August 7, 2025 • 59 mins
A Harvard astronomer is suggesting that an interstellar object nearing Earth could be an engineered object — rather than a natural one — after making similar claims in in 2023 and 2017.Avi Loeb, the chair of Harvard's astronomy department, told CNN on Thursday that the 31/ATLAS interstellar object detected by the Deep Random Survey remote telescope in Chile could have an alien origin."The brightness of the object implies a diameter of 20 km, and there is not enough rocky material in interstellar space to deliver such a giant object per decade," Loeb said.
He noted that it takes "10,000 years for that much mass to arrive to the inner part of the solar system."Loeb also said that the object will be closest to the Earth when our planet is on the opposite side of the sun, meaning we won't be able to actually see it.
"We won't be able to observe it, but that's the perfect time for it to maneuver, and so we just need to watch it," he said.
He went on to say he thinks there's a chance that the object could be engineered rather than naturally occurring."I'm not saying it's an alien technology," Loeb said. "I'm just saying it doesn't look like a very common thing, and actually, the glow that is around this object, usually for comets, you see a trailing tail behind the object and here the glow from the Hubble Space Telescope image is actually in front of the object."
The astronomer said that "we've never seen such a thing" and noted that a comet wouldn't "have glow in front of it."He argued that it’s prudent for humanity to examine any interstellar objects entering our solar system, just to be sure they’re harmless.
“[31/ATLAS] may come to save us or destroy us,” he said. “We'd better be ready for both options and check whether all interstellar objects are rocks.”31/ATLAS made news in July after scientists confirmed it originated outside of our solar system, making it one of only three known interstellar objects discovered in our little slice of space.The object is massive, with scientists estimating it is more than 12 miles wide.Loeb theorizing a more enigmatic origin of the object isn't exactly off-brand for him. In 2023 he made headlines after he and a team recovered a meteor that fell into the Pacific Ocean. He claimed at the time that an analysis found previously unseen metal alloys in the rock, suggesting at very least an origin outside of our solar system, but other astrophysicists were skeptical of those claims.Back in 2017, Oumuamua, a long, rod-like object, became the first known interstellar object detected in our solar system.
Loeb released a paper in 2021 exploring the idea that the strange object — which about the length of a football field but only as thick as a common cigar — was possibly using a "light sail" that captures the sun's energy as a means of propulsion.He was essentially suggesting that Oumuamua could have been crafted by aliens or some other intelligence.
n 2023, researchers published a study that found the object's strange orbit and apparent propulsion was actually achieved through a mechanism found in many icy comets. Essentially, hydrogen was being released from the object as it was warmed by the sun's heat.“For a comet several kilometers across, the outgassing would be from a really thin shell relative to the bulk of the object, so both compositionally and in terms of any acceleration, you wouldn’t necessarily expect that to be a detectable effect,” UC Berkeley assistant professor of che
He noted that it takes "10,000 years for that much mass to arrive to the inner part of the solar system."Loeb also said that the object will be closest to the Earth when our planet is on the opposite side of the sun, meaning we won't be able to actually see it.
"We won't be able to observe it, but that's the perfect time for it to maneuver, and so we just need to watch it," he said.
He went on to say he thinks there's a chance that the object could be engineered rather than naturally occurring."I'm not saying it's an alien technology," Loeb said. "I'm just saying it doesn't look like a very common thing, and actually, the glow that is around this object, usually for comets, you see a trailing tail behind the object and here the glow from the Hubble Space Telescope image is actually in front of the object."
The astronomer said that "we've never seen such a thing" and noted that a comet wouldn't "have glow in front of it."He argued that it’s prudent for humanity to examine any interstellar objects entering our solar system, just to be sure they’re harmless.
“[31/ATLAS] may come to save us or destroy us,” he said. “We'd better be ready for both options and check whether all interstellar objects are rocks.”31/ATLAS made news in July after scientists confirmed it originated outside of our solar system, making it one of only three known interstellar objects discovered in our little slice of space.The object is massive, with scientists estimating it is more than 12 miles wide.Loeb theorizing a more enigmatic origin of the object isn't exactly off-brand for him. In 2023 he made headlines after he and a team recovered a meteor that fell into the Pacific Ocean. He claimed at the time that an analysis found previously unseen metal alloys in the rock, suggesting at very least an origin outside of our solar system, but other astrophysicists were skeptical of those claims.Back in 2017, Oumuamua, a long, rod-like object, became the first known interstellar object detected in our solar system.
Loeb released a paper in 2021 exploring the idea that the strange object — which about the length of a football field but only as thick as a common cigar — was possibly using a "light sail" that captures the sun's energy as a means of propulsion.He was essentially suggesting that Oumuamua could have been crafted by aliens or some other intelligence.
n 2023, researchers published a study that found the object's strange orbit and apparent propulsion was actually achieved through a mechanism found in many icy comets. Essentially, hydrogen was being released from the object as it was warmed by the sun's heat.“For a comet several kilometers across, the outgassing would be from a really thin shell relative to the bulk of the object, so both compositionally and in terms of any acceleration, you wouldn’t necessarily expect that to be a detectable effect,” UC Berkeley assistant professor of che
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:18):
Hey, this is Cliff your host. This is a special
edition of Earth Ancients, and we have doctor Auvi Low
joining us to Harvard astrophysicist because he has been in
the news and we have a direct line to his
lab and whenever he shows up in the news. He
was in USA today on CNN and he's been on
(00:40):
a lot of TV. We had to get a hold
of him immediately. And what's going on is there's an
alien probe known as it's been identified and classified as
three I Atlas, the letter I three I Atlas and
this is another a mile mala kind of asteroid that
(01:02):
appears to be self directed, appears to be coming from
an ancient civilization outside of our cosmos, is entering our cosmos.
And what's a little unnerving is that the hypothesis from
this laboratory, from the scientific team is that it is
(01:24):
heading our way. And I don't want to frighten anybody,
but it's one of those situations where we just don't know,
and there's so much to talk about. We're gonna unload
quite a bit of data today. But the most important thing,
and why I have doctor loebe on the program fairly regularly,
(01:49):
is the fact that he is, without a doubt, the
most transparent scientist out there right now, and he's not
behooving to the government. I don't know if you guys
remember about five years ago when he came on, he
refused to sign a non disclosure agreement with the Department
of Defense, and he wanted to the public to know
(02:13):
what was going on in our base, in our cosmos.
And I'm not saying or suggesting that what we're going
to talk about today is a UAP, an unidentified aerial phenomenon.
It's that he is blowing the whistle on this because
within his hypothesis for what this is, there are consequences
(02:39):
and defense measures that need to be appropriated if this
so called asteroid UAP comes our way. So this is
going to be to the point. It's gonna be shorter
than normal, a little less an hour, and there are
(02:59):
very few interruptions, a few ads just to cover our bases.
But this is going to be short and sweet and
to the point, and that's what we need. And this
is why I really appreciate AVI coming on at such
short notice and to give us the details. So today's
program is Alien Probe three I at lasts and my
(03:21):
guest is doctor Avi Lobe. Well, I got a white
(03:59):
paper from my producer, Gail Tour. Asteroids are coming at us,
Asteroids are everywhere. That means that we have to think
of doctor Avi Lobe, and he has written an amazing paper.
We're always looking to see what he's up to. We
have him on I think at least once a year
to get an update on anything like the olma O
(04:19):
Maala asteroid that came by a few years ago. But
this is a really I don't know if it's an
alarmist paper or not. I was just talking to doctor
Lobe about this. But what makes this new object, we'll
call it unique, is the fact that it is an
interstellar I guess we're not gonna call it a probe
(04:40):
until doctor Lobe identifies it as a probe. But it's
very unique. It's got some kind of scary ramifications if
it's more than just a hypothesis. And for all the details,
guess what doctor Avi Lobe is with us. So hiy Avi,
welcome to Earth.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
Agent.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
It's great to see you. How you doing.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Thanks thank for having me. It's a great pleasure.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
All right, we got to get to the basics on
this are you set up at your observatory in Harvard
to observe this or this actually came from another observatory,
Is that correct?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Yeah, well, it was actually a half a meter telescope
called Atlas in Chile that discovered it on the first
of July twenty twenty five. And then, as it turns out,
the neighbor of that telescope is the Rubin Observatory that
was just inaugurated a few weeks earlier. And when they
(05:33):
looked back the data from the Ruby Observatory, which is
an eight point four meter telescope, they realized that it
was there. Now it's coming. The reason it was difficult
to spot it is because it's coming from the direction
of the center of the Milky Way, which is very
crowded with lots of stars. And you know, just this morning,
I wrote a new paper about the so called the
(05:58):
Lobe scale that's after my life name. I proposed an
idea a week ago after a Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna
called me on the phone and asked me for an
update about this new object, new interstellar object called three
I Atlas three because it's the third object spotted by
(06:18):
telescopes on Earth, is coming from outside the Solar System.
The first was of Muamua that you mentioned. Second was Boriso,
which was a comet. Ommu was very anomalous. We can
get into more details. But this one, which is called
three I I for interstellar and Atlas for the name
of the telescope. She wanted to know more about it,
and I told her. In fact, I said that there is.
(06:42):
It will come very close to Jupiter in mid March
twenty twenty six, and I wrote another paper suggesting that
we use Juno, a spacecraft that is currently orbiting Jupiter.
We give it a push away from Jupiter in mid
September twenty five. It was supposed to plunge into Jupiter's
(07:04):
atmosphere in mid September, the end of the mission. They
wanted to kill it, basically turn it to ashes, and
I said, don't do that, just push it the other way.
And with a sufficient push it could in principle intercept
three I at lasts, if it doesn't have enough fuel,
it will just get closer to it. And even with
very little fuel, like less than ten percent of the
(07:26):
original fuel that it had, it can come within ten
to twenty five million kilometers from three I atlas and
give us more information. Now, why is this information warranted?
Why is am I speaking about it so much? I
wrote maybe by now twenty six essays on medium dot
com over the past month that you can read all
(07:47):
the details about two of them. This morning, just this morning,
there was a paper from the Hubard Space Telescope that
image did and by the way, that's the latest news.
There seemed to be a glow of material preceding it.
Not there is no trailing tail. There is no tail
of this supposingly comet, So astronomers associated it with just
(08:11):
a comet from interstellar space moving too fast, moving at
sixty kilometers per second. Therefore it's not bound to the Sun.
It's approaching us. But what I've noticed is the brightness
of this object, and I noticed it on the first
day when it was discovered. The brightness implies a diameter
of twenty kilometers. And you know, amu Wa was just
(08:33):
about one hundred meters, you know, and this one is
twenty kilometers. There should be hundreds of thousands of objects
like Omuama for every object that is twenty kilometers. We
haven't seen hundreds of thousands. We've seen om and moa
and now this one after Boriso, which was also a
few hundred meters, so that's surprising. And moreover, you know,
(08:56):
there is not enough rocky material in interstellar space where
it came from to give us an object that is
made of rock which is twenty kilometers in diameter every decade.
In fact, if you just take a census of the
rocky material industrial space, you would expect such a giant
(09:17):
rock which is twice as large as the asteroid that
killed the dinosaurs. You expect that to be delivered to
the Inner Solar System once per ten thousand years. We've
detected it over a decade. It's supposed to have once
per ten thousand years. What's going on here? Of course,
one possibility, which I pointed out in my paper which
is now published, is that it wasn't a directed trajectory
(09:39):
targeting the Inner Solar System, meaning maybe it's technological. Maybe
the trajectory was designed. And then with two other collaborators,
Adam Hibbert and Adam Krawl, I wrote a paper that
is pointing out that the trajectory is indeed really unusual
in the sense that it's aligned with the orbital plane
(09:59):
of the planets around the Sun. Okay, to within five degrees,
and the chances of that happening at random is one
in five hundred. That's extremely unusual, and we haven't had
five hundred objects from interstellar space.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
And ask you real quickly, just for the Lettuce imaging
of this object, are you suggesting that we're looking at
a propulsion system of some kind.
Speaker 2 (10:29):
Not necessarily right now. It may have been propelled in that,
you know, before it arrived to our vicinity, before we
could see it. But the point is that the trajectory
is very fine tuned, first of all, to be in
the orbital plane of the planets. You know that, as
I said, that's one in five hundred chants of it
being so close to the orbital plane. It comes on
(10:49):
a retrograde orbit, which is opposite to the motion of
the planets around the Sun, meaning that if it wants
to deploy mini probes that will visit the planets there
is because the plants are moving towards it, so to speak.
And then it will arrive very close to Jupiter, Mars,
and Venus. And the chance of that happening at random,
(11:11):
you know, if you just take that trajectory, you say, okay,
I accept it's in the plane of the planet. I
just change the arrival time. Still, the chance is one
in twenty thousand that it will arrive so close to Mars,
Venus and Jupiter, and you know that makes it unusual.
And also it arrives closest to the Sun when the
(11:31):
Earth is on the opposite side, we won't be able
to observe it from Earth. If they know about us,
that's the best strategy if they wanted to do a
maneuver near the Sun, because that's when the gravitational assist
of the Sun can help do a very significant maneuver.
That's what we do, is spacecraft. We make a maneuver
close to the Sun because you are taking advantage of
(11:54):
the Sun's gravity to prepare yourself at a different speed.
So if they wanted, for example, to slow down, you know,
if they don't show up on the other side of
the Sun after we can't see them during the month
of October twenty twenty five, you know they will pass
closest to the Sun on October twenty ninth. If they
don't show up on the other side as expected, I
think the stock market may crash.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
Oh my god, amazing.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
Now I should also say that this morning I wrote
a paper. It's also available on medium dot com, where
I suggested it already a week ago, but I now
elaborated on that of what I is being called the
Lobe scale, which is a risk scale for interstellar objects,
(12:41):
objects coming from outside the Solar System. Zero implies that
it's a natural object, a rock like, for example, an
asteroid or an icy rock like a comet, the type
of rocks that we are familiar with in the Solar System.
And you know that would be a zero because the
chance of that hitting the Earth is very small. You know,
(13:03):
it really needs to be on a straight trajectory towards
Earth and that's a very small probability. But ten on
that scale is definitely artificial in origin, definitely technological, meaning
that we can see maneuvering in a way, you know,
non gravitational acceleration that represents perhaps propulsion or some engine.
(13:28):
We see evidence for artificial lights or excess heat from
an engine, or we see an unusual shape of the object.
All of these are indicative of a technological signature. And
you know, I think it's important for us to scale
any incoming interstellar object on this scale. And now the
(13:53):
Rubin Observatory in Chile will start discovering every few months
a new interstellar object. Until now, we had only three
spotted by telescopes over the past eight years. But from
now on, you know, there is an increase by almost
two orders of magnitude in the detection rate, and therefore
we should be alert because the implications would be huge
(14:16):
to humanity, not only in terms of US understanding that
there might be a smarter kid on the blog, us
being able to learn from their technologies, but also there
is a threat. You know, there is an existential threat
to humanity. And in the past we worried about the
existential threat from artificial intelligence or from climate change. Lots
(14:41):
of people are talking about this all the time, and
every now and then we also talk about a threat
from a killer asteroid of the type that killed the dinosaurs.
And of course NASA was tasked by Congress, the US
Congress to look for all objects above the size of
a fotball field that may risk that may come close
(15:03):
to Earth. And that's the reason the Rubin Observatory was constructed.
But I'm saying there is another type of objects that
we should be worried about, and we don't discuss those,
and that is alien technology objects. And we should just
check each and every object entering the Solar system if
(15:23):
it has anomalies that put it high above I would
say above level four on the Lob scale. That I
propose we should definitely have policy makers discuss them, getting
more data from scientists and deciding how to respond to them,
and then of course psychologists to decide how to communicate
(15:43):
the message to the public without creating panic, without the
economic meltdown.
Speaker 1 (15:50):
Have you been able to determine the shape? Is it
like the Omauma asteroid which just looks aerodynamic to me?
But do we have an idea idea.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Or Muama changed its brightness every eight hours. It was
stumbling by a factor of ten, and the best fit
for the variation of reflected sunlight from it implied that
it has a disk like shape, very unusual. And moreover,
it was pushed away from the Sun by some mysterious force,
(16:23):
and there wasn't any evaporation that is visible, no cometary
tail whatsoever, no molecules of dust or carbon based molecules
that are usually accompanying any comet, so there was no
rocket effect acting on it. The question was what is
pushing it, what's creating this non gravitational acceleration, And unfortunately
(16:44):
we were left in the dark about it because we
didn't get enough data to figure out its nature. And
I said, look, these anomalies should alert us because it
may be just like our own space debris, you know,
the space trash without For example, three years later, the
same telescope in Hawaii pan stars that discovered them as
(17:07):
a near Earth object found another near Earth object that
was pushed by reflecting sunlight, and that one ended up
being a rocket booster from a nineteen sixty six launch
by NASA. And just on January second this year, twenty
twenty five, the Minor Planet Center reported about a new
(17:29):
asteroid near Earth and then they realized, oh wait a minute,
this one moves along the path of the Tesla Roads,
the car that was launched by SpaceX, and then they
removed it from their list. So this one was not
a rock, It was a car, okay. And all I'm
saying is that maybe Elon Musk is not the most
(17:51):
accomplished space entrepreneur since the Big Bank. You know, thirteen
point eight billionaires passed since the Big Bank the Sun formed.
Just in the last one third of cosmic history, most
of the stars from billions of years before the Sun,
and you can ask where will Voyager be in a billionaeres,
it will be on the other side of the Milky
(18:11):
Way galaxy. And therefore there was plenty of time for
their space artifacts to arrive to our backyard. So we
should simply be agnostic and check each and every interest
our object, whether it has some technological features.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
with my guest today, doctor Avi Lobe coming to us
from Harvard University, will be right back. We're discussing the
(19:29):
alien probe three I atlas and what the ramifications are
for an impact scenario here on planet Earth. With our
guest today, doctor Avi Loebe. Can you tell with your
equipment if an object is changing its trajectory as it's
(19:52):
coming from an interstellar location.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Definitely you can. In fact, with the help of the Web,
which is positioned one and a half million kilometers away
from Earth, we can look at the object from two directions,
from telescopes on Earth and from the Web. It's just
like having two eyes that allow us to gauge distances
of objects, and in fact, I believe the Web observatory
(20:19):
is actually looking at it today. Okay, so we should see.
But the point of that is not only the Web
telescope is able to help us pinpoint the trajector of
the object and figure out if it has nongravitational acceleration
to a very high precision. We didn't have that with
more we had just the hubrid Space telescope, which is
much closer to Earth. The Web is further. We can
(20:42):
get the position of three ieutlats much better. But moreover,
the Web telescope can detect the heat emitted by three iyatlasers.
In other words, not just the reflection of sunlight from it,
but the infrared radiation that it emits, and that can
help us figure out its face temperature, to figure out
(21:02):
its surface area, and then a see spins every sixteen hours,
we could actually sort of get a three dimensional mapping
on of how it looks like, you know, and then
I'm waiting to see what the results will show. It's
you know, science is exciting because you don't need to
know the answer in advance. Despite what my colleagues are
(21:23):
or you know, they always know the answer in advance,
like it must be a comet, you know, and then
they get surprised. So in this case, just to give
you the surprise of the morning, there was the first
paper analyzing images from the Hubble Space telescope taken on
the fourth of July twenty twenty five, and they show
(21:47):
a glow of something in front of the object, in front,
not behind. Usually with comets you have a tail. That's
why we say comet retail. It's behind. This time you
see some glow in front of it, in the direction
that it moves towards the sun. And the question is why.
(22:07):
Of course, one possibility is that it's only you know
it has it doesn't spin very rapidly, so it has
a hot day side and a cold night side, and
the day side is warmed up by the sunlight, and
therefore you know, it ejects thus particles that you see
in front of it and not behind it. But another
(22:29):
thing that is peculiar is there is no evidence. And
by now there are maybe five studies, five independent papers
from different observatories using some of the best observatories in
the world, that it took a spectrum of the object
looking for the characteristic you know molecules that accompany cometary activity.
(22:50):
These are carbon based molecules that you find in every
comet in the Solar system. And they haven't found any spectrum.
They only saw the only saw reddening of the reflected sunlight.
In other words, the object is red but doesn't show
evidence for gas, molecules or atoms around it.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
And that's puzzling, that's fascinating. In your paper, you have
considerations to support your hypothesis that this is artificial. And
one of the things I wanted to ask you about.
You say, it's too large to be an asteroid, right,
and that makes what does that mean if Oma Mau
was Oma Mau too large to be an asteroid too?
Speaker 2 (23:35):
No, No, Omua Mua was roughly one hundred meters inside.
I mean that was the length the thing. It could
have been very thin, actually, but this one is two
hundred times bigger. It's it's twenty kilometers in diameter. If
what we are seeing is its brightness is simply reflection
from a solid object, Okay, Now, of course it's possible
(24:00):
that you know, some some cloud of dust around it
is doing the reflection. It's not the object. But if
it is the object, then it's twenty kilometers in diameter,
And why is that puzzling? Because there is not enough
mass in rocks in interstellar space to deliver a twenty
(24:20):
kilometer rock to our vicinity every decade. You know, our
survey went on for a decade. You can do that
once per ten thousand years, that would be reasonable, but
not every decade. So either it is a comet, but
the nucleus of the comet is very small, you know,
less than about a kilometer in diameter. Then you don't
(24:43):
need a lot of mass. And then the reflection that
we see, the brightness of the object results from dust
that was evaporating from the small object that creates this
glow around. It has nothing to do with the size
of the object. Size of the object is very small.
That's one possibility. And of course, if it happens to
(25:04):
be a large object, you know, I think it's extremely puzzling.
Why are we seeing it in over a survey of
one decade. And the one possibility that can explain it
is because it's not only a random trajectory. It's not like,
you know, you have a lot of these rocks moving around.
It's actually an object that targeted the inner Solar System.
(25:24):
By design, the trajectory wanted to get to the inner
part of the Solar System to visit the planets in
the habitable zone, and that of course would suggest some
designed the trajectory, some intelligence behind the trajectory, which is
also indicated by the fact that it's in the ecliptic
plane where the planets move around the Sun. With a
(25:46):
probability of one in five hundred, is it.
Speaker 1 (25:49):
Possible that this came from the same civilization that sent
out a more and more it's possible object in.
Speaker 2 (25:58):
The general it comes from a different direction. But you know,
we don't know the nature of a mua mua. It
could be just a surface layer or some debris lefto
I mean, I should say that this object three I
atlas enter the outskirts of the Solar system, you know,
the edge of the Oar cloud at ae hundred thousand
(26:20):
times the Earth Sun separation about eight thousand years ago.
If it started from far out, so eight thousand years
ago when humans started recording history, that's when this object
was at one hundred thousand times the Earth Sun separation.
On the other hand, you can imagine some kind of
(26:42):
a base of you know, alien technologies within the Solar
system like they already are not so far like if
there are at a thousand Earth sun separation a thousand
times that it would take them only about eight years
to reach us, you know, And so they if they
(27:03):
see that we are developing as a young technological cimilation,
we are developing and opposing a potential threat to them,
they might visit us. And you know, that is the
dark forest hypothesis, which was a solution to Fermi's paradox.
And Rico Fermi in nineteen fifty had launch in Los Alamos,
(27:23):
and they were discussing extraterrestrials, and he asked, where is everybody?
And the one possible solution is that they're out there,
but they're silent because of war is about predators. That's
a better strategy for them to survive. And if they
see a young civilization like ours developing technologies that are
on the cusp of endangering them, they might do a
(27:46):
reconnaissance mission to visit us. We should be aware of
that possibility because we don't know who exists in our
cosmic neighborhood. You know, we see a lot of sun
like stars, one hundred billion of them in the Milky
Way galaxy. Most of them formed the billions of years
(28:06):
before the Sun. And we see, we assess that, you know,
billions of Earth Sun analogs may exist in the Milky Way. Okay,
so billions of them. And you know, you can argue.
And that's what my colleagues in academia keep arguing that
(28:27):
it's an extraordinary claim to imagine that these houses that
look just like ours on the cosmic street have no
residence or never had residents. And I'm saying, how do
you know that. Let's check. Let's assume, you know, what
is called the Copernican principle that we are not special,
(28:47):
which implies that, you know, if we are not special,
things like us existed billions of years ago, and we
just need to search. And you know, the simplest way
to search is not to look for radio signals from
the houses towards us, because you know, nobody may call
us when we are listening. Actually, the best way is
(29:07):
to check our backyard and see whether among the rocks
that we find there there might be a tennis ball
that was thrown by a neighbor. And that is exactly
what I'm suggesting to do with interest of our objects.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
Let me just change the venue a little bit. In
your most recent dredging of the Pacific Ocean for that
down object that you thought may have been artificial, did
you pull up any analysis of it being an exotic metal?
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Well, we had the I mean, the expedition cost about
about one and a half million dollars. With that budget,
we could only use a sled that was covered with
magnets that we placed on the ocean floor, and we
couldn't really see what we are picking up. There was
no live video feed. So we brought up some magnetic
(30:01):
particles molten droplets from presumably an explosion that came from
a meteor, and then I brought back about eight hundred
and fifty of them to have at the university, where
I gave them to my colleagues, Time Jacobson, a world
renowned geochemist that has the best instruments in the world,
(30:24):
and we analyzed those materials and found that about ten
percent of those spherrows molten droplets have a chemical composition
that is different from solar system materials. It was never
reported before in the scientific literature, but I really want
to get bigger pieces. These were small. The spherals were
(30:47):
less than a millimeter in size, and there isn't a
lot of material in them. And I want to go
back to that location and search for bigger pieces of
in the wreckage of the original meteorite, uh, and perhaps
even find the core of the meteorite. But then to
do that, we need to use a remotely operated vehicle,
(31:09):
a robot with a video feed. That would cost six
and a half million dollars and we don't have the
funding so yet. If we do get the funding, we'll
go there again.
Speaker 1 (31:22):
That's fascinating, is your hypothesis, doctor, Love, that we are
being observed and these are just probes. H. I mean,
that's yourre That's that was what we were talking about
last time. This is more dire and I don't want
to get to the consequences right yet, but I do
want to get your sense of what we're dealing with.
(31:45):
This is a half a million year old civilization that
perhaps is not around anymore. These are perhaps probes that
are looking for signs of life.
Speaker 2 (31:59):
Well, it's but we don't know their agenda. We don't
know what their intent is. We are a young, technological
civilization with only a history of one hundred years since
quantum mechanics was discovered. I mean, the two of us
are speaking thanks to our understanding of quantum mechanics. You know,
the instruments we're using are all based on quantum mechanics,
(32:21):
and only one hundred years one century lapsed since we
started understanding physical reality in the context of quantum mechanics.
If you have another civilization that is far more advanced,
you know, they might even be more intelligent than we are.
You know, the human brain might not be the pinnacle
of creation. That might be you know, smarter kids on
(32:43):
our blog, and that means that we wouldn't fully understand.
Even if they didn't have much more time to develop things,
they could have developed things much better than we did.
Just look at the world politics. We are not that intelligent,
you know. But the other thing I wanted to mention
is that, so far we launch the probes to interstellar space.
(33:04):
These are Voyager one, Voyager two, Pioneer ten, Pioneer eleven
New Horizons, and they will become trash once I mean,
they will not be functional once they leave the outskirts
of the solar system in the ore cloud, because that
would be ten thousand years from now, and they were
not designed to survive that loan. But another civilization that
(33:27):
is far more advanced could have launched functional devices, and
they might visit us, you know, for a purpose. And
I think, just like with any blind date, my advice
for young people that are only blind date is to
first observe before having an opinion about the visitor. Yeah.
(33:53):
I mean a lot of people prefer to attribute whatever
they see to scripts of science fiction writers or from Hollywood,
and I say, all of these scripts are just like
large language models of artificial intelligence in the sense that
they are based on some training data set. You know
(34:14):
that whatever is familiar to us, the experiences we had
on Earth l l m's are not smarter than us
because they are trained on what we see, and what
we see is limited to Earth. Okay, that's it. But
then whatever comes from another star is, you know, could
be out of this world. It's all bets are off,
(34:37):
you know, and therefore we should be open minded to
be surprised instead of claiming anything in the sky must
be rocks. The way my colleagues that are comed experts
keep doing, you know, they I call it the Stone
Age of space exploration, in the sense that anything in
(34:57):
the sky must be stones.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
with my guest today, doctor Ave Loebe discussing the unusual
probe three I at Lasts will be right back by
(36:00):
Yesterday is Harvard astrophysicist Alvi Low discussing a new identified
probe known as three Eye Atlas, which is coming into
our cosmos in the next few weeks. Do you have
a feeling of this object being a UAP or is
(36:24):
it more just a probe?
Speaker 2 (36:26):
Well, that's interesting because well it depends on the size.
But if it's a twenty kilometer object, by the way,
very similar to the dimensions of the rama in the
science fiction novel Rendezvous with Rama that out of see
Clark wrote about he also envisioned the He actually envisioned
the cylinder that is twenty kilometers wide and fifty kilometers long.
(36:50):
But if this object three Eye Atlas is so big,
you know, you could imagine that, you know, it would
take a huge amount of energy for it to maneuver
and visit planets. It might actually just deploy mini probes
that go to the planets, sort of like a mothership.
And in that case, those minni probs would result in
(37:12):
enhanced activity of unidentified anomalous phenomenon on Earth after the visit,
so that will be October twenty ninth, twenty five. And
if we see more anomalies in the sky on Earth,
you know, they may be related to smaller probs that
have not you know, that are not the original object,
(37:33):
but they were deposited. And the Galileo Project under my leadership,
is currently assembling two additional observatories. We have one functioning
in Massachusetts monitoring the sky in the infrared, visible light, radio,
and audio, and we analyze the data with the machine
(37:54):
learning software to figure out if there is any anything
unfamiliar in the sky. And we are assembling additional observatories,
one in Pennsylvania and the other one in Nevada, and
they should be ready by September twenty twenty five, and
that's a month before three I Atlas comes closest to
(38:15):
the Sun and we will be able to tell if
there are any objects, anomalous objects that produce enhance activity
relative to what we see regularly. I mean, we have
the ability to detect a few million objects every year
with our instruments and the one special thing about these
(38:39):
observatories is that they are not traditional astronomical observatories because
those are limited to a very small region of the sky.
Usually astronomers are focusing on a small part of the
sky at any given time, whereas the one that we
constructed from scratch is a new type of observatories where
we monitor the entire sky at all times, and we
(39:00):
pay attention to objects that move fast overhead. These are
the kind of objects that astronomical telescopes often ignore. And
then I really look forward to future data. I believe
you know, as a scientist, I really enjoy having as
much data as possible. I was asked on a podcast,
(39:22):
how do you tell the difference between as a genuine
scientists and the conspiracy theories? And I said, there is
a very simple way of telling the difference. If you
just deliver much more data from instruments, the scientists will
be delighted, even if it changes the mind of the scientists.
(39:45):
Many times in history scientists change the mind based on
better data. That is exactly the scientific method. You have
some conjecture and then you test it with data, and
if the data doesn't agree with the conjecture, it's trued out. Okay,
that's detective. That's the way scientists operate. However, a conspiracy
theorist would be upset by more data that conspiracy theorists
(40:09):
we say, don't give me the data, don't confuse me
with facts. I know the answer on how dare you
even study those facts?
Speaker 1 (40:21):
All right, So let's get to the conclusion of this paper.
And this is so unlike the A V lobe that
I am familiar with. But the dire consequences are that
this is potentially coming for Earth and that we need
to be thinking of defense measures in some capacity. So
(40:43):
this is something that I've always had to chill up
my back about because we really don't have any known
anti asteroid defense system. But maybe it could be clandestine,
a black ops project that we don't know about.
Speaker 2 (40:58):
No, but.
Speaker 1 (41:01):
Why are your conclusions like that? Is it because it's
in the path of Earth's orbit?
Speaker 2 (41:08):
No, it's not coming close to Earth on its current path.
In fact, it gets closest to the Sun when the
Earth is on the opposite side. But that's the point
where it can do a maneuver. It's called an oorverth maneuver,
taking advantage of the Sun's gravity and perhaps it doesn't
want us to see it when it For example, it
could release mini probles that are doing this maneuver and
(41:30):
it will be hidden behind the sun. So I'm just
worried about it. We should see it might be just
a natural comet, and then we don't have to worry
about it. You know. That's the nature of getting as
much data as possible about it so that we can
figure it out. The reason I put it out as
a possibility is to encourage my colleagues observers to get
(41:52):
as much data as possible, because when you have a
lot of data, it's impossible to shove anomalies under the
carpet of traditional thinking. Just to consider Galileo Galilei, the
Church put him in house arrest because they didn't like
the answer he provided by looking through his telescope. But if,
on the other hand, you know, they would have looked
(42:15):
through telescopes and said, we would demonstrate that Gallegaliley is
wrong by looking through telescopes collecting more data about Jupiter
and showing that he was wrong, then they would have
corrected course much faster. I mean it took them three
hundred and fifty years after his death to admit that
he was right, And I say they could have saved
this time. They could have decided within a few years
(42:37):
that he's right by looking through telescopes. And so if
I can encourage my colleagues to prove me wrong by
looking through telescope, we'll get data. If I am actually
wrong and it's just a comet, natural object, so be it. Okay,
we land it's a natural object. That's it. Case closed.
But I don't want us to miss the opportunity to
(42:57):
get all these data by being get relaxed and saying
we know the answer in advance. It must be a comet.
Stop talking about it. How there you speak about something else.
This is not an intelligent approach to science.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
In this paper that you write, are you in contact
with the Department of Defense, who would probably be the
ones who would direct a missile towards trying to.
Speaker 2 (43:26):
No, I should say that right now, the trajector of
free i Atlas is such that there is no way
that we can reach it with any rocket it to
intercept it as it comes to the Sun, because it
will be moving at ninety eight kilometers per second in
(43:46):
the opposite direction relative to Earth. And we just our
best rockets are move at a third of that speed.
I mean, we can intercept it much further out, but
not as it approaches the sun. There is no way
right now. And then the other thing, the other comment
I wanted to make is that you can see that
(44:10):
also as an opportunity because if it happens, if we
happen to have an alien technological threat, I think it
will bring people together because we would realize that we
are all in the same boat, and you know, we
will perhaps stop fighting over territories on this rock that
we were born on the earth, because there is much
more real estate out there and we are very limited
(44:33):
in our mindset, you know of zero some games on
this earth. But if we see some other threat coming
beyond you know, this Earth, then perhaps we'll realize that
we're all in the same boat. Let's work together. And
in a way, it's the messianic message of peace, you know,
(44:54):
like perhaps we need a messiah from another star. AVI.
Speaker 1 (45:01):
I love this material, you know, I have to say this.
It's so refreshing. They have your transparent point of view
because other scientists would not be so free in the data.
And perhaps this is the big problem with UAPs is
the fact that here they are, they're observing us, but
no one's really taking it serious. I think in your
(45:24):
paper you say it's important to take it serious because
this could be a dire threat.
Speaker 2 (45:29):
Yeah, definitely. I mean we we should allow of this possibility.
We should not ridicule it. Which if you want to
refute it, if you want to show that it's wrong,
instead of expressing your opinion, look through telescopes, collect data
and show that it's wrong. This is my request to
(45:50):
the critics. It's not enough to just say blog on
it or write on it on social media. You know,
I was criticized over the past few weeks by people
who are not practicing science. Just check their record. They
don't have a single scientific paper over the past decade,
and they criticize me, a practicing scientist. I wrote nine
(46:11):
scientific papers in the month of July twenty twenty five,
just over the past thirty days. I wrote nine scientific papers.
They didn't write a single one over the past decade.
And they're protecting science against practicing scientists. How are they? Yeah,
I mean, this is really ridiculous. Obviously they just want
(46:32):
to get clicks, But their opinions should not matter because
science should be guided by evidence, And my point is
science should not censor questions. Any question should be allowed. Okay,
the question of whether it's technological should be allowed. The
scientific method is not about which questions to avoid. It's
(46:54):
about using data evidence to answer these questions. Okay, so
is it technological, Get data and show that it's not,
but don't express your opinion and move on. That's not
the scientific method.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
Are you, and we're closing here, are you anticipating alien
contact at some time in our lifetime?
Speaker 2 (47:17):
Well, it all depends if they're out there, you know,
and I'm trying to find out. Obviously, by saying they
don't exist and saying that it's an extraordinary claim, you know,
you're entering a self fulfilling prophecy because you're not seeking
the evidence, and in that case, you will obviously maintain
your ignorance. It's just like you look down without looking up,
(47:41):
or you act like the Vatican that didn't want to
look through Galileo's telescope. So did that change the reality
of the situation? You know, the Earth was moving around
the sun for four point five you know, billionaires before
the Church even existed, and it continued to move around
(48:02):
the sun even after they put the learned house arrests.
It doesn't change whether we have neighbors or not. If
we ridicule this, The question is can we find out
scientifically if that's the case, And for that we need
to collect data. And my point is, let's just be
agnostic and not ridicule ideas. Let's try to test them,
(48:23):
you know, by finding as much data as possible.
Speaker 1 (48:26):
Fantastic three I Atlas is fascinating thought. Where do we
take it from here? We're going to watch it as
it leaves our cosmos or why?
Speaker 2 (48:39):
Well, it's in the coming months. It's getting closer to
the Sun. So by October first we won't be able
to observe it because it will be too close to
the Sun and the Sun will basically burn up any
telescope looking there. But it will come closest to the
(49:01):
Sun on October twenty ninth, and after that, you know,
during the month of November and December, we should be
able to observe it as long as it continues along
the expected path, by the way, and we will learn
a lot about it in the coming two months, and
I expect us to know more about its nature. And
(49:22):
that's the way science is done. That my opinion will
change as more data comes in. But even if it
turns out to be just a natural comment, I say,
we should examine each and every new interstellar object that
the Rubin Observatory discovers every few months over the next decades.
(49:43):
So it's a completely new reality that we never had before,
where we are now on the path to discovering every
few months a new interestar object. And let's just be
open minded and check each and everyone, whether it's a
rock or some something else.
Speaker 1 (50:01):
Fantastic, AVI, wonderful being with you. Thank you for this
and always an eye opener when I have you on
the program, always something fantastic. So hey continue success on
this and I will. It's it's just a part of
a book you're working on. We think there's a book
right now.
Speaker 2 (50:18):
I'm working on a book about the expedition to the
Pacific Ocean. Will also be a Netflix documentary coming out
in early twenty twenty six that includes the footage from
the expedition, so stay tuned. And there are lots of
other exciting developments that I cannot speak about right now.
But you know, my life is interesting. We didn't have
(50:42):
time to discuss it. Lots of other interesting things going on.
Speaker 1 (50:45):
Where can people read more about your work? Do you
have a space website that they can check?
Speaker 2 (50:51):
Yeah, well, every day or two, I post an essay
on medium dot com. So just search for a v
AVII lobe looe B at medium dot com and you
can subscribe for free to my essays for email notifications.
Every time an update comes along, you will get it.
Speaker 1 (51:11):
I fully expect you to be the one who's going
to make the first contact with an alien race.
Speaker 2 (51:16):
Av Well, I already you know. I was asked in
one of the podcasts whether I'm seeking a Nobel price,
and I say, and I said not at all, because
if we discover some alien intelligence, you know, technological artifact
in your Earth, I just will not waste my time
(51:36):
going to Stockholm to get, you know, some recognition from
a committee. Instead, I would like to dedicate the time
to exploring this encounter. And I will basically follow Bob
Dylan on that front and not acknowledge the price.
Speaker 1 (51:53):
Fantastic. Hey, I really appreciate your time, Thanks for being with.
Speaker 2 (51:57):
Us, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (52:03):
One thing we didn't discuss is the what he calls
the consequences, which he features in this white paper that
he has published for everyone to look at, and that
the middle portion of this paper, consequences are in a
square in a box, and it basically says this, should
(52:24):
the hypothesis turn correct, this could be potentially dire for humanity,
and defense measures must be a consideration. Well, if you
remember Randall Carlson talking to us about asteroids, we go
on this turn filled every couple of twice a year.
(52:47):
We don't have any defense mechanisms. We have nothing to
repel a asteroid or a alien ship. And this is
why it's kind of he as Avy calls it. It's
dire news. What are we supposed to do? And I
don't want to upset anybody. This is likely projections of
(53:09):
the worst case scenario. I would hope that alien off
world for beings would not want to destroy us. It's
not like AP something out of a script for a
sci fi movie. It really really does. But I love
to talk about this because we need to wake up
(53:32):
regarding UAP's UFOs, whatever you want to call them, and
incidents of alien interactions when they actually land get out
and go hey we're here, where I'm from Planet X?
And how are you? Or you know the scenario is
we've been watching you for five hundred thousand years or whatever,
(53:53):
and we want to make contact now. Unfortunately, sophisticated countries
like the United States are or shoot first, ask questions later,
and that's just not the way to do it. We're
very animalistic when it comes to I mean, it's fear mongering.
We're gonna shoot you down because we can't understand your technology.
(54:13):
You're too sophisticated, and we're worried, we're upset, we're afraid.
We're children, and that's what it is. We act like children,
and that's just not going to cut it. So I
don't know to think. I am going to post this
paper that he has written that's going out to all
the news agencies on the Facebook page and also we'll
(54:35):
make it available on YouTube so that you can take
a look at it and see for yourself why he
is not only concerned but also suggesting that we need
to keep a more a closer look at these interstellar probes.
And as he was talking, mentioning before many of them
burn up in our atmosphere, but what if they were
(54:57):
to hover or park outside of our atmosphere to observe us,
or if there's a mothership. If it comes from a mothership,
maybe these are artificial probes that are scanning us, gaining
a sense of our technological status where we're at, and
(55:19):
then take it from there. So hard to know, but
I love this stuff, and come on, you gotta like
it too, or you want to be listening right? You
love this want We all want contact. We're all tired
of this kind of secretive UAPs are observing us, they're landing,
(55:41):
they're making contact, but we're not going to talk about it.
And you know what, we're not going to admit it either.
What do they think we are children? This is why
doctor Avi Lob is just brilliant in this whole presentation,
because he wants us to know what's going going on.
And I really appreciate it. Don't you want to know?
(56:03):
I want to know. Wouldn't it be nice to meet
and understand that we are part of a collective group
of planets in our cosmos?
Speaker 2 (56:14):
I would?
Speaker 1 (56:15):
I really would. We have an end of year tour
coming up. It is our Sacred Temples of Guatemala, and
I gotta tell you, I am really really excited. I
mentioned all the time that you can't climb touch or
interact with pyramids, temples or even in some cases causeways.
(56:35):
In Mexico, they've just basically shut everything down, and this
is a huge disappointment because the ancestors that built these
buildings designed them so that you can that you could
interact with them. This is a huge problem. Our tour
in Guatemala is special because we're going to interact with shaman,
(56:57):
archaeologists and specialists who regularly connect with pyramids, temples, and
ancient buildings that were designed to emit to loric energy.
To connect that. We're designed to sit, meditate, heal, and
we are gonna do that on a regular basis. The
(57:18):
tour dates are December first of the twelfth. We all
meet in Guatemala City and then we have twelve days
of just exquisite experiences and a great time. No drugs allowed,
I'm sorry. This is all about connecting with the Gaya
and getting a sense of where we've been and where
(57:40):
we're going. For more information on this tour, go to
Earth Ancients dot com forward slash tours and you can
check it out. And if you have any questions whatsoever,
send me an email Earth Agents. The number for the
letter you at gmail dot com. That's Earth Ancients for
you at gmail dot com. Come out and join us.
It's going to be We only have a few places left. Okay,
(58:04):
that's it for this program. I want to thank my
guest today, doctor Alvi Lowe, coming to us from Harvard,
and what a great presentation that was. As always, a
team of Gail tour, Mark Foster and Faisal Pavel. You
guys rock all right. Take care of me well and
(58:26):
we'll talk to you next time.
Hey, this is Cliff your host. This is a special
edition of Earth Ancients, and we have doctor Auvi Low
joining us to Harvard astrophysicist because he has been in
the news and we have a direct line to his
lab and whenever he shows up in the news. He
was in USA today on CNN and he's been on
(00:40):
a lot of TV. We had to get a hold
of him immediately. And what's going on is there's an
alien probe known as it's been identified and classified as
three I Atlas, the letter I three I Atlas and
this is another a mile mala kind of asteroid that
(01:02):
appears to be self directed, appears to be coming from
an ancient civilization outside of our cosmos, is entering our cosmos.
And what's a little unnerving is that the hypothesis from
this laboratory, from the scientific team is that it is
(01:24):
heading our way. And I don't want to frighten anybody,
but it's one of those situations where we just don't know,
and there's so much to talk about. We're gonna unload
quite a bit of data today. But the most important thing,
and why I have doctor loebe on the program fairly regularly,
(01:49):
is the fact that he is, without a doubt, the
most transparent scientist out there right now, and he's not
behooving to the government. I don't know if you guys
remember about five years ago when he came on, he
refused to sign a non disclosure agreement with the Department
of Defense, and he wanted to the public to know
(02:13):
what was going on in our base, in our cosmos.
And I'm not saying or suggesting that what we're going
to talk about today is a UAP, an unidentified aerial phenomenon.
It's that he is blowing the whistle on this because
within his hypothesis for what this is, there are consequences
(02:39):
and defense measures that need to be appropriated if this
so called asteroid UAP comes our way. So this is
going to be to the point. It's gonna be shorter
than normal, a little less an hour, and there are
(02:59):
very few interruptions, a few ads just to cover our bases.
But this is going to be short and sweet and
to the point, and that's what we need. And this
is why I really appreciate AVI coming on at such
short notice and to give us the details. So today's
program is Alien Probe three I at lasts and my
(03:21):
guest is doctor Avi Lobe. Well, I got a white
(03:59):
paper from my producer, Gail Tour. Asteroids are coming at us,
Asteroids are everywhere. That means that we have to think
of doctor Avi Lobe, and he has written an amazing paper.
We're always looking to see what he's up to. We
have him on I think at least once a year
to get an update on anything like the olma O
(04:19):
Maala asteroid that came by a few years ago. But
this is a really I don't know if it's an
alarmist paper or not. I was just talking to doctor
Lobe about this. But what makes this new object, we'll
call it unique, is the fact that it is an
interstellar I guess we're not gonna call it a probe
(04:40):
until doctor Lobe identifies it as a probe. But it's
very unique. It's got some kind of scary ramifications if
it's more than just a hypothesis. And for all the details,
guess what doctor Avi Lobe is with us. So hiy Avi,
welcome to Earth.
Speaker 2 (04:57):
Agent.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
It's great to see you. How you doing.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Thanks thank for having me. It's a great pleasure.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
All right, we got to get to the basics on
this are you set up at your observatory in Harvard
to observe this or this actually came from another observatory,
Is that correct?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Yeah, well, it was actually a half a meter telescope
called Atlas in Chile that discovered it on the first
of July twenty twenty five. And then, as it turns out,
the neighbor of that telescope is the Rubin Observatory that
was just inaugurated a few weeks earlier. And when they
(05:33):
looked back the data from the Ruby Observatory, which is
an eight point four meter telescope, they realized that it
was there. Now it's coming. The reason it was difficult
to spot it is because it's coming from the direction
of the center of the Milky Way, which is very
crowded with lots of stars. And you know, just this morning,
I wrote a new paper about the so called the
(05:58):
Lobe scale that's after my life name. I proposed an
idea a week ago after a Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna
called me on the phone and asked me for an
update about this new object, new interstellar object called three
I Atlas three because it's the third object spotted by
(06:18):
telescopes on Earth, is coming from outside the Solar System.
The first was of Muamua that you mentioned. Second was Boriso,
which was a comet. Ommu was very anomalous. We can
get into more details. But this one, which is called
three I I for interstellar and Atlas for the name
of the telescope. She wanted to know more about it,
and I told her. In fact, I said that there is.
(06:42):
It will come very close to Jupiter in mid March
twenty twenty six, and I wrote another paper suggesting that
we use Juno, a spacecraft that is currently orbiting Jupiter.
We give it a push away from Jupiter in mid
September twenty five. It was supposed to plunge into Jupiter's
(07:04):
atmosphere in mid September, the end of the mission. They
wanted to kill it, basically turn it to ashes, and
I said, don't do that, just push it the other way.
And with a sufficient push it could in principle intercept
three I at lasts, if it doesn't have enough fuel,
it will just get closer to it. And even with
very little fuel, like less than ten percent of the
(07:26):
original fuel that it had, it can come within ten
to twenty five million kilometers from three I atlas and
give us more information. Now, why is this information warranted?
Why is am I speaking about it so much? I
wrote maybe by now twenty six essays on medium dot
com over the past month that you can read all
(07:47):
the details about two of them. This morning, just this morning,
there was a paper from the Hubard Space Telescope that
image did and by the way, that's the latest news.
There seemed to be a glow of material preceding it.
Not there is no trailing tail. There is no tail
of this supposingly comet, So astronomers associated it with just
(08:11):
a comet from interstellar space moving too fast, moving at
sixty kilometers per second. Therefore it's not bound to the Sun.
It's approaching us. But what I've noticed is the brightness
of this object, and I noticed it on the first
day when it was discovered. The brightness implies a diameter
of twenty kilometers. And you know, amu Wa was just
(08:33):
about one hundred meters, you know, and this one is
twenty kilometers. There should be hundreds of thousands of objects
like Omuama for every object that is twenty kilometers. We
haven't seen hundreds of thousands. We've seen om and moa
and now this one after Boriso, which was also a
few hundred meters, so that's surprising. And moreover, you know,
(08:56):
there is not enough rocky material in interstellar space where
it came from to give us an object that is
made of rock which is twenty kilometers in diameter every decade.
In fact, if you just take a census of the
rocky material industrial space, you would expect such a giant
(09:17):
rock which is twice as large as the asteroid that
killed the dinosaurs. You expect that to be delivered to
the Inner Solar System once per ten thousand years. We've
detected it over a decade. It's supposed to have once
per ten thousand years. What's going on here? Of course,
one possibility, which I pointed out in my paper which
is now published, is that it wasn't a directed trajectory
(09:39):
targeting the Inner Solar System, meaning maybe it's technological. Maybe
the trajectory was designed. And then with two other collaborators,
Adam Hibbert and Adam Krawl, I wrote a paper that
is pointing out that the trajectory is indeed really unusual
in the sense that it's aligned with the orbital plane
(09:59):
of the planets around the Sun. Okay, to within five degrees,
and the chances of that happening at random is one
in five hundred. That's extremely unusual, and we haven't had
five hundred objects from interstellar space.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
And ask you real quickly, just for the Lettuce imaging
of this object, are you suggesting that we're looking at
a propulsion system of some kind.
Speaker 2 (10:29):
Not necessarily right now. It may have been propelled in that,
you know, before it arrived to our vicinity, before we
could see it. But the point is that the trajectory
is very fine tuned, first of all, to be in
the orbital plane of the planets. You know that, as
I said, that's one in five hundred chants of it
being so close to the orbital plane. It comes on
(10:49):
a retrograde orbit, which is opposite to the motion of
the planets around the Sun, meaning that if it wants
to deploy mini probes that will visit the planets there
is because the plants are moving towards it, so to speak.
And then it will arrive very close to Jupiter, Mars,
and Venus. And the chance of that happening at random,
(11:11):
you know, if you just take that trajectory, you say, okay,
I accept it's in the plane of the planet. I
just change the arrival time. Still, the chance is one
in twenty thousand that it will arrive so close to Mars,
Venus and Jupiter, and you know that makes it unusual.
And also it arrives closest to the Sun when the
(11:31):
Earth is on the opposite side, we won't be able
to observe it from Earth. If they know about us,
that's the best strategy if they wanted to do a
maneuver near the Sun, because that's when the gravitational assist
of the Sun can help do a very significant maneuver.
That's what we do, is spacecraft. We make a maneuver
close to the Sun because you are taking advantage of
(11:54):
the Sun's gravity to prepare yourself at a different speed.
So if they wanted, for example, to slow down, you know,
if they don't show up on the other side of
the Sun after we can't see them during the month
of October twenty twenty five, you know they will pass
closest to the Sun on October twenty ninth. If they
don't show up on the other side as expected, I
think the stock market may crash.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
Oh my god, amazing.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
Now I should also say that this morning I wrote
a paper. It's also available on medium dot com, where
I suggested it already a week ago, but I now
elaborated on that of what I is being called the
Lobe scale, which is a risk scale for interstellar objects,
(12:41):
objects coming from outside the Solar System. Zero implies that
it's a natural object, a rock like, for example, an
asteroid or an icy rock like a comet, the type
of rocks that we are familiar with in the Solar System.
And you know that would be a zero because the
chance of that hitting the Earth is very small. You know,
(13:03):
it really needs to be on a straight trajectory towards
Earth and that's a very small probability. But ten on
that scale is definitely artificial in origin, definitely technological, meaning
that we can see maneuvering in a way, you know,
non gravitational acceleration that represents perhaps propulsion or some engine.
(13:28):
We see evidence for artificial lights or excess heat from
an engine, or we see an unusual shape of the object.
All of these are indicative of a technological signature. And
you know, I think it's important for us to scale
any incoming interstellar object on this scale. And now the
(13:53):
Rubin Observatory in Chile will start discovering every few months
a new interstellar object. Until now, we had only three
spotted by telescopes over the past eight years. But from
now on, you know, there is an increase by almost
two orders of magnitude in the detection rate, and therefore
we should be alert because the implications would be huge
(14:16):
to humanity, not only in terms of US understanding that
there might be a smarter kid on the blog, us
being able to learn from their technologies, but also there
is a threat. You know, there is an existential threat
to humanity. And in the past we worried about the
existential threat from artificial intelligence or from climate change. Lots
(14:41):
of people are talking about this all the time, and
every now and then we also talk about a threat
from a killer asteroid of the type that killed the dinosaurs.
And of course NASA was tasked by Congress, the US
Congress to look for all objects above the size of
a fotball field that may risk that may come close
(15:03):
to Earth. And that's the reason the Rubin Observatory was constructed.
But I'm saying there is another type of objects that
we should be worried about, and we don't discuss those,
and that is alien technology objects. And we should just
check each and every object entering the Solar system if
(15:23):
it has anomalies that put it high above I would
say above level four on the Lob scale. That I
propose we should definitely have policy makers discuss them, getting
more data from scientists and deciding how to respond to them,
and then of course psychologists to decide how to communicate
(15:43):
the message to the public without creating panic, without the
economic meltdown.
Speaker 1 (15:50):
Have you been able to determine the shape? Is it
like the Omauma asteroid which just looks aerodynamic to me?
But do we have an idea idea.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Or Muama changed its brightness every eight hours. It was
stumbling by a factor of ten, and the best fit
for the variation of reflected sunlight from it implied that
it has a disk like shape, very unusual. And moreover,
it was pushed away from the Sun by some mysterious force,
(16:23):
and there wasn't any evaporation that is visible, no cometary
tail whatsoever, no molecules of dust or carbon based molecules
that are usually accompanying any comet, so there was no
rocket effect acting on it. The question was what is
pushing it, what's creating this non gravitational acceleration, And unfortunately
(16:44):
we were left in the dark about it because we
didn't get enough data to figure out its nature. And
I said, look, these anomalies should alert us because it
may be just like our own space debris, you know,
the space trash without For example, three years later, the
same telescope in Hawaii pan stars that discovered them as
(17:07):
a near Earth object found another near Earth object that
was pushed by reflecting sunlight, and that one ended up
being a rocket booster from a nineteen sixty six launch
by NASA. And just on January second this year, twenty
twenty five, the Minor Planet Center reported about a new
(17:29):
asteroid near Earth and then they realized, oh wait a minute,
this one moves along the path of the Tesla Roads,
the car that was launched by SpaceX, and then they
removed it from their list. So this one was not
a rock, It was a car, okay. And all I'm
saying is that maybe Elon Musk is not the most
(17:51):
accomplished space entrepreneur since the Big Bank. You know, thirteen
point eight billionaires passed since the Big Bank the Sun formed.
Just in the last one third of cosmic history, most
of the stars from billions of years before the Sun,
and you can ask where will Voyager be in a billionaeres,
it will be on the other side of the Milky
(18:11):
Way galaxy. And therefore there was plenty of time for
their space artifacts to arrive to our backyard. So we
should simply be agnostic and check each and every interest
our object, whether it has some technological features.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
with my guest today, doctor Avi Lobe coming to us
from Harvard University, will be right back. We're discussing the
(19:29):
alien probe three I atlas and what the ramifications are
for an impact scenario here on planet Earth. With our
guest today, doctor Avi Loebe. Can you tell with your
equipment if an object is changing its trajectory as it's
(19:52):
coming from an interstellar location.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Definitely you can. In fact, with the help of the Web,
which is positioned one and a half million kilometers away
from Earth, we can look at the object from two directions,
from telescopes on Earth and from the Web. It's just
like having two eyes that allow us to gauge distances
of objects, and in fact, I believe the Web observatory
(20:19):
is actually looking at it today. Okay, so we should see.
But the point of that is not only the Web
telescope is able to help us pinpoint the trajector of
the object and figure out if it has nongravitational acceleration
to a very high precision. We didn't have that with
more we had just the hubrid Space telescope, which is
much closer to Earth. The Web is further. We can
(20:42):
get the position of three ieutlats much better. But moreover,
the Web telescope can detect the heat emitted by three iyatlasers.
In other words, not just the reflection of sunlight from it,
but the infrared radiation that it emits, and that can
help us figure out its face temperature, to figure out
(21:02):
its surface area, and then a see spins every sixteen hours,
we could actually sort of get a three dimensional mapping
on of how it looks like, you know, and then
I'm waiting to see what the results will show. It's
you know, science is exciting because you don't need to
know the answer in advance. Despite what my colleagues are
(21:23):
or you know, they always know the answer in advance,
like it must be a comet, you know, and then
they get surprised. So in this case, just to give
you the surprise of the morning, there was the first
paper analyzing images from the Hubble Space telescope taken on
the fourth of July twenty twenty five, and they show
(21:47):
a glow of something in front of the object, in front,
not behind. Usually with comets you have a tail. That's
why we say comet retail. It's behind. This time you
see some glow in front of it, in the direction
that it moves towards the sun. And the question is why.
(22:07):
Of course, one possibility is that it's only you know
it has it doesn't spin very rapidly, so it has
a hot day side and a cold night side, and
the day side is warmed up by the sunlight, and
therefore you know, it ejects thus particles that you see
in front of it and not behind it. But another
(22:29):
thing that is peculiar is there is no evidence. And
by now there are maybe five studies, five independent papers
from different observatories using some of the best observatories in
the world, that it took a spectrum of the object
looking for the characteristic you know molecules that accompany cometary activity.
(22:50):
These are carbon based molecules that you find in every
comet in the Solar system. And they haven't found any spectrum.
They only saw the only saw reddening of the reflected sunlight.
In other words, the object is red but doesn't show
evidence for gas, molecules or atoms around it.
Speaker 1 (23:12):
And that's puzzling, that's fascinating. In your paper, you have
considerations to support your hypothesis that this is artificial. And
one of the things I wanted to ask you about.
You say, it's too large to be an asteroid, right,
and that makes what does that mean if Oma Mau
was Oma Mau too large to be an asteroid too?
Speaker 2 (23:35):
No, No, Omua Mua was roughly one hundred meters inside.
I mean that was the length the thing. It could
have been very thin, actually, but this one is two
hundred times bigger. It's it's twenty kilometers in diameter. If
what we are seeing is its brightness is simply reflection
from a solid object, Okay, Now, of course it's possible
(24:00):
that you know, some some cloud of dust around it
is doing the reflection. It's not the object. But if
it is the object, then it's twenty kilometers in diameter,
And why is that puzzling? Because there is not enough
mass in rocks in interstellar space to deliver a twenty
(24:20):
kilometer rock to our vicinity every decade. You know, our
survey went on for a decade. You can do that
once per ten thousand years, that would be reasonable, but
not every decade. So either it is a comet, but
the nucleus of the comet is very small, you know,
less than about a kilometer in diameter. Then you don't
(24:43):
need a lot of mass. And then the reflection that
we see, the brightness of the object results from dust
that was evaporating from the small object that creates this
glow around. It has nothing to do with the size
of the object. Size of the object is very small.
That's one possibility. And of course, if it happens to
(25:04):
be a large object, you know, I think it's extremely puzzling.
Why are we seeing it in over a survey of
one decade. And the one possibility that can explain it
is because it's not only a random trajectory. It's not like,
you know, you have a lot of these rocks moving around.
It's actually an object that targeted the inner Solar System.
(25:24):
By design, the trajectory wanted to get to the inner
part of the Solar System to visit the planets in
the habitable zone, and that of course would suggest some
designed the trajectory, some intelligence behind the trajectory, which is
also indicated by the fact that it's in the ecliptic
plane where the planets move around the Sun. With a
(25:46):
probability of one in five hundred, is it.
Speaker 1 (25:49):
Possible that this came from the same civilization that sent
out a more and more it's possible object in.
Speaker 2 (25:58):
The general it comes from a different direction. But you know,
we don't know the nature of a mua mua. It
could be just a surface layer or some debris lefto
I mean, I should say that this object three I
atlas enter the outskirts of the Solar system, you know,
the edge of the Oar cloud at ae hundred thousand
(26:20):
times the Earth Sun separation about eight thousand years ago.
If it started from far out, so eight thousand years
ago when humans started recording history, that's when this object
was at one hundred thousand times the Earth Sun separation.
On the other hand, you can imagine some kind of
(26:42):
a base of you know, alien technologies within the Solar
system like they already are not so far like if
there are at a thousand Earth sun separation a thousand
times that it would take them only about eight years
to reach us, you know, And so they if they
(27:03):
see that we are developing as a young technological cimilation,
we are developing and opposing a potential threat to them,
they might visit us. And you know, that is the
dark forest hypothesis, which was a solution to Fermi's paradox.
And Rico Fermi in nineteen fifty had launch in Los Alamos,
(27:23):
and they were discussing extraterrestrials, and he asked, where is everybody?
And the one possible solution is that they're out there,
but they're silent because of war is about predators. That's
a better strategy for them to survive. And if they
see a young civilization like ours developing technologies that are
on the cusp of endangering them, they might do a
(27:46):
reconnaissance mission to visit us. We should be aware of
that possibility because we don't know who exists in our
cosmic neighborhood. You know, we see a lot of sun
like stars, one hundred billion of them in the Milky
Way galaxy. Most of them formed the billions of years
(28:06):
before the Sun. And we see, we assess that, you know,
billions of Earth Sun analogs may exist in the Milky Way. Okay,
so billions of them. And you know, you can argue.
And that's what my colleagues in academia keep arguing that
(28:27):
it's an extraordinary claim to imagine that these houses that
look just like ours on the cosmic street have no
residence or never had residents. And I'm saying, how do
you know that. Let's check. Let's assume, you know, what
is called the Copernican principle that we are not special,
(28:47):
which implies that, you know, if we are not special,
things like us existed billions of years ago, and we
just need to search. And you know, the simplest way
to search is not to look for radio signals from
the houses towards us, because you know, nobody may call
us when we are listening. Actually, the best way is
(29:07):
to check our backyard and see whether among the rocks
that we find there there might be a tennis ball
that was thrown by a neighbor. And that is exactly
what I'm suggesting to do with interest of our objects.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
Let me just change the venue a little bit. In
your most recent dredging of the Pacific Ocean for that
down object that you thought may have been artificial, did
you pull up any analysis of it being an exotic metal?
Speaker 2 (29:40):
Well, we had the I mean, the expedition cost about
about one and a half million dollars. With that budget,
we could only use a sled that was covered with
magnets that we placed on the ocean floor, and we
couldn't really see what we are picking up. There was
no live video feed. So we brought up some magnetic
(30:01):
particles molten droplets from presumably an explosion that came from
a meteor, and then I brought back about eight hundred
and fifty of them to have at the university, where
I gave them to my colleagues, Time Jacobson, a world
renowned geochemist that has the best instruments in the world,
(30:24):
and we analyzed those materials and found that about ten
percent of those spherrows molten droplets have a chemical composition
that is different from solar system materials. It was never
reported before in the scientific literature, but I really want
to get bigger pieces. These were small. The spherals were
(30:47):
less than a millimeter in size, and there isn't a
lot of material in them. And I want to go
back to that location and search for bigger pieces of
in the wreckage of the original meteorite, uh, and perhaps
even find the core of the meteorite. But then to
do that, we need to use a remotely operated vehicle,
(31:09):
a robot with a video feed. That would cost six
and a half million dollars and we don't have the
funding so yet. If we do get the funding, we'll
go there again.
Speaker 1 (31:22):
That's fascinating, is your hypothesis, doctor, Love, that we are
being observed and these are just probes. H. I mean,
that's yourre That's that was what we were talking about
last time. This is more dire and I don't want
to get to the consequences right yet, but I do
want to get your sense of what we're dealing with.
(31:45):
This is a half a million year old civilization that
perhaps is not around anymore. These are perhaps probes that
are looking for signs of life.
Speaker 2 (31:59):
Well, it's but we don't know their agenda. We don't
know what their intent is. We are a young, technological
civilization with only a history of one hundred years since
quantum mechanics was discovered. I mean, the two of us
are speaking thanks to our understanding of quantum mechanics. You know,
the instruments we're using are all based on quantum mechanics,
(32:21):
and only one hundred years one century lapsed since we
started understanding physical reality in the context of quantum mechanics.
If you have another civilization that is far more advanced,
you know, they might even be more intelligent than we are.
You know, the human brain might not be the pinnacle
of creation. That might be you know, smarter kids on
(32:43):
our blog, and that means that we wouldn't fully understand.
Even if they didn't have much more time to develop things,
they could have developed things much better than we did.
Just look at the world politics. We are not that intelligent,
you know. But the other thing I wanted to mention
is that, so far we launch the probes to interstellar space.
(33:04):
These are Voyager one, Voyager two, Pioneer ten, Pioneer eleven
New Horizons, and they will become trash once I mean,
they will not be functional once they leave the outskirts
of the solar system in the ore cloud, because that
would be ten thousand years from now, and they were
not designed to survive that loan. But another civilization that
(33:27):
is far more advanced could have launched functional devices, and
they might visit us, you know, for a purpose. And
I think, just like with any blind date, my advice
for young people that are only blind date is to
first observe before having an opinion about the visitor. Yeah.
(33:53):
I mean a lot of people prefer to attribute whatever
they see to scripts of science fiction writers or from Hollywood,
and I say, all of these scripts are just like
large language models of artificial intelligence in the sense that
they are based on some training data set. You know
(34:14):
that whatever is familiar to us, the experiences we had
on Earth l l m's are not smarter than us
because they are trained on what we see, and what
we see is limited to Earth. Okay, that's it. But
then whatever comes from another star is, you know, could
be out of this world. It's all bets are off,
(34:37):
you know, and therefore we should be open minded to
be surprised instead of claiming anything in the sky must
be rocks. The way my colleagues that are comed experts
keep doing, you know, they I call it the Stone
Age of space exploration, in the sense that anything in
(34:57):
the sky must be stones.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
We're going to take a short commercial break to allow
our sponsors to identify themselves, and we will return shortly
with my guest today, doctor Ave Loebe discussing the unusual
probe three I at Lasts will be right back by
(36:00):
Yesterday is Harvard astrophysicist Alvi Low discussing a new identified
probe known as three Eye Atlas, which is coming into
our cosmos in the next few weeks. Do you have
a feeling of this object being a UAP or is
(36:24):
it more just a probe?
Speaker 2 (36:26):
Well, that's interesting because well it depends on the size.
But if it's a twenty kilometer object, by the way,
very similar to the dimensions of the rama in the
science fiction novel Rendezvous with Rama that out of see
Clark wrote about he also envisioned the He actually envisioned
the cylinder that is twenty kilometers wide and fifty kilometers long.
(36:50):
But if this object three Eye Atlas is so big,
you know, you could imagine that, you know, it would
take a huge amount of energy for it to maneuver
and visit planets. It might actually just deploy mini probes
that go to the planets, sort of like a mothership.
And in that case, those minni probs would result in
(37:12):
enhanced activity of unidentified anomalous phenomenon on Earth after the visit,
so that will be October twenty ninth, twenty five. And
if we see more anomalies in the sky on Earth,
you know, they may be related to smaller probs that
have not you know, that are not the original object,
(37:33):
but they were deposited. And the Galileo Project under my leadership,
is currently assembling two additional observatories. We have one functioning
in Massachusetts monitoring the sky in the infrared, visible light, radio,
and audio, and we analyze the data with the machine
(37:54):
learning software to figure out if there is any anything
unfamiliar in the sky. And we are assembling additional observatories,
one in Pennsylvania and the other one in Nevada, and
they should be ready by September twenty twenty five, and
that's a month before three I Atlas comes closest to
(38:15):
the Sun and we will be able to tell if
there are any objects, anomalous objects that produce enhance activity
relative to what we see regularly. I mean, we have
the ability to detect a few million objects every year
with our instruments and the one special thing about these
(38:39):
observatories is that they are not traditional astronomical observatories because
those are limited to a very small region of the sky.
Usually astronomers are focusing on a small part of the
sky at any given time, whereas the one that we
constructed from scratch is a new type of observatories where
we monitor the entire sky at all times, and we
(39:00):
pay attention to objects that move fast overhead. These are
the kind of objects that astronomical telescopes often ignore. And
then I really look forward to future data. I believe
you know, as a scientist, I really enjoy having as
much data as possible. I was asked on a podcast,
(39:22):
how do you tell the difference between as a genuine
scientists and the conspiracy theories? And I said, there is
a very simple way of telling the difference. If you
just deliver much more data from instruments, the scientists will
be delighted, even if it changes the mind of the scientists.
(39:45):
Many times in history scientists change the mind based on
better data. That is exactly the scientific method. You have
some conjecture and then you test it with data, and
if the data doesn't agree with the conjecture, it's trued out. Okay,
that's detective. That's the way scientists operate. However, a conspiracy
theorist would be upset by more data that conspiracy theorists
(40:09):
we say, don't give me the data, don't confuse me
with facts. I know the answer on how dare you
even study those facts?
Speaker 1 (40:21):
All right, So let's get to the conclusion of this paper.
And this is so unlike the A V lobe that
I am familiar with. But the dire consequences are that
this is potentially coming for Earth and that we need
to be thinking of defense measures in some capacity. So
(40:43):
this is something that I've always had to chill up
my back about because we really don't have any known
anti asteroid defense system. But maybe it could be clandestine,
a black ops project that we don't know about.
Speaker 2 (40:58):
No, but.
Speaker 1 (41:01):
Why are your conclusions like that? Is it because it's
in the path of Earth's orbit?
Speaker 2 (41:08):
No, it's not coming close to Earth on its current path.
In fact, it gets closest to the Sun when the
Earth is on the opposite side. But that's the point
where it can do a maneuver. It's called an oorverth maneuver,
taking advantage of the Sun's gravity and perhaps it doesn't
want us to see it when it For example, it
could release mini probles that are doing this maneuver and
(41:30):
it will be hidden behind the sun. So I'm just
worried about it. We should see it might be just
a natural comet, and then we don't have to worry
about it. You know. That's the nature of getting as
much data as possible about it so that we can
figure it out. The reason I put it out as
a possibility is to encourage my colleagues observers to get
(41:52):
as much data as possible, because when you have a
lot of data, it's impossible to shove anomalies under the
carpet of traditional thinking. Just to consider Galileo Galilei, the
Church put him in house arrest because they didn't like
the answer he provided by looking through his telescope. But if,
on the other hand, you know, they would have looked
(42:15):
through telescopes and said, we would demonstrate that Gallegaliley is
wrong by looking through telescopes collecting more data about Jupiter
and showing that he was wrong, then they would have
corrected course much faster. I mean it took them three
hundred and fifty years after his death to admit that
he was right, And I say they could have saved
this time. They could have decided within a few years
(42:37):
that he's right by looking through telescopes. And so if
I can encourage my colleagues to prove me wrong by
looking through telescope, we'll get data. If I am actually
wrong and it's just a comet, natural object, so be it. Okay,
we land it's a natural object. That's it. Case closed.
But I don't want us to miss the opportunity to
(42:57):
get all these data by being get relaxed and saying
we know the answer in advance. It must be a comet.
Stop talking about it. How there you speak about something else.
This is not an intelligent approach to science.
Speaker 1 (43:12):
In this paper that you write, are you in contact
with the Department of Defense, who would probably be the
ones who would direct a missile towards trying to.
Speaker 2 (43:26):
No, I should say that right now, the trajector of
free i Atlas is such that there is no way
that we can reach it with any rocket it to
intercept it as it comes to the Sun, because it
will be moving at ninety eight kilometers per second in
(43:46):
the opposite direction relative to Earth. And we just our
best rockets are move at a third of that speed.
I mean, we can intercept it much further out, but
not as it approaches the sun. There is no way
right now. And then the other thing, the other comment
I wanted to make is that you can see that
(44:10):
also as an opportunity because if it happens, if we
happen to have an alien technological threat, I think it
will bring people together because we would realize that we
are all in the same boat, and you know, we
will perhaps stop fighting over territories on this rock that
we were born on the earth, because there is much
more real estate out there and we are very limited
(44:33):
in our mindset, you know of zero some games on
this earth. But if we see some other threat coming
beyond you know, this Earth, then perhaps we'll realize that
we're all in the same boat. Let's work together. And
in a way, it's the messianic message of peace, you know,
(44:54):
like perhaps we need a messiah from another star. AVI.
Speaker 1 (45:01):
I love this material, you know, I have to say this.
It's so refreshing. They have your transparent point of view
because other scientists would not be so free in the data.
And perhaps this is the big problem with UAPs is
the fact that here they are, they're observing us, but
no one's really taking it serious. I think in your
(45:24):
paper you say it's important to take it serious because
this could be a dire threat.
Speaker 2 (45:29):
Yeah, definitely. I mean we we should allow of this possibility.
We should not ridicule it. Which if you want to
refute it, if you want to show that it's wrong,
instead of expressing your opinion, look through telescopes, collect data
and show that it's wrong. This is my request to
(45:50):
the critics. It's not enough to just say blog on
it or write on it on social media. You know,
I was criticized over the past few weeks by people
who are not practicing science. Just check their record. They
don't have a single scientific paper over the past decade,
and they criticize me, a practicing scientist. I wrote nine
(46:11):
scientific papers in the month of July twenty twenty five,
just over the past thirty days. I wrote nine scientific papers.
They didn't write a single one over the past decade.
And they're protecting science against practicing scientists. How are they? Yeah,
I mean, this is really ridiculous. Obviously they just want
(46:32):
to get clicks, But their opinions should not matter because
science should be guided by evidence, And my point is
science should not censor questions. Any question should be allowed. Okay,
the question of whether it's technological should be allowed. The
scientific method is not about which questions to avoid. It's
(46:54):
about using data evidence to answer these questions. Okay, so
is it technological, Get data and show that it's not,
but don't express your opinion and move on. That's not
the scientific method.
Speaker 1 (47:09):
Are you, and we're closing here, are you anticipating alien
contact at some time in our lifetime?
Speaker 2 (47:17):
Well, it all depends if they're out there, you know,
and I'm trying to find out. Obviously, by saying they
don't exist and saying that it's an extraordinary claim, you know,
you're entering a self fulfilling prophecy because you're not seeking
the evidence, and in that case, you will obviously maintain
your ignorance. It's just like you look down without looking up,
(47:41):
or you act like the Vatican that didn't want to
look through Galileo's telescope. So did that change the reality
of the situation? You know, the Earth was moving around
the sun for four point five you know, billionaires before
the Church even existed, and it continued to move around
(48:02):
the sun even after they put the learned house arrests.
It doesn't change whether we have neighbors or not. If
we ridicule this, The question is can we find out
scientifically if that's the case, And for that we need
to collect data. And my point is, let's just be
agnostic and not ridicule ideas. Let's try to test them,
(48:23):
you know, by finding as much data as possible.
Speaker 1 (48:26):
Fantastic three I Atlas is fascinating thought. Where do we
take it from here? We're going to watch it as
it leaves our cosmos or why?
Speaker 2 (48:39):
Well, it's in the coming months. It's getting closer to
the Sun. So by October first we won't be able
to observe it because it will be too close to
the Sun and the Sun will basically burn up any
telescope looking there. But it will come closest to the
(49:01):
Sun on October twenty ninth, and after that, you know,
during the month of November and December, we should be
able to observe it as long as it continues along
the expected path, by the way, and we will learn
a lot about it in the coming two months, and
I expect us to know more about its nature. And
(49:22):
that's the way science is done. That my opinion will
change as more data comes in. But even if it
turns out to be just a natural comment, I say,
we should examine each and every new interstellar object that
the Rubin Observatory discovers every few months over the next decades.
(49:43):
So it's a completely new reality that we never had before,
where we are now on the path to discovering every
few months a new interestar object. And let's just be
open minded and check each and everyone, whether it's a
rock or some something else.
Speaker 1 (50:01):
Fantastic, AVI, wonderful being with you. Thank you for this
and always an eye opener when I have you on
the program, always something fantastic. So hey continue success on
this and I will. It's it's just a part of
a book you're working on. We think there's a book
right now.
Speaker 2 (50:18):
I'm working on a book about the expedition to the
Pacific Ocean. Will also be a Netflix documentary coming out
in early twenty twenty six that includes the footage from
the expedition, so stay tuned. And there are lots of
other exciting developments that I cannot speak about right now.
But you know, my life is interesting. We didn't have
(50:42):
time to discuss it. Lots of other interesting things going on.
Speaker 1 (50:45):
Where can people read more about your work? Do you
have a space website that they can check?
Speaker 2 (50:51):
Yeah, well, every day or two, I post an essay
on medium dot com. So just search for a v
AVII lobe looe B at medium dot com and you
can subscribe for free to my essays for email notifications.
Every time an update comes along, you will get it.
Speaker 1 (51:11):
I fully expect you to be the one who's going
to make the first contact with an alien race.
Speaker 2 (51:16):
Av Well, I already you know. I was asked in
one of the podcasts whether I'm seeking a Nobel price,
and I say, and I said not at all, because
if we discover some alien intelligence, you know, technological artifact
in your Earth, I just will not waste my time
(51:36):
going to Stockholm to get, you know, some recognition from
a committee. Instead, I would like to dedicate the time
to exploring this encounter. And I will basically follow Bob
Dylan on that front and not acknowledge the price.
Speaker 1 (51:53):
Fantastic. Hey, I really appreciate your time, Thanks for being with.
Speaker 2 (51:57):
Us, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (52:03):
One thing we didn't discuss is the what he calls
the consequences, which he features in this white paper that
he has published for everyone to look at, and that
the middle portion of this paper, consequences are in a
square in a box, and it basically says this, should
(52:24):
the hypothesis turn correct, this could be potentially dire for humanity,
and defense measures must be a consideration. Well, if you
remember Randall Carlson talking to us about asteroids, we go
on this turn filled every couple of twice a year.
(52:47):
We don't have any defense mechanisms. We have nothing to
repel a asteroid or a alien ship. And this is
why it's kind of he as Avy calls it. It's
dire news. What are we supposed to do? And I
don't want to upset anybody. This is likely projections of
(53:09):
the worst case scenario. I would hope that alien off
world for beings would not want to destroy us. It's
not like AP something out of a script for a
sci fi movie. It really really does. But I love
to talk about this because we need to wake up
(53:32):
regarding UAP's UFOs, whatever you want to call them, and
incidents of alien interactions when they actually land get out
and go hey we're here, where I'm from Planet X?
And how are you? Or you know the scenario is
we've been watching you for five hundred thousand years or whatever,
(53:53):
and we want to make contact now. Unfortunately, sophisticated countries
like the United States are or shoot first, ask questions later,
and that's just not the way to do it. We're
very animalistic when it comes to I mean, it's fear mongering.
We're gonna shoot you down because we can't understand your technology.
(54:13):
You're too sophisticated, and we're worried, we're upset, we're afraid.
We're children, and that's what it is. We act like children,
and that's just not going to cut it. So I
don't know to think. I am going to post this
paper that he has written that's going out to all
the news agencies on the Facebook page and also we'll
(54:35):
make it available on YouTube so that you can take
a look at it and see for yourself why he
is not only concerned but also suggesting that we need
to keep a more a closer look at these interstellar probes.
And as he was talking, mentioning before many of them
burn up in our atmosphere, but what if they were
(54:57):
to hover or park outside of our atmosphere to observe us,
or if there's a mothership. If it comes from a mothership,
maybe these are artificial probes that are scanning us, gaining
a sense of our technological status where we're at, and
(55:19):
then take it from there. So hard to know, but
I love this stuff, and come on, you gotta like
it too, or you want to be listening right? You
love this want We all want contact. We're all tired
of this kind of secretive UAPs are observing us, they're landing,
(55:41):
they're making contact, but we're not going to talk about it.
And you know what, we're not going to admit it either.
What do they think we are children? This is why
doctor Avi Lob is just brilliant in this whole presentation,
because he wants us to know what's going going on.
And I really appreciate it. Don't you want to know?
(56:03):
I want to know. Wouldn't it be nice to meet
and understand that we are part of a collective group
of planets in our cosmos?
Speaker 2 (56:14):
I would?
Speaker 1 (56:15):
I really would. We have an end of year tour
coming up. It is our Sacred Temples of Guatemala, and
I gotta tell you, I am really really excited. I
mentioned all the time that you can't climb touch or
interact with pyramids, temples or even in some cases causeways.
(56:35):
In Mexico, they've just basically shut everything down, and this
is a huge disappointment because the ancestors that built these
buildings designed them so that you can that you could
interact with them. This is a huge problem. Our tour
in Guatemala is special because we're going to interact with shaman,
(56:57):
archaeologists and specialists who regularly connect with pyramids, temples, and
ancient buildings that were designed to emit to loric energy.
To connect that. We're designed to sit, meditate, heal, and
we are gonna do that on a regular basis. The
(57:18):
tour dates are December first of the twelfth. We all
meet in Guatemala City and then we have twelve days
of just exquisite experiences and a great time. No drugs allowed,
I'm sorry. This is all about connecting with the Gaya
and getting a sense of where we've been and where
(57:40):
we're going. For more information on this tour, go to
Earth Ancients dot com forward slash tours and you can
check it out. And if you have any questions whatsoever,
send me an email Earth Agents. The number for the
letter you at gmail dot com. That's Earth Ancients for
you at gmail dot com. Come out and join us.
It's going to be We only have a few places left. Okay,
(58:04):
that's it for this program. I want to thank my
guest today, doctor Alvi Lowe, coming to us from Harvard,
and what a great presentation that was. As always, a
team of Gail tour, Mark Foster and Faisal Pavel. You
guys rock all right. Take care of me well and
(58:26):
we'll talk to you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!