretical physicist.
我一开始是一名理论物理学家。
I went into computational astrophysics, magnetohydrodynamics of star formation, but I always was a philosophy minor.
我研究了计算天体物理学、恒星形成的磁流体动力学，但我一直辅修哲学。
I always had these sort of bigger questions sort of floating around the back of my mind.
我的脑海里总是浮现出这些更大的问题。
And what I’ve come to now is the most important question for physics is, what is life?
我现在想到的物理学最重要的问题是，生命是什么？
What the hell is the difference between a rock and a cell, fundamentally?
从根本上来说，岩石和细胞之间到底有什么区别？
And what I really mean by this, this is where I’m going to go non-traditional, is that really the fundamental question that is agency.
我真正的意思是，这就是我要非传统的地方，这确实是代理的基本问题。
What does it mean to be an autonomous agent?
成为自主代理人意味着什么？
How the hell does that happen?
这到底是怎么发生的？
I’m not a reductionist.
我不是还原论者。
I’m not somebody who’s just like, well, you just put together enough chemicals and bing, bang, boom, and it suddenly appears there’s something that really is going to demand a reconception of what nature itself is.
我不是那种会说，好吧，你只要把足够的化学物质放在一起，然后突然出现一些东西，真的需要重新认识自然本身是什么。
2:29:30 And so yeah, black holes are super cool.
所以，是的，黑洞非常酷。
Cosmology is super cool.
宇宙学超级酷。
But really this question of what is life?
但生命是什么这个问题真的吗？
Especially, from by viewing it from the inside, because it’s really about the verb to be.
尤其是从内部观察，因为它实际上是关于动词“to be”的。
Really what is the most impressing philosophical question beyond science?
科学之外最令人印象深刻的哲学问题到底是什么？
Is the verb to be, what is being?
是动词，什么是存在？
This is what Stephen Hawking said when he talked about, “What puts the fire in the equations?
这就是史蒂芬·霍金在谈到“是什么让方程着火了？
The fire.” The fire is this presence and this is where it touches things like whatever you want to say it, the sacred, spirituality, whatever you want to talk about.
火。”火就是这种存在，它在这里触及诸如你想说的任何事物，神圣的，灵性的，无论你想谈论的任何事物。
My first book was about science and human spirituality.
我的第一本书是关于科学和人类灵性的。
So this question of life, what makes life as a physical system so different is to me much more because that is where being appears.
所以这个生命问题，是什么让生命作为一个物理系统如此不同，对我来说更重要，因为那是存在出现的地方。
Being doesn’t appear out there.
存在并不出现在那里。
The only place that ever appears to any of us is us.
对我们任何人来说，唯一出现的地方就是我们自己。
I can do this kind of projection into this third person thing, but nobody ever has that, that God’s eye view.
我可以对第三人称进行这种投射，但没有人拥有上帝的视角。
That’s a story we tell.
这是我们讲的一个故事。
This is where, this between us is where the verb to be, appears.
这就是我们之间的 this 出现动词 to be 的地方。
So this is something that you write about in The Blind Spot, why science cannot ignore human experience, sort of trying to pull the fire into the process of science.
这就是你在《盲点》中写的内容，为什么科学不能忽视人类的经验，有点试图将火带入科学的进程。
2:30:36 And it’s a kind of critique of materialism.
这是对唯物主义的一种批判。
Can you explain the main thesis of this book?
您能解释一下这本书的主要论点吗？
Yeah.
是的。
2:30:56 So the idea of The Blind Spot is that there is this thing that is central to science.
所以《盲点》的想法是，有一个东西是科学的核心。
So we’re using the blind spot as a metaphor.
所以我们用盲点来比喻。
So the eye has an optic nerve, and the optic nerve is what allows vision to happen.
因此，眼睛有视神经，视神经使视觉得以发生。
So you can’t have vision without the optic nerve, but actually you’re blind to the optic nerve.
所以没有视神经你就没有视力，但实际上你对视神经是盲目的。
There’s a little hole in your vision where the optic nerve is.
你的视力中有一个小洞，就是视神经所在的地方。
And what we’re saying is that science has something like this.
我们所说的是科学有这样的东西。
There’s something that without which science would not be possible, but that science, the way it’s been configured, and actually, when we mean the blind spot, I’ll get into exactly what I mean what it is, but it’s not really science.
如果没有某些东西，科学就不可能存在，但是科学，它的配置方式，实际上，当我们指的是盲点时，我会准确地解释它是什么，但这不是真正的科学。
It is a set of ideas that got glued onto science.
这是一系列与科学紧密相连的想法。
It’s a metaphysics that got glued on science.
这是一种与科学紧密相连的形而上学。
And so what is that thing?
那么那东西是什么？
What is the blind spot?
什么是盲点？
It’s experience.
这是经验。
It is presence.
这是存在。
And if I experience, people have to be very careful.
如果我经历过，人们必须非常小心。
I’m not talking about being an observer.
我不是在谈论成为观察者。
There’s lots of words for it.
有很多词可以形容它。
There’s direct experience.
有直接的经验。
There is presence.
有存在感。
Being.
存在。
The life world.
生活世界。
Within the philosophy called phenomenology.
在称为现象学的哲学中。
There’s the life world.
这就是生活的世界。
2:32:00 It’s this sort of raw presence that you can’t get away from until you die.
这种原始的存在是你直到死都无法摆脱的。
And then who the hell knows that as long as you’re around, it’s there.
谁知道只要你在身边，它就在那里。
And what we’re saying is that, that is the way to say this, that is the precondition for the possibility of science and the whole nature of science, the way it has evolved is that it purposely pushed that out.
我们要说的是，这就是这样说的方式，这是科学可能性和科学整体本质的先决条件，它进化的方式是它故意将其推出。
It pushed that out.
它把它推出了。
So it could make progress, and that’s fine for a certain class of problems.
所以它可以取得进展，这对于解决某一类问题来说是很好的。
But when we try to answer, when we try and go deeper, there’s a whole other class of problems.
但当我们试图回答时，当我们尝试更深入地探讨时，就会发现另一类问题。
The nature of consciousness, the nature of time, quantum mechanics, that comes back to bite us.
意识的本质、时间的本质、量子力学，都会反过来咬住我们。
And that if we don’t learn how to take, understand that, that is always the background, that experience is always the background.
如果我们不学习如何接受、理解这一点，那永远是背景，那段经历永远是背景。
Then we just end up with these paradoxes and that require this intellectual yoga to get out of.
然后我们就会陷入这些悖论，而这需要这种智力瑜伽来摆脱。
I think you give a bunch of examples of that.
我想你举了很多例子。
2:32:54 Looking at temperature as a number is a very objective, scientific way of looking at that.
将温度视为一个数字是一种非常客观、科学的看待温度的方法。
And then there’s the experience of the temperature.
然后是温度的体验。
And how you build the parable of temperature that we call it.
以及如何构建我们称之为温度的寓言。
2:33:02 So what is the blind spot?
那么什么是盲点呢？
We use the term it’s a constellation.
我们使用“星座”这个词。
It’s not just materialism.
这不仅仅是唯物主义。
It’s a constellation of ideas that are all really sort of philosophical views.
这是一系列真正属于哲学观点的想法。
They’re not what science says, but because of the evolution of the history of science and culture got like pin the tail on the donkey, they were sort of pinned on and to tell us that this is what science says.
它们不是科学所说的那样，但由于科学和文化历史的演变就像把尾巴钉在驴子上一样，它们有点被钉住并告诉我们这就是科学所说的。
2:33:25 So what is it?
那么它是什么？
One is reductionism that you are nothing but your nerve cells, which are nothing but the chemistry, which is nothing but all the way down to quarks.
一种是还原论，认为你只不过是神经细胞，神经细胞只不过是化学物质，而化学物质只不过是一直到夸克。
That’s it.
就是这样。
So that’s reductionism.
这就是还原论。
2:33:36 The objective frame that science gives us this god’s eye view, this third-person view of the world to view the world from the outside.
科学给我们提供了上帝视角、第三人称世界观的客观框架，从外部看世界。
That’s what science bequeaths to us, that view.
这就是科学留给我们的观点。
2:33:46 Physicalism, that everything in the world is basically made of stuff.
物理主义，认为世界上的一切基本上都是由物质组成的。
There’s nothing else to talk about that, that’s all there is.
没有什么可谈的，仅此而已。
And everything can be reduced to that.
一切都可以归结为这一点。
2:33:55 And then also the reification of mathematics, that mathematics is somehow more real than this.
然后还有数学的具体化，数学在某种程度上比这更真实。
2:34:01 And there’s a bunch of other things.
还有很多其他的事情。
But all these together, what they all do is they end up pushing experience out and saying experience is an epiphenomena.
但所有这些加在一起，他们所做的就是最终将经验排除在外，并说经验是一种附带现象。
Consciousness.
意识。
I tend not to use the word consciousness.
我倾向于不使用意识这个词。
I think it leads us in the wrong direction.
我认为这把我们引向了错误的方向。
We should focus on experience because it is a verb kind of in a way.
我们应该关注经验，因为它在某种程度上是一种动词。
It is verb-like and by being blind to that, we end up with these paradoxes and problems that really not only block science, but also have been detrimental to society as a whole, especially where we’re at right now.
它就像动词一样，如果对此视而不见，我们最终会遇到这些悖论和问题，这些悖论和问题不仅阻碍了科学，而且对整个社会有害，尤其是我们现在所处的位置。
So you actually say that, that from a perspective of detrimental society, that there’s a crisis of meaning, and then we respond to that in a way that’s counterproductive to these bigger questions, scientific questions.
所以你实际上是说，从有害社会的角度来看，存在意义危机，然后我们以一种对这些更大的问题、科学问题适得其反的方式做出回应。
2:34:33 So the three ways responses you mentioned is scientific triumphalism, and then on the other side is rejecting science completely, both on the left and the right.
所以你提到的三种反应方式是科学必胜主义，而另一方面是完全拒绝科学，无论是左派还是右派。
I think the postmodernist on the left and the anti-establishment people on the right, and then just pseudoscience that kind of does this in-between thing.
我认为后现代主义者在左翼，反建制人士在右翼，然后伪科学就在做这种介于两者之间的事情。
Can you just speak to those responses and to the crisis of meaning?
您能谈谈这些反应和意义危机吗？
Right, right.
对，对。
2:35:08 So the crisis of meaning is that on the one hand, science wants to tell us that we’re insignificant.
所以意义的危机在于，一方面，科学想要告诉我们，我们是微不足道的。
We’re not important.
我们并不重要。
We’re just biological machines.
我们只是生物机器。
And so we’re basically an insignificant part of the universe.
所以我们基本上是宇宙中微不足道的一部分。
On the other hand, we also find ourselves being completely significant.
另一方面，我们也发现自己非常重要。
In cosmology, we have to figure out how to look from the inside.
在宇宙学中，我们必须弄清楚如何从内部观察。
At cosmology, we’re always the observers.
在宇宙学中，我们始终是观察者。
We’re at the center of this collapsing wavefront of light.
我们正处于坍缩的光波前的中心。
Quantum mechanics, it really comes in, it comes the measurement problem just puts us front and center.
量子力学，它真的进来了，它的测量问题让我们成为了焦点。
And we’ve spent 100…
我们已经花了100...
Some people spent 100 years trying to ignore the measurement part of the measurement problem.
有些人花了 100 年的时间试图忽略测量问题中的测量部分。
So on the one hand, we’re insignificant, and on the other hand, we’re central.
因此，一方面，我们是微不足道的，但另一方面，我们又是中心。
So which one is it?
那么是哪一个呢？
And so this all comes from not understanding actually the foundational role of experience, this inability, we can’t do science without already being present in the world.
因此，这一切都源于对经验的基础作用的不理解，这种无能，我们在没有出现在世界上的情况下就无法进行科学研究。
2:36:03 We can’t reduce what happens in science to some sort of formal…
我们不能将科学中发生的事情简化为某种形式……
A lot of it is about we love our formal systems, our mathematics, and we’re substituting.
这很大程度上是因为我们热爱我们的形式系统、我们的数学，以及我们正在替代。
That’s one of the things that, there’s two philosophers we really like for our heroes.
这是我们真正喜欢的英雄中有两位哲学家的原因之一。
One is Husserl, who is a mathematician, who invented phenomenology.
其中之一是胡塞尔，他是一位数学家，发明了现象学。
And the other is Whitehead, who’s one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century.
另一位是怀特海，他是 20 世纪最伟大的数学家之一。
And Husserl came up with this idea of the surreptitious substitution.
胡塞尔提出了秘密替代的想法。
Part of The Blind Spot is substituting a formal system, a calculus of data for actual experience that that’s more important.
盲点的一部分是用一个正式的系统，一个更重要的实际经验的数据计算来代替。
2:36:39 And so let me just do, before I go to those three responses, let’s just do the parable of temperature because I think people can…
因此，在我回答这三个问题之前，让我先做一个关于温度的比喻，因为我认为人们可以……
It’ll help them understand what we mean.
这将帮助他们理解我们的意思。
So think about degree Celsius.
所以考虑一下摄氏度。
We have in the modern scientific culture we live in, we think like, oh yeah, degree Celsius.
在我们生活的现代科学文化中，我们认为，哦，是的，摄氏度。
They’re out there.
他们就在那里。
The universe, the molecular cloud in space is 10 degrees Kelvin.
宇宙中，太空中的分子云为10开尔文。
The way we got there is we’ve forgotten how that idea is rooted in experience.
我们到达那里的方式是我们忘记了这个想法是如何植根于经验的。
We started off with science by, we had the subjective experience of hot and cold.
我们从科学开始，我们有热和冷的主观体验。
I feel hot, I feel cold, you feel hot, you feel cold.
我感觉热，我感觉冷，你感觉热，你感觉冷。
Science was this process of trying to extract from those experiences what Michel Bitbol philosopher calls, “The structural invariance.” The things that we could both kind of agree on.
科学就是试图从这些经验中提取哲学家米歇尔·比特博尔所说的“结构不变性”的过程。我们双方都可以达成一致的事情。
So we figured out like, oh, we could make a gradiated little cylinder that’s got mercury in it and that hot things will be higher in on that gradiated cylinder, cold things will be lower, and we can both kind of figure out what we’re going to agree on are our standards for that.
所以我们想，哦，我们可以制作一个里面有汞的渐变小圆柱体，在这个渐变圆柱体上热的东西会更高，冷的东西会更低，我们都可以弄清楚我们将同意的标准是什么。
And then we have thermometry, yay.
然后我们有温度测量，是的。
We have a way of having a structural invariant of this sort of very personal experience of hot or cold.
我们有一种方法可以使这种非常个人化的热或冷体验具有结构不变性。
2:37:53 And then from that, we can come up with thermodynamics, etc. And then we end up at the bottom of that with this idea of everyday I wake up and I check my phone and I’m like, oh, it’s going to be 60 degrees out.
然后我们可以得出热力学等等。然后我们最终会想到每天我醒来，检查我的手机，然后我就想，哦，气温将会是 60 度。
Great.
伟大的。
And we start thinking that 60 degrees is more real than hot and cold.
我们开始认为 60 度比冷热更真实。
That thermodynamics, the whole formal structure of thermodynamics is more real than the basic experience of hot and cold that it came from.
热力学，热力学的整个形式结构比它所来自的热和冷的基本经验更真实。
It required that bodily experience that also, not just me, I have to tell you, it’s part of my communication with you, cold today, isn’t it?
它需要身体体验，不仅仅是我，我必须告诉你，这是我与你交流的一部分，今天很冷，不是吗？
That from that basic irreducible experience of being in the world with everything that it involves, I developed degree Celsius, but then I forgot about it.
从存在于这个世界及其所涉及的一切的基本不可还原的经验中，我发展了摄氏度，但后来我忘记了它。
I forgot the experience.
我忘记了经历。
So that’s called the amnesia of experience.
这就是所谓的经验失忆症。
2:38:41 So that’s what we mean by how the blind spot emerges, how we end up, how science purposely pushes experience out of the way so it can make progress, but then it forgets that experience was important.
这就是我们所说的盲点是如何出现的，我们是如何结束的，科学如何故意排除经验以取得进步，但随后它忘记了经验的重要性。
So where does this show up?
那么这会出现在哪里呢？
Why is this?
这是为什么呢？
What are the responses to trying to get this back in and where this crisis of meaning emerge?
试图恢复这一点的反应是什么？这场意义危机是在哪里出现的？
So scientific triumphalism is the idea that the only thing that’s true for us are scientific truths.
因此，科学必胜主义认为，对我们来说唯一正确的就是科学真理。
Unless it can be codified in a formal system and represented as data, captured in some kind of scientific causal network, it doesn’t even exist.
除非它可以被编入正式系统并表示为数据，在某种科学因果网络中捕获，否则它甚至不存在。
And anything else that’s not part of it that can be formalized in that way is an epiphenomenon.
任何不属于它的一部分、可以以这种方式形式化的东西都是一种附带现象。
It’s not real.
这不是真的。
2:39:25 So scientific triumphalism is this response to the weirdness of, I could call it the mystery, the weirdness of experience by just ignoring it completely.
因此，科学必胜主义是对经验的怪异，我可以称之为神秘，怪异的反应，完全忽视它。
So there’s no other truth.
所以没有其他真理。
Art, music, human spirituality, it’s all actually reducible it neural correlates.
艺术、音乐、人类的灵性，实际上都是可以通过神经关联来简化的。
So that’s one way that it’s been dealt with.
所以这是处理它的一种方法。
2:39:47 The other way is this sort of, right, you’ve got on the postmodern, the left academic left, you get this thing, science is just a game.
另一种方式是这样的，对，你已经进入了后现代，左派学术左派，你明白了，科学只是一个游戏。
It’s just a game from the powerful come up with, which is also not true.
这只是强者想出的游戏，这也不是事实。
Science is totally potent and requires an account for what is happening.
科学是非常强大的，需要对正在发生的事情做出解释。
So that’s another way to push science away or respond to it.
所以这是另一种排斥科学或回应科学的方式。
The denial, science denial that happens.
否认，科学否认的发生。
That’s also another way of not understanding the balance that science is trying, that we need to establish with experience.
这也是不理解科学正在尝试的平衡的另一种方式，我们需要通过经验来建立这种平衡。
2:40:18 And then there’s just pseudoscience, which wants to sort of say, oh, the new age movement or whatever, which wants to deal with experience by kind of elevating it in this weird pseudo spiritual way or that doesn’t have the rigor of science.
然后就是伪科学，它想说，哦，新时代运动或其他什么，它想通过以这种奇怪的伪精神方式提升经验来处理经验，或者不具备科学的严谨性。
2:40:33 So all of these ways, all of these responses, we have this difficulty about experience.
因此，所有这些方式、所有这些反应，我们在体验方面都遇到了困难。
We need to understand how experience fits into the web of meaning, and we don’t really have a good way of doing it yet.
我们需要了解经验如何融入意义网络，但我们还没有真正做到这一点的好方法。
And the point of the book was to identify very clearly how the problem manifests, what the problem is, and what its effects are in the various sciences.
这本书的目的是非常清楚地确定问题是如何表现的、问题是什么以及它对各种科学的影响是什么。
And by the way, we should mention that at least the first two responses, they kind of feed each other just to observe the scientific community, those who gravitate a little bit towards the scientific triumphalism, is an arrogance that builds in the human soul.
顺便说一句，我们应该提到，至少前两种反应，它们互相促进，只是为了观察科学界，那些稍微倾向于科学必胜主义的人，是人类灵魂中建立的傲慢。
2:40:55 I mean, it has to do with PhDs, it has to do with sitting on an academic throne, all those things.
我的意思是，这与博士学位有关，与坐在学术宝座上，所有这些事情有关。
And the human nature with the egos and so on, it builds.
人性与自我等等，它建立起来。
And of course, that nobody likes arrogance.
当然，没有人喜欢傲慢。
And so those that reject science, the arrogance is fuel for the people that reject science.
因此，那些拒绝科学的人，傲慢是那些拒绝科学的人的燃料。
I absolutely agree.
我绝对同意。
It just goes back and is this divide that builds.
它只是回到过去，并且是这种分歧的形成。
Yeah, no, and that was a problem when you saw, so like I said, my first book was about science and human spirituality.
是的，不，当你看到时，这是一个问题，所以就像我说的，我的第一本书是关于科学和人类灵性的。
2:41:37 So I was trying to say that science is actually, if we look at what happens in human spirituality, not religion.
所以我想说的是，如果我们看看人类灵性中发生的事情，科学实际上不是宗教。
Religion is about politics, but about for the entire history of the species, we’ve had this experience of, for lack of a better word, the sacredness.
宗教与政治有关，但在人类的整个历史中，我们已经体验到了神圣性（因为找不到更好的词）。
I’m not connecting this God or anything.
我没有把这个上帝或任何东西联系起来。
I’m just saying this experience of the more, and then with the new atheist movement, you got people saying that, “Anybody who feels that is an idiot.” They just can’t handle the hardcore science.
我只是说更多的经历，然后随着新的无神论运动，人们会说，“任何有这种感觉的人都是白痴。”他们就是无法处理核心科学。
When in fact their views of the world are so denuded of, they can’t even see the role that experience plays in how they came up with their formal systems.
事实上，他们的世界观被剥夺了，他们甚至看不到经验在他们如何提出正式系统中所扮演的角色。
And experience fundamentally is weird, mysterious, it’s, it kind of goes down forever in some sense.
体验从根本上来说是奇怪的、神秘的，从某种意义上说，它会永远消失。
There is always more.
总是有更多。
So yeah, that arrogance then just if you’re telling everybody who’s not hardcore enough to do the standard model of cosmology, that they’re idiots, that’s not going to bode well for the advance of your project.
所以，是的，如果你告诉每个没有足够核心能力做宇宙学标准模型的人，他们是白痴，那么这种傲慢对于你的项目的进展来说并不是好兆头。
So you’re proposing at least to consider the idea that experience is fundamental, experience is not just an illusion that emerges from the set of quirks, that there could be something about the conscious experience of the world that is at the core of reality?
所以你建议至少考虑这样一个想法：体验是基础，体验不仅仅是从一系列怪癖中出现的幻觉，世界的意识体验可能存在某种处于现实核心的东西？
But I wouldn’t do it.
但我不会这么做。
2:42:56 I wouldn’t because there is panpsychism, right?
我不会，因为存在泛心论，对吗？
Which wants to say-
其中想说的是——
Right.
对。
2:43:02 So that’s all the way there.
这就是全部。
So panpsychism is, that’s literally one of the laws of physics is consciousness.
所以泛心论就是，从字面上看，物理定律之一就是意识。
Right.
正确的。
2:43:04 But see what all those do is just the idea of say, physicalism versus idealism, which are kind of the two philosophical schools you can go with.
但看看所有这些所做的只是物理主义与唯心主义的想法，这是你可以接受的两种哲学流派。
Physicalism says, “All that exists as physical.” Idealism says, “All that exists is mind.” We’re actually saying, “Look, both of these to take either of those positions is already to project out into that third-person view.
物理主义说：“一切以物理形式存在。”唯心主义说：“一切存在的都是心灵。”我们实际上是在说，“看，无论采取哪一个立场，都已经投射到了第三人称视角中。
And that third-person view we want to really emphasize is a fiction.” It’s a useful fiction when you’re doing science.
我们真正想要强调的第三人称视角是虚构的。”当你从事科学研究时，这是一本有用的小说。
If I want to do the Newtonian physics of billiard balls on a pool table, great.
如果我想在台球桌上研究台球的牛顿物理学，那就太好了。
I don’t want to have to think about experience at all, right?
我根本不想考虑经验，对吗？
But if I’m asking deeper questions, I can’t ignore the fact that there really is no person view and that any story I tell about the world is coming from, it’s not just first person, but it’s literally because I’m going to argue that experience always involves all of us.
但如果我问更深层次的问题，我不能忽视这样一个事实：确实不存在个人观点，而且我讲述的关于世界的任何故事都来自，它不仅仅是第一人称，而且是字面上的，因为我要争辩说，经验总是涉及我们所有人。
Experience always originates out of a community.
经验总是源自社区。
2:43:58 That you are always telling those stories from the perspective of already existing, of already being in experience.
你总是从已经存在的、已经存在的经验的角度来讲述这些故事。
So whatever account we want to give of the world is going to have to take that as experience as being irreducible and the irreducible starting point.
因此，无论我们想对世界做出何种解释，都必须将其视为不可还原的经验和不可还原的起点。
So ultimately, we don’t have an answer.
所以最终，我们没有答案。
That’s when people are like, “Well, what are you suggesting is the alternative?” It’s like, look, that’s the good work of the next science to come.
那时人们会说，“那么，你建议什么替代方案呢？”就像，看，这就是未来科学的杰作。
Well, our job was to point out the problem with this, but what we would argue with is, and we’re thinking about the next book, is this is really going to require a new conception of nature.
好吧，我们的工作是指出这个问题，但我们要争论的是，我们正在考虑下一本书，这是否真的需要一种新的自然概念。
That doesn’t sort of jump to that third-person…
这并没有跳转到第三人称……
That fictional third-person view and somehow figures out how to do science.
那个虚构的第三人称视角并以某种方式弄清楚如何进行科学研究。
Recognizing that it always starts from experience.
认识到它总是从经验开始。
It always starts from this field of experience.
它总是从这个领域的经验开始。
Or in phenomenology, the word is the life world that you’re embedded in.
或者在现象学中，这个词就是你所嵌入的生活世界。
You can’t un-embed yourself from it.
你无法将自己从其中解脱出来。
2:44:52 So how do you do…
那么你该怎么办...
So one of the things that Whitehead said was, “We have to avoid the bifurcation of nature.” And what he meant by that is the bifurcation into scientific concepts, wavelength.
所以怀特海说的其中一件事是，“我们必须避免自然的分歧。”他的意思是科学概念、波长的分歧。
Think about seeing a sunset.
想想看日落。
You can say like, “Oh look, it’s just wavelengths and scattering particles.” And your experience of the redness, the actual experience of the redness and all the other things.
你可以这样说：“哦，看，这只是波长和散射粒子。”还有你对红色的体验，对红色的实际体验以及所有其他事情。
It’s not just red.
它不仅仅是红色。
There’s no qualia, there’s no pure redness.
没有感受性，没有纯粹的红色。
Everything that’s happening in the experiential part is just an epiphenomena.
体验部分发生的一切都只是一种附带现象。
It’s just brain states, whatever.
无论如何，这只是大脑状态。
He said, “You can’t do that.
他说：“你不能那样做。
They’re both real.
它们都是真实的。
They’re both accounts.
他们都是帐户。
They both need to be integrated.” And so that required, I think, really a different of what we mean by nature.
它们都需要整合。”因此，我认为，这确实需要与我们所说的自然含义不同。
Is it something like incorporating in the physics, in the study of nature, the observer, the experiencing observer, or is that still also looking from a third-person?
它是否类似于融入物理学、自然研究、观察者、体验观察者，或者仍然是从第三人称视角来看？
I think that that’s what we have to figure out.
我认为这就是我们必须弄清楚的。
2:45:45 And so actually a great place to think about this is quantum mechanics, because one of the things we’re arguing is look..
所以实际上思考这个问题的一个好地方是量子力学，因为我们争论的事情之一是看起来……
In the chapter that I wrote on, because I wrote on, because I wrote this with Evan Thompson, who’s a wonderful philosopher, and Marcelo Gleiser, who’s a theoretical physicist.
在我写的那一章中，因为我继续写，因为我和埃文·汤普森（Evan Thompson）（一位出色的哲学家）和马塞洛·格莱塞（Marcelo Gleiser）（一位理论物理学家）一起写了这篇文章。
When I was writing the chapter on the origin of The Blind Spot, sort of how this emerged out of history, the subheader was like, “Well, it made sense at the time.” Because it did.
当我写关于《盲点》起源的章节时，就像它是如何从历史中出现的那样，小标题就像是，“嗯，这在当时是有意义的。”因为确实如此。
It really, there was a reason why people adopted this third person, God’s eye deterministic view.
确实，人们采用第三人称上帝之眼决定论的观点是有原因的。
This view of sort of like, yeah, the perfect clockwork of the universe.
这种观点有点像，是的，宇宙的完美发条。
Yeah, totally made sense.
是的，完全有道理。
But by the time you got to the beginning of the 20th century, science itself was telling you, “Eh-eh.” And no place does this appear more than in quantum mechanics, right?
但到了 20 世纪初，科学本身就告诉你，“呃呃”。没有什么地方比量子力学更容易出现这种情况了，对吧？
2:46:29 Quantum mechanics slams you with the idea of the measurement problem.
量子力学用测量问题的想法来打击你。
And most important thing about quantum mechanics is you have a dynamical equation, the Schrodinger equation, which you put in, like we talked about before, you have initial conditions and now you’ve got a differential equation and you crank out the differential equation and it makes predictions for the future, right?
关于量子力学最重要的是你有一个动力学方程，薛定谔方程，你把它放进去，就像我们之前讨论过的，你有初始条件，现在你有一个微分方程，你可以推导出微分方程，它可以预测未来，对吗？
Exactly like Newtonian physics or its higher versions of the Lagrange or Hamiltonians.
就像牛顿物理学或其更高版本的拉格朗日或哈密顿物理学一样。
But then this other thing happens where it’s like, oh, by the way, as soon as you look at it, as soon as the measurement is made, I have a whole nother set of rules for you.
但随后又发生了另一件事，哦，顺便说一下，一旦你看到它，一旦进行了测量，我就为你制定了另一套规则。
That’s what we call the born rule.
这就是我们所说的天生规则。
And it was telling you right from the beginning that measurement matters, right?
它从一开始就告诉你衡量很重要，对吧？
So when you’re asking, how will we do this?
那么，当您问，我们将如何做到这一点？
Quantum mechanics is actually pointing to how to do it.
量子力学实际上是在指出如何做到这一点。
2:47:17 So there’s been all these different interpretations of the quantum mechanics.
因此，对量子力学有各种不同的解释。
Many of them try to pretend the measurement problem isn’t there.
他们中的许多人试图假装测量问题不存在。
Go to enormous lengths like the many-worlds interpretation, literally inventing an infinite number of unobservable parallel universes to avoid the thing that quantum mechanics is telling them, which is that measurements matter.
像多世界解释一样，不遗余力地发明无数个不可观测的平行宇宙，以避免量子力学告诉他们的事情，即测量很重要。
And then you get something like QBism, which is I’m going to advocate for, is a new interpretation of quantum mechanics, which puts the Born rule at the center.
然后你会得到像 QBism 这样的东西，这是我要提倡的，是对量子力学的一种新解释，它将玻恩规则置于中心。
Instead of focusing on the Schrodinger equation and the weird things that come out of it, like Schrodinger’s cat and all that other stuff.
而不是关注薛定谔方程以及由此产生的奇怪的东西，比如薛定谔的猫和所有其他东西。
It says, “No, no, actually the real mystery is the Born rule.
它说：“不，不，实际上真正的谜团是玻恩法则。
Let’s think about the Born rule.” And like you said, that puts the agent, the agent and information at the center of the whole thing.
让我们考虑一下玻恩规则。”正如你所说，这将代理、代理和信息置于整个事情的中心。
So that’s not a thing you’re trying to get rid of?
所以这不是你想要摆脱的事情？
2:48:01 That’s the thing you’re trying to integrate at the center of the thing in quantum mechanics, it becomes super obvious, but maybe the same kind of thing should be incorporated in every layer of study of nature.
这就是你试图将其整合到量子力学的中心的东西，它变得非常明显，但也许同样的东西应该被纳入自然研究的每一层中。
Absolutely.
绝对地。
2:48:19 That’s exactly it.
就是这样。
So one of the things that’s really interesting to me, so we have a project, I’m part of a big project that Chris Fuchs and Jacques Pienaar on QBism.
对我来说真正有趣的一件事是，我们有一个项目，我是 Chris Fuchs 和 Jacques Pienaar 关于 QBism 的一个大项目的一部分。
So I’ve been part of that.
所以我也是其中的一部分。
And what I’ve been amazed by is the language they use.
让我惊讶的是他们使用的语言。
So what’s cool about QBism is it comes from quantum information theory.
QBism 的酷之处在于它来自量子信息理论。
It’s a pretty modern version of thinking about quantum mechanics.
这是量子力学思考的一个相当现代的版本。
And it’s always about do you have an agent who makes an action on the world?
它总是关于你是否有一个对世界采取行动的代理人？
And then the information they get from that action through the experiment, that’s the action on the world.
然后他们通过实验从该行动中获得的信息，就是对世界的行动。
Updates, their priors updates, their Bayesian, that’s why it’s called QBism.
更新，他们的先验更新，他们的贝叶斯，这就是为什么它被称为 QBism。
Quantum Bayesianism updates how the information they’ve gotten from the world.
量子贝叶斯主义更新了他们从世界获取信息的方式。
Now, this turns out to be, it’s kind of the same language that we’re using in a project that’s about the physics of life, where we have a grant from the Templeton Foundation to look at semantic information and the role of semantic information in living systems like cells.
现在，事实证明，这与我们在一个有关生命物理学的项目中使用的语言是一样的，在该项目中，我们获得了坦普尔顿基金会的资助，用于研究语义信息以及语义信息在细胞等生命系统中的作用。
2:49:16 So we have Shannon information, which is a probability distribution that tells you basically how much surprise there is in a message.
所以我们有香农信息，它是一种概率分布，基本上可以告诉你一条消息中有多少惊喜。
Semantic information focuses on meaning, right?
语义信息侧重于意义，对吧？
Focuses on in a very simple way, just how much of the information that the agent, the critter is getting from the world actually helps it survive.
以一种非常简单的方式关注主体（生物）从世界获得的多少信息实际上有助于其生存。
That’s the most basic idea of meaning.
这是最基本的意义观念。
We can get all philosophical about meaning, but this is it.
我们可以从哲学角度理解意义，但仅此而已。
Does it help me stay alive or not?
它对我的生存有帮助吗？
And the whole question of agency and autonomy that occurs in this setting of just asking about how do cells move up a chemical gradient to get more food?
在这种情况下发生的整个代理和自主问题只是询问细胞如何提高化学梯度以获得更多食物？
Kind of has the feel the same sort of architecture as what’s going on in quantum mechanics.
有点像量子力学中正在发生的结构。
So I think what you said is exactly it, how do we bring this sort of recognition?
所以我想你说的就是这样，我们如何带来这种认可？
That there’s always us, the agent or life the agent interacting with the world and drawing both giving information and passing information back as a way of doing science, doing hardcore science with experiments, but never forgetting that agency, which also means experience in some sense, is at the center of the whole thing.
总是有我们，代理人或生命代理人与世界互动，并把提供信息和传递信息作为科学研究的一种方式，通过实验进行核心科学，但永远不要忘记代理，这在某种意义上也意味着经验，是整个事情的中心。
So you think there could be something like QBism, Quantum Bayesianism that creates a theory, like a Nobel Prize winning theory, sort of hardcore real theories that put the agent at the center.
所以你认为可能存在像 QBism、量子贝叶斯主义这样的东西，它创造了一种理论，比如诺贝尔奖获得者的理论，某种将智能体置于中心的核心真实理论。
Yes.
是的。
2:50:42 That’s what we’re looking for.
这就是我们正在寻找的。
I think that is really, that’s the exciting part.
我认为这确实是令人兴奋的部分。
And it’s a move, the scientific triumphalist thing says, you understand why people love this?
这是一个举动，科学必胜主义者说，你明白为什么人们喜欢这个吗？
I have these equations.
我有这些方程。
And these equations represent, there’s this platonic ideal that they are, they exist eternally on their own.
这些方程代表了，它们就是柏拉图式的理想，它们永远独立存在。
It’s kind of quasi-religious, right?
这是一种准宗教，对吧？
It’s sort of somehow, look, these equations are the, you’re reading the mind of God, but this other approach to me is just as exciting because what you’re saying is there’s us and the world, they’re inseparable.
不知何故，看，这些方程是，你正在阅读上帝的思想，但另一种方法对我来说同样令人兴奋，因为你所说的是我们和世界，它们是不可分割的。
It’s always us and the world.
永远是我们和世界。
And what we’re now finding about is this co-creation, this interaction between the agent and the world such that these powerful laws of physics that need an account.
我们现在发现的是这种共同创造，这种智能体与世界之间的相互作用，使得这些强大的物理定律需要一个解释。
In no way am I saying these laws aren’t important.
我绝不是说这些法律不重要。
These laws are amazing, but they need an account, but not an account that strips, that turns the experience, turns the agent into just an epiphenomena, that it pushes the agent out and makes it seem as if the agent’s not the most important part of the story.
这些定律是令人惊奇的，但它们需要一个解释，但不是一个剥离、转变体验、将特工变成只是一种副现象的解释，它将特工推出去，并使特工看起来好像不是故事中最重要的部分。
So if you pull on this thread and say, there’s a whole discipline born of this, putting the agent as the primary thing in a theory, in a physics theory, is it possible it just breaks the whole thing open?
因此，如果你拉动这条线索并说，有一整套学科由此诞生，将代理作为理论、物理理论中的首要事物，是否有可能它只是将整个事物打开？
2:51:45 So there’s this whole effort of unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics of coming up with a theory of everything.
因此，我们需要努力统一广义相对论和量子力学，提出万有理论。
What if these are the tip of the iceberg?
如果这些只是冰山一角怎么办？
What if the agent thing is really important?
如果代理的事情真的很重要怎么办？
So listen, that would be kind of my dream.
听着，这将是我的梦想。
2:52:18 I’m not going to be the one to do it because I’m not smart enough to do it.
我不会成为那个人，因为我不够聪明，无法做到这一点。
Marcelo and I have for a while have been sort of critical of where foundational physics has been for a while.
一段时间以来，马塞洛和我一直对基础物理学的现状持批评态度。
With string theory, I’ve spent my whole life listening to talks about, “String theory, real soon.” And it’s gotten ever more disconnected from data, observations.
对于弦理论，我一生都在听“弦理论，很快就会成为现实。”而且它与数据、观察变得越来越脱节。
There were people talking for a while that it is post-empirical.
有一段时间有人谈论它是后经验主义的。
I always wanted to write a paper or an article that was like, physicists have been smoking their own stash.
我一直想写一篇论文或一篇文章，就像物理学家一直在抽自己的藏品一样。
There’s this way we’ve gotten used to, you have to out-weird the other person, my theory has 38 dimensions.
我们已经习惯了这样的方式，你必须比别人更奇怪，我的理论有38个维度。
My theory is 22 dimensions, but it’s got psychedelic squirrels in it.
我的理论是 22 维，但里面有迷幻的松鼠。
And so there’s a problem.
所以有一个问题。
I don’t need to tell you there’s a crisis in physics or there’s a crisis in cosmology.
我不需要告诉你物理学或宇宙学存在危机。
Other people have used that.
其他人也用过这个。
That’s been the headline on scientific American stories.
这是美国科学故事的头条新闻。
2:53:18 So clearly another direction has to be found, and maybe it has nothing to do with this, but I suspect that because so many times the agent or having to deal with the view from the inside or the role of agency.
因此，显然必须找到另一个方向，也许与此无关，但我怀疑，因为很多时候代理人或必须处理来自内部的观点或代理人的角色。
When it comes to time thinking that you can replace the block universe with the actual experience of time.
当谈到时间思考时，你可以用时间的实际体验来代替块宇宙。
Clocks don’t tell time.
时钟不能告诉时间。
We use clocks to tell time.
我们用时钟来报时。
So maybe that even the fundamental nature of time can’t be viewed from the outside, that there’s a new physics theory that is going to come from, that comes from this agential, informational, computational view.
因此，也许连时间的基本性质都无法从外部来看待，一种新的物理理论将会诞生，它来自于这种代理的、信息的、计算的观点。
I don’t know.
我不知道。
But that’s kind of what I think it would be fertile ground to explore.
但这正是我认为值得探索的沃土。
Yeah, time is really interesting one.
是的，时间真的很有趣。
2:54:05 Time is really important to us humans.
时间对于我们人类来说真的很重要。
What is time?
什么是时间？
Yeah, right.
是的，对。
2:54:12 What is time?
什么是时间？
So the way we have tended to view it is we’ve taken, this is what, when Husserl talks about the surreptitious substitution, we’ve taken Einstein’s beautiful, powerful, formal system for viewing time, and we substituted that for the actual experience of time.
所以我们倾向于看待它的方式是我们所采取的，这就是当胡塞尔谈论秘密替代时，我们采用了爱因斯坦美丽的、强大的、形式化的时间系统，我们用它来代替时间的实际体验。
So the block universe, where next Tuesday is already written down in the block universe, the four dimensional universe, all events are already there.
所以块宇宙，下周二已经写在块宇宙，四维宇宙里，所有的事件都已经在那里了。
Which is very potent for making certain kinds of predictions within the scientific framework.
这对于在科学框架内做出某些类型的预测非常有效。
But it is not lived time.
但这不是生活的时间。
And this was pointed out to Einstein, and he eventually recognized it.
这一点被向爱因斯坦指出，他最终也认识到了这一点。
Very famous meeting between Henri Bergson, who was the most famous philosopher of the early 20th century and Einstein, where Einstein was giving a talk on relativity-
20世纪初最著名的哲学家亨利·柏格森和爱因斯坦之间的一次非常著名的会面，爱因斯坦在会上发表了关于相对论的演讲——
2:55:03 The 20th century and Einstein, where Einstein was giving a talk on relativity and Berkson, whose whole thing was about time and it was about duration.
20 世纪和爱因斯坦，爱因斯坦发表了关于相对论的演讲，而伯克森的全部内容都是关于时间和持续时间的。
He wanted to separate the scientific image of time, the map of time from the actual terrain, which he used the word duration like we humans where duration for us is full.
他想要将时间的科学图像、时间地图与实际地形分开，他使用“持续时间”这个词，就像我们人类一样，我们的持续时间是完整的。
It’s stretched out.
它被拉长了。
It’s got a little bit of the past, a little bit of the future, a little bit of the present.
它有一点过去，一点未来，一点现在。
Music is the best example, right?
音乐就是最好的例子，对吧？
You’re hearing music, you’re both already anticipating what’s going to happen and you are remembering what’s going on.
当你听到音乐时，你们都已经预料到将会发生什么，并且正在记住正在发生的事情。
2:55:34 There’s a kind of phenomenal structure there, which is different from the representation of time that you have with the formal mathematics.
那里有一种现象结构，它与形式数学中的时间表示不同。
And the way we would look at this is that the problem with the surreptitious substitution, the problem with the blind spot is it says, “Oh, no, no, the formal system is time,” but really the only place time appears is with us, where we’re so having a theory that actually could start with us and then stretch out into the universe rather than imposing this imaginary third-person view back on us.
我们看待这个问题的方式是，秘密替代的问题，盲点的问题是，“哦，不，不，正式系统是时间”，但实际上时间出现的唯一地方是我们，我们有一个理论，实际上可以从我们开始，然后延伸到宇宙，而不是将这种想象的第三人称视角强加给我们。
Could, that’s a route towards a different way of approaching the whole problem.
可能，这是解决整个问题的另一种方法。
I just wonder who is the observer?
我只是想知道观察者是谁？
2:56:13 I mean, define what the agent is in any kind of frame is difficult.
我的意思是，在任何类型的框架中定义代理是什么都是很困难的。
Is difficult, but that’s the good work of the science ahead of us.
这很困难，但这是我们面前科学的伟大工作。
2:56:20 So what happened with this idea of the structural invariance I was talking about?
那么我所说的结构不变性的想法发生了什么？
So we start with experience, which is irreducible.
所以我们从经验开始，这是不可简化的。
There’s no atoms of experience.
没有经验的原子。
It’s a whole, and we go through the whole process, which is a communal process, by the way.
这是一个整体，我们经历了整个过程，顺便说一句，这是一个公共过程。
There’s a philosopher, Robert Crease, who talks about the workshop that started in the 1700s, 1600s, we developed this communal space to work in, sometimes it was literally a physical space, a laboratory where these ideas would be pulled apart, refined, argued over, and then validated.
有一位哲学家 Robert Crease，他谈到了 1700 年代、1600 年代开始的研讨会，我们开发了这个公共空间来工作，有时它实际上是一个物理空间，一个实验室，在这里这些想法将被分解、提炼、争论，然后得到验证。
And we want to the next step.
我们想要下一步。
2:56:54 So this idea of pulling out from experience, these thinner, abstract, structural invariance, the things that we could actually do science with, and it’s kind of like, we call it an ascending spiral of abstraction.
因此，这种从经验中抽离的想法，这些更薄的、抽象的、结构不变的东西，我们实际上可以用来做科学的东西，有点像，我们称之为抽象的上升螺旋。
So the problem with the way we do things now is we take those abstractions, which came from experience, and then with something like a computational model of consciousness or experience, we think we can put it back in.
因此，我们现在做事方式的问题是，我们采用了来自经验的抽象概念，然后通过诸如意识或经验的计算模型之类的东西，我们认为我们可以将其放回去。
You literally pulled out these super thin things, these abstractions neglecting experience because that’s the only way to do science.
你确实拉出了这些超薄的东西，这些抽象忽略了经验，因为这是做科学的唯一方法。
And then you think somehow, oh, I’m going to jam experience back in and have an explanation for experience.
然后你会想，哦，我要把经验塞回去，并对经验做出解释。
So do you think it’s possible to show that something like free will is quote, unquote real if you integrate experience back into into the physics model of the world?
那么你认为如果你将经验重新整合到世界的物理模型中，是否有可能证明像自由意志这样的东西是引用的，而不是真实的？
What I would say is that free will is a given.
我想说的是，自由意志是给定的。
2:57:46 And that’s the thing about experience.
这就是经验的问题。
So one of the things that Whitehead said, I really love this quote.
所以怀特海德说的其中一件事，我真的很喜欢这句话。
It says, “It’s not the job of either science or philosophy to account for the concrete.
它说：“解释具体事物不是科学或哲学的工作。
It’s the job to account for the abstract.” The concrete, what’s happening between us right now, is just given.
这是解释摘要的工作。”具体的，我们之间现在发生的事情，只是给定的。
It’s presented to us every day.
它每天都呈现在我们面前。
It’s presented to me.
它呈现给我。
If you want an explanation, fine, but the explanation actually doesn’t add anything to it.
如果你想要一个解释，那很好，但这个解释实际上并没有增加任何东西。
So that free will in some sense is the nature of being an agent.
因此，自由意志在某种意义上就是作为代理人的本质。
To be an agent agency and autonomy are sort of the two things that are, they’re equivalent.
代理机构和自治权是两件事，它们是等价的。
And so in some sense, to be an agent is to be autonomous.
因此，从某种意义上说，成为代理人就是自治。
And so then the question really to ask is, can you have an account for agency and autonomy that captures aspects of it’s arising in the world or the way it and the world sort of co-arise.
因此，真正要问的问题是，你能否对代理和自治有一个解释，捕捉它在世界中出现的各个方面，或者它与世界共同出现的方式。
2:58:41 But the idea why we argue about free will often is because we already have this blind spot view that the world is deterministic because of our equations, which themselves, we treat the equations as if they’re more real than experience.
但我们经常争论自由意志的想法是因为我们已经有了这种盲点观点，即世界是由于我们的方程而确定的，而我们将方程本身视为比经验更真实。
And the equations are a paler…
而且方程更苍白……
They don’t corral experience.
他们不积累经验。
They are a thinner representation.
他们是一个更瘦的代表。
As we like to say, “Don’t confuse the map for the terrain.” What’s happening between us right now and all the weirdness of it.
正如我们常说的：“不要将地图与地形混淆。”我们之间现在正在发生什么以及其中的所有奇怪之处。
That’s the terrain.
这就是地形。
The map is what I can write down on equations.
地图就是我可以写下方程式的东西。
And then in the workshop, do experiments on.
然后在车间里做实验。
Super powerful, needs an account, but experience overflows that.
超级强大，需要一个帐户，但经验丰富。
What if the experience is an illusion?
如果这种体验是幻觉怎么办？
2:59:17 How do we know what if the agency that we experience is an illusion?
如果我们所经历的代理是幻觉，我们怎么知道呢？
An illusion looking from where?
从哪里看出来的幻觉？
2:59:26 Because that already requires to take that stance is you’ve already pushed yourself into that third person view.
因为这已经需要采取这种立场，因为你已经将自己推向了第三人称视角。
And so what we’re saying is that third person view, which now you’re going to say like, “Oh, I’ve got a whole other set of entities, of ontological entities,” meaning things that I think exist in God’s living room in spite that are independent of me and the community of living things I’m part of.
所以我们所说的是第三人称视角，现在你会说，“哦，我有一套完全不同的实体，本体论实体”，意思是我认为存在于上帝客厅里的东西，尽管它们独立于我和我所属的生物群体。
So you’re pushing it elsewhere just like there’s a stack of turtles is probably, if this experience, the human experience is an illusion, maybe there’s an observer for whom it’s not an illusion.
所以你把它推到别处，就像有一堆乌龟一样，如果这种经历，人类的经历是一种幻觉，也许有一个观察者认为这不是幻觉。
2:59:51 So you always have to find an observer somewhere.
所以你总是必须在某个地方找到一个观察者。
And that’s why fundamentally the blind spot, especially the scientific triumphalist part is following a religious impulse.
这就是为什么从根本上来说盲点，尤其是科学必胜论部分是追随宗教冲动。
3:00:06 It’s wanting the god’s eye view.
它想要上帝的视角。
And what’s really interesting, and when we think about this and the way this gets talked about, especially publicly, there’s a line of philosophical inquiry that this language gets couched in and it is actually a pretty, it’s only one version of philosophy.
真正有趣的是，当我们思考这个问题以及讨论这个问题的方式时，尤其是在公开场合，这种语言表达了一系列哲学探究，它实际上是一种漂亮的哲学，它只是哲学的一个版本。
So it is pretty much what we call the analytic tradition.
所以这几乎就是我们所说的分析传统。
But there’s even in Europe or in the Western tradition for Western, what we’ll call western philosophy, there’s phenomenology.
但甚至在欧洲或西方的西方传统中，我们称之为西方哲学，也有现象学。
And Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty, which took an entirely different track.
海德格尔和梅洛-庞蒂走了一条完全不同的道路。
They were really interested in the structure of experience.
他们对体验的结构非常感兴趣。
They spent all their time trying to understand, trying to develop a language that could kind of climb into the circle.
他们花了所有的时间试图理解，试图开发一种可以进入这个圈子的语言。
That is experience, right experience.
这就是经验，正确的经验。
You’re not going to be able to start with axioms and work your way to it.
你不可能从公理开始并逐步实现它。
3:01:00 It’s given.
已给出。
So you have to kind of jump in and then try and find a language to account for its structure.
所以你必须跳进去，然后尝试找到一种语言来解释它的结构。
But then, so that has not been part of this discussion about you’ll never, good luck finding a YouTube video where someone, a famous scientist is talking about science from a phenomenological point of view, even though it’s a huge branch of philosophy.
但是，这并不是关于你永远不会的讨论的一部分，祝你好运，找到一个 YouTube 视频，其中有人，一位著名的科学家正在从现象学的角度谈论科学，尽管它是哲学的一个重要分支。
And then you get the philosophies that occurred from other cores of civilization.
然后你就会得到来自其他文明核心的哲学。
So there’s the western core out of which comes the Greeks and the Judeo- Christian Islamic tradition.
因此，希腊人和犹太基督教伊斯兰传统就是从西方核心产生的。
But then you get India and you get Asia and they developed their own.
但后来印度和亚洲都发展了自己的国家。
They were highly complex societies that developed their own responses to these questions.
他们是高度复杂的社会，对这些问题有自己的回应。
And they, for reasons they had contemplative practice.
而他们，出于某种原因进行了冥想练习。
They were very focused on direct, trying to directly probe attention and experience.
他们非常注重直接，试图直接探究注意力和体验。
They asked questions in ways that the West never really did.
他们以西方从未真正采用过的方式提出问题。
3:01:52 Phenomenology kind of started it, but there’s philosophers like Nagarjuna and Vasubandhu.
现象学是它的开端，但有像龙树和世亲这样的哲学家。
They’re like the Plato and the Aristotle of those philosophies.
他们就像这些哲学中的柏拉图和亚里士多德。
And they were really focused on experience in the West.
他们非常注重西方的经验。
I think maybe because we had the Judeo-Christian tradition where we already had this kind of God who was going to be the frame on which you could always point to that frame in the traditions that came from the classical philosophies of India and Asia.
我想也许是因为我们有犹太基督教的传统，我们已经有了这样一种上帝，他将成为你总是可以在来自印度和亚洲古典哲学的传统中指出这个框架的框架。
They started always with this.
他们总是以此开始。
They wanted to know about experience.
他们想了解经验。
Their whole philosophies and their logic and their argumentation was based on, I’ve got this experience, I can’t get out of this experience.
他们的整个哲学、他们的逻辑和他们的论证都是基于，我有这种经历，我无法摆脱这种经历。
How do I reason from it?
我如何从中推理？
So I think there’s a lot of other philosophical traditions that we could draw from.
所以我认为我们可以借鉴很多其他的哲学传统。
Not slavishly, we don’t all have to become Buddhists to do it, but there are traditions that really tried to work this out in a way that the Western traditions just didn’t.
不是盲目地，我们不必都成为佛教徒才能做到这一点，但有些传统确实试图以西方传统没有的方式解决这个问题。
But there’s also the practical fact that it’s difficult to build a logical system on top of experience.
但还有一个现实的事实是，很难在经验的基础上建立一个逻辑系统。
3:02:47 It’s difficult to have the rigor of science on top of experience.
在经验之上很难拥有科学的严谨性。
And so as science advances, we might get better and better.
因此，随着科学的进步，我们可能会变得越来越好。
The same is it’s very difficult to have any kind of mathematical or kind of scientific rigor to why complexity emerges from simple rules and simple objects, sort of the Santa Fe questions.
同样，很难用任何数学或科学的严谨性来解释为什么复杂性是从简单的规则和简单的对象中产生的，类似于圣达菲问题。
But I think we can do it.
但我认为我们可以做到。
3:03:16 I think there’s aspects of it.
我认为有几个方面。
I mean, as long as you’re never trying to, “This is what experience is,” I think that’s kind of where you’re never going to have a causal account of experience just given.
我的意思是，只要你从不试图说“这就是经验”，我认为这就是你永远不会对刚刚给出的经验进行因果解释的地方。
But you can do lots about, and that’s what the good work is to how do I approach this?
但你可以做很多事情，这就是我该如何解决这个问题的好工作？
How do I approach this in a way that’s rigorous that I can do experiments with also?
我如何以一种严格的方式来处理这个问题，并且我也可以用它来做实验？
But so for example, I was just reading this beautiful paper that was talking about in this is what we’re counting with our semantic information too.
但举例来说，我刚刚读了这篇漂亮的论文，其中讨论的就是我们也在用我们的语义信息来计算的内容。
Causal closure.
因果封闭。
Love this idea.
喜欢这个主意。
The idea that…
这个想法是……
So we talked about autopoiesis a while back, the idea that living systems, they are self creating and self maintaining.
所以我们不久前谈到了自创生，即生命系统是自我创造和自我维持的。
And so the membrane, cell membrane is a great example of this, right?
膜、细胞膜就是一个很好的例子，对吧？
The cell membrane, you can’t have a cell without a cell membrane.
细胞膜，没有细胞膜就不可能有细胞。
3:04:02 The cell membrane lets stuff through, keeps other stuff out.
细胞膜让物质通过，阻止其他物质进入。
But the cell membrane is part of the processes and it’s a product of the processes that the cell membrane needs, right?
但细胞膜是这些过程的一部分，并且是细胞膜所需过程的产物，对吧？
In some sense, the cell membrane creates itself.
从某种意义上说，细胞膜是自我创造的。
So there’s this strange, it’s always with life, there’s always this strange loop.
所以这很奇怪，生活总是如此，总是有这种奇怪的循环。
And so somehow figuring out how to jump into that strange loop is the science that’s ahead of us.
因此，以某种方式弄清楚如何跳入这个奇怪的循环是摆在我们面前的科学。
And so this idea of causal closure accounting for how the, we talk about downward causation.
所以这个因果封闭的想法是如何解释的，我们谈论向下因果关系。
So reductionism says everything only depends on the microstate.
所以还原论说一切只取决于微观状态。
Everything just depends on the atoms.
一切都取决于原子。
That’s it.
就是这样。
If you know the Lagrangian for the standard model, you are done.
如果您知道标准模型的拉格朗日量，那么您就完成了。
Of course, in principle, you need God’s computer, but fine.
当然，原则上，你需要上帝的计算机，但是很好。
In principle, it could be done.
原则上是可以做到的。
Causal closure, and I was just reading this great paper that sort of argues for this.
因果闭合，我刚刚读了一篇很好的论文，它对此进行了论证。
3:04:57 There’s ways in which using Epsilon machines and all this machinery from information theory, that you can see ways in which the system can organize itself so that it decouples from the microstates.
使用 Epsilon 机器和信息论中的所有这些机器，您可以通过多种方式了解系统如何组织自身，从而与微观状态解耦。
Now, the macrostate fundamentally no longer needs the microstate for its own description, its own account of the laws, whether that paper is true or not.
现在，宏观国家从根本上不再需要微观国家来进行自己的描述，自己对法律的解释，无论该论文是否真实。
It’s an example of heading down that road.
这是沿着这条路走下去的一个例子。
There’s also Robert Rosen’s work.
还有罗伯特·罗森的作品。
He was a theoretical biologist who he talked about closure to efficient cause that living systems are organizationally closed, are causally closed so that they don’t depend anymore on the microstate.
他是一位理论生物学家，他谈到了“有效原因的封闭”，即生命系统在组织上是封闭的，在因果上是封闭的，因此它们不再依赖于微观状态。
And he had a proof, which is very contentious.
他有一个非常有争议的证明。
Nobody knows if it’s some argue it’s true, some argue it’s not.
没有人知道是否有些人认为这是真的，有些人认为不是。
But he said that because of this, living systems are not church-turing complete, they cannot be represented as formal systems.
但他表示，正因为如此，生命系统并不是教会图灵完备的，它们不能被表示为正式系统。
So in that way, they’re not axioms, they’re not living systems will not be axioms.
所以这样一来，它们就不是公理，它们不是生命系统，也不会是公理。
3:05:55 They can only be partially captured by algorithms.
它们只能被算法部分捕获。
Now again, people fight back and forth about whether or not his proof is valid or not.
现在，人们再次争论他的证明是否有效。
But I’m saying them giving you examples of when you see the blind spot, when you acknowledge the blind spot, it opens up a whole other class of kinds of scientific investigations.
但我想说的是，他们给你举了一些例子，当你看到盲点时，当你承认盲点时，就会开启另一类科学研究。
The book we thought was going to be really heretical.
我们认为这本书将是真正的异端。
Obviously most public facing scientists are very sort of in that, especially scientific triumphant.
显然，大多数面向公众的科学家都在这方面取得了很大的成就，尤其是在科学上的胜利。
So we were just waiting for the fight.
所以我们只是等待战斗。
Then the review from science came out and it was totally pro…
然后科学界的评论出来了，这是完全正确的……
It was very positive.
这是非常积极的。
We’re like, “Oh my God.” Then a review came out in Nature Physics and it was totally positive.
我们就像，“天哪。”然后《自然物理学》上发表了一篇评论，它是完全积极的。
3:06:38 Then a review came out in the Wall Street Journal, kind of criticized, not capitalism, but we criticized all industrial economies for that they had been touched by the blind spots, socialism, communism.
然后《华尔街日报》发表了一篇评论，有点批评，不是批评资本主义，而是批评所有工业经济体，因为它们被盲点所触及，社会主义、共产主义。
It doesn’t matter.
没关系。
These extractive sort of had that sort of view that the is just reducible to resources.
这些提取者有这样的观点，即可以将其简化为资源。
The Wall Street Journal gave us a great review.
《华尔街日报》给了我们很好的评价。
So it feels like there’s actually out there, there is some, among working scientists in particular, there is some dissatisfaction with this triumphalist view and a recognition that we need to shift something in order to jump past these hurdles that we’ve been arguing about forever and we’re sort of stuck in a vortex.
所以感觉实际上确实有一些人，特别是在工作的科学家中，对这种必胜主义的观点感到不满，并认识到我们需要做出一些改变才能跨越这些我们一直争论不休的障碍，我们有点陷入了漩涡。
Well, it is.
嗯，确实如此。
3:07:18 I mean, I think there is a hunger to acknowledge that there’s an elephant in the room, that we’re just removing the agent.
我的意思是，我认为人们渴望承认房间里有一头大象，我们只是要移除特工。
Everyone is doing it and it’s like, yeah, yeah, there’s the experience and then there’s the third-person perspective on the world.
每个人都在这样做，就像，是的，是的，有经验，然后有第三人称的世界视角。
And so, man, science from, applying scientific rigor from a first-person perspective is very difficult.
因此，人类，从第一人称角度应用科学严谨性是非常困难的。
I mean, it’s fascinating.
我的意思是，这很有趣。
I think we can do it.
我想我们能做到。
3:07:44 Also, the thing, what’s really interesting is I think it’s not just first-person, first and second, because one idea is that, the idea that, oh, science gives us this objective third-person view.
另外，真正有趣的是，我认为这不仅仅是第一人称、第一和第二，因为一个想法是，哦，科学给了我们这种客观的第三人称视角。
That’s one way of talking about objectivity.
这是谈论客观性的一种方式。
There’s a whole other way is that I do the experiment.
还有另一种方法就是我做实验。
You do the experiment, we talk to each other, we agree on methods, and we both get the same result.
你做实验，我们互相交谈，我们就方法达成一致，然后我们都得到相同的结果。
That is a very different way of thinking about objectivity, and it acknowledges that when we talk about agents, agency and individuality are flexible.
这是一种非常不同的思考客观性的方式，它承认当我们谈论代理人时，代理和个性是灵活的。
3:08:18 So there’s a great paper, speaking of Santa Fe by David Krakauer, where they looked at sort of information, theoretic measures of individuality.
大卫·克拉考尔 (David Krakauer) 发表了一篇很棒的论文，谈到了圣达菲，他们在论文中研究了各种信息，即个性的理论衡量标准。
And what you find is it’s actually pretty fluid.
你会发现它实际上非常流畅。
My liver cell is an individual, but really it’s part of the liver.
我的肝细胞是一个个体，但实际上它是肝脏的一部分。
And my liver is a separate system, but really it’s part of me.
我的肝脏是一个独立的系统，但它确实是我的一部分。
So I’m an individual, yay.
所以我是一个人，是的。
But actually I’m part of a society and I couldn’t be me without the entire community of say, language users.
但实际上我是社会的一部分，如果没有整个社区（比如语言使用者），我就不可能成为我。
I wouldn’t even be able to frame any questions.
我什至无法提出任何问题。
And my community of language users is part of ecosystems that are alive, that I am a part of, a lineage of.
我的语言用户社区是活跃的生态系统的一部分，我是其中的一部分，是其血统的一部分。
This is like Sarah Walker stuff, and then those ecosystems are part of the biosphere.
这就像莎拉·沃克（Sarah Walker）的东西，然后这些生态系统就是生物圈的一部分。
We’re never separable as opposed to this very atomizing, the triumphal, this science view is wants like Boltzmann brains, you’re just a brain floating in the space.
我们永远是不可分离的，与这种非常原子化、胜利的科学观点相反，这种科学观点需要像玻尔兹曼大脑一样，你只是一个漂浮在太空中的大脑。
There is a fascinating degree to which agency is fluid.
代理的流动性达到了令人着迷的程度。
3:09:07 You are an individual, but you and I talking is the kind of individual, and then the person listening to this right now is also an individual.
你是一个个体，但是你我说话也是一个个体，那么现在听这个的人也是一个个体。
I mean, that’s a weird thing too.
我的意思是，这也是一件奇怪的事情。
That’s a weird thing, right?
这很奇怪，对吧？
Because there’s a broadcast nature too.
因为也有广播性质。
This is why information theoretic.
这就是信息论的原因。
3:09:29 So the idea that we’re pursuing now, which I get really excited about, is this idea of information architecture or organization.
因此，我们现在正在追求的想法是信息架构或组织的想法，对此我感到非常兴奋。
Organizational organization.
组织机构。
Because physicalism is like everything’s atoms, but Kant recognized, Kant is apparently the one who came up with the word organism.
因为物理主义就像一切的原子，但康德承认，康德显然是提出有机体这个词的人。
He recognized that life has a weird organization that would see specifically different from machines.
他认识到生命有一个奇怪的组织，它与机器有特别不同。
And so this idea that how do we engage with the idea that organization, which is often I can be cast in information theoretic terms or computational terms even.
因此，我们如何参与组织这一想法，我通常可以用信息论术语或计算术语来表达。
It’s not really quite physical.
这实际上并不完全是物理的。
It’s embodied in physical, in the physical.
它体现在身体上，身体上。
It has to instantiate in the physical, but it also has this other realm of design, not design like intelligent design, but there’s a…
它必须在物理中实例化，但它也有另一个设计领域，不是像智能设计那样的设计，但有一个……
The organization itself is a relationship of constraints and information flow.
组织本身就是一种约束和信息流的关系。
And I think again, that’s an entirely new interesting way that we might get a very different kind of science that would flow out of that.
我再次认为，这是一种全新的有趣的方式，我们可能会从中得到一种非常不同的科学。
So going back to Kant and organism versus machine.
那么回到康德和有机体与机器的问题上来。
3:10:29 So I showed you a couple of legged robots.
所以我向你们展示了几个有腿机器人。
Very cool.
非常酷。
Is it possible for machines to have agency?
机器有可能拥有代理权吗？
I would not discount that possibility.
我不会低估这种可能性。
3:10:44 I think there’s no reason I would say that it’s impossible that machines could, whatever it manifests that strange loop that we’re talking about that autopoiesis I don’t think there’s a reason to say it can’t happen in silicon.
我认为我没有理由说机器不可能做到这一点，无论它表现出我们正在谈论的自创生的奇怪循环，我认为没有理由说它不可能在硅中发生。
I think whatever, it would be very different from us, the idea that it would be like, oh, it would be just like us.
我认为无论如何，它会与我们非常不同，它会像，哦，它会像我们一样。
But now it’s instantiated and I think it might have very different kind of experiential nature.
但现在它被实例化了，我认为它可能具有非常不同的体验性质。
I don’t think what we have now, the LLMs are really there, but yeah, I’m not going to say that it’s not possible.
我不认为我们现在拥有的，法学硕士真的存在，但是，是的，我不会说这是不可能的。
I wonder how far you can get with imitation, which is essentially what LLMs are doing.
我想知道你能通过模仿走多远，这本质上就是法学硕士所做的事情。
3:11:26 So imitating humans, and I wouldn’t discount either the possibility that through imitation you can achieve what you would call consciousness or agency or the ability to have experience.
因此，模仿人类，我不会低估通过模仿你可以获得所谓的意识、能动性或获得经验的能力的可能性。
I think for most of us humans to think, oh, that’s just fake.
我认为我们大多数人都会想，哦，那只是假的。
That’s copying.
这就是抄袭。
But there’s some degree to which us, we humans are just copying each other.
但在某种程度上，我们人类只是在互相模仿。
We just are really good imitation machines coming from babies.
我们只是来自婴儿的非常好的模仿机器。
We were born in this world and we’re just learning to imitate each other.
我们出生在这个世界上，只是在学习互相模仿。
And through the imitation and the tension in the disagreements in the imitations.
并通过模仿和模仿中的分歧中的张力。
We gain personality, perspective, all that kind of stuff.
我们获得了个性、观点以及所有类似的东西。
Yeah, it’s possible, right?
是的，有可能，对吧？
3:12:08 It’s possible.
这是可能的。
But I think probably the view I’m advocating would say that one of the most important parts of agency is there’s something called, E-four.
但我认为我所提倡的观点可能会说，代理最重要的部分之一是有一个叫做 E-four 的东西。
The E-four theory of cognition, embodiment, enaction, embedding, and there’s another one, extension.
E-四理论：认知、具体化、执行、嵌入，还有另一种理论，延伸。
But so the idea is that you actually have to be in a body which is itself part of an environment that is the physical nature of it and of the extension with other living systems as well is essential.
但这个想法是，你实际上必须处于一个身体中，该身体本身就是环境的一部分，这是它的物理本质，并且与其他生命系统的扩展也是至关重要的。
3:12:46 So that’s why I think the LLMs are not going to, it’s not imitation.
所以这就是为什么我认为法学硕士不会这样做，这不是模仿。
It’s going to require, this goes to the brain in the VAT thing.
这将需要，这会进入增值税问题的大脑。
I did an article about the brain in the vat, which was really Evans, I was reporting on Evans.
我写了一篇关于缸中之脑的文章，这确实是埃文斯，我正在报道埃文斯。
Where they did the brain in the VAT argument.
他们在增值税争论中动了脑筋。
But they said, “Look, in the end, actually the only way to actually get a real brain in the VAT is actually to have a brain in a body.” And it could be a robot body, but you still need a brain in the body.
但他们说，“看，最终，实际上，真正在增值税中获得真正的大脑的唯一方法就是在身体中拥有大脑。”它可能是一个机器人身体，但你的身体里仍然需要一个大脑。
So I don’t think LLMs will get there because they can’t.
所以我认为法学硕士不会到达那里，因为他们做不到。
You really need to be embedded in a world, at least that’s the E-four idea.
你确实需要融入一个世界，至少这是 E-4 的想法。
The E-four, the 4E approach to cognition argues that cognition does not occur solely in the head, but is also embodied, embedded, enacted, and extended.
E-4，即 4E 认知方法，认为认知不仅仅发生在头脑中，而且还体现、嵌入、制定和扩展。
3:13:13 And by way of extra cranial processes and structures, they’re very much in vogue.
通过颅外过程和结构，它们非常流行。
4E cognition has received relatively few critical evaluations.
4E认知受到的批评性评价相对较少。
This is a paper, but reflecting on two recent collections, this article reviews the four E paradigm with a view to assessing the strengths and weaknesses.
这是一篇论文，但回顾了最近的两篇论文集，本文回顾了 4 E 范式，以评估其优点和缺点。
It’s fascinating.
这很有趣。
I mean, yeah, the branches of what is cognition extends far, and it could go real far.
我的意思是，是的，认知的分支延伸得很远，而且可以走得很远。
Right.
正确的。
3:13:49 There’s a great story about an interaction between Jonas Salk, who was very much a reductionist, the great biologist, and Gregory Bateson, who was a cyberneticist, and Bateson always loved to poke people.
有一个关于乔纳斯·索尔克（Jonas Salk）和格雷戈里·贝特森（Gregory Bateson）之间互动的精彩故事，乔纳斯·索尔克是一位还原论者，伟大的生物学家，格雷戈里·贝特森是一位控制论专家，而贝特森总是喜欢戳人。
And he said to Salk, he said, “Where’s your mind?” And Salk went, “Up here,” and Bateson said, “No, no, no, out here.” And what he really meant was this extended idea.
他对索尔克说，“你的想法在哪里？”索尔克说：“到这里来。”贝特森说：“不，不，不，到这里来。”他真正的意思是这个扩展的想法。
It’s not just within your cranium to have experience.
经验不只是在你的颅内。
Experience in some sense is not a thing you have.
从某种意义上说，经验并不是你所拥有的东西。
It is a thing you do.
这是你要做的一件事。
Almost perform it in a way, which is why both actually having a body, but having the body itself be in a world with other bodies is, from this perspective, is really important.
几乎以某种方式执行它，这就是为什么两者实际上都有一个身体，但从这个角度来看，让身体本身与其他身体处于一个世界中是非常重要的。
And it’s very attractive to me.
这对我来说非常有吸引力。
And again, if we’re really going to do science with them, we’re going to have to have these ideas crash up against data, crash up against, we can’t just armchair it or couch quarterbacking it, but I think there’s a lot of possibility here.
再说一次，如果我们真的要和他们一起做科学研究，我们就必须让这些想法与数据碰撞，碰撞，我们不能只是坐在扶手椅上或沙发上支持它，但我认为这里有很多可能性。
It’s a very radically different way of looking at what we mean by nature.
这是一种截然不同的看待自然含义的方式。
What do you make of the fact that this individual observer, you as an individual observer only get a finite amount of time to exist in this world?
作为一个个体观察者，你在这个世界上存在的时间是有限的，你对此有何看法？
3:14:53 Does it make you sad?
这会让你伤心吗？
No, actually it doesn’t make me sad.
不，实际上这并不让我难过。
3:15:04 Okay, so full reveal, I have been doing contemplative practice in the zen tradition for 30 years.
好吧，透露这么多，我已经按照禅宗传统进行冥想练习 30 年了。
I’ve been staring at a wall for 30 years, and it’s taught me a lot.
我盯着一堵墙已经三十年了，它教会了我很多东西。
I really value what that practice has given me about the nature of experience.
我真的很重视这种实践给我带来的关于经验本质的东西。
And one of the things it’s taught me is I don’t really matter that very much.
它教会我的一件事是我其实并不那么重要。
This thing I call Adam Frank is really, it’s kind of a construct.
我称之为亚当·弗兰克的这个东西实际上是一种构造。
There’s this process going on of which I am actually fundamentally, and that’s super cool, but it’s going to go.
我实际上正在经历这个过程，这非常酷，但它将会继续。
I don’t know where it came from.
我不知道它是从哪里来的。
It’s going to go, I don’t really need it to, and then who the hell knows?
它会消失，我真的不需要它，然后谁知道呢？
I’m not an advocate for an afterlife, but just that what I love, zen, has this idea of beyond birth and death, and they don’t mean reincarnation.
我并不是来世的拥护者，但我所热爱的禅宗具有超越生死的思想，而且它们并不意味着转世。
What they mean is, “Dude, you don’t even really understand what life is.” You know what I mean?
他们的意思是，“伙计，你根本不明白生活是什么。”你知道我的意思？
I’m like this core level of your own experience.
我喜欢你自己经历的核心水平。
So your ideas about what death is are equally ill-formed.
所以你关于死亡是什么的想法同样是错误的。
3:16:07 The contemplative practice really tries to focus on experience itself.
冥想练习确实试图专注于体验本身。
Spend five days at a zen session doing contemplative practice from 7:00 AM.
从早上 7:00 开始，花五天的禅宗课程进行冥想练习。
until 9:00 PM, obviously with breaks.
直到晚上 9:00，当然有休息时间。
And you’ll really get a much deeper understanding of what my own experience is.
你会对我自己的经历有更深入的了解。
What is it really like?
它到底是什么样的？
It forces you to learn how to stabilize your attention because attention is kind of like this thing.
它迫使你学习如何稳定你的注意力，因为注意力有点像这个东西。
It’s usually just like, “Oh, over there.
通常就像，“哦，在那儿。
Oh, my foot hurts.
哦，我的脚好痛。
Oh, I got to do my taxes.
哦，我得报税了。
Oh, what’s that guy over there?
哦，那边那个人是什么？
Why is he wearing those stupid shoes?” And with a contemplative practice, you learn how to stabilize it.
他为什么穿那双蠢鞋？”通过冥想练习，你将学会如何稳定它。
3:16:39 And once you stabilize it, you can now begin to sort of explore the phenomenal nature of it.
一旦你稳定了它，你现在就可以开始探索它的现象本质。
So what I think I’ve learned from that is kind of whatever, I’m not really kind of real to begin with.
所以我想我从中学到的是无论如何，我一开始就不太真实。
The Adam Frank part, the identity, the thing, and the part of me that is real is everything’s coming and going.
亚当·弗兰克的部分、身份、事物和我真实的部分是一切的来来去去。
It’s all coming and going.
一切都来了又去。
Well, how could I ever not come and go?
好吧，我怎么可能不来不走呢？
And the entire world is just, Buddhism has this idea of co-dependent arising.
而整个世界都是正义的，佛教有这种缘起的观念。
Nothing exists, nothing has self-nature.
一切事物都不存在，一切事物都没有自性。
Nothing exists by itself.
没有什么是单独存在的。
It’s an endless, infinitely connected web.
这是一个无止境、无限连接的网络。
But still, there’s a deliciousness to the individual experience.
但个人体验仍然有其美妙之处。
3:17:15 You get attached to it and it ends and it’s good while it last, and it sucks that it ends.
你对它产生了依恋，它就结束了，它持续的时候很好，但它结束了就很糟糕。
You can just be like, “Ah, well, everything comes and goes,” but I was eating ice cream yesterday.
你可以说，“啊，好吧，一切来来去去，”但我昨天正在吃冰淇淋。
I found this awesome low-carb ice cream called, Delights here in Austin, and it ends.
我发现了这种很棒的低碳水化合物冰淇淋，叫做“奥斯汀这里的快乐”，然后就结束了。
And I was staring at the empty container, and it was-
我盯着那个空容器，它是——
That’s beautiful, man.
那太漂亮了，伙计。
3:17:42 I love that.
我喜欢那个。
You could say, “Yeah, well, that’s how it all is, but…”
你可以说，“是的，好吧，事情就是这样，但是……”
Can I say that what I’ve learned from, because I love your idea of the deliciousness of it.
我可以说我从中学到了什么吗，因为我喜欢你对它的美味的想法。
3:17:47 But what I think happens with contemplative practice when it deepens is that you’re not just saying, this is I do koan practice.
但我认为，当冥想练习深入时，你不仅仅是说，这是我做的公案练习。
So this is a tradition in zen that it was established, it was a teaching method that was established a thousand years ago.
所以这是禅宗的一个传统，它是一千年前建立的一种教学方法。
They’re these book of koans.
它们就是这些公案书。
And every koan, if you’ve ever read Godel, he’s got a whole chapter on koans.
每一个公案，如果你读过哥德尔，他有一整章都是关于公案的。
They’re kind of non-logical problems that you have to work on.
它们是一些你必须解决的非逻辑问题。
One of my favorite one was, “Stop the sound of the distant temple bell.”
我最喜欢的一首是“让远处寺庙的钟声停止”。
3:18:23 You’re like, “What?” Every time my teacher gives it to him, I’m like, “What are you talking about?” This is the whole zen thing of up is down, but down is up.
你会说，“什么？”每次我的老师把它交给他时，我都会说：“你在说什么？”这就是禅宗的全部内容：上是下，下是上。
You must understand this.
你必须明白这一点。
So your job with these koans is to sit with them, is to sit with them until you realize what the thing is trying to teach you what aspect of experience it’s trying to teach you.
因此，你对这些公案的工作就是和他们坐在一起，直到你意识到它试图教你什么，它试图教你什么方面的经验。
So there’s no answer.
所以没有答案。
No.
不。
And in fact, actually, you don’t give an answer.
事实上，实际上，你没有给出答案。
You actually usually have to demonstrate.
你实际上通常必须进行演示。
The first time when I did a call on and the guy was like, “Don’t tell me the answer, show me the answer.” I was like, what are you talking about?
当我第一次打电话时，那个人就像是，“不要告诉我答案，给我看答案。”我当时想，你在说什么？
But after doing these for years now, I’ve kind of learned the language of them.
但在做了这些年之后，我已经学会了它们的语言。
So I could never tell you.
所以我永远无法告诉你。
If I told you the answer, I could give you a call and tell you the answer.
如果我告诉你答案，我可以给你打电话并告诉你答案。
You’d be like, “What?”
你会说，“什么？”
3:19:05 It’s not the words, it’s the So your experience of like, yeah, the cup is empty.
这不是言语，而是“所以你的体验就像，是的，杯子是空的”。
With a contemplative practice as it deepens over years, it really does take years.
随着冥想练习的深入，它确实需要数年的时间。
Just like anything in math, it took me years to understand the Lagrangians.
就像数学中的任何事情一样，我花了很多年才理解拉格朗日量。
You kind of come to a deeper understanding with yeah, the words of, it’s not just like, oh, everything changes.
你会通过“是的”这句话来获得更深刻的理解，这不仅仅是“哦，一切都变了”。
You actually feel that movement.
你确实感受到了那个运动。
You feel it with breath to breath, and it really becomes, sometimes I have this feeling, this is messed up, but of just joy and it’s not connected to anything.
你用呼吸来感受它，它真的变得，有时我有这种感觉，这很混乱，但只是喜悦，与任何东西无关。
That’s what I’ve kind of gotten from practice.
这就是我从实践中得到的。
It’s just like, yeah, that passage, that infinite passage of moment to moment that is truly the way things are.
就像，是的，那一段，那一刻又一刻的无限流逝，这就是事物的本来面目。
And it’s okay.
没关系。
It’s not okay because I have a feeling about it.
这不好，因为我对此有感觉。
Okay.
好的。
I want it to be okay.
我希望一切都好。
It just is okay.
没关系。
And so really, it’s a pretty awesome thing.
确实，这是一件非常棒的事情。
Yeah, that’s beautiful.
是的，那很漂亮。
3:19:51 Maybe it’s the genetics, maybe it’s the biochemistry in my brain, but I generally have that joy about experience, amorphous joy.
也许是基因的原因，也许是我大脑中的生物化学的原因，但我通常对经历有一种快乐，一种无形的快乐。
But it seems like, again, maybe it’s my Eastern European roots, but there’s always a melancholy that’s also sitting next to the joy, and I think it always feels like they’re intricately linked.
但似乎，也许这是我的东欧根源，但快乐旁边总是有一种忧郁，我认为它们总是错综复杂地联系在一起。
So the melancholy is about, maybe about the finiteness of experience, and the joy is just about the beauty of experience, and they’re just kind of sitting there.
所以忧郁可能是关于经验的有限性，而快乐只是关于经验的美丽，而他们只是坐在那里。
Which is cool actually, because I’m also, I come from Eastern, my roots are Eastern European as well, going back, and I get it right, but that’s also the cool thing.
这实际上很酷，因为我也是，我来自东方，我的根源也是东欧，回去，我说得对，但这也是很酷的事情。
3:20:22 I think one of the things is, well, that is what it is.
我认为其中一件事是，嗯，就是这样。
That is what it is.
就是这样。
You don’t have to do anything.
您无需执行任何操作。
You don’t have to manipulate it or move it around or yeah, this is the experience.
你不必操纵它或移动它，或者是的，这就是体验。
Can you speak to just the practical nature of sitting there from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM?
您能谈谈从早上 7:00 坐到晚上 9:00 的实际意义吗？
I’m like, what the hell are you doing, bro?
我想，你到底在做什么，兄弟？
What’s powerful?
有什么强大的？
3:20:46 What’s fascinating to you?
什么对你来说很有吸引力？
What have you learned from just the experience of staring at a wall?
你从凝视墙壁的经历中学到了什么？
Yeah.
是的。
3:20:51 Yeah.
是的。
So not really.
所以不是真的。
I mean, you’re staring.
我的意思是，你在盯着看。
You’re facing a wall, and what you’re doing is you’re just sitting with, there’s different meditative practices, there’s counting breaths.
你面对一堵墙，你所做的只是坐着，有不同的冥想练习，有数呼吸。
So that’s usually what I do.
所以这就是我通常所做的。
I sit down and I start counting breaths, and for the first half hour it’s just like, blah, blah, blah.
我坐下来，开始数呼吸，在前半个小时里，我的感觉就像是，等等，等等。
Like I said, I’m thinking about my taxes.
就像我说的，我正在考虑我的税收。
I’m thinking about what I got to do later on, yada, yada, yada.
我在想我以后要做什么，呀呀呀呀呀。
First time I ever did a full session, a two-day session, I swear to God, I had Bruce Springsteen’s, Born To Run album track through from the beginning to the end with the pauses.
我第一次进行完整的训练，为期两天的训练，我向上帝发誓，我把布鲁斯·斯普林斯汀（Bruce Springsteen）的《生来奔跑》（Born To Run）专辑曲目从头到尾都播放了一遍，中间有停顿。
This was back in when there were LPs with the fricking pauses.
这还是在唱片里有停顿的时候。
Nice.
好的。
My mind was just like, I need to do something.
我的想法就是，我需要做点什么。
3:21:24 So it literally played the whole album in order.
所以它确实按顺序播放了整张专辑。
That’s pretty cool, actually.
实际上，这很酷。
Yeah, it was pretty amazing to see because you really do, you see the dynamics of your mind.
是的，这真是令人惊奇，因为你真的看到了，你看到了你心灵的动态。
3:21:29 But what happens is, and this took me a while, I used to hate sitting.
但发生的事情是，这花了我一段时间，我过去讨厌坐着。
I do it, but after a while the mind gets exhausted.
我这样做了，但过了一会儿，我的心就变得精疲力尽了。
That part of the mind, the upper level, the roof brain chatter is just like, there’s nothing else to do.
头脑的那一部分，上层，屋顶大脑的喋喋不休就像，没有别的事可做。
And then you get bored.
然后你就会感到无聊。
And now I realize that’s when something interesting is going to happen.
现在我意识到那时将会发生一些有趣的事情。
You drop down and now it’s a very physical practice.
你倒下，现在这是一个非常体力的练习。
People think you’re just sitting there not thinking or thinking about not thinking.
人们认为你只是坐在那里不思考或思考不思考。
Actually, it becomes a very physical process where you’re really just following the breath, you’re kind of riding the breath and it gets very quiet.
事实上，它变成了一个非常物理的过程，你实际上只是跟随呼吸，你有点驾驭呼吸，它变得非常安静。
And within that quietness, there’s a path.
在那安静之中，有一条路。
Because obviously there’s been, Buddhism is always not about thinking, but there’s a huge literature.
因为显然，佛教始终不是关于思考的，但有大量的文献。
3:22:18 So these guys are always about, don’t think.
所以这些家伙总是在想，别想。
I’ve written all this stuff, but they’re guideposts.
我写了所有这些东西，但它们只是路标。
They’re like the finger pointing at the moon.
他们就像指向月亮的手指。
And there’s the idea of first, your mind is usually scattered.
首先，你的思想通常是分散的。
Right now, when I walk out, I’m going to go get the Uber and everything.
现在，当我走出去时，我要去叫优步什么的。
My mind’s going to be all over the place, but with sitting, first, you concentrate the mind so that there’s no more scatter anymore.
我的心会到处乱，但是通过静坐，首先你要集中心，这样就不会再分散了。
The thoughts are still happening, but you’re just not there happening up there.
这些想法仍在发生，但你只是不在那里发生。
You’re not even paying attention to them.
你甚至没有注意到他们。
And then as time goes on, you unify the mind, which is this very powerful thing where kind of the self drops away and there’s just this presence.
然后随着时间的推移，你会统一思想，这是一种非常强大的东西，自我会消失，只剩下这种存在。
3:22:49 It’s kind of like a raw presence, and that’s often where the joy up wells from, but you sit with whatever, maybe you’re going to sit and maybe you’re going to go through an hour of being bummed out about your mom who died or something.
这有点像一种原始的存在，这通常是快乐的源泉，但你和任何东西坐在一起，也许你会坐下来，也许你会经历一个小时，因为你妈妈的去世或其他什么事情而感到沮丧。
You’re just going to sit with whatever comes up you’re going to make.
无论发生什么，你都会坐下来。
That’s why the sitting part, you’re making the commitment.
这就是为什么坐着的部分，你正在做出承诺。
I’m going to sit here with whatever comes up, I will not be moved.
无论发生什么，我都会坐在这里，我不会被感动。
And then what You come away with it actually over time, it actually changes kind of who you are.
随着时间的推移，你实际上会得到什么，它实际上改变了你是谁。
I’m still the asshole I was from New Jersey growing up, but I just have more space now for things.
我仍然是那个来自新泽西长大的混蛋，但我现在有了更多的空间来处理事情。
Once Jersey, always Jersey.
曾经是泽西岛，永远是泽西岛。
Always Jersey.
总是泽西岛。
But I love the Bruce Springsteen is just blasting in your head.
但我喜欢布鲁斯·斯普林斯汀在你脑海中的震撼。
Yeah, that was amazing.
是的，那太棒了。
Why are we here?
我们为什么在这里？
3:23:30 What do you think is the purpose, the meaning of human existence?
您认为人类存在的目的、意义是什么？
It’s good that we just had the last conversation because I’m going to give this answer, which is so corny.
很高兴我们刚刚进行了最后一次谈话，因为我要给出这个答案，这太老套了。
3:23:35 It’s love, and I’m not messing around.
这是爱，我不会胡闹。
Because really actually, what happens, so within Buddhism, there’s the idea of the Bodhisattva principle.
因为实际上，发生了什么，所以在佛教中，有菩萨理的概念。
You’re here to help.
您是来帮忙的。
You’re just here to help, right?
你只是来帮忙的，对吧？
Compassion.
同情。
That’s a really essential part of this path, of the Dharma path.
这是这条道路、佛法道路中非常重要的一部分。
And when I first started, I was like, “I don’t care about compassion.
当我刚开始时，我想，“我不在乎同情心。
I’m here for knowledge.” I started contemplative practice because of the usual thing I was suffering.
我来这里是为了获取知识。”我开始冥想练习是因为我平常所遭受的痛苦。
The reason everybody comes to things like this, life was hard.
每个人之所以会遇到这样的事情，是因为生活很艰难。
I was going through stuff, but I also wanted knowledge.
我正在经历一些事情，但我也想要知识。
I wanted to understand the foundational nature of reality.
我想了解现实的基本本质。
So it was like compassion or whatever.
所以这就像同情心或其他什么。
But then I found out that you can’t get that.
但后来我发现你无法做到这一点。
You can’t get those.
你无法得到这些。
You can’t go to this level without compassion.
如果没有同情心，你就无法达到这个水平。
3:24:18 Somehow in this process, you realize that it really is about helping all sentient beings.
不知何故，在这个过程中，你意识到这实际上是在帮助一切众生。
That’s the way they frame, just being here to help.
这就是他们的框架，只是来这里提供帮助。
So I know that sounds cornball, but especially for a guy from Jersey, which is the main thing is to get over.
所以我知道这听起来很老套，但特别是对于一个来自泽西岛的人来说，最重要的是克服这一点。
Your job is to get over.
你的工作就是克服困难。
But that’s really what I found.
但这确实是我发现的。
It is actually kind…
其实也是很善良的……
And so that joy, the joy, some of that joy is just, it’s like this.
所以那种喜悦，那种喜悦，其中一些喜悦就是这样的。
One of the things I have when I have really, there’s a kind of experience I’ll have in contemplative practice, which will carry out into the world, which is just this gratitude for the fact that the world gives you everything, and there’s a certain way, just the blue sky and the breath, the world is just giving you itself completely unhindered.
当我真正拥有的时候，我会在冥想练习中获得一种体验，这种体验会落实到世界上，这就是对世界给予你一切的感激之情，有某种方式，只是蓝天和呼吸，世界只是将自己完全不受阻碍地给予你。
It holds nothing back.
它没有任何保留。
And yeah, that’s kind of the experience.
是的，这就是一种体验。
And then you kind of like, “Oh, I need to be helpful, because who’s not having this experience.”
然后你会觉得，“哦，我需要提供帮助，因为谁没有这样的经历呢。”
So just love for the world as it is?
那么只是爱世界本来的样子吗？
Love for the, and all the beings who are suffering.
爱众生，爱所有受苦的众生。
3:25:10 Everybody’s suffering, everybody’s suffering.
每个人都在受苦，每个人都在受苦。
Your worst political opponent, they’re suffering.
你最糟糕的政治对手，他们正在受苦。
And our job is just to try and drop our biases and our stories and see this fundamental level at which life is occurring.
我们的工作只是尝试放弃我们的偏见和我们的故事，并看到生活正在发生的这个基本层面。
And hopefully there’s many alien civilizations out there going through the same journey, out of suffering, towards love.
希望有许多外星文明能够经历同样的旅程，摆脱痛苦，走向爱。
That may be a universal thing about what it means to be alive.
这可能是关于活着的意义的普遍现象。
I hope so.
我希望如此。
I hope so too.
我也希望如此。
3:25:37 Either that or they’re coming to eat us.
要么他们就会来吃我们。
Especially if they’re a type three civilization.
特别是如果他们是第三类文明。
That’s right.
这是正确的。
3:25:41 And they got really big guns.
他们有非常大的枪。
Well, this was truly mind-blowing.
嗯，这确实令人兴奋。
3:25:45 Fascinating.
迷人。
Just awesome conversation.
非常棒的谈话。
Adam, thank you for everything you do, and thank you for talking today.
亚当，感谢你所做的一切，也感谢你今天的发言。
Oh, thank you.
哦，谢谢。
3:25:52 This was a lot of fun.
这很有趣。
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Adam Frank.
感谢您收听与亚当·弗兰克的对话。
3:25:54 To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description.
为了支持这个播客，请在说明中查看我们的赞助商。
And now, let me leave you with some words from Carl Sagan.
现在，让我向你们传达卡尔·萨根的话。
“The cosmos is all that is or ever was, or ever will be.
“宇宙就是现在、曾经、或者将来的一切。
Our feeblest, contemplations of the cosmos stir us.
我们对宇宙最微弱的沉思激发了我们。
There’s a tingling in the spine, a catch in the voice, a faint sensation as if a distant memory or falling from a height.
脊椎发麻，声音哽咽，有一种微弱的感觉，仿佛是遥远的记忆或从高处坠落。
We know we are approaching the greatest of mysteries.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
我们知道我们正在接近最大的谜团。”感谢您的聆听，并希望下次再见。
本集资源与出处
- 视频在 YouTube 收看
- 音频官方 MP3 直链来自 lexfridman.com 官方播客 RSS
- 官网Lex Fridman 官网本集页面
- 文稿官方 Transcript（lexfridman.com）
- 文稿HappyScribe 版文稿
