Podcasts about Hector Perez

Hoy tuvimos una gran charla con Hector Perez de Diablo barajas sobre que le paso al cardistry en Mexico como tambien cual es el mejor modelo de negocios para comercializar barajas.

Dr. Lili Liu, Dean of Health at the University of Waterloo, and Dr. Hector Perez, Postdoctoral Fellow, discuss the concept of serious games and their application in research for the aging population This includes how Drs. Liu and Perez have used games in their research such as exercise games, games for memory, social interaction, and cognitive thinking. Their work has been used to with the intent of decreasing the effects associated with older adults living with dementia, and has led to collaborative research and design processes with First Responders in First Nations communities in Quebec, Canada. Check out their work with the Aging and Innovation Research Project (AIRP):  https://uwaterloo.ca/aging-innovation-research-program/

Música y Palabras, episodio 137 El podcast de la musica aragonesa y las novedades pop y rock desde aragón y para todo el planeta en Musica y Palabras. En este primer programa de la sexta temporada, repasamos las novedades que nos han llegado durante el verano. En esta escucha nos acompañan Elem, Domador, Angel Lumbreras, Llorente, Hector Perez, Zahara con Shego, Julieta Venegas, Funambulista, Ginebras, Miguel Rios con la Mariachi Imperial Azteca, Diego Lorenzini, Atalaya Roja, Christiano Dorico y Er Juani. 🖊️Suscribete a ▶️ nuestros episodios y no te pierdas ninguno Apoya nuestros 🎙️podcast, hazte 💯fans para continuar con la difusión de la cultura en 🔊audio. Envíanos tus notas de voz a 📞Whasapt 654 93 42 41 Visita nuestras paginas Podcast Aragón y Música y Palabras

Mid-segment special guest: Hector Perez #3 of a 3-part series. In his book Moving Forward: Putting your Future Funded Ministry into Motion, Bruce Bruinsma guides everyday Christ-followers towards a future that is not only financially secure but also ministry-minded. In this three-part podcast series Bruce unpacks and simplifies the key components to retirement preparation. Today, in the third, and final, episode of the series, we are going to talk in detail about the execution of our plan for moving forward with our fully funded ministry. On this show, we have consistently redefined what retirement is; now it's time to learn what it looks like to move forward wisely. www.RetirementReformation.org

Tune-in to hear the host of Valley Views SFV, Hector Perez-Roman talk candidly about his show, becoming a broadcaster, living in Echo Park, CA and so much more! He and DoubleAA chop it up in studio to give and take us through a little journey through Hector's very busy life.

In today's episode, we meet Family Connections' ADAPT Coalition's Coordinator Hector Perez. Our staff interviews are a way to get more in-depth insight into who we are and why we are so passionate about our substance use prevention efforts in Essex County. Join us as we learn from Hector and gain some perspectives on the importance of listening and respecting each other in Essex County and beyond!Join us at an upcoming event by registering at https://bit.ly/ADAPTEvents!Don't forget to share your next event, program, etc. with Julia Revoredo for "Resource Tuesday" by emailing her at jrevoredo@familyconnectionsnj.org.

Hector Perez, Chief Executive Officer, http://www.quantumfbi.com/ (Quantum FBI, LLC), joins ACG NY to discuss Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the private Middle Market M&A ecosystem. Is enough being done and is the community making strides? Do some sectors and classes fair better and what more needs to be done?   Be sure to join ACG NY at the next DEI roundtable as part of an important series of meetings.  Support this podcast

Invitados La mañana en la Hoy 1. Ma Elena Rudolphi Farmacias Knop 2. EnSecreto y el lazamiento de Arrecife 3. Hector Perez desde España y su último tema Conmigo estás mejor

Bianca’s big brother, Hector Perez (the creator of our snazzy intro music) joins us to discuss the original Child’s Play film (1988), directed by Tom Holland, written by Don Mancini, and starring the mom from 7th Heaven. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/basementgirls/support

We look up and always wonder is there more to life than just on earth? Perhaps we will find our answers with government funding and exploration to look beyond our galaxy and into new worlds. We love and admire space and stand in awe; as we wonder how far we could go and take our first step into another planet and uncover the possibility of life. Private companies are in a mission to explore and conquer new worlds with Nasa and we cannot wait to share it with you all. Joining us is our dear friend Hector Perez, an enthusiast of the unknown as he shares his thoughts on the beyond. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/eccentricvibes/message

Marcus Luck & Hector Perez are guests. Marcus is the head of Lucky Punch Promotions, and that is just one of the hats he wears in boxing. Marcus talks about how Covid-19 changed boxing, provide an assessment of Shakur Stevenson, analyze some of the young heavyweight prospects in boxing, and discuss how he likes Deontay Wilder’s chances in the anticipated third match with Tyson Fury. Hector Perez is a competitor in the cruiserweight/heavyweight division. He will talk about his recent victory on ESPN against Juan Torres, and how he was disrespected by Timothy Bradley. We will also talk about the boxing action over the past week, and how Joshua Franco defeating Andrew Moloney has to be considered on of the fights of the years. Anthony “Zute” George is your host.

Lauren Pringle and Hector Perez, student entrepreneurs, join the host to talk about their endeavours and how they found success. Follow Voice! http://www.instagram.com/savoicepodcast Elle - http://www.instagram.com/elleisadora Reid - http://www.instagram.com/sneakypig1 Danny - http://www.instagram.com/nomiddlename13 List on: SoundCloud - https://soundcloud.com/user-922870775 Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/2e02AqfIYempk4lMFfL11Q Google Play - https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#/ps/Ixxh3xgl4torhgif5zjuvkvpesa Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/voice-podcast/id1479704425

Welcome to Black and Azul, a weekly podcast series where we discuss the San Jose Earthquakes MLS team. In this episode, we sit down to interview Quakes Assistant Equipment Manager Hector Perez. We ask Hector about his experience with the team and what the players are really like off the field. This episode is hosted by Joel Soria and Jamon Moore, experts on all things San Jose Earthquakes. Like, subscribe, and sign up for alerts to new episodes!Website: http://www.blackandazul.comTwitter: https://www.twitter.com/BlackAndAzul Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Black-and-Azul-543093642850399 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/blackandazul iTunes:  https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/black-and-azul/id1454120862 Google Play: https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkLnBvZGJlYW4uY29tL2JsYWNrYW5kYXp1bC9mZWVkLnhtbA%3D%3DSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0rGqRtJs6X6zfPzmhe1zpaPodBean: https://blackandazul.podbean.com/Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/black-and-azulTuneIn: https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Recreation-Podcasts/Black-and-Azul-p1207251/Hosts: Charles Wollin, Alex Morgan, Jamon MooreExecutive Producer/Director: Jason ShollProducer: Aaron ShollSet Construction: Todd ShollVisual Effects: JohnnyBDMusic: Baszz/AudioJungleProduction Services by Sholl Media Group http://www.shollmediagroup.com/

Primer episodio, en donde se discuten diversos temas de basketball, entre los divagues de Arturo Melgarejo y Hector Perez...

Bienvenidos a TRAS EL DIAMANTE, un podcast sobre béisbol que pretende ir más allá de la MLB. -En este primer episodio el “manager” Mario Gomez (@mario19g) abre con Pepe Latorre (@MediasRojasEsp) para repasar la actualidad de las Grandes Ligas.-Jon Molinero (@jonamolinero) y Alex Carande (@AlexfCARANDE) toman el relevo y analizan como Lucas Giolito se ha convertido en unas de las revelaciones del 2019.-A continuación Àngel Carrillo (@angelllcarrillo) y Javier Urberuaga (@jurberuaga) charlan sobre el béisbol en la cultura popular.-Y como closer Hector Perez (@hector_pg11) con el béisbol internacional: Mundial sub 18 de Corea y el Europeo donde España está rindiendo a gran nivel. Música: Running Eiskrokodil by Lobo Loco.

10th grade students Gaby Orduña, Alvaro Ibarra, Hector Perez and Gael Flores discuss global rites of passage, customs and traditions, as well as local points of interest in the 2nd Podcast of Saint George Prep School.

Welcome to the inaugural episode of what may be a regularly featured podcast at Radio Scouts, or what will end up a one-off episode special/offshoot of Radio Scouts Podcast.We have a brief and way-too-early discussion about the 2020 draft and who the Jays should pick if they end up with a top 5 selection, which leads into some talk about the sweeping changes that the current regime has brought to the organization from the ground up. Other subjects include Alejandro Kirk, Josh Winckowski, Lourdes Gurriel Jr. (yeah, he's no longer a prospect), potential returns on a Ken Giles trade, Bo Bichette, and Cavan Biggio.Enjoy!With Michael Paul and Linc (aka BlueRocky)Bookmarks:0:26 Way too early 2020 MLB Draft talk11:00 Alejandro "Captain" Kirk19:58 Josh Winckowski24:02 Lourdes Gurriel Jr's hot streak28:54 Next year's payroll: Will the Blue Jays spend money? Competitive timeline?31:59 Hector Perez and return for Osuna36:52 Ken Giles, most valuable trade chip? Twins as a trade partner?43:00 Call-up coming for Bo Bichette45:08 Everything Cavan Biggio58:09 Wrap upIntro/outro music:Track: BallgameMusic provided by Michael PaulFree stream: https://soundcloud.com/michael-paul-727286580/take-me-out-to-the-ballgame-extended-versionSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/radioscouts)

This instalment of Radio Scouts Podcast is chock full of practically-legendary baseball discussion. All exaggerations aside, we're proud of this episode and would like to put it in your earholes if you're into that:-(0:32) Bo vs. Tatis: Who ya got? We debate the merits of the surprising major league promotion of super-rookie, Fernando Tatis Jr.-(9:02) Bo Bichette chitchat-(12:08) Welcome introduction-(13:40) Quick summary of some Jayscon from The Athletic's MLB player poll.-(17:46) 25-man roster speculation: ~Trent Thornton (and The Vulture™️ role)~Opening Day!~Andrew shares his Kevin Pillar encounter and semi-pro dodgeball career~Bullpen discussion: Tepera's injury, Giles, Mayza, Biagini, Gaviglio, Luciano, Pannone, Hudson, Norris, Adam, Paulino's demotion~Outfield: Hernandez, McKinney, Pillar trade possibilities, Grichuk~Infield is set: Jansen/Maile, Smoak, Gurriel, Galvis, Drury, either Urena or Sogard~Glaring omissions? Alford's demotion~Pompey to DL (again, and in the most bizarre way)~Sean Reid-Foley's Spring Training struggles-(42:21) Potential 2019 breakout prospects: Nate Pearson (top 20 prospect by mid-season), -Chavez Young, Hector Perez, Adam Kloffenstein, Alejandro Kirk, Leonardo Jimenez, Samad Taylor.-(48:53) The evolving contract landscape (pre-FA extensions vs. free agency).-(57:21) What could a hypothetical Vlad extension look like?-(1:00:40) MLB awards predictions.-(1:06:30) Live DDL (Darrelly Dynasty League) trade talks. Mike offers Carlos Correa to Andrew for a prospect package headlined by Bo Bichette.-(1:14:00) OutroWe hope you enjoyed this one. Thanks for listening.Follow us on Twitter!Recording date: Mar. 26, 2019Intro/outro music:Track: Disfigure - Blank [NCS Release]Music provided by NoCopyrightSoundsWatch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7ZsBPK656sFree Download/stream: http://ncs.io/blankSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/radioscouts)

Spring is here, and so is another episode of Locked On Blue Jays!Ryan Andrews breaks down the recent roster moves made by the Blue Jays and what it means for the roster that will begin the year against Detroit. The first half is dedicated to the batters, as well as pouring one out for Devon Travis, and determining when Anthony Alford will get his shot.The second half deals with the recent news that Ryan Tepera and John Axford have elbow pains and what this will mean for the Blue Jays' pitching staff. Andrews details how the potential Tepera injury could mean openings for Sam Gaviglio and Hector Perez.Follow the podcast on Twitter @LockedOnJays and follow the host @NeoAC18!Subscribe on Google Play, Spotify, Himalaya and iTunes!This episode is sponsored by The Jays From the Couch Guide to the 2019 Toronto Blue Jays, Himalaya and the Locked On Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Spring is here, and so is another episode of Locked On Blue Jays! Ryan Andrews breaks down the recent roster moves made by the Blue Jays and what it means for the roster that will begin the year against Detroit. The first half is dedicated to the batters, as well as pouring one out for Devon Travis, and determining when Anthony Alford will get his shot. The second half deals with the recent news that Ryan Tepera and John Axford have elbow pains and what this will mean for the Blue Jays' pitching staff. Andrews details how the potential Tepera injury could mean openings for Sam Gaviglio and Hector Perez. Follow the podcast on Twitter @LockedOnJays and follow the host @NeoAC18! Subscribe on Google Play, Spotify, Himalaya and iTunes! This episode is sponsored by The Jays From the Couch Guide to the 2019 Toronto Blue Jays, Himalaya and the Locked On Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ryan Andrews is back for another installment of Arrivals and Departures! In this episode, the host talks Aledmys Diaz, Trent Thornton, Yennsy Diaz, Patrick Murphy, Hector Perez, Jacob Waguespack and Guillermo Martinez! Plus updates on the kitteh co-host and some departures you may have missed!Follow the podcast on Twitter @LockedOnJays and follow the host @NeoAC18!Subscribe on Google Play and iTunes!This episode is sponsored by Locked on NFL and Locked on NBA. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ryan Andrews is back for another installment of Arrivals and Departures! In this episode, the host talks Aledmys Diaz, Trent Thornton, Yennsy Diaz, Patrick Murphy, Hector Perez, Jacob Waguespack and Guillermo Martinez! Plus updates on the kitteh co-host and some departures you may have missed! Follow the podcast on Twitter @LockedOnJays and follow the host @NeoAC18! Subscribe on Google Play and iTunes! This episode is sponsored by Locked on NFL and Locked on NBA. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

En este episodio me acompaña mi vecino desde los 8 años, Hector. Pertenecemos a un grupo de Whatsapp juntos de vecinos y sabemos de uno al otro por ahí pero no nos sentamos a hablar hace más de un año atrás. Hector también tuvo que irse despues del Huracan Maria a Colorado y nos contamos la historia de cómo y porqué llegó la decisión de irnos. Siganme Cafeteros: Donjuandelcampo.com Redes hector: twitter.com/acentooscuro Auspiciadores: Los que siempre estan atentos a mis antojos. Antojo Boricua, antojoboricuapr.com CODE: CAFEENMANO Audible from Amazon: El app que me enseña algo nuevo todos los días. Te regalo un audiolibro y 30 días gratis del app, usando este link: audibletrial.com/cafeenmano

I hope you like the long shows, because we got a marathon episode this week. With tons of callups, promotions, and noteworthy performances, there's a lot to cover. We talk both sides of the Nolan Gorman helium tank, breakdown Matt Manning, discuss my looks at Alex Faedo, Isaac Paredes, Daz Cameron, and Hector Perez. Before jumping into our weekly 5 by 5 where we dive into ten players a piece. It’s Ralph! It’s Lance! It’s the Razzball Prospect Podcast! As always support our sponsor Rotowear and head over to Rotowear.com to get your hands on the highest quality fantasy t-shirts on the market. When you do, remember to use our promo-code SAGNOF to save 20% off all of your fresh new purchases.

Corey Copping – Dennis Higgins, Tulsa 1:46 – Effective and an all-around good guy Hector Perez – Sam Levitt, Corpus Christi 4:13 – He just has to throw strikes Double-A New Hampshire Fisher Cats – Tyler Murray 5:45 – Averaging nearly 10 runs per game without Vladdy Jr. 6:32 – Max Pentecost is back to a full workload and red hot 8:53 – Santiago Espinal is getting more line-drive hits 10:01 – Forrest Wall, acquired from Colorado, is looking good 12:42 – Travis Bergen’s effectiveness A Lansing Lugnuts – Dante De Caria 14:09 – Chad Spanberger brings rain 16:50 – Ryan Noda’s recent tear 18:42 – Samad Taylor has improved his fielding and batting eye AAA Buffalo Bisons – Pat Malacaro 22:16 – Jacob Waguespack debuts with a 12-K effort 25:18 – Vladdy Jr. looks just as good in person as on video clips 27:05 – Rowdy Tellez has found his approach 27:56 – Billy McKinney is a threat to throw you out on the bases Short-Season A Vancouver Canadians – Rob Fai 30:19 – The Nike Employee Store! 31:31 – The Canadians’ three All-Stars: Conine, Kirwer, Johnson 32:45 – In his third year in Vancouver, Bryan Lizardo is hitting 33:35 – Jake Brodt, like boat 34:16 – Vinny Capra is one of those guys you need on your team 35:08 – Jim Czajkowski’s fatherly influence Advanced Rookie Bluefield Blue Jays – Zach Helton 36:50 – Dealing with the loss of the Mercer Cup 37:28 – Hagen Danner’s coming out of his shell 38:10 – Rafael Lantigua is a second leadoff guy 39:01 – Troy Watson has been amazing all year 40:48 – Nicolas Medina makes Zach feel energetic 41:37 – Eric Pardinho will go right at people 43:54 – Don’t leave your seat if Cal Stevenson gets on 44:57 – The coaching staff has been working on the little things Interview 47:14 – Reggie Pruitt, Lansing Lugnuts

Jeffrey Paternostro of Baseball Prospectus stops by to give his reports on all eight prospects the Blue Jays picked up in July trades, with in depth discussion on Forrest Wall, Hector Perez, Felipe Paulino, and Billy McKinney. Greg and Josh also discuss the Osuna deal from the major league perspective, including the disingenuous comments from Astros GM Jeff Luhnow and the acquisition of Ken Giles. They also talk about the Axford/Loup deals and what the five recent trades have done to roster, potential for August deals, and Lourdes Gurriel Jr. doing something historic before getting hurt. Finally, they answer listener questions and give out a Gold Star.

There is only one thing to talk about in today's Locked On Blue Jays episode, and it's not the performance of Jaime Garcia... Host Ryan Andrews dives into all facets of the Roberto Osuna trade, starting with the moral problems the Blue Jays lifted from their team by trading the closer and announcing that he was not going to play for the organization again. Andrews discusses the Astros' putting winning over morality and the problems it leads to in sports in general. In the second half, Andrews turns their attention to the new members of the team, be it Ken Giles' focus issues, David Paulino's ability to start and Hector Perez and his potential for the future. They also close with a brief look at who else could be traded today. Follow the podcast on Twitter @LockedOnJays and follow the host @NeoAC18! Subscribe on Google Play and iTunes! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There is only one thing to talk about in today's Locked On Blue Jays episode, and it's not the performance of Jaime Garcia...Host Ryan Andrews dives into all facets of the Roberto Osuna trade, starting with the moral problems the Blue Jays lifted from their team by trading the closer and announcing that he was not going to play for the organization again. Andrews discusses the Astros' putting winning over morality and the problems it leads to in sports in general.In the second half, Andrews turns their attention to the new members of the team, be it Ken Giles' focus issues, David Paulino's ability to start and Hector Perez and his potential for the future. They also close with a brief look at who else could be traded today.Follow the podcast on Twitter @LockedOnJays and follow the host @NeoAC18!Subscribe on Google Play and iTunes! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hello Everyone and thank you for joining me today. My vision of this podcast is to provide a dose of inspiration to your real estate journey, by finding and giving you the best information that will help you invest successfully in real estate. In some episodes, I will be talking about specific aspects and key factors of real estate investing. In others, I will be interviewing investors, from those who are still working a 9 to 5 job to others who have accumulated an incredible amount of wealth in real estate and are the best in their respective fields. I want you to be able to learn from multifamily and single-family investors, wholesalers, flippers, lenders, authors, real estate agents and other successful people. Each of these sessions  will be designed to help you learn, so you can combine your knowledge with actions. My goal is to share information 100% real estate related, and in others I will be talking about the psychology of investing, strategies to keep you motivated and inspire you to be the best you can be.

Gain new strategies to make your first day of class a great one. In the very first podcast of the new FDTE Beyond the Podium Podcast Series faculty from across campus share some of their most memorable first day experiences and strategies that they have developed to start the semester off right! Featured Guests:Dr. Melanie Harris, Faculty member at P.K. Yonge Developmental Research SchoolDr. Gillian Lord, Chair of Spanish and Portuguese at UFDr. Hector Perez, Associate Professor for the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences at UF Dr. Kim Moore, Professor for the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences at UFDr. Melissa Johnson, Associate Director of the Honors Program at UFL.B. Hannahs, Special Assistant to the Vice President of Student Affairs at UFView the transcript.Music: Indie Disco by Ben Fawkes @benfawkes Creative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported— CC BY-SA 3.0

Active learning cultivates interest and engagement with course content. Who doesn't want to be the "cool" professor? As it turns out, being committed to teaching and using a student-centered approach just may land you this title. Dr. Hector Perez, Associate Professor of Seed Biology, Plant Conservation, and Restoration at the University of Florida shares his philosophy, experience, and focus on active learning. Featured Guest: Héctor E. Pérez, Ph.D. Bio | Teaching Resources View the transcript.Music: Indie Disco by Ben Fawkes @benfawkes Creative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported— CC BY-SA 3.0

You can reach Hector Perez at the following: 714-883-1831 HectorPerez@mchapusa.com www.mchapusa.com If you are a church planter, soon to be church planter, or leader of an established church, that is looking for more insight and direction on what God is doing through church planting to reach the lost, then this is the podcast for you!

In this short but juicy episode, it's a family affair as we share some recent events in our business! Kale Darling, my Acquisitions Manager, shares an interview with Tom Wood, my father-in-law, who recently joined our company and started his house flipping journey. They have a great “flipping failure” story to share. I also share Amber Wood‘s (my sister-in-law) “compound effect” project and share her progress. Plus, we find out the winner of the Biggest Flipping Failure Challenge!Have any questions? Just post them in the comments area below! And if you like what you hear, be sure to click here to subscribe in iTunes. And while you’re there, why not leave us a review and five-star rating?Show NotesOn this episode we discussTom's background before he started flipping housesThe reason Tom switched careersHow Tom overcame the steep learning curve with house flippingTom's first day in my officeTom shares information on his first dealThe importance of having the right system in placeThe importance of maintaining balance in one's lifeKale Darling and Tom WoodTweetable Quotes“If we just focus on the processes that helps us achieve our goals, then we'll reach them” – Justin Williams“Setting up processes and setting up goals make things work more smoothly” – Justin Williams“When you worry about huge, monumental goals, you can get overwhelmed” – Justin Williams“It's not just about goals but it's about having the right systems in place” – Justin WilliamsLinks and ResourcesAmber's Blog: www.thecompoundproject.comThe Compound Effect by Darren HardyJames ClearFail Fast FlippingHouse Flipping HQ MastermindThe Biggest Flipping Failure is: Hector Perez!A huge congratulations and pat on the back to Hector Perez! He is the winner of the Biggest Flipping Failure Challenge and as you heard in last week's episode, took some massive action and fell flat on his face (but learned a ton in the process)!A close second was Dave Comer, who was an amazing competitor, also took a ton of action and did a great job too.To be honest, in my mind you are both winners! Well done guys and I couldn't be prouder!Don't fear the failure!Get the inside scoop on why failure is actually your best friend when it comes to house flipping!Join us and ask me any questions you might have about house flipping and real estate!–> Click here to Join!

As you probably are aware, we held a competition for members of the Mastermind group called the Biggest Flipping Failure Challenge where members were rewarded for taking massive action and earned points for failing forward. (You can learn more about it in this original blog post here.)So, in this episode of the podcast, we have the two finalists, Dave Comer and Hector Perez. They share their ups, downs, failures and successes from the challenge, and after you've had a chance to listen, just mark below in the survey form which one you think should win the grand prize. We'll announce the winner in next week's episode. Have any questions? Just post them in the comments area below! And if you like what you hear, be sure to click here to subscribe in iTunes. And while you’re there, why not leave us a review and five-star rating?Show NotesDave SharesHow and why he got started with real estateHow he found the House Flipping Mastermind GroupHis experiences while doing the challengeThe parts of the challenges that pushed him beyond his comfort zone and what he learnedWhy you should vote for Dave. Hector SharesHector's background and how he became interested in flipping housesWhy having a full time job is not a hinderance to taking actionHis specific goals and how he made them happenWhy you should focus on your strengthsWhy stepping out of your comfort zone makes you growThe importance of tracking your numbersDelegating tasks as a way to scale your business and get things doneWhy you should vote for Hector. Tweetable Quotes“What you do will define you on this business, it will define you as a House Flipper” – Dave Comer“When the business gets hard, DON'T STOP!” – Dave Comer“You succeeded because you took action”– Justin Williams“What gets talked about, gets talked about, and what gets measured gets done” – Justin Williams“We would never be where we are today if we didn't get out of our comfort zone” – Hector Perez“Having a support system that will give you a push really helps” – Hector PerezLinks and ResourcesFail Fast FlippingHouse Flipping HQ MastermindVote for your favorite!So, who do you think was the winner of the challenge? Who took crazy amounts of action and really made the most of this opportunity? Who inspired you the most? Fill out this form and we'll find out who the winner is!Don't fear the failure!Get the inside scoop on why failure is actually your best friend when it comes to house flipping!Join us and ask me any questions you might have about house flipping and real estate!–> Click here to Join!

Lisa Randall is a theoretical physicist, expert on particle physics and cosmology who was a visiting Miller Professor at UC Berkeley in 2011-2012. Author of two books “Warped Passages” and “Knocking on Heaven's Door,” she is currently Professor at Harvard University.TranscriptSpeaker 1: Spectrum's next Speaker 2: [inaudible]. Welcome to [inaudible] Speaker 1: can the Science and technology show on k [00:00:30] a l x Berkeley, a biweekly 30 minute program bringing you interviews featuring bay area scientists and technologists as well as a calendar of local events and news. Speaker 3: Good afternoon. I'm Rick Karnofsky. Brad swift and I are interviewing Lisa Randall, the author of the recent popular physics book, knocking on Heaven's door, how physics and scientific thinking aluminate the universe and the modern world. She's a visiting Miller professor [00:01:00] in the Physics Department here at cal and our first postdoc was also here as a president's fellow. She is currently a frank be buried junior professor of science at Harvard University and previously wrote the book worked passages and also the Libretto for Hector Perez, hyper music prologue. Lisa Randall, welcome to spectrum. In your book, you talk a lot about the large hadron collider at cern. Can you talk to us more about that? Speaker 4: So I'm very interested in what's happening at the large Hadron Collider, but I'm also quite interested in just [00:01:30] what it means to do science. After I wrote my first book were passages. A lot of people showed that even when they were interested in science, there were some confusions about just how science advances and how science works in practice. And you know, people think of it as this very definite thing with definite announcers. But right now, and we see this right now with the large hedge on clutter and the Hicks herd, you know, it's messy in the beginning. We don't know the answers and it's important to understand the role of uncertainty, the role of scale and sort of building ideas on top of each other. Having said that, I'll tell you a little bit [00:02:00] about um, surgeon and the large Hadron collider. As a theorist, I'm not actively working on experiments. Speaker 4: What I do is I suggest what that can look for us, such as exotic ideas, like extra dimensions of space or versions of supersymmetry. But we also tell them how to go about doing the experiments to some extent, or at least discussed that and tried to interpret what they find. But what the large Hadron collider is, it's a giant underground being 27 kilometers in circumference. It collides together hydrogens, which are pro protons, which are our form of Hadrons, and it's doing it at high [00:02:30] energy, the highest energy ever achieved in such collisions. And the goal is via equals MC squared to create particles that have never been made before because they're too heavy. You need high energy to make heavier particles. And in looking at these particles, we want to understand what underlies the structure of the standard model. What is it that gives particles, their math, what is it explains the values of these masses. So it's a long story. That's why there's a whole book, but there's a lot of interesting stuff in it. Have you been to cern to see the itself [00:03:00] officially? I'm a visiting professor there, although I don't have much time to spend there. It was actually really fun. The first time I visited it, it was much more excited than I thought. You know, I'd seen other experiments before, but um, it's just bigger and the magnitude and the people involved are so impressive. Speaker 5: Uh, what's the motivation for pushing to other link scales to improving our models of the universe? Speaker 4: That's a great question. And part of it is it's just intrinsically interesting. When people discovered the elements of an Adam, they didn't just find a nucleus and electron, which of course [00:03:30] is very interesting in itself, but they found eventually quantum mechanics. We found the underlying physical law. It's quite different than what we had anticipated. So we're not just looking for new stuff, new particles. We're really looking for the underlying physical structure to understand more deeply what's going on. Of course, that doesn't mean that the standard model is wrong, but it could be that it's not the most basic understanding of particle physics and that could be something deeper and richer that underlies it. So that's part of the goal is I [00:04:00] think that people are just interested in what's there. But also by pushing technology, by pushing scientific thought to the limits, there's all sorts of subsidiary benefits in terms of an educated populace in terms of people being interested and excited and just knowing more about the world. Speaker 5: We know from just pitting data that adding extra parameters will often lead to a better fits. Is there some justification beyond that for wanting these simple low parameter models? Speaker 4: We're trying to get a deeper understanding of connections among things. We're not just trying to enumerate them, list [00:04:30] them. We'd like to say that if I measured this quantity, I can predict that one. So the standard model in some sense has very few parameters in terms of there's only three forces plus gravity, these strong, weak and electromagnetic force. And with those parameters you can predict an enormous number of different processes. So it is true that you can of course add from, but you don't necessarily gain understanding by doing that. What we're trying to do is really gain some deeper understanding about the connections, the underlying physical [00:05:00] laws, and it takes a while before we know that we've achieved that. Speaker 5: I'd also like to sort of touch on testability of different models. So in both war passages and the knocking on heaven story, you talk about your own work with extra dimensional space. Speaker 4: The dimensions of course are just sort of the stage. They're the setting and so, um, in fact, we don't, we generally only think about having one additional dimension other than the three we know about left right forward, backward, up, down. The idea is that there could be an extra dimension. Put My collaborator Robin Syndrome and I were interested in this extra dimension for a couple of reasons. [00:05:30] One is just to understand abstractly what's going on. We had actually set out to explore, but we found accidentally you could have even an infinite extra dimension that has no visible consequences. In other words, something as dramatic as an infinite to mention could be untestable. The other side of the coin though is that there is a version of the series where it actually explains why particle messes are what they are. We're answers something we call the hierarchy problem, which can be interpreted as why gravity is so weak compared to the other fundamental forces. Speaker 4: Gravity [00:06:00] might not seem that weak because after all, we have the entire earth acting on us, but from the point of view of fundamental particles, gravity is extraordinarily weak. And by having an extra dimension, we can hope to explain that in the sense that we found a, what we called a warp to extra dimension, and gravity is strong elsewhere, but very weak where we are at various exponentially quickly as you'd go out in another dimension. Now, what's amazing about that is that like any theory that explains this question of the weakness of gravity and why masses are what they are, it leads to testable predictions [00:06:30] and that's what we're quite excited about at the large Hadron collider. It's looking not only for the Higgs Boson, I don't we can come back to that has to do with how particles acquire their mass, but it's also looking for the theory that explains why these masses are what they are, and that leads to testable consequences at about the energies at the large Hadron collider studies. We could be unlucky and it could be a little bit heavier or we could be lucky and it could be right in range. Speaker 6: [inaudible] you're listening to spectrum on k a [00:07:00] l x Berkeley. We're talking with Lisa Randall, theoretical particle physicist about her new book knocking on Heaven's door. Speaker 4: In terms of new tools. Are there things like simulation that you would see value in, in fact of these experiments run in conjunction with simulation? The thing is you can only simulate accurately what you've, what you know about. They certainly simulate what would be the consequences [00:07:30] if some of these ideas were correct, such as extra dimensions or supersymmetry. But then there's no alternative to going out and seeing whether they're actually realized in nature. And can you give us some examples about what we expect to see just besides observations of subatomic particles at a particular mass energy window? Well, actually what we expect to see exacerbations of subatomic particles headed mass energy window, but they're particles with very special properties. And that's part of the art of the kind of, uh, both theory and experiment is to really see what are those [00:08:00] special properties in general, you know, your clients have the protons, protons are in some sense messy objects. Speaker 4: They have things inside corks, cal together by glue, ones that communicate the strong nuclear force. And so when you collide them together, you get a lot of junk that comes out. And what you have to do is distinguish something new, something we haven't seen before, a particle with different properties from the mess of stuff that comes out of the standard model. So for example, if this warped extra dimensional idea is correct and indeed explains the weakness of gravity particles, like [00:08:30] the ones we know about, they have similar properties in the sense of they interact in similar ways, but they're heavier, they're heavier because it's a reflection of the fact that they have momentum in another dimension because we don't see that dimension directly. We interpret that as additional math. So you would look for particles that have very particular properties related to the ones we know about, but they're heavier. So that would be one example. And because they had these very particular properties, you can it and say this is in fact a Calusa client particle. There's another version of potential [00:09:00] solution called super symmetry. And in that case, for every particle we know about, there's an associated particle that's again heavier but would have the same charges. And related interactions. So again, we have a very definite idea of what these particles should look like. And so there are very definite search strategies Speaker 5: on sort of link scales. You look at not only subatomic particles but dark energy and dark matter which are associated with cosmology, which you also hope to observe at the LHC or are there other experiments that might test theories about that? Speaker 4: So we have to be clear here on the large [00:09:30] Hadron collider is primarily designed to do particle physics and answer these questions about mass that we keep alluding to. However, there is a possibility that he could also shed light on dark matter. So first of all, dark matter, it's actual matter. It's actual stuff that clumps just like the matter we know about, but it doesn't interact with light. It's really transparent matter. Now dark energy on the other hand is a whole other beast. It's not particles, it doesn't clump. It does. It spreads out throughout the universe. So the large Hadron collider won't shed light on dark energy. However, there [00:10:00] is a chance it could shed light on dark matter. And the reason for that is what could be just a coincidence or it could be some deep underlying clue which is that if a particle is stable and neutral, the states did not interact with light and has the kind of mass that can be produced at the large Hadron collider. Speaker 4: If it has those properties and you just trace its cosmological evolution, what's happened to it since the beginning of time because it's heavy, there's not that much left of it today. It turns out to have just about the right amount to account for [00:10:30] the measured value of the dark matter measured through its gravitational effects which makes many people think that there is a chance to produce and find out about dark matter at the large Hadron collider. Of course, because it interacts so weekly, it's a very indirect thing. You'd have to produce something else that then could decay into it or produce it. Having said that, there are also a lot of very exciting experiments, J and talk a little bit about them looking much more directly for dark matter. Really looking for it either because it annihilates in the sky and they can see what comes out of it or dark matter actually [00:11:00] leaves a signal in some big underground vat of stuff. And so it recoils and you see a little bit of evidence there. So there are many more directed experiments for dark matter. Speaker 5: So you're both a practicing theoretical physicist in both popularized and communicate science and physics through books or through parents is like this. How does this sort of science outreach or advocacy sort of feed into your own research and vice versa. Speaker 4: But, and in terms of actual research on the whole, it means that I just have less time to try. I'm afraid, [00:11:30] but, but what I do do it, it's very directed and, and I do feel like if I'm doing stuff, it should be interesting and important. So I've managed to um, also do some very interesting research and I have to say after doing a lot of book talks in the fall, I was quite happy to visit surgeon and just get back to research too. Do you think all scientists should have the same sort of ability to communicate with the public? Absolutely not. I think, I mean, I, you know, and I a self to never thought I would do this kind of thing. Actually when I started out it was only after I, you know, I basically, I wrote some papers that really became like the most cited [00:12:00] papers around and I just thought, you know, people who really want to understand science, they should have access to it. Speaker 4: You know, there's some very general broad books and there's very specific, but I thought, you know, I'd like to do something where you sort of really tell the full story of really how science is really happening. And I didn't know I would do a second book, but like I said, I'm sort of inspired a little bit by just wanting to explain really the nature of science in a way that would get rid of some of the silly arguments that you sometimes see in the newspaper or whatever I did. Just to really understand how it works. How much do you think the general public should know about [00:12:30] science? More than I do. I don't know. Um, I don't think they have to know about everything going on at the [inaudible] client or unless they want to. I think that what I'm doing is providing access to that detailed information, but I do think that they should understand just the nature of scientific thinking, what, you know, very broad brush, statistical thought, what it means to be right and wrong, how theories build on each other and what it means to have an approximation and to understand that science really involves that sort of middle ground. Speaker 4: I think also, [00:13:00] you know, to understand risk better and to understand what goes into, um, the ways we think about risks so people are more prepared to deal with it, what it is that allows us to put new ideas together, both in science and, and in art. So I think all of these things are, we're just, we've just would have more interesting discussions and more productive discussions if people were more aware of, you know, sort of basic mathematics and basic statistical thought. Can you talk about your imagination for us a bit. It's very hard to talk about [00:13:30] one's imagination. I will say that what I, one thing I like about scientists, it's sort of constrained creativity. You sort of have definite problems to focus on where you have a world of ideas to think about, but you have these very definite problems and so definite marks of progress when you've connected various things that seems to totally disparate or find some underlying connections. And especially if you can do it in a way that can be tested and eventually tested correctly. Speaker 6: It's a spectrum on k eight LX Brooklyn. [00:14:00] We're talking with Lisa Randall, theoretical physicist coming up. She talks about the intersection of art and science [inaudible] Speaker 4: so your latest book, a mix, several musical illusions including the title of course. Uh, and you wrote the Libretto too. Do you yourself have a strong interest in music? It's a little embarrassing. I think where my major interests in music is that lyrics stick in my head whether I want them to or not. So I think I actually, I come in [00:14:30] probably more from a work point of view. The word stick in my head, although tunes they stick it in my head with tunes and sometimes, but right in Libretto, um, was I was just a lucky opportunity. In fact, it was so different from anything I'd thought about. Um, you know, I just finished writing war passages, which was a book where it tried to tie together really 20th century physics thought and really build up to where we are today in terms of particle string theory and the ideas I've worked on about extra dimensions of space. Speaker 4: And it was really a challenge to put it all into a linear order. And then, um, you know, I hadn't [00:15:00] many sort of writers and artists contact me, but the composer Hetero Pero just had this really interesting idea. The idea was to really put physics into the opera in a way that they don't usually do. You know, you'll have movies or books or whatever about artists or writers, but you never actually see them doing what they do. So the, it was kind of interesting idea to have actual physics and she was actually a physicist and a composer. One of the protagonists. I like the idea of sort of the unifying theme of sort of what drives discovery, what drives creative thought, both for artists [00:15:30] and for scientists. And so having the, having an extra dimension of space seemed like a really nice metaphor for that once. Speaker 4: And it was wonderful to work with Hector because, you know, I'd never done something like this so we could work together. He could tell me the kinds of things he needed or wanted. We had Matthew Ritchie, the artists come on board to do the set. So it was just an at a premiere at the Pompidou Center. So how good is that? So, so it was just a brilliant opportunity. So, so yes, I do like music, but probably, um, this is a lot of people around who are far more expert than I am. Well, you know, I also co [00:16:00] curated an art exhibit, um, on the theme of scale. Obviously it was something I was thinking about a lot. Brian's buck. And we had artists who sort of reflected on scale both the way artists do, but also the way scientists do. The idea was sort of not to just have art representing science, but to take a theme that both artists and scientists think about a lot and see if they could work with that and so have physics or biology feed into it if they wanted to, but it didn't have to. Speaker 4: So a couple of pieces scientifically related, but mostly it was abstract art and it was great. I do think I, in fact, I was just on a panel discussion, um, [00:16:30] the last couple of days, um, from the Radcliffe Institute talking about science and art in the crossroads. And it's just, it's a very exciting time for that. There's some good, good art coming out of it and there's some bad art coming out of it, but it's a time where we're sort of thinking what it means. And I think for different people it means different things. I mean, for me, because the science I do is so abstract, I find it nice way to communicate, to sort of introduce people to ideas. And in fact, we saw that even with the people at the Pompidou Center who at first were very skeptical of this American physicist writing a Libretto [00:17:00] for their opera, but then really came to embrace the project and was so excited about the idea of physics itself and also representing physics in this opera. Speaker 4: Your most recent book actually talks quite a bit about religion. Science and religion are sort of often pitted against one another. Can you talk about that a bit? Um, I thought it was important. I didn't want to extensively dwell on that. It wasn't a book about that, but I thought I would discuss two of the ideas that have had struck me as important. One was really sort of where, where do, where does scientific and religious thought really diverged so that we can actually have a productive [00:17:30] conversation about it and the other, so there were two chapters. One was about that essentially, and one was about why do we care? Why is this issue considered so important? For the first issue it had to do is I think a lot of people will sort of say I'm spiritual, but I like science. But the question is what does that mean? Speaker 4: What does it mean to be spiritual? And so just to really define what a scientific way of thinking is in terms of if you believe spirituality has to do with a way of thinking about the world. Science would say, well the way of thinking about the world is rooted in some sort of physical [00:18:00] substrate. And so if that's true, does that mean that's petroleum is affecting individual neurons? How, how exactly is that working? So trust to sort of isolate what the difference is in terms of how you would approach the problem, what it is you're thinking about. And I do think that there are very different ways of at a fundamental level of thinking about it, of course, as a social or psychological phenomenon that's entirely different story. And of course any kind of spirituality, religion can play a big role for people, but that's not the same as actually understanding how things work. Speaker 4: And understanding [00:18:30] either how you make your decisions or how planets move or anything, so I thought it was just important to get that. To me to be clear about that in terms of why we care, I think it really is sort of where people feel more in control. Do you think that science is helping us control our environment and giving us breakthroughs that allows us to have a better world or do you think that you'd rather see some higher authority takeover? I like to think that we have the ability to understand more and be able to move forward. Sometimes scientists [00:19:00] are seen as very egotistical because they think they can figure things out for themselves, but actually scientists are questioning their, they're trying to understand things they're not taking for granted that we, that we know the answers and I think that's a wonderful way to approach the world. Speaker 6: You are tuned to k a l x Berkley. The show is spectrum. Our guest is Lisa rambled, theoretical particle physicist and often in the coming segments she talks about scientific outreach. Speaker 4: [00:19:30] We as scientists sometimes succumb to marketing. I mean the hangs flows on is nicknamed the God particle by some. Um, do you think that this hurts us or helps us? Uh, I, in fact I say we shouldn't take the name of the Higgs Boson in vain. And so I don't, I mean I think there is marketing and it happens. It's different because we're talking to different people. We tend to say we're talking to the public, but the public or different people, I mean, some people will already be interested in science and want to know what's really going on. There are other people who like [00:20:00] the people at the Pompidou Center who'd never heard a strength or you'd never heard of extra dimensions. And this was a way of introducing them to the idea. And for those people, maybe it's not so bad to say that God particles catch someone's eye and then, and then actually tell them what's really going on. Speaker 4: And what was really interesting, um, when, when they had some evidence for the Higgs Boson back in December, I was asked to write a piece for Newsweek and they were like, well, of course you'll tell us how this changes the world. And I said, well, it's not really changing the world. Like, well why is everyone so interested as I was like, I don't know. So it became kind of an article about the fact that people are interested [00:20:30] even though it doesn't necessarily directly change the world. And I think there is a level that once people start thinking about it, it becomes intrinsically interesting and it's after all, if you think about the things that people get fascinated by, um, it doesn't, it doesn't have to change the world. It can be something that just captures our interest and certainly understanding the world at a deeper level falls into that category. Speaker 4: Do you think science funding in this country is diminishing or stable, especially for big projects? No, I think it's a good question. And I think we're at a, at a critical juncture where we do seem [00:21:00] to be in danger of losing that. And I think that actually isn't as much a question of just interest, but which sort of short term versus longterm thinking. You know, to the extent that science funding is increasing, it's more for short term projects. Let's try to solve this problem. And often that's not the way big science advances or there are major scientific advances. Sometimes you just have to jump in the water and just hope that things will happen. And not just blindly. I mean, you go into the deep end, you go in the right part and you know what, you know what you're looking for. [00:21:30] But a lot of scientific discoveries had consequences. Speaker 4: No one anticipated. I mean, we're just talking about lunch. Even when the electron was discovered, they were like, well, that's useless. Um, you know, it's, it's, people don't know what's gonna come out of it, but major things come out of it. And certainly, um, having attention to science has, has never failed in the past. I mean, there's no society that's paid a lot of attention to science that has failed because of it. It's easy to sort of point to the technological innovations who's benefiting to the general public and telling them they want science that way. But how do you sort [00:22:00] of tie that to the question of how much science should be funded and especially which scientific projects should be funded? That's a very specific question that one would have to do on a case by case basis. I think that the kind of physics I do, it's deep fundamental physics. Speaker 4: It can only be done experimentally by these sorts of big projects and so it's just one direction to go in. I think there's a lot of attempt in just sort of smaller projects and those will have, could have important consequences, but it's very easy to overstate because especially things that are biological, they seem so directly [00:22:30] related to human beings. But you know, it's crazy. I mean quantum mechanics, it's couldn't seem more abstract than that, but the electronics where evolution came out of that through semiconductors and that of course has greatly affected our lives. So it isn't something where it's very, and I actually talk about cost benefit analysis and in applied to science or applied more generally. You know, we really want to be able to pin numbers and to pin probabilities into, but there are cases where we can't and we have to acknowledge that we have to acknowledge the uncertainties in, in doing this. Speaker 4: There's a lot of interesting questions just in particle physics [00:23:00] and we have these experiments now and I think, uh, and particularly during sort of the public stuff and, and science, I mean if ever our physics fails or doesn't work or whatever, I mean there's certainly were interesting questions and I think about them. I talk to people. I mean, I think there's a lot of interesting stuff. It's interesting to reflect on it and talk to colleagues, find out whether it's similar in different in different types of sciences. Find out about other scientific advances. Certainly physics isn't the only field making advances today and to really not only the kind of physics I do, Emmy [inaudible] [00:23:30] is she sort of a hero of yours here? I don't, I don't have heroes. I know people are always really disappointed that, you know, they were like, so who are your heroes? Speaker 4: I'm like, well I don't have, I mean what, I do have a science, you know, I think there's science that I really appreciate and I think she was one of the people that made interesting advances and it was exciting when I found out that it was a woman because you don't learn about many women in your elementary physics classes. Not as many people have heard of her as I've heard of some of the other scientists. And it's, it's interesting. Are there other salient [00:24:00] people active now that you refer to quite often follow their work closely? You know, one of the fun things about having the book be over is just visiting other places. Might not even people that I hadn't known about or heard of can be doing interesting things. It turns out so it's been fun catching up and finding out what people are doing. Speaker 4: But um, overall, overall I think the field will go forward with lots of people contributing. And is that a huge challenge? Just trying to keep up with all the information that's out there. The answer is sort of yes or no. I mean I think I often keep up by doing stuff [00:24:30] and in fact I, you know, I was sort of lucky in the sense that as soon as the book was kind of done, I ended up doing a project that actually was sort of kind of central to where people are going today in terms of thinking about supersymmetry in fact. And so, um, and to the extent that I can get involved right away, which is sometimes easier when you have some interesting idea about something or whatever. Um, that's quite helpful. Is there anything that you would want to mention about the predominance of matter over anti matter? Speaker 4: Well, that's a, that's a big scientific [00:25:00] question about barrier genesis. It's called how, why there's more baryons what we call them than anti barons, more protons and antiprotons. In fact, it's something I've gotten involved with in the context of dark matter. And the reason for that, which is that the amount of energy and dark matter, it's about six times the amount of energy and ordinary matter. In principle, it could have been, you know, a factor of a trillion off. So the fact that they're so similar seems to indicate there could be a connection between the creation of dark matter and the creation of ordinary matter. So it's actually quite an interesting research problem [00:25:30] right now. Are you going to write a third book or are you, I don't have immediate plans, but a, I didn't have a media plan so, and told me, I was like, yeah, I don't remember where I talked to you after you wrote your first book. You said you'd never write another book. I completely forget ever saying that so, so I, I wouldn't rule it out, but I don't know what I'm going to do yet. Elisa Randall, thanks for joining us. Thank you very much for that. Speaker 6: [inaudible] [00:26:00] bringing a feature of spectrums to mention a few of the science and technology events happening in the bay area. Speaker 4: Here's Rick with the calendar. The reason for reason and the center for inquiry are hosting Speaker Mark Edward, who will discuss his book, Psychic Blues, Confessions of a conflicted medium on Saturday, July 7th at Kelly's Irish pub, five 30 Jackson Street in San Francisco. [00:26:30] This free talk starts at 5:00 PM with doors at four 30 with decades of experience practicing mental magic, Edward has worked on both sides of the psychic fence. He believes that most of the psychic business Speaker 3: are out and out scam artists and that the common need to believe in things supernatural is merely a part of human nature. From phone psyche to headliner at the famed Magic Castle Mark Edward will recount his experiences and expose techniques you used in the multibillion dollar [00:27:00] psychic industry. For more information, visit reason for reason.org. That's the reason the number four reason. Dot. O r.G , the Leonardo art science evening rendezvous or laser. This month will be at the University of San Francisco at 6:45 PM on Monday, July 9th the talks at this free meeting include Ian winters presenting on responsive installations based on attention, social [00:27:30] memory and the use of motion capture analysis. Christina smoke a on synthetic biology, the next generation of biotechnology. Mark Jacobson on a plan to power the world for all purposes with wind, water and the sun and both the UC Berkeley professor of anthropology, Paul Rainbow and National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow, Adrian van Allen on synthetic biology and security. You can find more information on [00:28:00] how to register@wwwdotleonardo.info now, Lisa cabbage with the news story Speaker 7: using remote sensing technology, researchers from Stanford University have discovered the largest ever bloom of phytoplankton buried underneath the Arctic Ice Shelf, four times more concentrated than open ocean blooms. They came across this bloom by accident in Alaska as Chuck CISI while cutting through ice that was only a meter thick compared to the three meter thickness [00:28:30] in the past. Under ice. Blooms are rarely seen microscopic phytoplankton that rely on the sun for nutrients and form the base of the Arctic Food Web as Climate Change thins. The Arctic ice sheet completing the summer cycle earlier, the timing of the under ice bloom could throw off the timing of the entire Arctic food web. When the ice sheet melt in the spring, Su plankton moves into areas of open water to feed on phytoplankton and in turn become food for fish. If they follow the seasons rather [00:29:00] than the blooms, they may arrive too late affecting larger animals like whales. Speaker 3: [inaudible]Speaker 2: [inaudible].Speaker 6: The music card during the show is by Los Donna David from his album folk and acoustic is made available through creative Commons attribution license 3.0 Speaker 2: [inaudible]Speaker 6: production assistance by Lisa cabbage Speaker 2: [inaudible].Speaker 6: Thank you for listening to spectrum. If you have comments [00:29:30] about the show, please send them to us via email. Our email address is spectrum dot k a l x@yahoo.com join us in two at this same Speaker 2: time. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Lisa Randall is a theoretical physicist, expert on particle physics and cosmology who was a visiting Miller Professor at UC Berkeley in 2011-2012. Author of two books “Warped Passages” and “Knocking on Heaven’s Door,” she is currently Professor at Harvard University.TranscriptSpeaker 1: Spectrum's next Speaker 2: [inaudible]. Welcome to [inaudible] Speaker 1: can the Science and technology show on k [00:00:30] a l x Berkeley, a biweekly 30 minute program bringing you interviews featuring bay area scientists and technologists as well as a calendar of local events and news. Speaker 3: Good afternoon. I'm Rick Karnofsky. Brad swift and I are interviewing Lisa Randall, the author of the recent popular physics book, knocking on Heaven's door, how physics and scientific thinking aluminate the universe and the modern world. She's a visiting Miller professor [00:01:00] in the Physics Department here at cal and our first postdoc was also here as a president's fellow. She is currently a frank be buried junior professor of science at Harvard University and previously wrote the book worked passages and also the Libretto for Hector Perez, hyper music prologue. Lisa Randall, welcome to spectrum. In your book, you talk a lot about the large hadron collider at cern. Can you talk to us more about that? Speaker 4: So I'm very interested in what's happening at the large Hadron Collider, but I'm also quite interested in just [00:01:30] what it means to do science. After I wrote my first book were passages. A lot of people showed that even when they were interested in science, there were some confusions about just how science advances and how science works in practice. And you know, people think of it as this very definite thing with definite announcers. But right now, and we see this right now with the large hedge on clutter and the Hicks herd, you know, it's messy in the beginning. We don't know the answers and it's important to understand the role of uncertainty, the role of scale and sort of building ideas on top of each other. Having said that, I'll tell you a little bit [00:02:00] about um, surgeon and the large Hadron collider. As a theorist, I'm not actively working on experiments. Speaker 4: What I do is I suggest what that can look for us, such as exotic ideas, like extra dimensions of space or versions of supersymmetry. But we also tell them how to go about doing the experiments to some extent, or at least discussed that and tried to interpret what they find. But what the large Hadron collider is, it's a giant underground being 27 kilometers in circumference. It collides together hydrogens, which are pro protons, which are our form of Hadrons, and it's doing it at high [00:02:30] energy, the highest energy ever achieved in such collisions. And the goal is via equals MC squared to create particles that have never been made before because they're too heavy. You need high energy to make heavier particles. And in looking at these particles, we want to understand what underlies the structure of the standard model. What is it that gives particles, their math, what is it explains the values of these masses. So it's a long story. That's why there's a whole book, but there's a lot of interesting stuff in it. Have you been to cern to see the itself [00:03:00] officially? I'm a visiting professor there, although I don't have much time to spend there. It was actually really fun. The first time I visited it, it was much more excited than I thought. You know, I'd seen other experiments before, but um, it's just bigger and the magnitude and the people involved are so impressive. Speaker 5: Uh, what's the motivation for pushing to other link scales to improving our models of the universe? Speaker 4: That's a great question. And part of it is it's just intrinsically interesting. When people discovered the elements of an Adam, they didn't just find a nucleus and electron, which of course [00:03:30] is very interesting in itself, but they found eventually quantum mechanics. We found the underlying physical law. It's quite different than what we had anticipated. So we're not just looking for new stuff, new particles. We're really looking for the underlying physical structure to understand more deeply what's going on. Of course, that doesn't mean that the standard model is wrong, but it could be that it's not the most basic understanding of particle physics and that could be something deeper and richer that underlies it. So that's part of the goal is I [00:04:00] think that people are just interested in what's there. But also by pushing technology, by pushing scientific thought to the limits, there's all sorts of subsidiary benefits in terms of an educated populace in terms of people being interested and excited and just knowing more about the world. Speaker 5: We know from just pitting data that adding extra parameters will often lead to a better fits. Is there some justification beyond that for wanting these simple low parameter models? Speaker 4: We're trying to get a deeper understanding of connections among things. We're not just trying to enumerate them, list [00:04:30] them. We'd like to say that if I measured this quantity, I can predict that one. So the standard model in some sense has very few parameters in terms of there's only three forces plus gravity, these strong, weak and electromagnetic force. And with those parameters you can predict an enormous number of different processes. So it is true that you can of course add from, but you don't necessarily gain understanding by doing that. What we're trying to do is really gain some deeper understanding about the connections, the underlying physical [00:05:00] laws, and it takes a while before we know that we've achieved that. Speaker 5: I'd also like to sort of touch on testability of different models. So in both war passages and the knocking on heaven story, you talk about your own work with extra dimensional space. Speaker 4: The dimensions of course are just sort of the stage. They're the setting and so, um, in fact, we don't, we generally only think about having one additional dimension other than the three we know about left right forward, backward, up, down. The idea is that there could be an extra dimension. Put My collaborator Robin Syndrome and I were interested in this extra dimension for a couple of reasons. [00:05:30] One is just to understand abstractly what's going on. We had actually set out to explore, but we found accidentally you could have even an infinite extra dimension that has no visible consequences. In other words, something as dramatic as an infinite to mention could be untestable. The other side of the coin though is that there is a version of the series where it actually explains why particle messes are what they are. We're answers something we call the hierarchy problem, which can be interpreted as why gravity is so weak compared to the other fundamental forces. Speaker 4: Gravity [00:06:00] might not seem that weak because after all, we have the entire earth acting on us, but from the point of view of fundamental particles, gravity is extraordinarily weak. And by having an extra dimension, we can hope to explain that in the sense that we found a, what we called a warp to extra dimension, and gravity is strong elsewhere, but very weak where we are at various exponentially quickly as you'd go out in another dimension. Now, what's amazing about that is that like any theory that explains this question of the weakness of gravity and why masses are what they are, it leads to testable predictions [00:06:30] and that's what we're quite excited about at the large Hadron collider. It's looking not only for the Higgs Boson, I don't we can come back to that has to do with how particles acquire their mass, but it's also looking for the theory that explains why these masses are what they are, and that leads to testable consequences at about the energies at the large Hadron collider studies. We could be unlucky and it could be a little bit heavier or we could be lucky and it could be right in range. Speaker 6: [inaudible] you're listening to spectrum on k a [00:07:00] l x Berkeley. We're talking with Lisa Randall, theoretical particle physicist about her new book knocking on Heaven's door. Speaker 4: In terms of new tools. Are there things like simulation that you would see value in, in fact of these experiments run in conjunction with simulation? The thing is you can only simulate accurately what you've, what you know about. They certainly simulate what would be the consequences [00:07:30] if some of these ideas were correct, such as extra dimensions or supersymmetry. But then there's no alternative to going out and seeing whether they're actually realized in nature. And can you give us some examples about what we expect to see just besides observations of subatomic particles at a particular mass energy window? Well, actually what we expect to see exacerbations of subatomic particles headed mass energy window, but they're particles with very special properties. And that's part of the art of the kind of, uh, both theory and experiment is to really see what are those [00:08:00] special properties in general, you know, your clients have the protons, protons are in some sense messy objects. Speaker 4: They have things inside corks, cal together by glue, ones that communicate the strong nuclear force. And so when you collide them together, you get a lot of junk that comes out. And what you have to do is distinguish something new, something we haven't seen before, a particle with different properties from the mess of stuff that comes out of the standard model. So for example, if this warped extra dimensional idea is correct and indeed explains the weakness of gravity particles, like [00:08:30] the ones we know about, they have similar properties in the sense of they interact in similar ways, but they're heavier, they're heavier because it's a reflection of the fact that they have momentum in another dimension because we don't see that dimension directly. We interpret that as additional math. So you would look for particles that have very particular properties related to the ones we know about, but they're heavier. So that would be one example. And because they had these very particular properties, you can it and say this is in fact a Calusa client particle. There's another version of potential [00:09:00] solution called super symmetry. And in that case, for every particle we know about, there's an associated particle that's again heavier but would have the same charges. And related interactions. So again, we have a very definite idea of what these particles should look like. And so there are very definite search strategies Speaker 5: on sort of link scales. You look at not only subatomic particles but dark energy and dark matter which are associated with cosmology, which you also hope to observe at the LHC or are there other experiments that might test theories about that? Speaker 4: So we have to be clear here on the large [00:09:30] Hadron collider is primarily designed to do particle physics and answer these questions about mass that we keep alluding to. However, there is a possibility that he could also shed light on dark matter. So first of all, dark matter, it's actual matter. It's actual stuff that clumps just like the matter we know about, but it doesn't interact with light. It's really transparent matter. Now dark energy on the other hand is a whole other beast. It's not particles, it doesn't clump. It does. It spreads out throughout the universe. So the large Hadron collider won't shed light on dark energy. However, there [00:10:00] is a chance it could shed light on dark matter. And the reason for that is what could be just a coincidence or it could be some deep underlying clue which is that if a particle is stable and neutral, the states did not interact with light and has the kind of mass that can be produced at the large Hadron collider. Speaker 4: If it has those properties and you just trace its cosmological evolution, what's happened to it since the beginning of time because it's heavy, there's not that much left of it today. It turns out to have just about the right amount to account for [00:10:30] the measured value of the dark matter measured through its gravitational effects which makes many people think that there is a chance to produce and find out about dark matter at the large Hadron collider. Of course, because it interacts so weekly, it's a very indirect thing. You'd have to produce something else that then could decay into it or produce it. Having said that, there are also a lot of very exciting experiments, J and talk a little bit about them looking much more directly for dark matter. Really looking for it either because it annihilates in the sky and they can see what comes out of it or dark matter actually [00:11:00] leaves a signal in some big underground vat of stuff. And so it recoils and you see a little bit of evidence there. So there are many more directed experiments for dark matter. Speaker 5: So you're both a practicing theoretical physicist in both popularized and communicate science and physics through books or through parents is like this. How does this sort of science outreach or advocacy sort of feed into your own research and vice versa. Speaker 4: But, and in terms of actual research on the whole, it means that I just have less time to try. I'm afraid, [00:11:30] but, but what I do do it, it's very directed and, and I do feel like if I'm doing stuff, it should be interesting and important. So I've managed to um, also do some very interesting research and I have to say after doing a lot of book talks in the fall, I was quite happy to visit surgeon and just get back to research too. Do you think all scientists should have the same sort of ability to communicate with the public? Absolutely not. I think, I mean, I, you know, and I a self to never thought I would do this kind of thing. Actually when I started out it was only after I, you know, I basically, I wrote some papers that really became like the most cited [00:12:00] papers around and I just thought, you know, people who really want to understand science, they should have access to it. Speaker 4: You know, there's some very general broad books and there's very specific, but I thought, you know, I'd like to do something where you sort of really tell the full story of really how science is really happening. And I didn't know I would do a second book, but like I said, I'm sort of inspired a little bit by just wanting to explain really the nature of science in a way that would get rid of some of the silly arguments that you sometimes see in the newspaper or whatever I did. Just to really understand how it works. How much do you think the general public should know about [00:12:30] science? More than I do. I don't know. Um, I don't think they have to know about everything going on at the [inaudible] client or unless they want to. I think that what I'm doing is providing access to that detailed information, but I do think that they should understand just the nature of scientific thinking, what, you know, very broad brush, statistical thought, what it means to be right and wrong, how theories build on each other and what it means to have an approximation and to understand that science really involves that sort of middle ground. Speaker 4: I think also, [00:13:00] you know, to understand risk better and to understand what goes into, um, the ways we think about risks so people are more prepared to deal with it, what it is that allows us to put new ideas together, both in science and, and in art. So I think all of these things are, we're just, we've just would have more interesting discussions and more productive discussions if people were more aware of, you know, sort of basic mathematics and basic statistical thought. Can you talk about your imagination for us a bit. It's very hard to talk about [00:13:30] one's imagination. I will say that what I, one thing I like about scientists, it's sort of constrained creativity. You sort of have definite problems to focus on where you have a world of ideas to think about, but you have these very definite problems and so definite marks of progress when you've connected various things that seems to totally disparate or find some underlying connections. And especially if you can do it in a way that can be tested and eventually tested correctly. Speaker 6: It's a spectrum on k eight LX Brooklyn. [00:14:00] We're talking with Lisa Randall, theoretical physicist coming up. She talks about the intersection of art and science [inaudible] Speaker 4: so your latest book, a mix, several musical illusions including the title of course. Uh, and you wrote the Libretto too. Do you yourself have a strong interest in music? It's a little embarrassing. I think where my major interests in music is that lyrics stick in my head whether I want them to or not. So I think I actually, I come in [00:14:30] probably more from a work point of view. The word stick in my head, although tunes they stick it in my head with tunes and sometimes, but right in Libretto, um, was I was just a lucky opportunity. In fact, it was so different from anything I'd thought about. Um, you know, I just finished writing war passages, which was a book where it tried to tie together really 20th century physics thought and really build up to where we are today in terms of particle string theory and the ideas I've worked on about extra dimensions of space. Speaker 4: And it was really a challenge to put it all into a linear order. And then, um, you know, I hadn't [00:15:00] many sort of writers and artists contact me, but the composer Hetero Pero just had this really interesting idea. The idea was to really put physics into the opera in a way that they don't usually do. You know, you'll have movies or books or whatever about artists or writers, but you never actually see them doing what they do. So the, it was kind of interesting idea to have actual physics and she was actually a physicist and a composer. One of the protagonists. I like the idea of sort of the unifying theme of sort of what drives discovery, what drives creative thought, both for artists [00:15:30] and for scientists. And so having the, having an extra dimension of space seemed like a really nice metaphor for that once. Speaker 4: And it was wonderful to work with Hector because, you know, I'd never done something like this so we could work together. He could tell me the kinds of things he needed or wanted. We had Matthew Ritchie, the artists come on board to do the set. So it was just an at a premiere at the Pompidou Center. So how good is that? So, so it was just a brilliant opportunity. So, so yes, I do like music, but probably, um, this is a lot of people around who are far more expert than I am. Well, you know, I also co [00:16:00] curated an art exhibit, um, on the theme of scale. Obviously it was something I was thinking about a lot. Brian's buck. And we had artists who sort of reflected on scale both the way artists do, but also the way scientists do. The idea was sort of not to just have art representing science, but to take a theme that both artists and scientists think about a lot and see if they could work with that and so have physics or biology feed into it if they wanted to, but it didn't have to. Speaker 4: So a couple of pieces scientifically related, but mostly it was abstract art and it was great. I do think I, in fact, I was just on a panel discussion, um, [00:16:30] the last couple of days, um, from the Radcliffe Institute talking about science and art in the crossroads. And it's just, it's a very exciting time for that. There's some good, good art coming out of it and there's some bad art coming out of it, but it's a time where we're sort of thinking what it means. And I think for different people it means different things. I mean, for me, because the science I do is so abstract, I find it nice way to communicate, to sort of introduce people to ideas. And in fact, we saw that even with the people at the Pompidou Center who at first were very skeptical of this American physicist writing a Libretto [00:17:00] for their opera, but then really came to embrace the project and was so excited about the idea of physics itself and also representing physics in this opera. Speaker 4: Your most recent book actually talks quite a bit about religion. Science and religion are sort of often pitted against one another. Can you talk about that a bit? Um, I thought it was important. I didn't want to extensively dwell on that. It wasn't a book about that, but I thought I would discuss two of the ideas that have had struck me as important. One was really sort of where, where do, where does scientific and religious thought really diverged so that we can actually have a productive [00:17:30] conversation about it and the other, so there were two chapters. One was about that essentially, and one was about why do we care? Why is this issue considered so important? For the first issue it had to do is I think a lot of people will sort of say I'm spiritual, but I like science. But the question is what does that mean? Speaker 4: What does it mean to be spiritual? And so just to really define what a scientific way of thinking is in terms of if you believe spirituality has to do with a way of thinking about the world. Science would say, well the way of thinking about the world is rooted in some sort of physical [00:18:00] substrate. And so if that's true, does that mean that's petroleum is affecting individual neurons? How, how exactly is that working? So trust to sort of isolate what the difference is in terms of how you would approach the problem, what it is you're thinking about. And I do think that there are very different ways of at a fundamental level of thinking about it, of course, as a social or psychological phenomenon that's entirely different story. And of course any kind of spirituality, religion can play a big role for people, but that's not the same as actually understanding how things work. Speaker 4: And understanding [00:18:30] either how you make your decisions or how planets move or anything, so I thought it was just important to get that. To me to be clear about that in terms of why we care, I think it really is sort of where people feel more in control. Do you think that science is helping us control our environment and giving us breakthroughs that allows us to have a better world or do you think that you'd rather see some higher authority takeover? I like to think that we have the ability to understand more and be able to move forward. Sometimes scientists [00:19:00] are seen as very egotistical because they think they can figure things out for themselves, but actually scientists are questioning their, they're trying to understand things they're not taking for granted that we, that we know the answers and I think that's a wonderful way to approach the world. Speaker 6: You are tuned to k a l x Berkley. The show is spectrum. Our guest is Lisa rambled, theoretical particle physicist and often in the coming segments she talks about scientific outreach. Speaker 4: [00:19:30] We as scientists sometimes succumb to marketing. I mean the hangs flows on is nicknamed the God particle by some. Um, do you think that this hurts us or helps us? Uh, I, in fact I say we shouldn't take the name of the Higgs Boson in vain. And so I don't, I mean I think there is marketing and it happens. It's different because we're talking to different people. We tend to say we're talking to the public, but the public or different people, I mean, some people will already be interested in science and want to know what's really going on. There are other people who like [00:20:00] the people at the Pompidou Center who'd never heard a strength or you'd never heard of extra dimensions. And this was a way of introducing them to the idea. And for those people, maybe it's not so bad to say that God particles catch someone's eye and then, and then actually tell them what's really going on. Speaker 4: And what was really interesting, um, when, when they had some evidence for the Higgs Boson back in December, I was asked to write a piece for Newsweek and they were like, well, of course you'll tell us how this changes the world. And I said, well, it's not really changing the world. Like, well why is everyone so interested as I was like, I don't know. So it became kind of an article about the fact that people are interested [00:20:30] even though it doesn't necessarily directly change the world. And I think there is a level that once people start thinking about it, it becomes intrinsically interesting and it's after all, if you think about the things that people get fascinated by, um, it doesn't, it doesn't have to change the world. It can be something that just captures our interest and certainly understanding the world at a deeper level falls into that category. Speaker 4: Do you think science funding in this country is diminishing or stable, especially for big projects? No, I think it's a good question. And I think we're at a, at a critical juncture where we do seem [00:21:00] to be in danger of losing that. And I think that actually isn't as much a question of just interest, but which sort of short term versus longterm thinking. You know, to the extent that science funding is increasing, it's more for short term projects. Let's try to solve this problem. And often that's not the way big science advances or there are major scientific advances. Sometimes you just have to jump in the water and just hope that things will happen. And not just blindly. I mean, you go into the deep end, you go in the right part and you know what, you know what you're looking for. [00:21:30] But a lot of scientific discoveries had consequences. Speaker 4: No one anticipated. I mean, we're just talking about lunch. Even when the electron was discovered, they were like, well, that's useless. Um, you know, it's, it's, people don't know what's gonna come out of it, but major things come out of it. And certainly, um, having attention to science has, has never failed in the past. I mean, there's no society that's paid a lot of attention to science that has failed because of it. It's easy to sort of point to the technological innovations who's benefiting to the general public and telling them they want science that way. But how do you sort [00:22:00] of tie that to the question of how much science should be funded and especially which scientific projects should be funded? That's a very specific question that one would have to do on a case by case basis. I think that the kind of physics I do, it's deep fundamental physics. Speaker 4: It can only be done experimentally by these sorts of big projects and so it's just one direction to go in. I think there's a lot of attempt in just sort of smaller projects and those will have, could have important consequences, but it's very easy to overstate because especially things that are biological, they seem so directly [00:22:30] related to human beings. But you know, it's crazy. I mean quantum mechanics, it's couldn't seem more abstract than that, but the electronics where evolution came out of that through semiconductors and that of course has greatly affected our lives. So it isn't something where it's very, and I actually talk about cost benefit analysis and in applied to science or applied more generally. You know, we really want to be able to pin numbers and to pin probabilities into, but there are cases where we can't and we have to acknowledge that we have to acknowledge the uncertainties in, in doing this. Speaker 4: There's a lot of interesting questions just in particle physics [00:23:00] and we have these experiments now and I think, uh, and particularly during sort of the public stuff and, and science, I mean if ever our physics fails or doesn't work or whatever, I mean there's certainly were interesting questions and I think about them. I talk to people. I mean, I think there's a lot of interesting stuff. It's interesting to reflect on it and talk to colleagues, find out whether it's similar in different in different types of sciences. Find out about other scientific advances. Certainly physics isn't the only field making advances today and to really not only the kind of physics I do, Emmy [inaudible] [00:23:30] is she sort of a hero of yours here? I don't, I don't have heroes. I know people are always really disappointed that, you know, they were like, so who are your heroes? Speaker 4: I'm like, well I don't have, I mean what, I do have a science, you know, I think there's science that I really appreciate and I think she was one of the people that made interesting advances and it was exciting when I found out that it was a woman because you don't learn about many women in your elementary physics classes. Not as many people have heard of her as I've heard of some of the other scientists. And it's, it's interesting. Are there other salient [00:24:00] people active now that you refer to quite often follow their work closely? You know, one of the fun things about having the book be over is just visiting other places. Might not even people that I hadn't known about or heard of can be doing interesting things. It turns out so it's been fun catching up and finding out what people are doing. Speaker 4: But um, overall, overall I think the field will go forward with lots of people contributing. And is that a huge challenge? Just trying to keep up with all the information that's out there. The answer is sort of yes or no. I mean I think I often keep up by doing stuff [00:24:30] and in fact I, you know, I was sort of lucky in the sense that as soon as the book was kind of done, I ended up doing a project that actually was sort of kind of central to where people are going today in terms of thinking about supersymmetry in fact. And so, um, and to the extent that I can get involved right away, which is sometimes easier when you have some interesting idea about something or whatever. Um, that's quite helpful. Is there anything that you would want to mention about the predominance of matter over anti matter? Speaker 4: Well, that's a, that's a big scientific [00:25:00] question about barrier genesis. It's called how, why there's more baryons what we call them than anti barons, more protons and antiprotons. In fact, it's something I've gotten involved with in the context of dark matter. And the reason for that, which is that the amount of energy and dark matter, it's about six times the amount of energy and ordinary matter. In principle, it could have been, you know, a factor of a trillion off. So the fact that they're so similar seems to indicate there could be a connection between the creation of dark matter and the creation of ordinary matter. So it's actually quite an interesting research problem [00:25:30] right now. Are you going to write a third book or are you, I don't have immediate plans, but a, I didn't have a media plan so, and told me, I was like, yeah, I don't remember where I talked to you after you wrote your first book. You said you'd never write another book. I completely forget ever saying that so, so I, I wouldn't rule it out, but I don't know what I'm going to do yet. Elisa Randall, thanks for joining us. Thank you very much for that. Speaker 6: [inaudible] [00:26:00] bringing a feature of spectrums to mention a few of the science and technology events happening in the bay area. Speaker 4: Here's Rick with the calendar. The reason for reason and the center for inquiry are hosting Speaker Mark Edward, who will discuss his book, Psychic Blues, Confessions of a conflicted medium on Saturday, July 7th at Kelly's Irish pub, five 30 Jackson Street in San Francisco. [00:26:30] This free talk starts at 5:00 PM with doors at four 30 with decades of experience practicing mental magic, Edward has worked on both sides of the psychic fence. He believes that most of the psychic business Speaker 3: are out and out scam artists and that the common need to believe in things supernatural is merely a part of human nature. From phone psyche to headliner at the famed Magic Castle Mark Edward will recount his experiences and expose techniques you used in the multibillion dollar [00:27:00] psychic industry. For more information, visit reason for reason.org. That's the reason the number four reason. Dot. O r.G , the Leonardo art science evening rendezvous or laser. This month will be at the University of San Francisco at 6:45 PM on Monday, July 9th the talks at this free meeting include Ian winters presenting on responsive installations based on attention, social [00:27:30] memory and the use of motion capture analysis. Christina smoke a on synthetic biology, the next generation of biotechnology. Mark Jacobson on a plan to power the world for all purposes with wind, water and the sun and both the UC Berkeley professor of anthropology, Paul Rainbow and National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow, Adrian van Allen on synthetic biology and security. You can find more information on [00:28:00] how to register@wwwdotleonardo.info now, Lisa cabbage with the news story Speaker 7: using remote sensing technology, researchers from Stanford University have discovered the largest ever bloom of phytoplankton buried underneath the Arctic Ice Shelf, four times more concentrated than open ocean blooms. They came across this bloom by accident in Alaska as Chuck CISI while cutting through ice that was only a meter thick compared to the three meter thickness [00:28:30] in the past. Under ice. Blooms are rarely seen microscopic phytoplankton that rely on the sun for nutrients and form the base of the Arctic Food Web as Climate Change thins. The Arctic ice sheet completing the summer cycle earlier, the timing of the under ice bloom could throw off the timing of the entire Arctic food web. When the ice sheet melt in the spring, Su plankton moves into areas of open water to feed on phytoplankton and in turn become food for fish. If they follow the seasons rather [00:29:00] than the blooms, they may arrive too late affecting larger animals like whales. Speaker 3: [inaudible]Speaker 2: [inaudible].Speaker 6: The music card during the show is by Los Donna David from his album folk and acoustic is made available through creative Commons attribution license 3.0 Speaker 2: [inaudible]Speaker 6: production assistance by Lisa cabbage Speaker 2: [inaudible].Speaker 6: Thank you for listening to spectrum. If you have comments [00:29:30] about the show, please send them to us via email. Our email address is spectrum dot k a l x@yahoo.com join us in two at this same Speaker 2: time. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.