Podcasts about Luxembourg

StefanFeuersteinis a leadership expert recognized by Oprah Winfrey as part of her inaugural SuperSoul 100 list of “awakened leaders” using their voices to elevate humanity. With over two decades of high-stakes leadership experience in humanitarian and private-sector roles, he has led teams of hundreds to over 4,000 across Honduras, Peru, and the United States. He served as legal guardian to more than 1,000 orphaned and abandoned children with Nuestros Pequeños Hermanos and later oversaw the care of over 51,000 unaccompanied migrant children as Operations Chief of the largest shelter of its kind in history. Born in Washington, D.C., raised in Luxembourg, and educated in England and Germany,Stefanholds degrees from the University of Warwick and University College London and has spent 15+ years working throughout Latin America. His A-B-C Delegation method gives leaders a practical framework for knowing when they need to be asked, informed, or completely hands-off—empowering teams, eliminating bottlenecks, and redefining how leadership scales.

The Space Show Presents BRYCE MEYER, Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2025Quick SummaryWe initially focused on our Space Show program featuring Bryce Meyer discussing his upcoming book on space agriculture, which explores technologies and principles for growing food in space environments. The discussion covered various challenges of space farming, including plant adaptation, soil biomes, and the need for further research on growing crops to maturity in microgravity conditions. The conversation concluded with an examination of agricultural techniques for space colonization, including the use of bioreactors, mushrooms, and various animals for food production, while emphasizing the importance of certifying existing technology and addressing biological questions related to plants in different gravity regimes.Detailed SummaryDavid hosted a Space Show program featuring Bryce Meyer, who discussed his new book “Designing Farms in Space” scheduled for release on January 2nd by Springer Publishing. The book aims to provide a comprehensive guide on technologies and principles for space agriculture, covering topics from biochemistry to farm system calculations. David announced upcoming programs for the month, including guests Manuel Cuba, Isaac Arthur, and Michael Lissner, and reminded listeners of their annual fundraising campaign. Former NASA Administrator Dr. Mike Griffin with be with us Tuesday evening, Dec. 23.Bryce and David discussed the challenges and unknowns of growing plants in space, emphasizing the need to adapt Earth technologies while accounting for microgravity, different gravitational forces, and radiation. Bryce highlighted the lack of data on growing crops to maturity in space and the need for experiments to understand plant responses in these environments. They also touched on the potential impact of the space environment on plants, including chemical emissions from the structure and unknown factors like the moon's magnetic field. David humorously asked about plant consciousness, but Bryce focused on the practical challenges and the importance of further research.Marshall and Bryce discussed the adaptability of plants and the importance of a living soil biome for crop productivity. Bryce explained that while plants are highly adaptive, certain crop strains are specifically optimized for certain conditions. They explored the concept of transforming simulated lunar soil into a living soil biome, with Bryce mentioning research by Adam Williams on using red worms and manure to achieve this. Bryce also described the spectrum of growing methods from aeroponics to soil-based systems, highlighting the benefits of a full soil biome for plant resilience and nutrient availability.Bryce discussed the development of space farming and agriculture, noting that while significant progress has been made, such as China's 360-day closed-loop system with a crew of eight, there are still challenges. He suggested that dietary diversity and the inclusion of animals in the system could improve outcomes, as monotony and inadequate nutrition could lead to weight loss and decreased productivity. John Jossy and David explored the possibility of cultured meat in space, with Bryce warning about the risks of contamination in bioreactors, while suggesting tofu and other resilient crops as viable alternatives.Bryce continued discussing various animals and plants suitable for space agriculture, including chickens, goats, mealworms, and plants for pharmaceuticals. He explained the challenges of shipping animals, particularly mammals, due to their sensitivity during long space journeys. Bryce also highlighted the existing market for vertical farming technologies, which could be adapted for space agriculture, and mentioned the need to test these technologies in different gravity conditions.Our guest talked with us about the evolutionary model for Space Farms and emphasized the importance of adapting agricultural solutions to different settlement types. He noted that while China is ahead in some areas, the U.S. has made significant advancements in bioreactor technology. Bryce outlined a sequence for growing food on Mars, starting with salad greens, followed by high-value crops like peanuts and soybeans, and eventually tree crops like citrus. He also suggested growing strawberries and melons, as well as using aquaponics to cultivate shrimp for protein. The Wisdom Team discussed the potential of using crickets for protein, but Bryce suggested focusing on shrimp instead due to the “ick factor” that could deter settlers.The group discussed the challenges of growing food for children in space, focusing on nutritional needs and the impact of gravity on plant growth. Bryce explained that children require a more diverse amino acid profile and different fat content than adults, suggesting the need for animal or yeast-developed crops. They also touched on the importance of controlling environmental factors like light and CO2 levels for optimal plant growth. The conversation concluded with a discussion on the potential use of LED lights and the need for different growing strategies depending on the location, such as using lava tubes on the Moon or natural sunlight on Mars.Bryce mentioned different agricultural regimes for rotating habitats and the importance of energy calculations in determining the type of lighting used. He explained the processing steps needed to convert raw crops into edible foods, including the use of storage tanks and various storage mechanisms like vacuum packing. Our guest highlighted the role of spices in space agriculture and the challenges of growing certain spices like cinnamon. David inquired about the viability of Mars One's agricultural plan, and Bryce suggested that AI and augmented reality could be used to assist with maintenance and troubleshooting in space habitats without the need for excessive volunteers and labor.The Mars One topic led to a discussion about the labor requirements for farming, noting that while some tasks could be robotically assisted, people would likely be eager to participate in gardening activities. He shared personal anecdotes about his grandmother's farm management and suggested that future farms would need designated farm bosses to oversee operations. Marshall inquired about the maximum population density for efficient space farming, to which Bryce responded that current Earth-based farming supports 8 people per acre, while vertical farming could potentially accommodate 20 people per hectare. The conversation concluded with a discussion about the benefits of mushrooms in farming, particularly their ability to break down lignin in plant waste and their role in managing CO2 and oxygen cycles in closed-loop systems.Bryce continued by talking about agricultural techniques for space colonization, including the use of bioreactors, mushrooms, and various animals for food production. He explained the progression of animal farming in space, starting with birds and rabbits before moving to larger mammals like cows. Bryce also covered the potential use of genetically modified bacteria and lab-grown meat as backup food sources. The discussion touched on the practicality of these methods in space habitats like O'Neill colonies and long-duration space vehicles, considering factors such as radiation, contamination risks, and the efficiency of current agricultural technologies compared to those in the 1970s and 1980s.The challenges and benefits of rotating habitats for plant growth in space, emphasizing that they might be better than growing in lower gravity environments was one of our later topics. Phil inquired about the feasibility of a large-scale, long-duration experiment like Biosphere 2, to which Bryce responded that similar experiments have already been conducted by China and that a larger, more diverse structure like Biosphere 2 would be beneficial. The team touched on the potential ethical concerns surrounding the manipulation of life in space, including animal rights and dietary restrictions based on religious beliefs. Bryce suggested that vegetarian or vegan diets might be more feasible in the early stages of space settlement, as it could take several years to establish a self-sustaining food supply on Mars.Bryce concluded by talking about the need for further studies on space agriculture, emphasizing the importance of certifying existing technology in space and addressing biological questions related to plants in different gravity regimes. He highlighted the potential for large-scale plant testing in rotating settlements or on the moon within the next five to six years, as China is already planning to send plants to the moon. Bryce expressed hope that SpaceX and other experts would collaborate on these efforts, noting that the technology needed is already available. The discussion concluded with a reflection on ethical considerations in food production and consumption.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2025 No program today | Tuesday 16 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonTuesday, Dec. 16: No Program today. We are still in our campaign for 2026 funding. Please support us. See PayPal to the right side of our home page.Broadcast 4474: Hotel Mars with Dr. Sabyasachi Pal | Thursday 18 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Dr. Sabyasachi PalHotel Mars with Dr. Sabyasachi Pal re Giant Radio Quasars and his 53 black hole research papeFriday, Dec. 19, 2025 No program today. Please support The Space Show/. See the PayPal button on the right side of our home page. | Friday 19 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonNo program today due to medical. Support The Space Show by using our PayPal button on the right side of our home page.Broadcast 4475 ZOOM Michael Listner, Atty. | Sunday 21 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Michael ListnerZOOM: Michael Listner, space atty breaks down legal, policy and more for 2025 space Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show presents Manuel Cuba of Helix Space Luxembourg, Friday, 12-12-25.Quick SummaryOur program focused on Helix Space's operations in Luxembourg and their role in the European space sector, including discussions about funding, defense services, and commercial space activities. Manuel explained how Helix Space helps European companies access funding and develop innovation programs, while also addressing European space initiatives and launch capabilities. The conversation concluded with discussions about space medicine research, European space capabilities and challenges, and potential collaboration opportunities between American and European space companies.Detail SummaryOur guest shared that Helix Space, based in Luxembourg, has been operating for five years, noting that the COVID period was relatively mild in Luxembourg compared to other regions. John Jossie inquired about the impact of the UK's cancellation of its space department on European space activities, to which Manuel responded that it caused some media attention but had minimal practical impact, as the UK continues to contribute to the European Space Agency. This program began with an introduction to Helix Space and its ecosystem, focusing on the Luxembourg Space Agency (LSA) and its role in accessing European Space Agency funding. Manuel explained the differences between the European Space Agency and the European Union Space Agency, highlighting their distinct responsibilities and occasional conflicts. The discussion also touched on European space initiatives like Iris Squared and the competition among European nation-states in the space sector.Manuel discussed his role as Managing Director of Helix Space in Luxembourg, explaining the company's focus on space technology and satellite manufacturing. David announced upcoming programs featuring Isaac Arthur, Michael Listner and Dr. Mike Griffin, and reminded listeners of the ongoing annual campaign. The show also highlighted the importance of listener support and various payment options, including PayPal, Zelle, and Substack.Manuel explained that Helix Space, which he co-founded over five years ago, initially focused on developing microgravity research products for both humans and animals, but later shifted its focus to 90% defense-related services and 10% civil space services. He detailed how the company helps European companies obtain public and private funding, develop innovation programs, and improve cybersecurity standards. David inquired about the commercial space boom, to which Manuel shared that both Luxembourg's Space Agency and the European Space Agency prioritize funding projects with strong commercial viability, requiring detailed business plans and evidence of market potential before supporting research and development.Manuel discussed the Feed for Start program, a national accelerator in Luxembourg that supports space companies worldwide, with successful graduates eligible for government funding to establish operations in Luxembourg. He highlighted a French company that enables rocket launch bookings, noting its improved website and growing customer base. John Jossy inquired about the market sectors for satellite customers, and Manuel outlined the main categories: traditional SATCOM, Earth observation, space services, and space resources, with Europe focusing on defensive measures rather than weaponization in space. David asked about Europe's stance on space weaponization, to which Manuel confirmed that Europe prioritizes defensive capabilities and cybersecurity measures, such as zero-trust architectures and potential robotic arms for satellite protection.Manuel discussed the significant impact of the Russian Ukrainian war on Europe's space sector, highlighting increased investments and the rapid sale of SAR satellites by Finnish company Ice Eye. He mentioned European companies like Redwire and Tumi Robotics developing autonomous systems for microgravity research and lunar exploration. Manuel also explained Helix Space's involvement with the European Space Resources Innovation Center's Startup Support Program, which helps startups develop terrestrial applications of lunar technology, and addressed the criticism and potential impact of the Artemis program on the European space industry.Next, the discussion focused on European space launch capabilities and trends. Manuel explained that while Ariane Space remains a significant provider with 11-12 launches annually, Europe is developing multiple new rocket companies including Rocket Factory Augsburg, ISAR Aerospace, and PLD Space to reduce dependency on foreign launch providers. Marshall inquired about European preferences for launch providers and payment methods, to which Manuel responded that public procurement follows open tenders while private actors choose based on availability and cost. David raised questions about European spaceports and private space stations, with Manuel noting that while there's activity around autonomous vehicles and payload capabilities, European companies like Airbus are partnering with American companies like Voyager Holdings for space station development.Manuel discussed Helix Base's for-profit business model, highlighting their success in helping companies raise funds and their work with European Space Resources Innovation Center. He mentioned several companies they work with, including Tumi Robotics, Space Backend, and Polymux Space, which are developing innovative technologies for space exploration and resource utilization. John Jossy inquired about Luxembourg's space resources law and asteroid mining, to which Manuel provided insights into the companies involved in these activities and their progress.Manuel explained that Helix Space focuses on preventive medicine rather than pharmaceutical development, drawing inspiration from his father's experience with alternative treatment in Peru and historical medical practices. He noted that healthcare costs are skyrocketing globally, with a significant portion of budgets dedicated to healthcare, and emphasized the need for preventive measures. Manuel and his wife, a systems biology expert, are exploring unconventional medical approaches based on historical anecdotes and scientific research, though he acknowledged that some of their findings should be taken with a grain of salt.Manuel discussed his company's efforts to develop preventive medicine treatments for conditions like osteoarthritis through space-based experiments. After assessing microgravity service providers in Europe, they found limited interest and decided to pause their efforts until there is more commercial demand. Manuel expressed frustration with the current space research ecosystem, particularly regarding the International Space Station's capabilities and the lengthy development processes, and emphasized the need for streamlined, autonomous operations in the future.Our guest explained that while space medicine research exists, there are no concrete medical products developed in space that have made it to market on Earth. He described the European Space Agency's requirement for business plans, which led to the adoption of the Business Model Canvas as a structured framework for proposal submissions. Manuel detailed how the Value Proposition Canvas tool helps identify and balance the diverse needs of different stakeholders in a business context, particularly relevant for space projects where system engineering processes are crucial.Manuel explained the opportunities for American startups to access the European market through Helix Pace, a chartered member of the American Chamber of Commerce in Luxembourg. He highlighted the country's openness to American companies setting up subsidiaries or headquarters, as well as access to funding and expertise. He also discussed the European Space Agency's interest in lunar exploration and the selection process for astronauts, emphasizing the need for diplomatic negotiations and collaboration with NASA.Toward the end, our Managing Director guest discussed Europe's space capabilities and challenges, noting that while Europe lacks expertise and infrastructure to compete with China's moon program, it is focused on defense and rearmament. He mentioned that the European Space Agency is concerned about space debris and space weather and is developing programs to track debris and study its impact on infrastructure. Manuel also shared that RSS Hydro, a Luxembourg-based commercial space company specializing in flood and wildfire risk management, has been doubling revenue for the past three years and is expanding in the US. David invited Manuel to join the show's advisory board and suggested potential US events for Manuel to attend, including the Space Symposium and ISDC in Washington, D.C.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2025 No program today | Tuesday 16 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonTuesday, Dec. 16: No Program today. We are still in our campaign for 2026 funding. Please support us. See PayPal to the right side of our home page.Broadcast 4474: Hotel Mars with Dr. Sabyasachi Pal | Thursday 18 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Dr. Sabyasachi PalHotel Mars with Dr. Sabyasachi Pal re Giant Radio Quasars and his 53 black hole research papeFriday, Dec. 19, 2025 No program today. Please support The Space Show/. See the PayPal button on the right side of our home page. | Friday 19 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonNo program today due to medical. Support The Space Show by using our PayPal button on the right side of our home page.Broadcast 4475 ZOOM Michael Listner, Atty. | Sunday 21 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Michael ListnerZOOM: Michael Listner, space atty breaks down legal, policy and more for 2025 space Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Isaac Arthur, Sunday, 12-14-25Quick SummaryOur program began with a discussion about space exploration projects and the evolution of telecommunications, followed by a conversation about AI's impact on education and society. The Wisdom Team then explored various space-related topics including lunar missions, space habitats, and the importance of public-private partnerships in funding exploration efforts. The discussion concluded with Isaac, as president of the National Space Society, emphasizing the organization's mission and encouraging listener participation in space exploration initiatives.Detailed SummaryIsaac and I started the conversation talking about space exploration, with Isaac expressing caution about discussing specific details of NASA's Artemis program due to its frequent changes. David emphasized the need to balance discussion of Artemis with other space-related topics to avoid overwhelming our conversations as Artemis is a hot topic at this time. We began talking about space exploration projects, including Mars missions and space elevators, with Isaac expressing skepticism about fusion technology progress. I then introduced the program schedule, noting upcoming guest appearances and the annual fundraising campaign. Isaac, as the president of the National Space Society, started the space discussion which over time covered various space-related topics and the importance of listener end of the year support for The Space Show given we are 100% listener/participant financed.David and Isaac discussed the impact of AI on education and society. Isaac emphasized that AI should be viewed as a tool to augment human creativity and learning, rather than a replacement for critical thinking. He suggested that professors adapt their teaching methods to account for AI's presence, such as conducting in-person exams. David shared his experience using AI for medical information, which led to complaints from doctors. Isaac advised that while AI can be a useful diagnostic tool, it should not replace professional medical advice. Both agreed that critical thinking and understanding the limitations of AI are essential skills in the modern world.Isaac went on to discuss the current state and future of space exploration, emphasizing the significant progress made in the last decade and expressing optimism about returning to the moon, whether through Artemis or private sector initiatives. He noted that while commercial involvement in space has increased, NASA remains crucial for fundamental research and large-scale projects without a clear profit motive. Isaac also highlighted the importance of learning from past missions and the need for careful planning, suggesting that while Mars missions could be feasible in the near future, they should not be rushed.Our Wisdom Team along with Isaac discussed space exploration plans and competition with China. Isaac emphasized the importance of making detailed plans for space missions, including a permanent moon base with features like a nuclear reactor and the ability to rescue astronauts. He downplayed concerns about China's space program, noting that competition can drive progress. The discussion also covered the size and staffing requirements for a moon base, with Marshall and Isaac agreeing that it should be larger than the ISS and have a higher ratio of robots to humans due to communication delays. This part of the conversation concluded with Bill asking Isaac about his views on the future direction of NASA, given the potential confirmation of Isaacman as administrator.Isaac suggested that NASA should focus on the moon mission as its primary goal, requiring strong leadership and centralization to motivate and align companies involved. He emphasized the need for NASA to shift its focus towards commercial development and experimentation, potentially separating it from military space operations. John Hunt proposed that China's potential moon landing before the U.S. could actually benefit the U.S. space program by creating a sense of competition and urgency, though Isaac noted the risks of complacency and the importance of maintaining a strong commitment to space exploration.Isaac and David discussed the potential for public-private partnerships to fund lunar exploration and the challenges of predicting commercial opportunities in space. They explored various options for lunar and space-based activities, including manufacturing, resource utilization, and energy production. Isaac emphasized the importance of real-world testing and innovation in low gravity, while David raised concerns about the energy requirements for AI and data centers, suggesting that space-based data centers could offer regulatory advantages. Both agreed on the need for diverse energy sources and technological advancement to address global energy shortages.The Wisdom Team discussed energy solutions, with Dr. Kothari and Isaac agreeing that molten salt reactors using thorium could provide a safe and scalable solution for both civilization's energy needs and data center requirements. Isaac emphasized the importance of increasing energy generation capacity across multiple technologies rather than focusing on efficiency alone, while David raised concerns about the difficulty of getting broad support for these solutions from policymakers. The discussion concluded with Isaac noting that while government agencies like NASA struggle with public relations, private space companies have shown more success in marketing space initiatives to the public and policymakers.The team next discussed strategies for promoting space and nuclear initiatives to policymakers, with Isaac highlighting the importance of personal engagement and storytelling to generate enthusiasm. Dr. Kothari proposed collaboration between NSS and TSS to present a unified pitch for space and nuclear programs to key figures like J.D. Vance's Chief of Staff. Isaac shared insights on the economic and strategic benefits of space exploration, emphasizing the need for realistic messaging to avoid a space bubble. The conversation concluded with a discussion on the potential impact of SpaceX's IPO on the U.S. economy, with Isaac suggesting it could stabilize after an initial fluctuation.Isaac and Marshall discussed the economic potential of SpaceX's Starlink, with Marshall highlighting its rapid revenue growth and potential impact on global telecommunications. They explored the challenges and opportunities of space settlement, with Isaac emphasizing the importance of creating space habitats for long-term human presence, while acknowledging the need for gravity and the potential for new ecosystems in space. Before ending, David inquired about the feasibility of space settlement and the necessity of knowing the gravity RX for children, to which Isaac responded that while humans currently require gravity, future solutions like cybernetic organisms or genetic modifications could provide alternatives.Isaac discussed the feasibility of space habitats, noting that while O'Neill cylinders might not be built this century, smaller habitats like Calpana could be more realistic. He expressed skepticism about Musk's plan for a Mars city by mid-century, questioning the need for biological self-sustaining settlements and emphasizing the importance of medical intervention for gravity-related issues. Isaac also highlighted the potential challenges of raising children in space and suggested that space habitats would likely start with small, specialized populations rather than large, self-sustaining cities.Isaac and Dr. Ajay discussed the feasibility of building a smaller lunar lander within 3-5 years, with Isaac expressing skepticism about meeting such a tight timeline due to the complexity and risks involved in space missions. They also debated the merits of building a lunar lander versus a space station, with Isaac advocating for a more robust approach that includes both options. David raised concerns about potential regulatory and economic challenges that could hinder space exploration efforts in the coming years.Isaac discussed the importance of space regulations, emphasizing the need to balance economic development with safety and environmental concerns. He highlighted potential issues with space advertising and the need for international cooperation in regulating space activities. The conversation also touched on nuclear waste management, with Isaac suggesting recycling radioactive materials and disposing of them in deep oceanic trenches as safer alternatives to space disposal.Isaac, the president of the National Space Society, discussed the organization's mission and encouraged listeners to join, emphasizing its inclusive nature and the opportunity to contribute to space exploration efforts. He reflected on the journey of space exploration, highlighting the importance of enjoying the process rather than solely focusing on destinations. Isaac also mentioned upcoming events, including the ISDC conference in McLean, Virginia, and discussed plans for future roadmaps and white papers on space-related topics.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2025 No program today | Tuesday 16 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonTuesday, Dec. 16: No Program today. We are still in our campaign for 2026 funding. Please support us. See PayPal to the right side of our home page.Broadcast 4474: Hotel Mars with Dr. Sabyasachi Pal | Thursday 18 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Dr. Sabyasachi PalHotel Mars with Dr. Sabyasachi Pal re Giant Radio Quasars and his 53 black hole research papeFriday, Dec. 19, 2025 No program today. Please support The Space Show/. See the PayPal button on the right side of our home page. | Friday 19 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonNo program today due to medical. Support The Space Show by using our PayPal button on the right side of our home page.Broadcast 4475 ZOOM Michael Listner, Atty. | Sunday 21 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Michael ListnerZOOM: Michael Listner, space atty breaks down legal, policy and more for 2025 space Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

We see the diversification mirage – one of our 2026 Outlook themes – playing out in real time with a sharp spike in global bond yields. Natalie Gill, Portfolio Strategist at the BlackRock Investment Institute, explains. FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION IN THE U.S., CANADA, LATIN AMERICA, AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, DENMARK, FINLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, IRELAND, ISRAEL, ITALY, LIECHENSTEIN, LUXEMBOURG, NETHERLANDS, NORWAY, PORTUGAL, SOUTH AFRICA, SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, THE UNITED KINGDOM, HONG KONG, SINGAPORE AND AUSTRALIA. FOR INSTITUTIONAL, PROFESSIONAL, QUALIFIED CLIENTS/INVESTORS IN OTHER PERMITTED COUNTRIES. General disclosure: This document is marketing material, is intended for information and educational purposes only, and does not constitute investment advice, a recommendation or an offer or solicitation to purchase or sell any securities or any investment strategies. The opinions expressed are as of [DATE] and are subject to change without notice. Reliance upon information in this material is at the sole discretion of the reader. Investing involves risks. This information is not intended to be complete or exhaustive and no representations or warranties, either express or implied, are made regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information contained herein. This material may contain estimates and forward-looking statements, which may include forecasts and do not represent a guarantee of future performance. In EMEA, in the UK and Non-European Economic Area (EEA) countries: this is Issued by BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered office: 12 Throgmorton Avenue, London, EC2N 2DL. Tel: + 44 (0)20 7743 3000. Registered in England and Wales No. 02020394. For your protection telephone calls are usually recorded. Please refer to the Financial Conduct Authority website for a list of authorised activities conducted by BlackRock. In the European Economic Area (EEA): this is Issued by BlackRock (Netherlands) B.V. is authorised and regulated by the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets. Registered office Amstelplein 1, 1096 HA, Amsterdam, Tel: 31-20-549- 5200. Trade Register No. 17068311 For your protection telephone calls are usually recorded. In Italy, for information on investor rights and how to raise complaints please go to https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/compliance/investor-right available in Italian. BlackRock Advisors (UK) Limited - Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Branch is a Branch of a Foreign Company registered with the Abu Dhabi Global Market Registration Authority (Registered number 21523), with its office at Floor 25, Al Sila Tower, Abu Dhabi Global Market Square, Al Maryah Island, Abu Dhabi, UAE, and is regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority (“FSRA”) to engage in the regulated activities of ‘Arranging Deals in Investments'; ‘Advising on Investments or Credit' ‘Managing Assets'; and ‘Managing in a Collective Investment Fund' (FRSA Reference 240099). Blackrock Advisors (UK) Limited - Dubai Branch is a Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Foreign Recognised Company registered with the DIFC Registrar of Companies (DIFC Registered Number 546), with its office at Unit L15 - 01A, ICD Brookfield Place, DIFC, PO Box 506661, Dubai, UAE, and is regulated by the DFSA to engage in the regulated activities of ‘Advising on Financial Products' and ‘Arranging Deals in Investments' in or from the DIFC, both of which are limited to units in a collective investment fund (DFSA Reference Number F000738). In Albania, Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Botswana, Bulgaria, Egypt, Georgia, Ghana, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kosovo, Lebanon, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Serbia, Tanzania, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Zambia, Zimbabwe, this document is intended strictly for central banks and sovereign investors only. In Israel: BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Limited is not licensed under Israel's Regulation of Investment Advice, Investment Marketing and Portfolio Management Law, 5755-1995 (the “Advice Law”), nor does it carry insurance thereunder. In South Africa, please be advised that BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Limited is an authorized financial services provider with the South African Financial Services Board, FSP No. 43288. In the ADGM, the information contained in this document is intended strictly for Professional Clients. In the DIFC, this material is intended strictly for Professional Clients as defined under the Dubai Financial Services Authority (“DFSA”) Conduct of Business (COB) Rules. In the Kingdom of Bahrain and the Sultanate of Oman, the information contained in this document is intended strictly for sophisticated institutions. In the State of Kuwait, the information contained in this document is intended strictly for sophisticated institutions that are ‘Professional Clients' as defined under the Kuwait Capital Markets Law and its Executive Bylaws. In Qatar, the information contained in this document is intended strictly for sophisticated investors and high net worth investors. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, this material is for distribution to Institutional and Qualified Clients (as defined by the Implementing Regulations issued by Capital Market Authority) only and should not be relied upon by any other persons. In United Arab Emirates (UAE) (excluding the DIFC and the ADGM: the information contained in this document is intended strictly for Professional Investors. In Australia and New Zealand, issued by BlackRock Investment Management (Australia) Limited ABN 13 006 165 975 AFSL 230 523 (BIMA). The material provides general information only and does not take into account your individual objectives, financial situation, needs or circumstances. Refer to BIMAL's Financial Services Guide on its website for more information. In New Zealand, this material is for the exclusive use of the recipient, who warrants by receipt of this material that they are a wholesale client as defined under the New Zealand Financial Advisers Act 2008 respectively. BIMAL is not licensed by a New Zealand regulator to provide ‘Financial Advice Service' ‘Investment manager under an FMC offer' or ‘Keeping, investing, administering, or managing money, securities, or investment portfolios on behalf of other persons'. BIMAL's registration on the New Zealand register of financial service providers does not mean that BIMAL is subject to active regulation or oversight by a New Zealand regulator. In China, this material may not be distributed to individuals resident in the People's Republic of China (“PRC”, for such purposes, excluding Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan) or entities registered in the PRC unless such parties have received all the required PRC government approvals to participate in any investment or receive any investment advisory or investment management services. In Hong Kong, this material is issued by BlackRock Asset Management North Asia Limited and has not been reviewed by the Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong. In Japan, this is issued by BlackRock Japan. Co., Ltd. (Financial Instruments Business Operator: The Kanto Regional Financial Bureau. License No375, Association Memberships: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trusts Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers Association, Type II Financial Instruments Firms Association) for Institutional Investors only. All strategies or products BLK Japan offer through the discretionary investment contracts or through investment trust funds do not guarantee the principal amount invested. The risks and costs of each strategy or product we offer cannot be indicated here because the financial instruments in which they are invested vary each strategy or product. In Singapore, this is issued by BlackRock (Singapore) Limited (Co. registration no. 200010143N). This advertisement or publication has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. In South Korea, this information is issued by BlackRock Investment (Korea) Limited, for distribution to Qualified Professional Investors (as defined in the Financial Investment Services and Capital Market Act and its sub-regulations). In Taiwan, independently operated by BlackRock Investment Management (Taiwan) Limited. Address: 28F., No. 100, Songren Rd., Xinyi Dist., Taipei City 110, Taiwan. Tel: (02)23261600. For other APAC countries, this material is issued for Institutional Investors only (or professional/sophisticated /qualified investors, as such term may apply in local jurisdictions). In Latin America, no securities regulator within Latin America has confirmed the accuracy of any information contained herein. The provision of investment management and investment advisory services is a regulated activity in Mexico thus is subject to strict rules. For more information on the Investment Advisory Services offered by BlackRock Mexico please refer to the Investment Services Guide available at www.blackrock.com/mx. ©2025 BlackRock, Inc. or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved. BLACKROCK is a trademark of BlackRock, Inc., or its affiliates. All other trademarks are those of their respective owner.BIIM1225U/M-5064073

Actualités. Gros plan. International. La Slovaquie sans frontieres. La Vie comme elle va.Le Bazar de Noël de Luxembourg, le plus important événement caritatif international du pays, s'est a nouveau tenu cette année. Le stand slovaque était présent pour le plus grand plaisir des visiteurs. Hommage au Danube rendu par les bateliers de Bratislava, un fleuve exigeant et dangereux qui fait ses victimes. Deuxieme partie.

Ambassador Karpetova links the Czech Republic to Luxembourg through the life of the beloved Charles IV Ambassador Barbara Karpetová, the Czech Republic Ambassador to Luxembourg, is a Doctor of Social Anthropology. As such, she is fascinated by the way in which our world is shaped by humans and their choices or actions. Charles IV, a man so omnipresent in the lives of Czech people still today, is a man worth the study of a social anthropologist, as his life is far from ordinary. And indeed, his father was from Luxembourg.  Few historical figures embody Europe's interconnected identity as vividly as Emperor Charles IV. Born in 1316 to a Luxembourgish father and a Czech mother, Charles would become one of the most enlightened rulers of the Middle Ages: the greatest Czech of all time according to so many Czech polls, and arguably the most influential Luxembourger in European history. Yet many in Luxembourg remain unaware that this remarkable visionary, whose reign transformed Central Europe, was one of their own. Charles IV's early life was shaped by trauma and displacement. Taken from his mother at the age of three amid political turmoil, he spent his formative years at the French court, where he absorbed languages, diplomacy, and intellectual rigour. His father, John the Blind of Luxembourg, a charismatic but restless knight-king, embodied glory and instability in equal measure. His mother, Elizabeth of Bohemia, offered emotional depth, cultural identity, and spiritual grounding, although her own tragic life imprinted upon him a lifelong empathy and introspection. These tensions forged a ruler who sought stability, reflection, and humane governance rather than the cycle of destruction so common in his era. Unlike many medieval monarchs who fashioned their legacy through conquest, Charles IV built his through construction and culture. In Prague, he imagined and executed a city worthy of an imperial capital: Charles Bridge, St Vitus Cathedral, the New Town of Prague, and the glittering fortress of Karlštejn, his sanctuary for meditation and prayer. These were not monuments of vanity but investments in civic life, education, and international exchange. Above all, his founding of Charles University in 1348, the first in Central Europe, signalled a radical belief: that a prosperous society begins with knowledge, openness, and shared intellectual endeavour. Charles IV was also a political architect. His Golden Bull of 1356 established clear rules for imperial elections and gave the Holy Roman Empire centuries of stability. This was an achievement so visionary that historians still marvel at its durability today. His reign was defined by diplomacy, multilingual engagement, and the kind of pragmatic cooperation that Luxembourg cherishes today. A fluent speaker of five languages, he travelled extensively, preferring personal dialogue over emissaries. His political style, rooted in listening and persuasion rather than coercion, made him a quietly transformative figure in a turbulent century. Though he carried Luxembourgish blood and Czech devotion in equal measure, Charles IV saw Europe as a unified web long before the concept existed. He moved between courts, cultures, and identities with the ease of a modern European statesman. His values of multilingualism, education, peaceful leadership, and cultural openness mirror those of Luxembourg today, a nation where diversity is not a challenge but a strength. In many ways, Charles IV was Europe before Europe: a bridge between peoples whose life story reminds us that one person, or small countries, can shape the continent in profound ways. This Advent season, his legacy carries a particularly resonant message. In an age of fast decisions and constant noise, Charles IV was a ruler who stopped, reflected, prayed, and reshaped his world with intention. He believed deeply in service, in building rather than breaking, and in leading through wisdom rather than force. His life encourages us to pause, to examine our direction, and to choose the kind of leadership—personal or political—that uplifts rather than divides. For Luxembourg and the Czech Republic, Charles IV is not just shared history; he is shared inspiration. A child of two nations, a builder of cities, a scholar-king, a European long before the invention of the term. He is a reminder that greatness can arise from unlikely circumstances, and that values rooted in openness, stability, and compassion endure across centuries. And in the heart of Prague, where his bridges cross the Vltava and his university still thrives, Charles IV continues to welcome the world, just as he did in life.

Europe was the first major region to roll out a comprehensive crypto framework, but now it's rethinking how that framework is enforced.In this episode of Byte-Sized Insight, we break down the European Union's proposal to centralize crypto supervision under the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), a move that would shift oversight of crypto-asset service providers away from national regulators and toward a single EU-level authority.To understand what's happening on the ground, we speak with Dr. Lewin Boehnke, chief strategy officer at Crypto Finance Group, who offers a rare perspective from both Switzerland's mature crypto market and the EU's newly regulated one. He explains why MiCA's overall approach makes sense, where technical details are slowing adoption and why centralizing supervision under ESMA could actually help reduce friction rather than create it.(1:55) Europe moves to centralize crypto oversight under ESMA (4:58) Why MiCA's rollout has been slow, and why that's not surprising(5:24) Switzerland's head start on institutional crypto adoption(6:38) Why MiCA's focus on regulating intermediaries makes sense(7:48) The MiCA Article 75.6 ambiguity slowing banks down(9:09) Why Europe's quieter regulatory approach may be a long-term strength(10:13) Uneven MiCA enforcement across Germany, Luxembourg, and Malta(12:26) What Europe should prioritize in crypto regulation over the next yearThis episode was hosted and produced by Savannah Fortis, @savannah_fortis.Follow Cointelegraph on X @Cointelegraph.Check out Cointelegraph at cointelegraph.com.If you like what you heard, rate us and leave a review!The views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this podcast are its participants alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph. This podcast (and any related content) is for entertainment purposes only and does not constitute financial advice, nor should it be taken as such. Everyone must do their own research and make their own decisions. The podcast's participants may or may not own any of the assets mentioned.

Vill ëffentlech Kulturhaiser kënne mat engem Rollstull besicht ginn, well si esou ëmgebaut goufen, datt dat méiglech ass. Mä iwwerall do, wou d’Kultur méi am Ënnergrond ass – zum Deel wuertwiertlech, nämlech am Keller – ass dat schwéier bis onméiglech. An dëser Episod vum Podcast erkläert d’Melanie Czarnik, wisou grad dacks déi klengste Kultur-Veranstalter*innen net barrièrefräi sinn. Ee Problem, deen sech an deenen nächste Joer léise soll, bis 2032 nämlech. Et ginn awer Leit, déi net esou laang waarde wëllen, an och iwwert deenen hir Petitioun geet riets. Den Artikel, iwwert dee mir geschwat hunn: Barrierefreie Kultur The post De laange Wee zur barrièrefräier Kultur first appeared on Radio ARA.

The Space Show Presents Dr. Avi Loeb, Sunday, 11-23-25.Quick summary:Today's program focused on the upcoming interview with Professor Avi Loeb regarding 3I Atlas and its interpretation. Dr. Loeb shared detailed insights about interstellar objects, including the discovery of 3i Atlas and its unusual characteristics, while expressing concerns about NASA's limited presentation of data and the need for more comprehensive scientific investigation.Detailed summary:Professor Avi Loeb joined the program and clarified that he prefers to be addressed as Avi, without any titles. They discussed the controversial topic of 3I Atlas, with Avi explaining its uniqueness and the challenges in interpreting the blurry images released by NASA.Avi criticized NASA's recent press conference about the 3I/Atlas object, arguing that the blurry images and lack of scientific experts at the recent NASA press event undermined public interest and respect. He highlighted that the data showed an unusual glow in front of the object's direction of motion, which was not mentioned in the conference. Avi emphasized the importance of humility in science and expressed frustration that the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, which the public cares about, receives no federal funding compared to the prioritized search for microbes.Avi talked about the discovery of 3i Atlas, an interstellar object, and its unusual characteristics. He noted that its mass and size suggest it is much larger than previously discovered interstellar objects, leading to questions about its origin and composition. Avi highlighted an extraordinary coincidence in 3i Atlas's trajectory, aligning with Jupiter's Hill radius, which he found statistically significant. He also mentioned observations of jets emanating from the object, which could be indicative of natural processes or technological activity. He expressed a desire for more data on the jets' speed and composition to determine their nature.Our guest discussed anomalies in interstellar objects, emphasizing that traditional scientists often overlook technological origins in favor of natural explanations. He criticized experts for ignoring evidence of artificial structures and proposed expanding their training datasets to include technological objects. Marshall inquired about the inclination of planetary axes, which Avi attributed to planetesimal collisions and gravitational interactions rather than interstellar objects. They also discussed the possibility of life on rogue planets ejected from their solar systems.Avi explained that interstellar objects the size of a football field enter the solar system approximately once per year, while smaller objects, like the interstellar meteor discovered by Avi and his student Amir Siraj, are more numerous but only visible when they collide with Earth. He noted that the Oort cloud contains a vast number of objects, with one object within Earth's orbit potentially representing quadrillions more in the cloud. Loeb suggested that NASA's limited presentation of the 3I Atlas data was due to bureaucratic oversight rather than a hidden agenda, criticizing the lack of a permanent administrator and the decision to hold a press conference without new or exciting information.Our guest continued to talk about the upcoming close approach of the asteroid 3I Atlas to Earth on December 19th, noting that hundreds of telescopes will observe it as part of an international campaign. He emphasized the importance of gathering data to determine the object's nature, learned from past mistakes with Oumuamua. Avi also mentioned a recent radio observation by the Meerkat Radio Observatory in South Africa that set limits on potential radio transmissions from the object. He expressed hope to update the object's ranking on his Loeb Scale, which ranges from 0 for natural objects to 10 for technological objects, within a month. John Hunt asked if the object would leave the solar system after its close approach, to which Avi confirmed, noting that the object's trajectory suggests it is not aimed at Earth. John Jossy inquired about the anomaly of the gas jet pointing towards the sun, which Loeb explained is not unusual for comets, but the lack of a turnaround in the dust trail behind the object is surprising.Dr. Loeb explained the physics behind the anti-tail phenomenon in comets, emphasizing that it is not an optical illusion but a result of the force exerted by sunlight on sub-micron dust particles. He discussed two possible explanations for the unusual behavior of comet 3I Atlas, including the possibility of larger, less affected dust particles and the sublimation of ice fragments. Avi also provided an update on his Galileo project, which aims to detect and analyze interstellar objects, potentially including technological devices from extraterrestrials. The project has built three observatories, including one in Las Vegas, and is using machine learning to identify any objects with characteristics beyond human-made technologies.Our professor discussed the presence of sideways lines in comet images, explaining that they could be caused by communication satellites, which he calculated could cross a typical field of view during an exposure. He noted that while satellite contamination is a concern, it is relatively easy to identify and avoid in comet observations. He also expressed his preference for a natural explanation over a technological one for the comet's features, though he acknowledged that more data would be needed to confirm his suspicions. He criticized mainstream science for sometimes failing to recognize unusual data that doesn't fit traditional assumptions, using the example of nickel and iron ratios in a comet's gas plume.Avi discussed his observations about scientific integrity, noting that scientists may twist facts to fit their preconceived ideas but typically do not intentionally withhold data. He expressed optimism about the upcoming close approach of the interstellar object 3I Atlas on December 19th and encouraged open-mindedness when evaluating the data. Abraham shared his experience of increased public interest in space science, including media appearances and positive responses from parents and children inspired to pursue scientific careers. He concluded by reflecting on the role of humans in art and sports, emphasizing the importance of human connection and critical thinking in the age of AI.Avi was asked about his background. He said he grew up on a farm in Israel with his transition into astrophysics after receiving a postdoctoral fellowship at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. He emphasized his approach to science, focusing on the big picture and questioning conventional methods, particularly in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence.Note that the program audio will archive at www.thespaceshow.com and doctorspace.substack.com. The Zoom video will be posted on our Substack page with the link in the line above. This program will also be posted to The Space Show YouTube account.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4473 ZOOM Manuel Cuba | Friday 12 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Manuel CubaZoom: Manuel reports back from Helix Space in Luxembourg on private space investment in Europe and more,Broadcast 4474 Zoom Isaac Arthur | Sunday 14 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Isaac ArthurZoom: Isaac return with NSS news and other space, science, engineering news and questions and answers Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

2025 war ein Jahr voller Bewegung – im wörtlichen wie im übertragenen Sinn. Im großen Jahresrückblick sprechen Marc und Jil über das, was Grenzgänger und Luxemburger beschäftigt hat: die Weststrecke in Trier, weitere Grenzkontrollen, das 40-jährige Schengen-Jubiläum und den festlichen Thronwechsel. Dazu kommt ein Kulturjahr voller Highlights – von Nina Chuba und Ikkimel bis zu den großen Shows im Jahr 2026. ­ Auch der Alltag hat Fragen aufgeworfen: Homeoffice, Renten, Steuern, steigende Kosten und kritisch zu betrachtende Bewerbungsgespräche. Die heutige Folge bietet einen kompakten Überblick über das letzte Jahr und zeigt, wie unterschiedlich Menschen an der Grenze leben, arbeiten und Zukunft planen. ­ Die erwähnten Folgen zum Nachhören: So hadern Pendler mit ihrer Work-Life-Balance Der Luxembourg Times Podcast: The future of Luxembourg's royals Kurios, rechtswidrig, toxisch? Was in Bewerbungsgesprächen passiert Grenzgänger und Homeoffice: Ein Modell mit Ablaufdatum? Krank in Luxemburg? Das müssen Pendler bei der Krankmeldung wissen Warum Luxemburger nach Deutschland ziehen ­ Das erwähnte Dossier zur Rentendebatte ist hier verlinkt. Hier geht's zum letzten Pendler-Update. ­ Schreibt uns eure Fragen und Anregungen gerne an pendler@wort.lu! ­ Der Pendler Club ist ein Podcast vom Luxemburger Wort. Mediahuis Luxembourg sind Teil des internationalen Trust Project, das für transparenten und vertrauenswürdigen Journalismus steht. Weitere Informationen dazu finden Sie hier. ­ Moderation und Produktion: Marc Blasius und Jil Reale Redaktion: Luxemburger Wort Grafik: Marc BlasiusSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Space Show present Brian Clegg, author of “The Multiverse When One Universe Isn't Enough” on Friday, Dec. 5, 2025Short summaryOur discussion featured Brian Clegg, a UK science author, who talked his book “The Multiverse: When One Universe Isn't Enough.” The conversation explored various scientific theories about multiple universes, including inflationary cosmology, string theory, and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, while acknowledging that these concepts remain largely speculative and not yet supported by strong scientific evidence. The discussion concluded with Brian sharing insights about writing science for general audiences and exploring the philosophical implications of multiverse theories, including their connection to spiritual perspectives and the challenges of communicating between different universes.Detailed SummaryI introduced the participants, including John Jossy, Dr. Sherry Bell, and Brian, who was joining from Wiltshire, England. Others from The Space Show Wisdom Team joined during the discussion.I introduced Brian Clegg, a well-known UK science author, to discuss his book “The Multiverse: When One Universe Isn't Enough.” Brian explained that the multiverse theory suggests the existence of multiple universes beyond our own, though he noted that this concept is still largely speculative and not yet widely accepted in mainstream science. The discussion touched on recent developments in physics, including Professor Tutani's work at the University of Tokyo on dark matter, which Brian expressed skepticism about without further confirmation. I also provided updates on the show's upcoming programs and encouraged listeners to support the show through donations and subscriptions.Brian discussed the concept of a multiverse, explaining that it extends beyond the traditional universe and is influenced by both scientific and fictional perspectives. He explored various scientific theories, including multiple universes resulting from more than one big bang or additional dimensions, and addressed the fine-tuning problem, which suggests that a multiverse could explain the existence of life in our universe. Brian noted that while some cosmologists and physicists support the idea of a multiverse, it remains largely philosophical and unproven, with no current scientific method to confirm its existence.We discussed various theories about the multiverse, including the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics and the concept of bubble universes expanding in a higher-dimensional space. Brian explained that while inflation is well-accepted in our universe, other universes could be based on different inflation models. Marshall raised questions about the 11 dimensions in string theory and their potential connection to other universes and gravity. Brian noted that while the Ekpyrotic Universe theory offers an interesting picture, there are still many gaps in the physics that need to be sorted out. He concluded that while the multiverse concept is intriguing, it remains largely speculative and not yet supported by strong scientific evidence.David and Brian discussed the concept of a multiverse, exploring its origins and the evolution of ideas about the universe over time. Brian explained that ancient civilizations, like the Greeks, had a limited view of the universe, constrained to the solar system, and lacked the scientific basis to conceptualize a larger universe. The invention of the telescope expanded their understanding, revealing a much larger scale with more stars and galaxies. Brian noted that modern multiverse theories, such as the many-worlds hypothesis and inflationary cosmology, emerged in the 20th century, often driven by philosophical and fictional influences. He also criticized the use of statistics in some multiverse theories, arguing that they do not provide a sound basis for concluding the existence of other universes.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the concept of fine-tuning in the universe, with David questioning how finely tuned properties could exist alongside random creation. Brian shared insights from physicist Fred Hoyle, who believed in some form of organization outside the universe, while John explained the anthropic principle, which suggests that the universe must have certain properties for conscious beings like humans to exist. Marshall inquired about the interrelation of physical constants, but Brian stated that no general theory unifying all constants into one basic constant like Planck's has been developed. Brian also clarified the distinction between the weak and strong anthropic principles, noting that while the weak principle is widely accepted, the strong principle faces challenges due to the lack of evidence for other universes and the misuse of statistics.Brian discussed his approach to writing about complex scientific concepts like the multiverse, emphasizing the importance of providing an overview and presenting different theories without getting overwhelmed by details. He highlighted the tendency of media headlines to overhype scientific ideas, using examples like the quantum multiverse and Google's analogy, and noted that scientists themselves often do not make such grand claims. Brian also explained the concept of colliding universes based on M-theory, where each universe is a multidimensional brane floating in a wider space, and discussed how gravity's weakness could be explained by these universes colliding.The Wisdom Team discussed the concept of multiple universes and how people might connect with the idea through spiritual or religious perspectives. Brian noted that the concept of parallel dimensions became popular in the late 19th century with the rise of spiritualism. John Hunt and David explored the possibility of extraterrestrials coming from other universes, but John emphasized that this is more science fiction than science. The discussion also touched on the challenges of communicating between different universes and the potential for time travel to create new realities.We continued focusing on multiverse theories and their implications, with Brian explaining that different bubble universes don't overlap because space itself is expanding rather than universes expanding into each other. He explored concepts of infinity and time with us, with Marshall and Brian discussing mathematical perspectives on infinity and Brian noting that while time travel is technically possible according to relativity, practical backward time travel remains unlikely. The conversation concluded with Brian discussing his upcoming biography of the electron and his approach to writing science for general audiences, noting that while multiverse theories remain speculative, they continue to be an interesting area for scientific and philosophical exploration.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4471 ZOOM Bryce Meyer | Tuesday 09 Dec 2025 700PM PTGuests: Bryce MeyerZOOM: Bryan talks about his upcoming book and growing food in spaceBroadcast 4772 Hotel Mars with Dr.Sabyasachi Pal | Wednesday 10 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: John Batchelor, Dr. David Livingston, Dr. Sabyasachi PalBlackhole discovery and theoryBroadcast 4473 ZOOM Manuel Cuba | Friday 12 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Manuel CubaZoom: Manuel reports back from Helix Space in Luxembourg on private space investment in Europe and more,Broadcast 4474 Zoom Isaac Arthur | Sunday 14 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Isaac ArthurZoom: Isaac return with NSS news and other space, science, engineering news and questions and answers Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Open Lines, Sunday, 12-7-25Quick recapThe program began with discussions about space-related topics including data centers in LEO, NASA's Artemis program, and orbital debris concerns. The conversation ended with our Wisdom Team talking about the geopolitical implications of returning to the moon, the challenges of space exploration priorities, and the disconnect between space technology and the general public.Detailed SummaryWe various space topics such as NASA's Artemis program and the appointment of Isaacman as an administrator, with David expressing skepticism about the program's future. John Jossy shared insights from discussions on space solar power and orbital debris concerns. We concluded with a brief mention of Isaac Arthur's show on AI and data centers in space, and Dr. Sherry expressing confidence in Sam Altman's ability to pursue such projects.We began with a discussion about AI and data centers in space, with David mentioning his contact at Stoke and the lack of media interest from the company. Ryan, a long-time visitor, was encouraged to become a $100 donor to join Zoom calls rather than using Zoom phone lines. I mentioned upcoming guests and topics, including Dr. Antonio Del Popolo discussing extraterrestrial life on December 26th and Dr. Mike Griffin returning to the show on Tuesday, Dec. 23. The conversation ended with a reminder about the importance of donations and sponsorships to support the program.The Wisdom Team discussed Jatan's Moon Monday blog and his poetry about space, with John Jossy recommending it as an excellent source of information. I proposed an off-topic space show program about the origins of dogs and wolves based on recent research, which Ajay and Philip supported, suggesting a connection to human adaptation for future space missions. This portion of the conversation ended with Ajay praising David's work and mentioning his own upcoming high-level government hearing related to nuclear technology and Russian missile developments, while David advised caution due to potential global listener conflicts.Our Wisdom Team discussed Ajay's upcoming meeting with Vice President Vance, including the security protocols and potential interactions. They also debated Jared Isaacman's appointment as NASA administrator, with concerns raised about his close relationship with SpaceX and the need for increased transparency regarding contractor performance. The conversation concluded with a discussion about the Artemis program, with Mike Griffin advocating for its immediate cancellation to develop alternatives, while others believed it should continue, particularly given SpaceX's human lander contract.The Wisdom Team discussed the U.S. lunar return strategy and potential competition with China. David and Michael expressed concerns that China might secretly aim to reach the moon earlier than their public timeline, potentially requiring a return to an Apollo-style approach. Bill noted that both SpaceX and Blue Origin had resubmitted more competitive lunar lander proposals. The discussion also touched on legal and treaty implications of a U.S. return to the moon, with Ajay explaining the vast size of the South Pole region and Peter inquiring about potential legal restrictions on U.S. presence.We moved on to discuss the geopolitical implications of returning to the moon, with Michael emphasizing the need to establish a presence there to prevent China from claiming sovereignty and potentially using it as a precedent for broader space claims. Ajay suggested focusing on infrastructure development rather than planting flags, while David highlighted the importance of the moon mission in maintaining U.S. influence and national security. The discussion touched on the trade-offs between pursuing the moon mission now versus waiting a few years for better technology, with Peter questioning the value of the current moon mission in light of other priorities like cislunar space development.The group discussed the challenges and priorities of space exploration, focusing on whether to prioritize a moon landing or orbital technology development. Michael and Ajay advocated for a moon landing as a more feasible and urgent goal within the decade, while David emphasized the need to confront China's aggressive space program and geopolitical influence. Peter raised concerns about the realism of these goals given Congress's limitations and the country's financial situation. The discussion also touched on China's space capabilities, including their reusable rocket program and plans for a lunar research station, as well as the potential for sustainable space activities like mining resources on the moon.We addressed SpaceX's potential IPO, with Elon Musk downplaying a recent Wall Street Journal article about the company's valuation. They debated whether Musk would give up control by going public, with Peter suggesting he could maintain control through a class of stock. The conversation then shifted to Starlink's pricing strategy and potential competition from Amazon's constellation. Finally, Peter raised the question of orbital data centers, discussing their potential advantages and the likely resurgence of nuclear power as a more cost-effective solution for data center power needs.The Wisdom Team discussed the feasibility and implications of placing data centers in space, with Ajay emphasizing the potential of advanced nuclear reactors on Earth as a more efficient and cost-effective solution. Michael highlighted China's plans for a data center constellation in sun-synchronous orbit, while Peter and others debated the economic viability and environmental impact of such projects. Our conversation mentioned Microsoft's refurbishment of Three Mile Island and the long-term vision of Sam Altman regarding the expansion of energy consumption beyond Earth's capabilities.We talked about the disconnect between space technology and the general public, with David expressing concern that the space community is out of touch with the everyday issues facing Americans, such as debt and inflation. Philip shared insights from a survey revealing low public knowledge about space, while Michael suggested focusing on the practical benefits of space technology in everyday life. Bill and others acknowledged the challenge of engaging the public in space issues, with Bill suggesting that technology is often taken for granted. The discussion highlighted the need to bridge the gap between the space community and the general public, though no concrete solutions were proposed.We promoted the idea of the importance of allowing different fields and individuals to continue their unique contributions without expecting them to understand or align with each other's work. Ajay emphasized that the progress of humanity benefits from the synergy of diverse efforts, including those of poets, artists, and sportspeople. Bill highlighted the need to avoid negativity around space exploration and noted that most people find it interesting, despite not fully understanding it. David expressed frustration over societal disconnect from space's potential benefits, while Michael shared an anecdote about law students showing interest in space law. The group also discussed the challenges of information overload and the increasing reliance on smartphones, particularly among children. The conversation ended with a brief discussion about the National Space Society and its upcoming events, as well as a conversation about the lack of evidence and the potential national security implications surrounding UAPs.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming ProgramsBroadcast 4473 ZOOM Manuel Cuba | Friday 12 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Manuel CubaZoom: Manuel reports back from Helix Space in Luxembourg on private space investment in Europe and more,Broadcast 4474 Zoom Isaac Arthur | Sunday 14 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Isaac ArthurZoom: Isaac return with NSS news and other space, science, engineering news and questions and answers Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

This session will examine key considerations for leaders, senders, and international travelers/workers in the areas of duty of care, risk assessment, contingency planning, security, and common pitfalls ("lessons learned") in international mission work.

On homoploutia and national market liberalism. Branko Milanovic, Research Professor at City University of New York, talks to Phil and Alex about his most recent book, The Great Global Transformation: National Market Liberalism in a Multipolar World. What unites the political trajectories of Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump? How is global inequality, growth and political conflict evolving in the aftermath of globalisation? How are hierarchies of global income shifting as the world rebalances towards East Asia? What kind of political theories can we use to model the emergence of this new multipolar world – Adam Smith, Lenin, Luxembourg or John Rawls? And what is Homoploutia?  Links: The Great Global Transformation: National Market Liberalism in a Multipolar World, Branko Milanovic Global Inequality 3.0 and More, Branko's substack An Economist's Case for Open Borders, Branko Milanovic, Dissent Magazine The ‘homoploutic' elephant, with Branko Milanović, FT  

The John Batchelor Hotel Mars program featuring co-host Dr. David Livingston and guest Rick Fisher discussed the space safety issues in that China's Space Station lacked an emergency lifeboat when their space craft sustained a crack in the window in space. Evidently a high-velocity space debris cracked a porthole on the Chinese space station, forcing the unmanned return of the Shenzhou 20 spacecraft given space safe concerns for occupants. Fisher criticized the Chinese space program for failing to maintain a backup “lifeboat” spacecraft attached to the station as this left their crew vulnerable for about ten days until an emergency backup vehicle could be sent up to them for return to Earth. The Chinese situation did not conform to the safety standards in place with the ISS without functional exit capability, a critical safety violation contradicting International Space Station protocols. John Batchelor pointed this out during the program. Rick also addressed other concerns with the Chinese space program.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:See The Space Show Upcoming Program Information on the right side of our home page, www.thespaceshow.com. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dr. Casey Handmer, Tuesday, Dec. 2, 2025Short Summary:The meeting focused on discussing the Artemis program's challenges and complexities, with particular emphasis on comparing NASA's current architecture with SpaceX's Starship capabilities for lunar missions. The group explored various technical and political considerations, including orbital refueling requirements, safety constraints, and the potential for China to establish a lunar presence before the U.S. They also discussed broader topics such as the feasibility of Mars missions, the challenges of powering data centers in space, and the need for NASA reorganization to remain competitive in the global space race.Detailed Summary:David and Casey discussed the challenges and complexities of the Artemis program, emphasizing the need for simplification and focusing on delivering only what is essential to achieve the lunar mission. Casey highlighted the importance of reducing complexity, similar to the Apollo era's lunar orbit rendezvous approach, and noted that congressional funding often prioritizes parochial interests over strategic goals. They also touched on the potential for China to establish a lunar presence by 2029, suggesting that the U.S. needs to accelerate its efforts to remain competitive.Casey criticized the current NASA architecture for returning to the moon, particularly SLS, Orion, and Gateway, arguing they are inefficient and costly, while Starship offers a more viable alternative. Phil challenged Casey's views, questioning whether halting funding for Orion and SLS is the right move, and they debated Starship's current capabilities, with Casey defending SpaceX's engineering expertise and Phil citing his own calculations showing Starship lacks sufficient delta-V for orbital flight. Marshall suggested that Test Flight 13 could demonstrate Starship's orbital capabilities, potentially resolving the debate.The Space Show Wisdom Team discussed the comparison between SpaceX's Starship and NASA's SLS/Orion programs, focusing on orbital refueling capabilities and safety constraints. Casey argued that even if Starship demonstrates orbital refueling, NASA would continue funding SLS due to political reasons, while Phil suggested canceling SLS if Starship meets safety constraints and achieves 100+ ton propellant transfers. The discussion highlighted concerns about Starship's refueling requirements and success rates, while emphasizing the challenges of orbital refueling compared to satellite deployment. Bill noted that launch success probabilities might improve over time, but Casey emphasized the timing issues and marginal requirements in the Artemis program.The group discussed the differences between SpaceX's and NASA's approaches to space exploration, with Casey emphasizing the efficiency and innovation at SpaceX's Starbase in Texas. All discussed the challenges of boil-off in rocket fuel tanks, noting that while it is a concern for liquid hydrogen, it is not a significant issue for methane. They also explored the possibility of using Falcon Heavy instead of the SLS and Orion for lunar missions, with Ajay suggesting that Falcon Heavy could be a more cost-effective and safer option. Casey agreed, stating that using Falcon Heavy and Dragon could simplify and potentially reduce the risks of the Artemis program.The Wisdom Team discussed the Artemis program and its viability for returning to the moon, with Casey explaining that while many in the industry doubt the current approach, the program remains a government policy with congressional approval. David raised concerns about the lack of technical expertise at the highest levels of NASA and questioned how to effectively advocate for program changes, noting that Congress may not fully grasp technical details. Casey suggested that successful completion of the HLS contract by SpaceX could influence future decisions, while Marshall highlighted the potential for embarrassment and increased urgency if China achieves a moon landing before the US.Casey expressed concerns about China's potential lunar claims and the need for U.S. space dominance, while David inquired about the blowback from Casey's blog post criticizing NASA's Orion space capsule as garbage. Casey explained that the post was well-received and based on NASA's own internal watchdog reports, highlighting past NASA failures. Phil suggested creating an Office of the Inspector General for SpaceX and Blue Origin due to perceived lack of oversight, to which Casey responded that existing oversight bodies like NASA's OIG and FAA can already address issues with NASA-funded programs.The Wisdom Team discussed the accuracy of refueling estimates for the Starship rocket, with IG analysis showing 16 refuelings compared to SpaceX's estimate of 8-12. Casey noted that while most people working on the Starship program lack expertise in making these calculations, the actual number of qualified experts worldwide is less than 10. The discussion then shifted to alternative landers for the HLS program, including a potential intermediate human-rated lander from Blue Origin that would be larger than the Mark I but smaller than the HLS version, though Casey and others questioned its viability due to launch and fuel efficiency challenges.Next, we focused on the feasibility of human missions to Mars, with Casey explaining that while significant progress has been made since 2025, achieving a self-sustaining city on Mars would require approximately 10,000 additional Starship missions beyond initial landings by 2035. Casey noted that life support systems for Mars missions are technically feasible, citing nuclear submarines as a precedent, and suggested that while faster transit times would be desirable, they are not essential for mission success. The conversation concluded with a discussion about advanced propulsion systems, with Casey proposing antimatter propulsion as a potential future technology that could enable human exploration beyond Mars, though he acknowledged that such developments are not currently in the near-term plans of space agencies.David brought up questions about the feasibility of AI data centers in low Earth orbit, with Casey expressing skepticism and suggesting that ground-based solutions near Starlink gateways would be more cost-effective and efficient due to latency and infrastructure constraints. Ajay emphasized the potential of thorium-based molten salt reactor nuclear power plants for data centers, citing their lower cost and easier construction compared to space-based options. Casey countered that building enough nuclear reactors to meet the energy demands of AI data centers on Earth is unlikely, and highlighted the need for further computational analysis to determine the viability of space-based solutions.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges of powering data centers, with Casey noting that while it's possible to build a 10 gigawatt data center in 18 months, there's no way to power it that quickly. Marshall suggested using Starlink satellites to provide computing power, while others emphasized the need for reliable communication infrastructure. The conversation then shifted to the future of the Starliner program, with Casey expressing doubt about its viability due to ongoing technical issues and financial losses. The discussion concluded with a brief exploration of the high costs associated with Mars sample return missions, which Casey attributed to the complex coordination between multiple agencies and contractors.Casey discussed the challenges at JPL, highlighting how bureaucratic inefficiencies and lack of incentives for cost-saving measures have led to expensive and delayed missions, such as the Mars Rover, which cost $2.4 billion and was 12 years late. He noted that JPL has laid off 1,500 people and is struggling due to reduced project work, while commercial space has taken over many traditional NASA roles. Casey emphasized that NASA and JPL lack fiscal discipline compared to private industry and suggested that the agency needs reorganization or new missions to remain relevant.Casey discussed the urgent need to enhance NASA's operational capacity to ensure U.S. strategic interests are not compromised by other nations, emphasizing that decades of neglect have created a dire situation that requires significant effort to address. He also shared his work on synthetic fuel production, inspired by the need for a primary materials supply chain on Mars, and highlighted the challenges and opportunities in developing this technology using solar power. The conversation included discussions about refining processes for metals and the potential for innovation in energy production, with Casey encouraging interested individuals to join his team or pursue their own ventures in this field.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4469: Brian Clegg, author of The Multiverse When One Universe Isn't Enough” | Friday 05 Dec 2025 930AM PTGuests: Brian CleggZoom: Brian Clegg, author of The Multiverse When One Universe Isn't Enough”Broadcast 4470 Zoom: OPEN LINES | Sunday 07 Dec 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. David LivingstonZoom: Open Lines Discussion. Join us with Zoom phone lines Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

It's growth investing, just not as we knew it. Technology is disrupting the traditional signals for growth companies, such as revenue acceleration or addressable market expansion. In this episode, Sean Kenney sits down with MFS portfolio manager Brad Mak to explore what the AI revolution means for the future of growth companies and the potential for bubbles. They also cover current opportunities underappreciated by the market and look forward to what 2026 has in store. Listen in for the signals to help you identify where growth investing is heading.         Distributed by: U.S. – MFS Institutional Advisors, Inc. ("MFSI"), MFS Investment Management and MFS Fund Distributors, Inc., Member SIPC; Latin America – MFS International Ltd.; Canada – MFS Investment Management Canada Limited.; Note to UK and Switzerland readers: Issued in the UK and Switzerland by MFS International (U.K.) Limited ("MIL UK"), a private limited company registered in England and Wales with the company number 03062718, and authorised and regulated in the conduct of investment business by the UK Financial Conduct Authority. MIL UK, an indirect subsidiary of MFS®, has its registered office at One Carter Lane, London, EC4V 5ER.;  Note to Europe (ex UK and Switzerland) readers: Issued in Europe by MFS Investment Management (Lux) S.à r.l. (MFS Lux) – authorized under Luxembourg law as a management company for Funds domiciled in Luxembourg and which both provide products and investment services to institutional investors and is registered office is at S.a r.l. 4 Rue Albert Borschette, Luxembourg L-1246. Tel: 352 2826 12800.  This material shall not be circulated or distributed to any person other than to professional investors (as permitted by local regulations) and should not be relied upon or distributed to persons where such reliance or distribution would be contrary to local regulation; Singapore – MFS International Singapore Pte. Ltd. (CRN 201228809M); Australia/New Zealand - MFS International Australia Pty Ltd ("MFS Australia") (ABN 68 607 579 537) holds an Australian financial services licence number 485343. MFS Australia is regulated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.; Hong Kong - MFS International (Hong Kong) Limited ("MIL HK"), a private limited company licensed and regulated by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (the "SFC"). MIL HK is approved to engage in dealing in securities and asset management regulated activities and may provide certain investment services to "professional investors" as defined in the Securities and Futures Ordinance ("SFO").; For Professional Investors in China – MFS Financial Management Consulting (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 2801-12, 28th Floor, 100 Century Avenue, Shanghai World Financial Center, Shanghai Pilot Free Trade Zone, 200120, China, a Chinese limited liability company registered to provide financial management consulting services.; Japan - MFS Investment Management K.K., is registered as a Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Finance Bureau (FIBO) No.312, a member of the Investment Trust Association, Japan and the Japan Investment Advisers Association. As fees to be borne by investors vary depending upon circumstances such as products, services, investment period and market conditions, the total amount nor the calculation methods cannot be disclosed in advance. All investments involve risks, including market fluctuation and investors may lose the principal amount invested. Investors should obtain and read the prospectus and/or document set forth in Article 37-3 of Financial Instruments and Exchange Act carefully before making the investments. For readers in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, and UAE (excluding the DIFC and ADGM). In Qatar strictly for sophisticated investors and high net worth individuals only. In Bahrain, for sophisticated institutions only: The information contained in this document is intended strictly for professional investors. The information contained in this document, does not constitute and should not be construed as an offer of, invitation or proposal to make an offer for, recommendation to apply for or an opinion or guidance on a financial product, service and/or strategy. Whilst great care has been taken to ensure that the information contained in this document is accurate, no responsibility can be accepted for any errors, mistakes or omissions or for any action taken in reliance thereon. You may only reproduce, circulate and use this document (or any part of it) with the consent of MFS international U.K. Ltd ("MIL UK"). The information contained in this document is for information purposes only. It is not intended for and should not be distributed to, or relied upon by, members of the public. The information contained in this document, may contain statements that are not purely historical in nature but are “forward-looking statements”. These include, amongst other things, projections, forecasts or estimates of income. These forward-looking statements are based upon certain assumptions, some of which are described in other relevant documents or materials. If you do not understand the contents of this document, you should consult an authorised financial adviser. Please note that any materials sent by the issuer (MIL UK) have been sent electronically from offshore. South Africa - This document, and the information contained is not intended and does not constitute, a public offer of securities in South Africa and accordingly should not be construed as such. This document is not for general circulation to the public in South Africa. This document has not been approved by the Financial Sector Conduct Authority and neither MFS International (U.K.) Limited nor its funds are registered for public sale in South Africa.  

Moving from A2 to B1 in Luxembourgish can feel like a big step — it's that “threshold” where basic Luxembourgish turns into more independent communication. Many learners wonder: Is B1 really that much harder?In Part 1 of this new episode, we unpack what B1 actually means in the CEFR and Luxembourgish Language Assessment Framework, why some parts of B1 can even feel easier than A2, and which areas typically challenge learners most.You'll also learn why B1 is the key level for managing daily life in Luxembourg — and even for the Sproochentest.

We're back with a new mini Coffee Break French lesson, and this time we're exploring a charming tradition that marks the start of the festive season in parts of Europe!

Cailin Marcel Manson is a conductor, baritone opera singer, and longtime vocal studies teacher who's performed on some of the world's biggest stages — from the Conservatoire de Luxembourg to Carnegie Hall. In this episode, we talk with Cailin about what it means to command a space long dominated by white men — armed with Black skin, a bit of Philly swagger, and a corset.Homegoings is a production of Vermont Public. Follow the show here.This episode was hosted and reported by executive producer, Myra Flynn and mixed by Sarah Baik. Our video director is Mike Dunn and Aaron Edwards is our story editor. Myra composed the theme music with other music by Blue Dot Sessions. Kyle Ambusk is the graphic artist behind this episode'sHomegoings portrait.Thank you for listening. You can see this episode on our YouTube channel.To continue to be part of the Homegoings family: Subscribe to our YouTube channel Sign up for the Homegoings newsletter Write to us at: hey@homegoings.co Follow us on Instagram @wearehomegoings Make a gift to continue elevating BIPOC storytelling Tell your friends, your family or a stranger about the show! And of course, subscribe!

Radio International - The Ultimate Eurovision Experience is broadcast from Malta's Radio 105FM on Tuesday evenings from 2100 - 0059 hours CET. The show is broadcast live on Wednesday evenings from 1900 - 2300 hours CET on the Eurovision Radio International Mixcloud Channel as well as on the Facebook Page of Eurovision Radio International with an interactive chatroom.             AT A GLANCE - ON THE SHOW THIS WEEK  Interview with Cesar Sampson (Austria 2018) done at the Eurovision Club Germany's Convention 2025  The Eurovision Song Contest 2026 National Final Season The Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025 - Review and Preview (Part 3) Eurovision Spotlight: Austria's History at the Eurovision Song Contest  with Dermot Manning Eurovision News with Dermott Manning in for Nick van Lith from www.escXtra.com Eurovision Birthday File with David Mann Eurovision Cover Spot with David Mann Eurovision Calendar with Javier Leal  National Final Update for Junior and Eurovision Song Contest with Alain Forotti  New Music Releases by Eurovision Artists  Your music requests    Cesar Sampson (Austria 2018) at EC Germany Convention 2025 Interview with Cesar Sampson (Austria 2018):  At the Eurovision Club Germany's annual convention on 22 Nov 2025 in Cologne, Germany four great Eurovision performers where invited to perform in front of an international crowd of Eurovision Fans. Radio International's JP, Marc and Salman were on location in Cologne and conduction interviews with the below artists which you will be able to listen to on the show during the upcoming weeks. Last week on Radio International we heard already the interview with Laura Thorn who represented Luxembourg at the eurovision Song Contest 2025 with the song "La poupée monte le son" coming 22nd in the Grand Final of the Eurovision Song Contest 2025. Another artist from the Eurovision 2025 was Klemen who represented Slovenia at the Eurovision Song Contest 2025 with the song "How much time do we have left" sadly not making it out of his Semi Final.  Then from the Eurovision Song Contest 2004, Jonatan Cerrada represented, as a Belgian, France at the Eurovision Song Contest with the song "A chaque pas" coming 15th.   And Cesar Sampson represented Austria at the Eurovision Song Contest in 2018 coming third with "Nobody but you".    This week on Radio International enjoy the interview and a catch-up with Cesar Sampson from Austria. The Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025: The 23rd edition of the Junior Eurovision Song Contest will be held on Saturday 13 Dec 2025 from the Gymnastic Hall of the Olympic City in Tblisi in Georgia with young artists from 18 countries taking part. In the running order: Malta, Azerbaijan, Croatia, San Marino, Armenia, Ukraine, Ireland, The Netherlands, Poland, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Georgia, Cyprus, France and Albania.  Returning countries are Azerbaijan, Croatia and Montenegro while Estonia and Germany are taking a break. The Hosts of the show are David Aladashvili and Liza Tsiklauri. The show starts at 1700 hours CET. Last year's Winner was Georgia's Andria Putkaradze who won with the song "To my mom".  Radio International will be introducing the songs to the listeners over the next weeks until the week on the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025. But also there will some highlights from past editions of the Junior Eurovision Song Contest.    The Home Composed Song Contest 2025 - We have a Winner:  Congratulations go to ConstantX who won the 34th edition of the the Home Composed Song Contest 2025 with the song "Summer Drifting". For the details visit the website of the Home Composed Song Contest - click here The Home Composed Song Contest is in its 34th year, this is a competition for Eurovision fans who write, perform and produce their own music, who enter their own original song composition (audio only) and then also take part as a jury, to help choose the winning song. This year there are 24 songs from 12 different countries, and you can listen to the songs, and read the lyrics and bios on the official website - click here   Watch the Grand Final Show on the contest's YouTube Channel. Click here to watch the Grand Final.           The Eurovision Spotlight - The history of Austria at the Eurovision Song Contest:  It is Autumn 2025 it also time for the traditional look at the next host country's Eurovision Song Contest entries. JJ won Eurovision 2025 and with that Austria will host the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 in the Wiener Stadthalle on 12 and 14 May 2026 for the two Semi Finals and the Grand Finale to take place on Saturday, 16 May 2026. Over the next weeks and before the National Final Season for 2026, Radio International's team members will be reviewing all the Eurovision entries from Austria. Dermot Manning will be continuing series of the Eurovision Spotlight looking at the history of Austria at the Eurovision Song Contest. Eurovision News, New Song Releases, Birthday File, Coverspot, Eurovision Calendar:Also JP will be joined by David Mann for the Eurovision Birthday File and Eurovision Coverspot.  Javier stands in for Nick and will be presenting the Eurovision News courtesy of escXtra.com. There will be a lot of the great new releases of Eurovision artists on the show as well as great Eurovision Classics. Javier will be updating us on the upcoming Eurovision events in the Eurovision Calendar and Alain Forotti gives us already some updates of the National Finals regarding the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2025 and the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 and and....   For full details of this week's Show Content and Play List - click here

Ce mercredi 3 décembre, Antoine Larigaudrie a reçu Bastien Baron, fondateur de Justae - Conseil en gestion de fortune, dans l'émission Tout pour investir sur BFM Business. Retrouvez l'émission du lundi au vendredi et réécoutez la en podcast.

durée : 02:00:13 - Le 5/7 - À 5h45 : Delphine Michele, agente à la banque d'investissement européenne au Luxembourg. À 6H20 : Francois Mabille, Chercheur CNRS, directeur de l'Observatoire de géopolitique des religions à l'IRIS. Auteur de “La papauté face à un monde en crise” (Eyrolles). Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

durée : 00:04:24 - Déjà debout - par : Mathilde MUNOS - Delphine Michele, agente à la banque d'investissement européenne au Luxembourg. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

durée : 00:04:24 - Déjà debout - par : Mathilde MUNOS - Delphine Michele, agente à la banque d'investissement européenne au Luxembourg. Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

Dans cette deuxième partie, on retrouve Giuliano Sperandio au moment où sa vie bascule vraiment dans le métier.C'est un chapitre fait de voyages, d'apprentissages parfois rudes, de rencontres fondatrices et de décisions parfois impulsives — mais toujours guidées par une boussole intérieure très claire : vivre sa vie, pas celle que les autres attendent.On le suit du concours européen au Luxembourg — qu'il gagne presque malgré lui — à Monaco, puis Rome, où il découvre ce qui deviendra sa cuisine : les condiments, les cuissons, les jus, ces « petites touches qui font briller le palais ».On le découvre observateur obsessionnel, mémoriel sur les gestes et les attitudes, mais totalement imperméable à l'idée de reproduire un plat qu'il n'a pas compris.Et puis il y a ces virages qui disent tout de son tempérament :New York et ses cuisines chaotiques, la Suisse, la Grèce avec Nobu, puis ce besoin presque organique d'apprendre les bases françaises, à Paris, quitte à mettre son couple dans la balance.Ce chapitre, c'est le moment où Giuliano se construit un langage : chercher, absorber, décoder, comprendre — et ne jamais faire semblant.Une trajectoire faite « d'envies » plutôt que de plans, de liberté cadrée et d'intuition.Pour découvrir la cuisine de Giuliano Sperandio, c'est par ici !

In nearly seventy years of the Eurovision Song Contest, no country has ever won by performing second. Coincidence?This week, Steven crunches the numbers to find out, and the results might surprise even the nerdiest of Eurovision fans!.Mentioned in this episode:Serteb Erener - ‘Everyway That I Can' (Turkey, 2003): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0_QrKnqd5E Marie N - ‘I Wanna' (Latvia, 2002): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_M-w89U8TEU Kathy Kirby - ‘I Belong' (United Kingdom, 1965): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeDI52bdntQFrance Gall - ‘Poupée de cire, poupée de son' (Luxembourg, 1965): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyFnDf8PvmU Sebnem Paker and Grup Etnic - ‘Dinle' (Turkey, 1997): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5J6-bCMz3YJessica Garlick - ‘Come Back' (United Kingdom, 2002): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8tokc1B_E0Sahlene - ‘Runaway' (Estonia, 2002): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tky7vWXSZrsalyona alyona and Jerry Heil - ‘Teresa & Maria' (Ukraine, 2024): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4N82wPpdg8Dino Merlin - ‘Love in Rewind' (Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2011): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBg3coarF_8 Teach-In - ‘Ding-A-Dong' (Netherlands, 1975): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPxuq4uQ0OU Brotherhood of Man - ‘Save Your Kisses For Me' (United Kingdom, 1976): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yJUi6ke71I Herreys - ‘Diggi-Loo, Diggi-Ley' (Sweden, 1984): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySOCalwr6Yo Laura Thorn - ‘La poupée monte le son' (Luxembourg, 2025): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT7ZZBCscUg .If you love Eurovision as much as we do, don't forget to connect with us on social. DM us on Twitter at @Bingewatch_Pod and join our Facebook Page.You can also now support the show with a generous Douze Points of your own!Discover your next favourite restaurant with NeoTaste, the exclusive membership unlocking huge discounts at hundreds of restaurants. Get 2 MONTHS FREE on us! Simply use the code BINGE at checkout. Sign up here: https://douze-points-a-eurovision-podcast.captivate.fm/neotaste If you want more bingeworthy TV coverage, check out our other shows:

Dans cet épisode, Capucine raconte comment un message, en apparence envoyé par l'Assurance Maladie, a déclenché une fraude téléphonique d'une précision redoutable. Un mail crédible, un faux site officiel, puis la voix rassurante d'un prétendu conseiller bancaire l'appelant, quelques jours plus tard, pour la prévenir d'une fraude en cours sur son moyen de paiement : en l'espace de quelques minutes, une mécanique parfaitement huilée se met en place. Et Capucine, persuadée de protéger son compte, valide elle-même plusieurs opérations frauduleuses, avant de prendre conscience de ce qui se passe et d'appeler le numéro indiqué au dos de son moyen de paiement pour faire opposition. Son témoignage montre comment ces arnaques exploitent nos automatismes et nos émotions. Pour comprendre comment elles se construisent, comment les fraudeurs choisissent leurs victimes et préparent leurs attaques, l'épisode donne aussi la parole à Julien Gabillet, directeur des risques chez Visa pour la France, la Belgique et le Luxembourg. Il dévoile les coulisses de ces attaques, les signes qui doivent alerter, et les bons réflexes à adopter pour garder la maîtrise.Entre récit personnel et décryptage d'expert, cet épisode éclaire un phénomène d'ampleur, qui peut toucher chacun d'entre nous. Un épisode indispensable pour y voir plus clair et renforcer sa vigilance face à ces nouvelles formes d'arnaques. Si, après votre écoute, vous souhaitez en savoir plus, rendez-vous sur le site de Visa pour découvrir les différents types d'arnaques du moment, et les conseils de vigilance à appliquer au quotidien. Ce HORS-SERIE est proposé par VISA. La Rédaction n'a pas participé à sa réalisation.Journaliste : Clémentine GarnierRéalisation : Rudy TolilaMixage : Killian Martin DaoudalDirecteur de la Production : Baptiste FarinazzoProduction exécutive : Jean-Baptiste Rochelet pour OneTwo OneTwo Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Irish Basketball International Taiwo Badmus spoke to Sean Carley ahead of Ireland's EuroBasket 2029 Pre-Qualifier against North Macedonia at the National Basketball Arena on Sunday (30th November) at 5 pm. Ireland suffered a 89-77 loss away to Luxembourg in the opening game of the group on Thursday. Despite the loss, Taiwo was Ireland's top scorer with 24 points. Taiwo spoke to Sean Carley about the meeting with North Macedonia tomorrow as well as his well-travelled career to date...

Luxembourg's Space Agency has awarded a contract to the Canadian Space Mining Corporation (CSMC) to develop a novel space-based quantum gravimetry sensor system called Quantum Atomic Subsurface Mapper (QASM). China plans to send an unmanned spacecraft to Tiangong Space Station on November 25 to support the crew left without a return vehicle. China has launched a commercial trial of satellite Internet of Things (IoT) services, and more. Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Be sure to follow T-Minus on LinkedIn and Instagram. T-Minus Guest Dave Bittner, host of The Cyberwire, and cybersecurity executive Brandon Karpf, join Maria Varmazis for our monthly space and cyber segment to talk about GPS spoofing. Selected Reading Luxembourg Space Agency awards contract to CSMC to Advance Quantum Sensing for Resource Exploration China to launch Shenzhou-22 spacecraft on November 25, state media reports- Reuters China launches commercial trial of satellite IoT services - CGTN ST Engineering Selected to Support UAE's Space Ambitions with Cutting-Edge SAR Satellite AST SpaceMobile Announces BlueBird 6 Launch Date, the Largest Commercial Communications Array Ever Deployed in Low Earth Orbit Space Race With China Drives Antenna-Building Boom in Arctic - Bloomberg The new space race: These are the different space strategies across Europe- Euronews NASA Awards Liquid Hydrogen Supply Contracts School seeks help to find 'space adventure' bear Share your feedback. What do you think about T-Minus Space Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show.  Want to hear your company in the show? You too can reach the most influential leaders and operators in the industry. Here's our media kit. Contact us at space@n2k.com to request more info. Want to join us for an interview? Please send your pitch to space-editor@n2k.com and include your name, affiliation, and topic proposal. T-Minus is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

durée : 00:25:23 - Francesco Tristano, pianiste (5/5) - par : Judith Chaine - Francesco Tristano explore classique et électro, crée des projets comme Aufgang et Bach Stage, fonde son label et transmet sa curiosité musicale et son expérience de la scène au Conservatoire du Luxembourg. - réalisé par : Adrien Roch Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

durée : 00:24:59 - Francesco Tristano, pianiste (3/5) - par : Judith Chaine - À 16 ans, Francesco Tristano quitte le Luxembourg pour la Juilliard School. Il s'immerge dans la vie musicale new-yorkaise, expérimente synthés et séquenceurs et pose les bases de son univers où piano et musique électronique se rencontrent. - réalisé par : Adrien Roch Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les autres épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France.

Our guest on The Publisher Podcast this week is Liesbeth Nizet, Head of Future Audiences Monetization at Mediahuis, a media group with a presence in Belgium, the Netherlands, Ireland, Germany and Luxembourg. In her role, Liesbeth is focused on next-generation audiences, and helping build future-proof business models that bridge editorial purpose and commercial potential. We talked at FIPP Congress about stereotypes around young people paying for news, to what extent demographics are helpful when understanding behaviours, and what she's doing at Mediahuis to encourage younger audiences to engage with news content. Get the write-up of the key points of this interview in your inbox by subscribing to The Publisher Newsletter, over on voices.media

The Space Show Presents Leonard David for Tuesday, 11-18-25Brief SummaryThe program focused on discussing various aspects of the space industry, including current challenges with space safety standards, rescue capabilities, and NASA's progress on lunar exploration programs. The participants explored potential solutions for space rescue missions, debated the feasibility of alternative lunar exploration approaches, and discussed the challenges of developing a cislunar economy. The conversation concluded with discussions about environmental impacts of space activities, the potential for AI data centers in space, and the upcoming release of a film about UFOs/UAPs.Detailed SummaryDavid and Leonard discussed the Chinese space program's current issues with their rescue vehicle and the need for international standards in space safety. They also touched on NASA's current state and the upcoming visit to the International Space Station by Jared Isaacman. David announced upcoming guests for the space show, including Avi Loeb, and reminded listeners about the annual fundraising drive.Leonard discussed his extensive experience in space documentation and emphasized the importance of archiving current space activities for future reference. He highlighted the need for a space rescue capability, citing the Chinese space program's backup plan as a wake-up call for the United States to develop similar capabilities, especially with the increase in private space flights. David agreed with Leonard's concerns and mentioned the ongoing discussions about space rescue at AIAA Ascend conferences, expressing concern about the lack of progress and interest in this critical area.Leonard and David discussed the potential for SpaceX to assist in a possible Chinese rescue mission, highlighting the need for compatible docking standards with the Chinese space station. They also touched on the challenges NASA faces, including leadership uncertainty and the need for decisive action on key decisions. Leonard expressed frustration with the lack of clear direction and the need for a strong, decisive leader at NASA to move forward with important projects.Leonard expressed concerns about NASA's progress on the Artemis program, noting delays and uncertainty about the February launch date for Artemis II. He compared the current situation to the space race with the Soviet Union, suggesting that the U.S. is falling behind China in lunar exploration efforts. Marshall asked about key milestones for NASA's moon mission, and Leonard highlighted the importance of SpaceX's Starship program, praising its development pace but expressing uncertainty about NASA's decision-making process and timeline.The SS Wisdom Team discussed China's aggressive lunar program, with Leonard noting their goal to achieve significant milestones before 2030, including robotic missions and a lunar research station. They debated alternative approaches to reaching the moon beyond the Artemis program, with Leonard expressing optimism about Blue Origin's business plan for the moon and its potential to contribute to a cislunar economy. David inquired about the feasibility of alternative methods, and Leonard suggested consulting NASA Watch for insights into NASA's decision-making processes. Dr. CJ inquired about Mark 1.5, a proposed spacecraft capable of carrying four astronauts and 3,000 kilograms to the moon, but Leonard was unfamiliar with this concept and could not confirm its validity.We discussed challenges in the space industry, including the difficulty of filtering credible ideas from speculative ones, and the problem of maintaining workforce stability in startup companies. They explored various launch technologies with some expressing skepticism about Spin Launch on Earth due to drag and heating issues, while noting its potential feasibility on the Moon. The conversation concluded with a discussion about electromagnetic launch systems, with Leonard sharing his experiences from Princeton's Space Studies Institute and noting how technology advancements could revive interest in these systems.The tea, discussed the potential for economic development in cislunar space and on the Moon. Leonard expressed optimism about lunar surprises, citing recent Chinese sample findings. David questioned the feasibility of a cislunar economy, noting high launch costs and the lack of infrastructure. He suggested that economic opportunities might be better suited for in-space markets rather than Earth-bound returns. The discussion highlighted the challenges of envisioning markets without existing infrastructure and the need for creative solutions to develop a lunar economy.Another topic we discussed was the potential for AI data centers in space, with Marshall noting that the Pentagon had offered $12 billion to build a 5 gigawatt solar panel, though David questioned whether the funding was secured. Leonard expressed concerns about the militarization of space, highlighting the U.S. Space Force's growing capabilities and the potential for conflict with other nations. The conversation also touched on Russia's development of the Poseidon torpedo and the ongoing arms race between major powers, with Marshall mentioning SpaceX's Starshield program and its potential for advanced surveillance capabilities.The team covered the challenges and benefits of nuclear power, both on Earth and in space. Also emphasizing the advantages of using advanced nuclear reactors on Earth, such as molten salt reactors, which are safer and more efficient than current technologies. The conversation touched on regulatory issues and the reluctance to adopt new nuclear technologies, with David highlighting China's progress in this area. Leonard mentioned his recent article on space waste and the increasing concern about human-made debris entering Earth's atmosphere, which could have detrimental effects on the ozone layer. The group agreed that more research and regulation are needed to address these issues.The group discussed the environmental impact of space activities, with Phil noting that aerospace emissions are 3-4 times worse than ground-based CO2, and Marshall sharing that 44 metric tons of meteorite material falls to Earth daily. David shared that a USC student paper by Jose Ferraria examines the toxic materials released into the upper atmosphere during rocket re-entry, and the group discussed the need for better measurement and understanding of this environmental impact. Looking ahead to 2025, Leonard expressed concern about potential space accidents affecting public interest, while David noted that space tourism has not yet become truly commercial despite earlier predictions, and AI's influence on rhetoric and belief systems remains a wildcard factor.David expressed optimism about space research and development, highlighting medical advances from microgravity studies and the potential for private space stations to drive innovation. He emphasized the importance of affordable and reliable power sources for space research, while expressing concerns about budget cuts and the devaluation of science. The team discussed the progress of private space companies like Blue Origin and SpaceX, with John suggesting that Elon Musk's Starship could be ready in 5 years. Leonard and others agreed that human spaceflight may not be the focus of major advancements in the next 5 years, but space technology could still significantly impact life on Earth.Leonard brought up the upcoming film “Disclosure” about UFOs, which will be available for free on the producer's website and on Amazon Prime. They debated the potential impact of revealing government secrets about UFOs, with John expressing concerns about national security and the complications that disclosure could create. Leonard shared his personal belief that something significant is happening in the UFO community, while David noted a shift in cultural acceptance of the idea of extraterrestrial life over the past five years. The conversation concluded with plans for future shows featuring Katheryn Bolich of the WEX Foundation and Avi Loeb.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4466: ZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb | Sunday 23 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:Dr. Abraham (Avi) LoebZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb returns to discuss our latest interstellar visitor and more. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

Hotel Mars with Eric Berger, Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2025John Batchelor and I introduced Eric Berger of Ars Technica as our guest to discuss the recent very successful launch and flight of the Blue Origin New Glenn rocket. Eric Berger described the successful second launch and booster landing of Blue Origin's New Glenn rocket as thrilling. We noted the accuracy of the return of the first stage to return to the barge pad, hover, move sideways and then land dead center in the zero target on the barge. This was a huge step forward. It also successfully deployed a NASA payload to Mars which our guest discussed. New Glenn is the world's third largest rocket and is crucial for Amazon's LEO constellation and NASA's Artemis moon program. We also asked Eric for his opinion regarding Jarod Isaacman as the NASA Administrator. Eric shared many important thoughts regarding this nomination.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4466: ZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb | Sunday 23 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests:Dr. Abraham (Avi) LoebZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb returns to discuss our latest interstellar visitor and more. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents KATHRYN BOLISH, WEX Foundation, Friday, 11-21-25Brief Summary:The program focused on discussing the WEX Foundation's educational programs, particularly their space STEM initiatives for K-12 students through their LCATS program, which provides free education and mentorship in space-related topics. The discussion covered the foundation's approach to teaching mathematics and programming, as well as their collaboration with NASA and other aerospace companies to develop student projects and curriculum. The conversation concluded with an exploration of the program's impact on student engagement and academic performance, while addressing challenges related to the COVID pandemic, funding, and policy issues in public education.Detailed Summary:David, John Jossy, and Kathryn Bolish, our guest from the WEX Foundation, discussed the WEX Foundation, its projects, and its namesake, Judge Waldo Jimenez. Kathryn explained the power outages at her office causing WIFI issues for this broadcast. We lost audio and video with our guest a few times during the program but were fortunate that we were able to reconnect with a minor delay. We do apologize for the audio/video issues during this discussion.Kathryn discussed her passion for mathematics and her plans to pursue a PhD at UTSA. John Jossy and I welcomed Dr. Ajay Kothari to the meeting and others as they joined us. I provided a formal introduction for Kathryn Bolish, a mathematician pursuing a PhD, who discussed her passion for mathematics and its applications in space travel. They explored the disconnect between theoretical and numerical mathematics in education, with Kathryn highlighting the importance of teaching math theory and logic from an early age to improve understanding and reduce remedial needs. Before commencing with the full program, I announced upcoming guests and program changes, including a fundraising campaign after Thanksgiving which is essential for supporting The Space Show for 2026.Kathryn discussed the importance of teaching propositional logic and set theory to students early on to help them understand math as a tool rather than a monster. She explained how WEX Foundation provides free space STEM education to K-12 students, focusing on lunar exploration. The program, called LCATS, accepts 30-40 students annually for a three-year commitment, meeting bi-weekly Saturdays at San Antonio area universities. Kathryn emphasized the need for teachers to understand basic programming and math theory to effectively teach these subjects. The discussion also touched on the challenges of AI in education, with Kathryn advocating for using AI as a tool for learning rather than for cheating. David inquired about the program's impact on students' general academic performance, including students not in a WEX program but in the class with a WEX student. Kathryn replied that it has led to increased interest and engagement in STEM subjects among participating students.Kathryn explained that the WEX Foundation's LCATS program, which was piloted by NASA in 2017, faced challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic and staff changes in 2020. She emphasized the importance of ensuring that the program's content remains relevant to the space industry and highlighted the need to find suitable locations and teachers willing to conduct classes on Saturdays. Kathryn also discussed the foundation's approach to connecting young students with space industry experts, noting that while the experts may initially seem intimidating, the students often view their feedback as valuable learning opportunities. She mentioned that the foundation plans to finalize a comprehensive LCATS curriculum by May 2026, which will then be used to expand the program to other regions.Kathryn discussed the benefits of exposing students to industry challenges, noting that while some SMEs may be harsh, the experience helps build student confidence. She shared an example of a student project that led to a 3D printer prototype for lunar construction, now displayed at a museum. David raised concerns about magical thinking among graduate students and asked how Kathryn addresses it with young minds, to which she responded that embracing the “magic” of unknown possibilities is crucial for innovation, drawing parallels to historical achievements like the moon landing.The meeting discussed the NASA-funded New Worlds program, which trains pre-service educators in lunar habitat design. Kathryn explained that the program teaches students about lunar lava tubes and challenges them to design habitat systems. Ajay raised concerns about landing on the lunar surface, suggesting that the program could help address this issue by developing solutions for landing on uneven terrain. Marshall inquired about the transition from Earth-based biospheres to lunar habitats, and Kathryn mentioned that the program partners with experts in this field to provide students with relevant constraints and knowledge. The conversation ended with a reminder that the show had a strict 60-minute time limit.Kathryn explained that her parent company, Astroport, evaluates student proposals for space-related projects by assessing their feasibility for terrestrial demonstrations before advancing to lunar applications. She noted that while Astroport works with major aerospace companies like Boeing and SpaceX, WEX focuses on space STEM education and collaborates with these organizations through mentorship and partnerships. Kathryn also mentioned that WEX operates from the same building as Astroport and occasionally hosts engineers to help students brainstorm solutions for their projects, while acknowledging the challenges of addressing policy and regulation issues in their curriculum.Kathryn explained that WEX Foundation's space education programs are structured to be self-sustaining and low-cost, allowing them to continue operations despite NASA's education budget cuts. She clarified that while students can propose their own ideas for lunar projects, the program focuses on teaching established concepts like lava tube habitation and letting students develop their own solutions. The discussion concluded with Ajay offering to share a paper about space exploration with Kathryn, who expressed gratitude for the collaborative spirit among the participants.This program featured a discussion with Kathryn from the WEX Foundation, who shared insights about her math-focused educational programs in San Antonio. She explained how her mathematical background supports her work in program management and curriculum development, despite not directly using advanced math in her current role. The conversation highlighted the diversity of her student cohorts and the collaborative nature of her programs, which bring together students of different ages and backgrounds. The discussion concluded with questions about the demographics of her students and plans for program expansion, as well as a brief conversation about the challenges of public education and the role of money in society.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4466: ZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb | Sunday 23 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Abraham (Avi) LoebZOOM: Dr. Avi Loeb returns to discuss our latest interstellar visitor and more. Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of Com d'Archi, we meet Marc Mimram, a renowned French architect and structural engineer, founder of Marc Mimram Architecture Ingénierie in Paris.Educated at the École des Beaux-Arts, the École des Ponts et Chaussées, and the University of California, Berkeley, Mimram has devoted his career to exploring the dialogue between engineering precision and architectural emotion.From his emblematic Solferino Footbridge in Paris — gracefully linking the Tuileries Garden and the Musée d'Orsay — to international works in China and Luxembourg, his projects merge structure, light, and landscape in a powerful architectural language.In this conversation, Marc Mimram reflects on the responsibility of building, the value of public space, and the importance of designing with awareness of place and geography.

In this episode of the Pro Mindset® Podcast, host Craig Domann sits down with Céleste Mordenti, elite gymnast and the first athlete in Luxembourg's history to win a FIG World Cup medal. Céleste opens up about the discipline, mindset, and inner resilience required to rise from a small nation to the world stage in artistic gymnastics.She shares powerful insights into overcoming doubt, pushing through plateaus, and building a mental framework strong enough to sustain elite performance. From mastering pressure to finding joy in the grind, Céleste's journey is a masterclass in chasing excellence—no matter where you come from.Whether you're an athlete, a leader, or someone striving for personal excellence, Céleste's story will inspire you to aim higher and break your own barriers.Episode Takeaways:

Hello again Pacific War Week by Week listeners, it is I your dutiful host Craig Watson with more goodies from my exclusive patreon podcast series. This is actually going to be a two parter specifically looking at the failure and responsibility of Emperor Hirohito during the 15 year war Japan unleashed in 1931. Again a big thanks to all of you for listening all these years, you are all awesome.   Hello everyone, a big thanks to all of you who joined the patreon and voted for this to be the next episode, you all are awesome.    Now I realize very well when I jumped into my former patreon episode on Ishiwara Kanji, I fell into a rabbit hole and it became a rather long series. I wanted to get this one done in a single episode but its also kind of a behemoth subject, so I will do this in two parts: this episode will be on Hirohito's failure and responsibility in regards to the China War from 1931-1941. The next one will cover Hirohito's failure and responsibility in the world war from 1941-1945.   I am not going to cover the entire life of Hirohito, no what I want is to specifically cover his actions from 1931-1945. Nw I want you to understand the purpose of this episode is to destroy a narrative, a narrative that carried on from 1945-1989. That narrative has always been that Emperor Hirohito was nothing more than a hostage during the war years of 1931-1945. This narrative was largely built by himself and the United States as a means of keeping the peace after 1945. However upon his death in 1989 many meeting notes and diaries from those who worked close to him began emerging and much work was done by historians like Herbert P Bix and Francis Pike. The narrative had it that Hirohito was powerless to stop things, did not know or was being misled by those around him, but this is far from the truth. Hirohito was very active in matters that led to the horrors of the 15 year war and he had his own reasons for why or when he acted and when he did not.   For this episode to be able to contain it into a single one, I am going to focus on Hirohito's involvement in the undeclared war with China, that's 1931-1941. For those of you who don't know, China and Japan were very much at war in 1931-1937 and certainly 1937 onwards, but it was undeclared for various reasons. If you guys really like this one, let me know and I can hit Hirohito 1941-1945 which is honestly a different beast of its own.   For those of you who don't know, Hirohito was born on April 29th of 1901, the grandson of Emperor Meiji. Hirohito entered the world right at the dawn of a new era of imperial rivalry in Asia and the Pacific. According to custom, Japanese royals were raised apart from their parents, at the age of 3 he was placed in the care of the Kwamura family who vowed to raise him to be unselfish, persevering in the face of difficulties, respectful of the views of others and immune to fear. In 1908 he entered elementary education at the age of 7 and would be taught first be General Nogi Maresuke who notoriously did not pamper the prince. Nogi rigorously had Hirohito train in physical education and specifically implanted virtues and traits he thought appropriate for the future sovereign: frugality, diligence, patience, manliness, and the ability to exercise self-control under difficult conditions. Hirohito learnt what hard work was from Nogi and that education could overcome all shortcomings. Emperor Meiji made sure his grandson received military training.   When Emperor Meiji died in 1912, Hirohito's father, Yoshihito took the throne as emperor Taisho. Taisho for a lack of better words, suffered from cerebral meningitis at an early age and this led to cognitive deficiency's and in reality the Genro would really be running the show so to say. When Taisho took the throne it was understood immediately, Hirohito needed to be prepared quickly to take the throne. After Meiji's funeral General Nogi politely told the family he could no longer be a teacher and committed seppuku with his wife. He wrote a suicide letter explained he wanted to expiate his disgrace during the russo japanese war for all the casualties that occurred at Port Arthur, hardcore as fuck. Hirohito would view Nogi nearly as much of an iconic hero as his grandfather Meiji, the most important figure in his life.   Hirohito's next teacher was the absolute legendary Fleet Admiral Togo Heihachiro who would instill national defense policy into him. Hirohito would be taught Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahans theories as all the great minds were taught at the time. Now I know it sucks but I cant delve deep into all this. What I want you to envision is a growing Man, instilled with the belief above all else, the Kokutai was most important. The Kokutai was the national essence of Japan. It was all aspects of Japanese polity, derived from history, tradition and customs all focused around the cult of the Emperor. The government run by politicians was secondary, at any given time the kokutai was the belief the Emperor could come in and directly rule.   If you are confused, dont worry, I am too haha. Its confusing. The Meiji constitution was extremely ambiguous. It dictated a form of constitutional monarchy with the kokutai sovereign emperor and the “seitai” that being the actual government. Basically on paper the government runs things, but the feeling of the Japanese people was that the wishes of the emperor should be followed. Thus the kokutai was like an extra-judicial structure built into the constitution without real legal framework, its a nightmare I know.    Let me make an example, most of you are American I imagine. Your congress and senate actually run the country, wink wink lets forget about lobbyists from raytheon. The president does not have actual executive powers to override any and all things, but what if all Americans simply felt he did. Thus everyone acted in accordance to his wishes as they assumed them to be, thats my best way of explaining Japan under Hirohito.    Emperor Taisho dies in 1926, and Hirohito takes the throne ushering in the Showa Era. He inherited a financial crisis and a military that was increasingly seizing control of governmental policies. Hirohito sought to restore the image of a strong charismatic leader on par with his grandfather Meiji, which was sorely lacking in his father Taishos reign. He was pressured immediately by the Navy that the national sphere of defense needed to be expanded upon, they felt threatened by the west, specifically by the US and Britain who had enacted the Washington Naval Treaty. Hirohito agreed a large navy was necessary for Japan's future, he was a proponent of the decisive naval battle doctrine, remember his teacher was Togo.    From the very beginning Hirohito intensely followed all military decisions. In 1928 the Japanese covertly assassinated the warlord of Manchuria, Zhang Zuolin. The current prime minister Tanaka Giichi had performed a thorough investigation of the incident and presented his report to Hirohito on December 24th of 1928. He told Hirohito he intended to court martial the criminals, purge the army and re-establish discipline. However the rest of Tanaka's cabinet wished to allow the army to deal with the matter and quiet the entire thing down. Hirohito responded by stating he had lost confidence in Tanaka and admonished his report. Hirohito allowed the army to cover up the incident, he sought to have it hushed up as well. Thus Hirohito had indulged the army in its insubordination and the kwantung army officers now felt they could take matters into their own hands.   Also in 1928 the Tanaka cabinet failed to endorse the international protocol banning chemical and biological warfare. The next year the privy council, pressured by the military, failed to ratify the full geneva convention of prisoners of war. Hirohito in response began doing something Emperor Meiji never had done, he began to scold officials to force them to retire from positions. Tanaka Giichi was bullied out. Hirohito then stated his endorsement of Hamaguchi Osachi as Tanaka's successors.   Just a few months after Hamaguchi cabinet formed, Hirohito overrode the advice of his naval chief of staff and vice chief of staff, Admiral Kato and Vice Admiral Suetsugu. The Americans and British were hinting they might form a naval alliance against Japan if she did not abide by the Washington Conference mandates on naval tonnage. Kato and Suetsugu refused to accept the terms, but prime minister Hamaguchi stood firm against them. The navy leaders were outraged and accused Hamaguchi of signing the treaty without the support of the Navy General Staff thereby infringing upon the “emperor's right of supreme command”. Two months after signing the treaty, Hamaguchi was assassinated and upon learning of this Hirohito's first concern apparently was “that constitutional politics not be interrupted”. The military felt greatly emboldened, and thus began the age of the military feeling “its right of supreme command”. Generals and Admirals fought back against arms reduction talks, discipline within the officer corps loosened, things spiraled out of control. Alongside this came the increasing cult of the emperor, that they were all doing this in his name.   When rumors emerged of the emerging Mukden Incident in 1931, Hirohito  demanded the army be reigned in. Attempts were made, but on September 18th of 1931, Kwantung army officer detonated an explosion at Liut'iaokou north of Mukden as a false flag operation. The next day the imperial palace were given a report and Hirohito was advised by chief aide de camp Nara Takeji “this incident would not spread and if the Emperor was to convene an imperial conference to take control of the situation, the virtue of his majesty might be soiled if the decisions of such a conference should prove impossible to implement”. This will be a key theme in Hirohito's decision making, protect the kokutai from any threats.   As the Mukden incident was getting worse, the Kwantung officers began to demand reinforcement be sent from the Korea army. The current Wakatsuki cabinet met on the issue and decided the Mukden incident had to remain an incident, they needed to avoid a declaration of war. The official orders were for no reinforcements of the Korea army to mobilize, however the field commander took it upon his own authority and mobilized them. The army chief of staff Kanaya reported to Hirohito the Korea army was marching into Manchuria against orders. At 31 years of age Hirohito now had an excellent opportunity to back the current cabinet, to control the military and stop the incident from getting worse. At this time the military was greatly divided on the issue, politically still weak compared to what they would become in a few years, if Hirohito wanted to rule as a constitutional monarch instead of an autocratic monarch, well this was his chance. Hirohito said to Kanaya at 4:20pm on September 22nd “although this time it couldn't be helped, [the army] had to be more careful in the future”. Thus Hirohito accepted the situation as fait accompli, he was not seriously opposed to seeing his army expand his empire. If it involved a brief usurpation of his authority so bit, as long as the operation was successful. Within two weeks of the incident, most of Japan had rallied being the kwantung army's cause. Hirohito knew it was a false flag, all of what they had done. Hirohito planned the lightests punishments for those responsible. Hirohito then officially sanctioned the aerial strike against Chinchou, the first air attack since ww1.   A message had gone out to the young officers in the Japanese military that the emperors main concern was success; obedience to central command was secondary. After the Mukden incident Prime Minister Wakatsuki resigned in december after failing to control the army and failing to contain the financial depression. The new Priminister Inukai took to action requesting permission from Hirohito to dispatch battalions to Tientsin and a brigade to Manchuria to help the Kwantung army take Chinchou. Hirohito responded by advising caution when attacking Chinchou and to keep a close eye on international public perception. Nevertheless Chinchou was taken and Hirohito issued an imperial rescript praising the insubordinate Kwantung army for fighting a courageous self defense against Chinese bandits. In a few more years Hirohito would grant awards and promotions to 3000 military and civil officials involved in the Manchurian war. When incidents broke out in Shanghai in 1932 involved the IJN, Tokyo high command organized a full fledged Shanghai expeditionary force under General Shirakawa with 2 full divisions. But within Shanghai were western powers, like Britain and America, whom Hirohito knew full well could place economic sanctions upon Japan if things got out of hand. Hirohito went out of his way to demand Shirakawa settle the Shanghai matter quickly and return to Japan.   And thus here is a major problem with Hirohito during the war years. On one end with Manchuria he let pretty much everything slide, but with Shanghai he suddenly cracks the whip. Hirohito had a real tendency of choosing when he wanted to act and this influenced the military heavily. On May 15th of 1932, young naval officers assassinated prime minister Inukai at his office. In the political chaos, Hirohito and his advisors agreed to abandon the experiment in party cabinets that had been the custom since the Taisho era. Now Hirohito endorsed a fully bureaucratic system of policy making, cabinet parties would no longer depend on the two main conservative parties existing in the diet. When the diet looked to the genro as to who should be the next prime minister, Hirohito wrote up “his wishes regarding the choice of the next prime minister”. Loyal officials backed Hirohito's wishes, the cult of the emperor grew in power. To the military it looked like Hirohito was blaming the party based cabinets rather than insubordinate officers for the erosion of his own authority as commander in chief. The young military officers who already were distrustful of the politicians were now being emboldened further.    After Manchuria was seized and Manchukuo was ushered in many in the Japanese military saw a crisis emerge, that required a “showa restoration' to solve. There were two emerging political factions within the military, the Kodoha and Toseiha factions. Both aimed to create military dictatorships under the emperor. The Kodoha saw the USSR as the number one threat to Japan and advocated an invasion of them, aka the Hokushin-ron doctrine, but the Toseiha faction prioritized a national defense state built on the idea they must build Japans industrial capabilities to face multiple enemies in the future. What separated the two, was the Kodoha sought to use a violent coup d'etat to do so, the Toseiha were unwilling to go so far. The Kodoha faction was made up of junior and youthful officers who greatly distrusted the capitalists and industrialists of Japan, like the Zaibatsu and believed they were undermining the Emperor. The Toseiha faction were willing to work with the Zaibatsu to make Japan stronger. Hirohito's brother Prince Chichibu sympathized with the Kodoha faction and repeatedly counseled his brother that he should implement direct imperial rule even if it meant suspending the constitution, aka a show restoration. Hirohito believed his brother who was active in the IJA at the time was being radicalized. Chichibu might I add was in the 3rd infantry regiment under the leadership of Colonel Tomoyuki Yamashita.   This time period has been deemed the government by assassination period. Military leaders in both the IJA and IJN and from both the Kodoha and Toseiha began performing violence against politicians and senior officers to get things done.    A enormous event took place in 1936 known as the february 26 incident. Kodoha faction officers of the IJA attempted a coup d'etat to usher in a showa restoration. They assassinated several leading officials, such as two former prime ministers and occupied the government center of Tokyo. They failed to assassinate the current prime minister Keisuke Okada or take control over the Imperial palace. These men believed Japan was straying from the Kokutai and that the capitalist/industrialists were exploiting the people of the nation by deceiving the emperor and usurping his power. The only solution to them was to purge such people and place Hirohito as an absolute leader over a military dictatorship.    Now the insurrectionists failed horribly, within just a few hours they failed to kill the current prime minister, and failed to seize the Sakashita Gate to the imperial palace, thus allowing the palace to continue communicating with the outside, and they never thought about what the IJN might do about all of this. The IJN sent marines immediately to suppress them. The insurrectionists had planned to have the army minister General Kwashima who was a Kodoha backer, report their intentions to Hirohito who they presumed would declare a showa restoration. They falsely assumed the emperor was a puppet being taken hostage by his advisers and devoid of his own will.   At 5:40am on February the 26th Hirohito was awakened and informed of the assassinations and coup attempt. From the moment he learnt of this, he was outraged and demanded the coup be suppressed and something I would love to highlight is he also immediately demanded his brother Prince Chichibu be brought over to him. Why would this be important? Hirohito believed the insurrectionists might enlist his brother to force him to abdicate. Hirohito put on his army uniform and ordered the military to “end it immediately and turn this misfortune into a blessing”. Hirohito then met with Kwashima who presented him with the insurrectionists demands to “clarify the kokutai, stabilize national life and fulfill national defense, aka showa restoration”. Hirohito scolded Kwashima and ordered him to suppress the mutiny. On the morning of the 27th Hirohito declared administrative martial law on the basis of Article 8 of the Imperial Constitution, pertaining to emergency imperial ordinances. Formally he was invoking his sovereign power to handle a crisis. Hirohito displayed an incredible amount of energy to crush the mutiny as noted by those around him at the time. Every few hours he demanded reports to be given to him by top officials and at one point he was so angry he threatened to lead the Imperial Guard division himself to go out and quell it. Hirohito met with Chichibu and its alleged he told his brother to end any relationships he had with the Kodoha members. By february 29th, Hirohito had firmly crushed the mutiny, most of the ringleaders were arrested. In april they were court martialed secretly without even given a chance to defend themselves in court and 17 were executed by firing squad in July. As a result of it all, the Kodoha faction dissolved and the Toseiha faction reigned supreme.    On the morning of July 8th of 1937 came the Marco Polo Bridge incident, a nearly identical false flag operation to what occurred at Mukden in 1931. Hirohito's reaction was first to consider the possible threat of the USSR. He wondered if the communists would seize the opportunity to attack Manchukuo. This is what he said to Prime Minister Konoe and army minister Sugiyama “What will you do if the Soviets attack us from the rear?” he asked the prince. Kan'in answered, “I believe the army will rise to the occasion.” The emperor repeated his question: “That's no more than army dogma. What will you actually do in the unlikely event that Soviet [forces] attack?” The prince said only, “We will have no choice.” His Majesty seemed very dissatisfied.    Hirohito demanded to know what contingency plans existed. After this he approved the decision of the Konoe cabinet to move troops into Northern China and fixed his seal to the orders of dispatch. The emperor had tacitly agreed to it all from the start. With each action taken for the following months, Hirohito would explicitly sanction them after the fact. In his mind he kept thinking about a fight with the USSR, he believed he had no choice in the China matter. All of his top ranking officials like Sugiyama would tell him “even if war with China came… it could be finished up within two or three months”. Hirohito was not convinced, he went to Konoe, to imperial conferences, to other military officials to get their views. None convinced him but as Hirohito put it  “they agreed with each other on the time factor, and that made a big difference; so all right, we'll go ahead.”     Two weeks into the conflict, the kwangtung army and Korean army were reinforced by 3 divisions from Japan and on July 25th were reaching Beijing. What did the man who was not responsible in such decision making say? On July 27 Hirohito sanctioned an imperial order directing the commander of the China Garrison Force to “chastise the Chinese army in the Peking-Tientsin area and bring stability to the main strategic places in that region.” Hirohito wanted a killing blow to end the war, and thus he escalated the incident. Historian Fujiwara Akira noted “it was the [Konoe] government itself that had resolved on war, dispatched an army, and expanded the conflict,” and Hirohito had fully supported it”   Chiang Kai-shek abandoned northern China pulling into the Interior and unleashed a campaign in Shanghai to draw the Japanese into a battle showcased in front of western audiences. Chiang Kai-shek tossed the creme of his military all into Shanghai to make it as long and explosive as possible to try and win support from other great powers. On August 18 Hirohito summoned his army and navy chiefs for a pointed recommendation. The war, he told them, “is gradually spreading; our situation in Shanghai is critical; Tsingtao is also at risk. If under these circumstances we try to deploy troops everywhere, the war will merely drag on and on. Wouldn't it be better to concentrate a large force at the most critical point and deliver one overwhelming blow? Based on our attitude of fairness, Do you, have in hand plans for such action? In other words, do we have any way worked out to force the Chinese to reflect on their actions?”   The chiefs of staff returned 3 days later with an aerial campaign to break China's will to fight and strategic cities needed to be seized. Hirohito gave his sanction and on August 31st gave the order “for the Dispatch of the North China Area Army. [D]estroy the enemy's will to fight and wipe out resistance in the central part of Hepei Province,” Over the course of weeks Hirohito sanctioned 6 troop mobilizations to the Shanghai area where the fighting had bogged down. Then he sanctioned 3 divisions from Taiwan to Shanghai, but for units in northern Manchuria to stand guard firmly in case the USSR attacked. The entire time this was happening both China and Japan referred to it as an incident and not a real war lest either of them lose the backing of their great power allies. Japan needed oil, iron and rubber from America, China was likewise received materials from the USSR/America/Britain and even Germany.    By november the war was not going well and Hirohito had the Imperial Headquarters established within his palace as a means to exercise his constitutional role as supreme commander, the army and navy would act in concert. For a few hours in the morning a few days every week, the chiefs of staff, army and navy ministers and chiefs of operations would meet with Hirohito. At these imperial conferences Hirohito presided over and approved decisions impacting the war. This was Hirohito's device for legally transforming the will of the emperor into the will of the state. Hirohito not only involved himself, sometimes on a daily basis he would shape strategy and decide the planning, timing and so on of military campaigns. He even intervened in ongoing field operations. He monitored and occasionally issued orders through commanders to subordinate units. Now I can't go through the entire 1937-1945 war and showcase all the things he did but I will highlight things I think we're important.    On November 9th, the Shanghai battle was finally falling apart for the Chinese as they began a withdrawal to the Nanking area some 180 miles away. The Japanese forces chased them and for the first time were really coming into direct contact with Chinese civilians, when it came to Shanghai most had evacuated the areas. The Japanese burned, plundered and raped villages and towns as they marched towards Nanking. On december 1st, Hirohito's imperial HQ ordered the 10th army and Shanghai expeditionary force to close in on Nanking from different directions, a pincer maneuver. Prince Asaka took command of the Shanghai expeditionary force and General Matsui commanded the Central China Area Army consisted of the Shanghai force and 10th army. Asaka led the forces to assault the walled city of Nanking with a population estimated to be 4-5 hundred thousand and it would fall on December 13th. Was there an order to “rape Nanking”, no. The Imperial HQ did not order the total extermination of the Chinese in Nanking, they had ordered an encirclement campaign. However, the standing orders at this time were to take no prisoners. Once Nanking fell, the Japanese began to execute en massage military prisoners and unarmed troops who surrendered willingly. There was a orgy of rape, arson, pillage and murder. The horror was seen in Nanking and the 6 adjacent villages over the course of 3 months far exceeding any atrocities seen during the battle for Shanghai or even the march to Nanking. General Nakajima's 16th division on its first day in Nanking was estimated to have murdered 30,000 POWs. Estimate range insanely, but perhaps 200,000 POW's and civilians were butchered over the course of 6 weeks.   Prince Asaka the 54 year old grand uncle to Hirohito and other members of the Imperial Family commanded the attack on Nanking and supervised the horrors. 49 year old General Prince Higashikuni chief of the army air force alongside Prince Kan'in knew of the atrocities occurring. Army minister Sugiyama knew, many middle echelon officers of the Imperial HQ knew. Hirohito was at the top of the chain of command, there is no way he was not informed. Hirohito followed the war extensively, reading daily reports, questioned his aides. It was under his orders that his army “chastise China”, but did he show any concern for the breakdown of his army's discipline? There is no documented evidence he ordered an investigation, all we are met with as historians is a bizarre period of silence. Hirohito goes from supervising the war with OCD precision, to silence, then back to normal precision. Did Hirohito show anything publicly to show angry, displeasure or remorse, at the time he energetically began spurring his generals and admirals on their great victories and the national project to induce “Chinese self-reflection”.    On November 24th Hirohito gave an after the fact sanction to the decision of General Matsui to attack and occupy Nanking. Hirohito was informed the city was going to be bombarded by aircraft and artillery and he sanctioned that as well. That was basically him removing any restrictions on the army's conduct. On December 14th the day after Nankings fall, he made an imperial message to his chiefs of staff expressing his pleasure at the news of the city's capture and occupation. Hirohito granted General Matsui an imperial rescript for his great military accomplishments in 1938 and gave the order of the golden early to Prince Asaka in 1940. Perhaps Hirohito privately agonized over what happened, but publicly did nothing about the conduct of his armed forces, especially in regards to the treatment of POW's.   Emperor Hirohito was presented with several opportunities to cause cease-fires or peace settlements during the war years. One of the best possible moments to end it all came during the attack on Naking when Chiang Kai-sheks military were in disarray. Chiang Kai-shek had hoped to end the fighting by enticing the other great powers to intervene. At the 9 power treaty conference in Brussel in november of 1937, Britain and the US proposed boycotting Japan. However the conference ended without any sanctions being enacted upon Japan. The Konoe government and Imperial HQ immediately expanded the combat zone. Chiang Kai-shek in desperation accepted a previous offer by Germany to mediate. Oscar Trautmann, the German ambassador to China attempted to negotiate with Japan, but it failed. China was offered harsh terms; to formally recognize Manchukuo, cooperate with it and Japan to fight communism, permit the indefinite stationg of Japanese forces and pay war reparations.    On January 9th of 1938, Imperial HQ formed a policy for handling the China incident which was reported to Hirohito. Konoe asked Hirohito to convene an imperial conference for it, but not to speak out at it  “For we just want to formally decide the matter in your majesty's presence.” Konoe and Hirohito were concerned with anti expansionists within the army general staff and wanted to prevent German interference in Japanese affairs. On January 11th, the policy was showcased and adopted, there would be no peace until Chiang kai-shek's regime was dissolved and a more compliant regime followed. Hirohito presided over the conference in full army dress uniform and gave his approval. He sat there for 27 minutes without uttering a word, appearing to be neutral in the matter, though in fact he was firmly backing a stronger military policy towards China.    The Konoe cabinet inaugurated a second phase to the China incident, greatly escalating the war. By this point in time Japanese had seen combat casualties at 62,007 killed, 160,000 wounded. In 1939 it would be 30,081 killed, 55,970 wounded, then 15,827 killed and 72,653 wounded in 1940. Major cities were under Japanese control ranging from the north east and south. Chiang Kai-shek fled to Chongqing, the war was deadlocked without any prospect of victory in sight.    On July 11 of 1938, the commander of the 19th division fought a border clash with the USSR known to us in the west as the battle of Lake Khasan. It was a costly defeat for Japan and in the diary of Harada Kumao he noted Hirohito scolded Army minister Itagaki “Hereafter not a single soldier is to be moved without my permission.” When it looked like the USSR would not press for a counter attack across the border, Hirohito gave the order for offensives in China to recommence, again an example of him deciding when to lay down the hammer. Konoe resigned in disgrace in 1939 having failed to bring the China war to an end and being outed by his colleagues who sought an alliance with Germany, which he did not agree with. His successor was Hiranuma a man Hirohito considered a outright fascist. Hiranuma only received the job because he promised Hirohito he would not make enemies of Britain or the US by entering in a hasty alliance with Nazi Germany. However his enter prime ministership would be engulfed by the alliance question.   In May of 1939 there was another border clash with the USSR, the battle of Khalkhin Gol. This one was much larger in scale, involving armored warfare, aircraft and though it seems it was not used, the Japanese brought biological warfare weapons as well. The Japanese had nearly 20,000 casualties, it was an unbelievable defeat that shocked everyone. Hirohito refrained from punishing anyone because they technically followed orders based on a document “outline for dealing with disputes along the manchurian soviet border” that Hirohito had sanctioned shortly before the conflict arose.   In July of 1939, the US told Hiranuma's government they intended not to renew the US-Japan treaty of commerce and navigation. Until this point Roosevelt had been very lenient towards Japan, but now it looked to him war would break out in europe and he wanted Japan to know they could expect serious economic sanctions if they escalated things. Hirohito complained to his chief aide de camp Hata Shunroku on August 5th “It could be a great blow to scrap metal and oil”. Then suddenly as Japan was engaging in a truce with the USSR to stop the border conflict, Germany shocked the world and signed a nonaggression pact with them. This completely contravened the 1936 Japan-German anti-comintern pact. Hiranuma resigned in disgrace on august 28th.    Hirohito was livid and scolded many of his top officials and forced the appointment of General Abe to prime minister and demanded of him “to cooperate with the US and Britain and preserve internal order”. Then Germany invaded Poland and began a new European War. Abe's cabinet collapsed from the unbelievable amount of international actions by January 14th 1940. Hirohito appointed Admiral Yonai as prime minister  and General Tojo to vice army minister. As we have seen Hirohito played a active role appointing high level personnel and imposed conditions upon their appointments.    Hirohito dictated what Yonai was to do, who he was to appoint to certain positions so on and so forth. When a large part of the military were calling for an alliance with Germany, Hirohito resisted, arguing Japan should focus on the China war and not ally itself to Germany unless it was to counter the USSR. Three months passed by and Germany began invading western europe. Norway fell, Denmark fell, Luxembourg, Belgium, the netherlands and then France, it was simply stunning. While Japan had been locked in a deadlock against China, Germany was crushing multiple nations with ease, and this had a large effect on asia. Britain, France and the Netherlands could not hope to protect their holdings in asia. But Hirohito kept pressuring Yonai not to begin any talks of an alliance, and the military leaders forced Yonai's cabinet to collapse.    So Hirohito stood by while Hiranuma, Abe and Yonai met each crisis and collapses. He watched as the China war went nowhere and the military was gradually pushing for the Nanshin-ron doctrine to open a southern war up with the west. Not once did he make a public effort on his lonesome to end the war in China. Japan's demands of China were unchanged, relations with the west were getting worse each day. The China war was undeclared, hell it was from the Japanese viewpoint “chastising China”. Japan was no respecting any rules of war in China, atrocities were performed regularly and for that Hirohito shared responsibility. For he alone was free to act in this area, he needed to act, but he did not. He could have intervened and insisted on respecting the rules of war, especially in regards to POW's and the results could have been dramatically different. Hirohito bore direct responsibility for the use of poison gas upon Chinese and Mongolian combatants and non combatants even before the undeclared war of 1937.    Then on July 28th of 1937 Hirohito made his first directive authorizing the use of chemical weapons which was transmitted by the chief of the army general staff prince Kan'in. It stated that in mopping up the Beijing-Tientsin area, “[Y]ou may use tear gas at suitable times.” Then on September 11th of 1937 he transmitted again through Kan'in the authorization to deploy special chemical warfare units in Shanghai. Gas weapons were one weapon the imperial HQ, aka Hirohito held effective control over throughout the China war. Front line units were never free to employ it at their own discretion, it required explicit authorization from the imperial HQ. During the Wuhan offensive of August to October 1938, imperial HQ authorized the use of poison gas 375 separate times. Hirohito authorized on May 15th of 1939 the carrying out of field studies of chemical warfare along the Manchukuo-soviet border.  In 1940 Hirohito sanctioned the first experimental use of bacteriological weapons in China, though there is no documented evidence of this, given the nature of how he micro managed everything it goes without saying he would have treated it the same as the poison gas. He was a man of science, a person who questioned everything and refused to put his seal on orders without first examining them. Imperial HQ directives went to unit 731 and as a rule Hirohito overlooked them. There again is no documents directly linking him to it, but Hirohito should be held responsibility for strategic bombing campaigns performing on cities like Chongqing. Alongside such horror Hirohito sanctioned annihilation campaigns in China. Such military campaigns were on the scale of what occurred at Nanking. Take for example the Hebei offensive which saw the infamous “three alls policy, burn all, kill all, steal all”.    Before Pearl Harbor and the ushering in of the war against the west, look at the scene that had unfolded. China and Japan were not officially at war until December of 1941. Not to say it would have been easy by any means, but look at the countless opportunities the man, emperor, so called god if you will, held in his hands to stop it all or at the very least stop escalating it. Why did he not do so? To protect the Kokutai. Above all else, the role and survival of the emperor's divinity over the people of Japan was always at the forefront of his mind. He did what he thought was always necessary to thwart threats internal and external. He allowed his military to do horrible things, because they did so in his name, and likewise they were a threat to him. I know its abrupt to end it like this, but for those of you who perhaps say to yourself “well he really was powerless to stop it, they would have killed him or something”, who chose suddenly to intervene in 1945 and made the decision to surrender?

The Space Show Presents Dr. Doug Plata on Elon Musk, Sunday, 11-16-25Brief Summary: The program began with technical discussions and introductions for a space show featuring Dr. Doug Plata as the guest, followed by coverage of Blue Origin's successful New Glenn launch and their future plans including a NASA moon mission. The conversation then delved into Elon Musk's motivations and ventures, exploring how his philosophical beliefs about life's meaning and civilization's future have driven his various companies including SpaceX, Tesla, and Twitter. The discussion concluded with an analysis of Musk's influence on AI development, population concerns, and his acquisition of Twitter, while emphasizing the importance of truth and careful decision-making in his future endeavors. Dr. Plata said he that for this discussion, he wanted to “address how Elon came to his personal philosophy after an existential crisis of meaning when he was age 12 and his belief that what is most important is the survival of human intelligence and civilization explains very well why he puts his personal time into some ventures (e.g. SpaceX) and why he doesn't put much time into others (e.g. Boring Company). The civilizational aspect explains his pro-natal arguments / actions and also his apparently counter-productive foray into Twitter and politics.”Detailed Summary: We started out by talking about the significance of the recent Blue Origin launch before David introduced Doug as the guest for the Sunday afternoon West Coast Space Show. David mentioned upcoming guests for the week, including Leonard David, Eric Berger, Cat Bolish, and Dr. Avi Loeb. As Wisdom Team then discussed Blue Origin's successful New Glenn launch, which delivered two NASA satellites to Mars and landed on a drone ship. They praised the landing accuracy and the innovative landing system that uses sparks to secure the rocket on the ship. Doug mentioned that Blue Origin is planning to launch their own Kuiper (rebranded to Leo) constellation, which will provide revenue for the company. We also discussed Blue Origin's upcoming moon mission for NASA's Artemis program and potential future launches for the Department of Defense, pending certification by the Space Force.Our team discussed Elon Musk's philosophy and ventures, with Doug presenting a hypothesis that Musk's search for the meaning of life drives his focus on advancing human civilization through technology. They explored how Musk's experiences, including an existential crisis at age 12 and his fascination with “Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,” shaped his belief that the path to understanding the universe's meaning is through technological advancement and exploration. The discussion highlighted how Musk's ventures, from SpaceX to Twitter, align with this philosophical perspective, though some participants expressed concerns about his political involvement.The team discussed Elon Musk's motivations and communication style, with David questioning whether Musk cares about public perception and Marshall comparing him to other engineers who pursue leading-edge technology. Doug presented research on Musk's childhood, including his struggles with bullying and depression, and how reading “Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy” helped him develop a philosophy of curiosity. The discussion touched on Musk's autistic traits and his ambitious projects, with Marshall noting that his success allows him to pursue risky ventures without financial ruin.Doug discussed Elon Musk's ventures and philosophy, focusing on how his actions align with his existential goals of preserving human intelligence and finding the meaning of life. Doug explained that Musk's creation of SpaceX and Tesla, despite their initial financial risks, were driven by his desire to establish a self-sustaining city on Mars to ensure humanity's long-term survival. The discussion also touched on Musk's transition to sustainable energy through Tesla and his role in the current administration, with Peter noting that the media's portrayal of Musk has changed over time.Doug led a discussion about Elon Musk's motivations and ventures, focusing on his founding of SpaceX in 2001 after being frustrated by the lack of access to rocket launches for his Mars Oasis project. They explored how Musk's concerns about energy sustainability and civilization's future influenced his decision to start Tesla, which he viewed as part of a broader strategy to transition to an electric economy. The discussion also covered Musk's approach to other ventures like The Boring Company, noting that while he supported and promoted these projects, he delegated day-to-day leadership to others as they didn't align as closely with his existential and civilization-focused goals as SpaceX and Tesla did.We discussed Elon Musk's ventures and their potential connection to his goal of establishing a human colony on Mars. They explored how projects like Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink, and humanoid robots could indirectly support Mars development through revenue generation. Marshall and Doug agreed that while these ventures aren't essential for Mars colonization, they have valuable side benefits. The conversation also touched on Musk's concerns about AI's existential risks, including his involvement with OpenAI and his recent call for a pause in AI development to address these concerns.Our Wisdom Team discussed Elon Musk's views on AI and population decline. Doug explained that Musk has shifted from being an observer to an active participant in AI development, aiming to direct its growth in a beneficial way. They also discussed Musk's pronatalist views and concerns about population collapse in Japan and South Korea. Marshall and Doug shared statistics on fertility rates in China and the United States. David raised concerns about Medicare fraud and suggested that government support for IVF could help address declining birth rates. This part of the conversation concluded with a brief discussion on Musk's involvement with Twitter and his political stance.The team discussed Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter and his philosophy regarding free speech as essential for technological advancement and civilization's progress. They explored how Musk's political actions, including his support for Trump and concerns about immigration, were motivated by his belief in preserving Western civilization and free speech. The discussion concluded with concerns about misinformation surrounding Musk and the challenges of finding accurate information about his ventures, with Philip suggesting the need to combat misinformation with truth rather than counter it with more misinformation.A big part of the discussion focused on Elon Musk's influence and future impact, with Doug presenting a comprehensive analysis of Musk's ventures and motivations. They explored Musk's role in AI development through Neuralink, with concerns raised about AI's potential to outpace human capabilities. The panelists agreed that while Musk's ventures have been largely positive, he should be cautious about AI development and political involvement. The discussion concluded with messages to Musk emphasizing the importance of truth, careful decision-making, and continued focus on space exploration.Please note that our guest, Dr. Doug Plata, is a practicing medical doctor, not a psychologist or psychiatrist. The analysis and ideas he presented regarding Mr. Musk were his own.If you are listening to the audio of this program on The Space Show website, you might want to check out the Zoom video on our Substack page, doctorspace.substack.com.Please remember we are in our annual fundraising drive to support the program for 2026. Please donate either through PayPal on the right side of our home page, www.thespaceshow.com, Zelle using david@onegiantleapfoundation.org or Substack using doctorspace.substack.com.Thank you.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4463: ZOOM: Leonard David | Tuesday 18 Nov 2025 700PM PTGuests: Leonard DavidZOOM: Leonard returns with news and perspectives that only he has for our space industry. You don't want to miss our program.Broadcast 4464 Hotel Mars with Eric Berger | Wednesday 19 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Eric Berger, John Batchelor, Dr. David LivingstonEric reports on the Blue Origin New Glenn successful test flight and moreBroadcast 4465: ZOOM: Kathryn Bolish | Friday 21 Nov 2025 930AM PTGuests: Kathryn BolishZOOM: Kathryn Bolish is CEO of WEX Foundation re stem and much more Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

John Batchelor and I welcomed Cal Tech Professor Matthew Graham to Hotel Mars to discusses the most powerful black hole flare ever recorded, equal in brightness to about 10 trillion suns known and referred to as an Active Galactic Nucleus (AGN). It is believed and our guest explained that material falling into the supermassive black hole forms an accretion disc which releasing both massive and intense radiation. This 10-billion-year-old event (10 billion light years from Earth) was detected using computer cameras and multiple terrestrial telescopes. Dr. Graham explained that these black holes are ancient “seeds” of galaxies, acting as cosmic vacuum cleaners, such as when a large star gets shredded. This Hotel Mars program was in two segments totaling about 19.5 minutes.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4462: Zoom: Dr. Doug Plata | Sunday 16 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Doug Plata Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The Space Show Presents Dr. Daniel Whiteson on his new book, “Do Aliens Speak Physics” Friday, 11-14-25Brief Summary:Our program began with introductions and discussions about alternative physics theories, including hyperdimensional physics, and the challenges of accepting unconventional ideas in the scientific community. The group explored various topics related to extraterrestrial life and communication, including the nature of mathematics, the potential for alien civilizations, and the challenges of decoding alien messages. They concluded by discussing unidentified aerial phenomena, the possibility of discovering extraterrestrial life, and the difficulties of communicating with alien civilizations, while acknowledging the skepticism of most physicists regarding philosophical questions about the nature of physics and reality.Detailed full summary:David, Dr. Daniel Whiteson (our guest) and John Jossy discussed alternative physics theories, including the brief mention of hyperdimensional physics (if real), and the challenges of accepting unconventional ideas in the scientific community. John Jossy, a physicist & astronomy major at Cal and now a retired engineer, shared his educational background and interest in astronomy, expressing excitement for the upcoming discussion on life and the universe. The group also touched on the importance of traditional science education and the evolution of science requirements in universities that seem weaker today than yesteryear.The meeting recording started with a discussion about Andy Weir's book, “Project Hail Mary,” including its screenplay adaptation by the same person who wrote “The Martian.” Daniel expressed admiration for the book's creativity, particularly in its portrayal of alien interactions. David then introduced the show's format and Wisdom Team participants, including Marshall Martin, a retired software engineer with an engineering perspective, and John Hunt, a physics advisor to David and TSS. David explained his background in business and his interest in space and science, as well as his son's experience with cystic fibrosis and the advancements in medical technology which led him to many lessons learned re media, science and medical reporting, narrow versus broad minded thinking while remaining grounded in reality. The Team discussed the potential for alien contact and the importance of science and media in shaping public perception of future technologies. The conversation ended with an announcement of upcoming guests and a reminder about the show's fundraising campaign which is essential to Space Show continuance as it is a 100% listener supported non-profit program.Daniel discussed his book “Do Aliens Speak Physics?” which explores the question of whether physics is universal and if aliens would necessarily understand it in the same way as humans. He emphasized the importance of remaining open-minded about potential alternative ways of understanding the universe, as current data only supports the universality of physics within our observable universe. Daniel explained his decision to write the book in a light-hearted, accessible format with humor and illustrations to make complex concepts more approachable for readers. David raised the possibility that aliens might perceive and interact with the universe in fundamentally different ways than humans, potentially challenging our current understanding of physics and conservation laws.Daniel discussed the nature of physics and reality, exploring the possibility of multiple ways to describe the universe. He explained that while our current models of physics work well, they are based on philosophical assumptions rather than scientific evidence. Daniel suggested that the universe could be much stranger than we imagine, and that our intuitive understanding may not align with the true nature of reality. He also touched on the limitations of our senses and how they shape our perception of the universe, highlighting the potential for alien physics to be fundamentally different from our own.The Wisdom Team discussed the challenges of communicating with extraterrestrial life, focusing on two scenarios: receiving a message from aliens and their physical arrival on Earth. Daniel and David explored the difficulties of decoding alien messages, highlighting the arbitrary nature of language encoding and the lack of a Rosetta Stone for alien languages. They emphasized that even understanding human languages without cultural context is challenging, making the prospect of decoding alien messages seem hopeful but uncertain. The discussion concluded that direct physical interaction with aliens might offer a more promising avenue for communication, as it would provide a shared context for building understanding.The Wisdom Team discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence and the nature of mathematics in the universe. Daniel and David explored the idea that mathematics might not be universal, while John Hunt suggested that alien species could have different senses and physical capabilities. Daniel shared his experiences with the elegance of mathematical descriptions in physics, but also acknowledged the arguments of mathematician Field, the author of the classic “Science Without Numbers,” that mathematics could be a human construct rather than a universal language. The discussion raised questions about whether aliens could understand the universe differently, and whether mathematics is necessary for explaining physical phenomena.We continued discussing the nature of mathematics and its potential alternatives, with Daniel explaining that while mathematicians seek universal axioms, physicists are more flexible in their approach, often modifying axioms to better describe observations. Marshall challenged the notion of alternative foundations to Euclidean geometry, while John Jossy focused on the universality of the four fundamental forces, suggesting that even aliens would likely recognize these forces despite different methods of perception and communication.Daniel discussed the possibility that alien civilizations might not share humanity's scientific approach to understanding the universe, suggesting that technological advancement could occur without a deep understanding of fundamental physics. He emphasized that human descriptions of the universe are approximate and historically contingent, leading to the idea that there could be multiple valid ways to describe and interact with the universe. David asked about the best way to attempt contact with aliens, given potential incompatibilities in communication methods. Daniel suggested building von Neumann probes for exploration, noting the large distances involved and the potential for exponential reproduction, while acknowledging the ethical and practical challenges of such an endeavor.Daniel and David discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial life and the potential for discovering intelligent beings with different ways of understanding the universe. Daniel emphasized the excitement of finding colleagues with similar interests but also highlighted the value of encountering beings who challenge human assumptions about mathematics and physics. He suggested that discovering alien intelligence that operates differently from humans could offer profound insights into the nature of human existence. David raised a question about the role of a universal God in the context of alien life, prompting Daniel to reflect on the possibility that such a God might not necessarily be the same for all intelligent beings.Daniel and David discussed the potential for extraterrestrial life and the implications for human understanding of the universe. Daniel suggested that aliens might have diverse beliefs and cultures, including religious and scientific perspectives, which could challenge human concepts of God and faith. David shared a perspective from a Chabad rabbi that equates scientific and religious faith, but Daniel emphasized the self-correcting nature of science as a key distinction given that scientific faith requires data. Religious faith is usually based on stories, not quantifiable data. Marshall raised the possibility of using artificial intelligence to communicate with aliens, but Daniel expressed doubt that AI could truly understand the universe, though it might assist in decoding alien communications.As we were nearing the end of the program, our Wisdom Team discussed the possibility of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) and extraterrestrial life, with Daniel expressing skepticism despite wanting to believe in aliens. John Hunt shared his perspective on the pervasive nature of UAP reports over the past 80 years and the government's history of disinformation. They explored potential methods of communication with aliens, with Daniel suggesting starting with mathematics and using a broad range of sensors to detect signals. David raised questions about Earth's signal leakage and the potential for extraterrestrial civilizations to detect us, suggesting that light-based communication might be more effective than radio waves, assuming we used the best wave lengths for such communication.In conclusion, our discussion focused on the challenges of communicating with extraterrestrial civilizations, with Daniel explaining that while powerful astrophysical phenomena like quasars emit intense signals, harnessing such energy for communication would be impractical and potentially dangerous. Daniel emphasized the difficulty of distinguishing between natural signals and potential alien communications due to our limited understanding of the universe, using examples like the WOW signal and cosmic rays to illustrate this challenge. The conversation concluded with Daniel expressing optimism about the possibility of discovering extraterrestrial life, while acknowledging that most physicists are skeptical of philosophical questions about the nature of physics and reality.If you are reading the summary on The Space Show website, try Substack and watch the Zoom video: doctorspace.substack.com. Please don't forget that we are in our fund raising period to support TSS for the coming year. Please donate now. Let me know if you have questions.drspace@thespaceshow.com. Thank you very much.Special thanks to our sponsors:Northrup Grumman, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Helix Space in Luxembourg, Celestis Memorial Spaceflights, Astrox Corporation, Dr. Haym Benaroya of Rutgers University, The Space Settlement Progress Blog by John Jossy, The Atlantis Project, and Artless EntertainmentOur Toll Free Line for Live Broadcasts: 1-866-687-7223 (Not in service at this time)For real time program participation, email Dr. Space at: drspace@thespaceshow.com for instructions and access.The Space Show is a non-profit 501C3 through its parent, One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. To donate via Pay Pal, use:To donate with Zelle, use the email address: david@onegiantleapfoundation.org.If you prefer donating with a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation and mail to:One Giant Leap Foundation, 11035 Lavender Hill Drive Ste. 160-306 Las Vegas, NV 89135Upcoming Programs:Broadcast 4462: Zoom: Dr. Doug Plata | Sunday 16 Nov 2025 1200PM PTGuests: Dr. Doug Plata Get full access to The Space Show-One Giant Leap Foundation at doctorspace.substack.com/subscribe

The FC crew reacts to Germany's win over Luxembourg despite not having their best effort. Then, reaction to Cristiano Ronaldo potentially facing a match ban in the 2026 World Cup if Portugal do qualify. Then, discussion on Gattuso's comments on the playoff system in World Cup qualification. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

John Murray, Ali Bruce-Ball & Conor McNamara talk football, travel & language after Cristiano Ronaldo sees red as Republic of Ireland beat Portugal, and England beat Serbia. What about the ‘mind-altering' shoes some of the England players are wearing? There's a European theme to Clash of the Commentators. And suggestions always welcome for our Great Glossary of Football Commentary and unintended pub names from football commentary - WhatsApp voicenotes to 08000 289 369 & emails to TCV@bbc.co.uk00:40 Conor fresh from Ireland-Portugal 04:40 Takeaways from England-Serbia 06:05 Mind-altering shoes & commentary attire 16:05 5 Live commentaries this weekend 18:00 John prepares for trip to Albania 24:55 Unintended (and intended) pub names 33:15 Clash of the Commentators 41:45 Great Glossary of Football Commentary 52:55 Magazine memories5 Live / BBC Sounds Premier League commentaries: Fri 1945 Slovakia v Northern Ireland on Sports Extra, Sat 1330 Man City v Man Utd in WSL on Sports Extra, Sat 1700 Liechtenstein v Wales on Sports Extra, Sat 1945 Greece v Scotland on 5 Live, Sun 1200 Liverpool v Chelsea in WSL on Sports Extra, Sun 1200 Brighton v Leicester in WSL on Sports Extra 2, Sun 1430 Tottenham v Arsenal in WSL on 5 Live, Sun 1700 Albania v England on 5 Live, Mon 1945 Northern Ireland v Luxembourg on Sports Extra, Tue 1945 Scotland v Denmark on 5 Live, Tue 1945 Wales v North Macedonia on Sports Extra, Wed 2000 Arsenal v Real Madrid in UWCL on 5 Live, Thu 2000 Chelsea v Barcelona in UWCL on 5 Live.Glossary so far (in alphabetical order):DIVISION ONE Bosman, Cruyff Turn, Dead-ball specialist, Fox in the box, Giving the goalkeeper the eyes, Head tennis, Hibs it, In a good moment, Leading the line The Maradona, Olimpico, Onion bag, Panenka, Rabona, Scorpion kick, Spursy, Tiki-taka, Where the kookaburra sleeps, Where the owl sleeps, Where the spiders sleep.DIVISION TWO Ball stays hit, Business end, Came down with snow on it, Cauldron atmosphere Coat is on a shoogly peg, Come back to haunt them, Easy tap-in, Daisycutter, First cab off the rank, Has that in his locker, High wide and not very handsome, Howler, One for the cameras, One for the purists, Played us off the park, Purple patch, Put their laces through it, Rolls Royce, Root and branch review, Row Z, Seats on the plane, Show across the bows, Stramash, Taking one for the team, That's great… (football), Thunderous strike.UNSORTED 2-0 is a dangerous score, After you Claude, All-Premier League affair, Aplomb, Bag/box of tricks, Brace, Brandished, Bread and butter, Breaking the deadlock, Bundled over the line, Champions elect / champions apparent, Clinical finish, Commentator's curse, Coupon buster, Cultured/Educated left foot, Denied by the woodwork, Draught excluder, Elimination line, Fellow countryman, Foot race, Formerly of this parish, Free hit, Goalkeepers' Union, Goalmouth scramble, Good touch for a big man, Honeymoon Period, In and around, In the shop window, Keeping ball under their spell, Keystone Cops defending, Languishing, Loitering with intent, Marching orders, Nestle in the bottom corner, Numbered derbies, Nutmeg, Opposite number, Park the bus, PK for penalty-kick, Postage stamp, Put it in the mixer, Rasping shot, Red wine not white wine, Relegation six-pointer, Rooted at the bottom, Route One, Roy of the Rovers stuff, Sending the goalkeeper the wrong way, Shooting boots, Sleeping giants, Slide rule pass, Small matter of, Spiders web, Stayed hit, Steepling, Stinging the palms, Stonewall penalty, Straight off the training ground, Taking one for the team, Team that likes to play football, Throw their cap on it, Thruppenny bit head / 50p head, Towering header, Two good feet, Turning into a basketball match, Turning into a cricket score, Usher/Shepherd the ball out of play, Walking a disciplinary tightrope, Wand of a left foot, We've got a cup tie on our hands, Winger in their pocket, Wrap foot around it, Your De Bruynes, your Gundogans etc.

What does it take to turn a struggling company into a global powerhouse? In this episode of The Greatness Machine, Darius sits down with turnaround legend Peter Cuneo, the executive who helped lead Marvel Entertainment from bankruptcy to becoming one of the most successful entertainment empires in history. Peter opens up about the leadership principles that guided Marvel's transformation, from rebuilding top creative talent and setting a clear strategic direction to fostering a culture of accountability and innovation. He shares how focusing on people, discipline, and long-term vision can turn even the most distressed companies into thriving, purpose-driven organizations. In this episode, Darius and Peter will discuss: Peter talks about rebuilding Marvel by bringing back top creative talent He emphasizes disciplined, strategic leadership in every turnaround The importance of a strong culture in driving long-term success Peter shares lessons on decision-making under pressure Developing future leaders through experience and mentorship The value of perseverance and clear purpose in business recovery And other topics… Peter Cuneo is an American businessman renowned for his leadership in corporate turnarounds across the media and consumer products industries. Best known for revitalizing major brands, he served as CEO of Remington Products and as Vice Chairman of Marvel Entertainment, where he helped steer the company from bankruptcy to a $4 billion sale to Disney. Over his career, Cuneo has successfully completed seven major business turnarounds, including at Clairol, Black & Decker, and Marvel. He later founded Cuneo & Company, an investment firm focused on consumer, media, and entertainment ventures, achieving notable successes such as a 13x return on the sale of Valiant Entertainment. He has also held leadership roles on several corporate boards and, in 2024, became Chairman of OCSiAl, a nanotechnology company based in Luxembourg. Sponsored by:  Indeed: Get a $75 sponsored job credit to boost your job's visibility at Indeed.com/darius. Shopify: Start your $1/month trial at Shopify.com/greatness. Brevo: Head over to brevo.com/greatness and use the code greatness to get 50% off Starter and Standard Plans for the first 3 months of an annual subscription. Masterclass: Get 15% off any annual membership at MasterClass.com/DARIUS. Connect with Peter: Website: https://www.petercuneo.com/  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-cuneo/  Book: https://www.amazon.com/Superhero-Leadership-Courage-Strength-Compassion/dp/1510783849  Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/superhero-leadership-with-peter-cuneo/id1706007621  Connect with Darius: Website: https://therealdarius.com/ Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dariusmirshahzadeh/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/imthedarius/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Thegreatnessmachine  Book: The Core Value Equation https://www.amazon.com/Core-Value-Equation-Framework-Limitless/dp/1544506708 Write a review for The Greatness Machine using this link: https://ratethispodcast.com/spreadinggreatness.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We have a small favour to ask! We've put together a survey about This Is History, and it would mean a lot to us if you could fill it out. You can find it at: https://bit.ly/4oFyVRg  Fresh from his jaw-dropping triumph at Agincourt, King Henry V rides into London not just as a victor—but as a legend. The city explodes in celebration: mock castles tower over cheering crowds, wine gushes from fountains, and the streets roar with praise for England's warrior king. But behind the spectacle, Henry is already scheming. Cold, calculating, and relentless, he wastes no time turning glory into power—securing a high-stakes alliance with Sigismund of Luxembourg. The war with France isn't over. In fact, it's only just begun. Henry's next chapter will be bigger, bolder, and even more ruthless. To learn about how France fared after Agincourt, listen back to The Enemy of My Enemy from our last miniseries, The Glass King.  Remember, you can always delve deeper into the history behind each episode by becoming a This Is History Royal Favourite on Patreon. In addition to ad-free listening and bonus episodes — now available to watch on video — you get to chat with mediaeval buffs from around the world, chat with Dan and the team, and get exclusive access to behind the scenes extras just for favourites.  Don't miss out. Sign up at patreon.com/thisishistory  –  A Sony Music Entertainment production.  Find more great podcasts from Sony Music Entertainment at sonymusic.com/podcasts  To bring your brand to life in this podcast, email podcastadsales@sonymusic.com  Learn more about your ad choices.  Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices  Written and presented by Dan Jones Producer - Alan Weedon  Senior Producer - Dominic Tyerman Executive Producer - Simon Poole Production Manager - Jen Mistri  Production coordinator - Eric Ryan  Sound Design and Mixing - Amber Devereux Head of content - Chris Skinner Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The film Nuremberg, to be released November 7th, 2025 is an American drama written, co-produced and edited by James Vanderbilt. It is based on the 2013 book, THE NAZI AND THE PSYCHIATRIST by Jack El Hai..In 1945, after his capture at the end of the Second World War, Hermann Göring arrived at an American-run detention center in war-torn Luxembourg, accompanied by sixteen suitcases and a red hatbox. The suitcases contained all manner of paraphernalia: medals, gems, two cigar cutters, silk underwear, a hot water bottle, and the equivalent of 1 million in cash. Hidden in a coffee can, a set of brass vials housed glass capsules containing a clear liquid and a white precipitate: potassium cyanide. Joining Göring in the detention center were the elite of the captured Nazi regime. Grand Admiral Dönitz; armed forces commander Wilhelm Keitel and his deputy Alfred Jodl; the mentally unstable Robert Ley; the suicidal Hans Frank; the pornographic propagandist Julius Streicher. Fifty-two senior Nazis in all, of whom the dominant figure was Göring.To ensure that the villainous captives were fit for trial at Nuremberg, the US army sent an ambitious army psychiatrist, Captain Douglas M. Kelley, to supervise their mental well-being during their detention. Kelley realized he was being offered the professional opportunity of a lifetime: to discover a distinguishing trait among these arch-criminals that would mark them as psychologically different from the rest of humanity. So began a remarkable relationship between Kelley and his captors, told here for the first time with unique access to Kelley's long-hidden papers and medical records.Kelley's was a hazardous quest, dangerous because against all his expectations he began to appreciate and understand some of the Nazi captives, none more so than the former Reichsmarshall, Hermann Göring. Evil had its charms.Joining me to discuss, NUREMBERG and the book the film is based on THE NAZI AND THE PSYCHIATRIST: Hermann Goring, Dr. Douglas M. Kelley, and a Fatal Meeting of Minds at the End of WWll—Jack El-Hai

SHOW 10-29-25 CBS EYE ON THE WORLD WITH JOHN BATCHELOR 1920 BOLIVAR IN CARACAS THE SHOW BEGINS IN THE DOUBTS ABOUT CARACAS... FIRST HOUR 9-915 Global Flashpoints: Ceasefires, Nuclear Claims, and the Legality of Venezuela Deployment Guest: Colonel Jeff McCausland Colonel Jeff McCausland assesses global conflicts, noting the Gaza ceasefire remains fragile as neither Israel nor Hamas is willing to compromise meaningfully. Russia remains defiant, having recently tested a claimed nuclear-powered missile, with Putin insisting Ukraine must surrender to achieve peace. McCausland criticizes the US deployment of a carrier battle group near Venezuela as "overkill," resembling nineteenth-century gunboat diplomacy intended to intimidate the Maduro regime. He questions the legality of kinetic action against alleged drug smugglers without Congressional approval. 915-930 VGlobal Flashpoints: Ceasefires, Nuclear Claims, and the Legality of Venezuela Deployment Guest: Colonel Jeff McCausland Colonel Jeff McCausland assesses global conflicts, noting the Gaza ceasefire remains fragile as neither Israel nor Hamas is willing to compromise meaningfully. Russia remains defiant, having recently tested a claimed nuclear-powered missile, with Putin insisting Ukraine must surrender to achieve peace. McCausland criticizes the US deployment of a carrier battle group near Venezuela as "overkill," resembling nineteenth-century gunboat diplomacy intended to intimidate the Maduro regime. He questions the legality of kinetic action against alleged drug smugglers without Congressional approval. 930-945 Analysis of US Carrier Deployment to Venezuela: Overkill for Drug Ops, Risk of Intervention Guests: Brad Bowman, Cameron McMillan Brad Bowman and Cameron McMillan analyze the massive US military buildup near Venezuela, including the USS Gerald Ford carrier strike group. They note this extraordinary accumulation of power is "orders of magnitude beyond" what is needed for stopping drug boats. The deployment conveys the "shadow of power" over the Maduro regime but raises serious concerns about constitutional war powers, high opportunity costs for US global security, and the risk of occupation similar to Iraq. 945-1000 Analysis of US Carrier Deployment to Venezuela: Overkill for Drug Ops, Risk of Intervention Guests: Brad Bowman, Cameron McMillan Brad Bowman and Cameron McMillan analyze the massive US military buildup near Venezuela, including the USS Gerald Ford carrier strike group. They note this extraordinary accumulation of power is "orders of magnitude beyond" what is needed for stopping drug boats. The deployment conveys the "shadow of power" over the Maduro regime but raises serious concerns about constitutional war powers, high opportunity costs for US global security, and the risk of occupation similar to Iraq. SECOND HOUR 10-1015 Diplomacy and Deterrence: Trump's Asia Success and the Venezuela Crisis Guest: Mary Kissel Mary Kissel reviews President Trump's successful engagement in Asia, including the ACEN conference where trade agreements and critical mineral investments were highlighted. She notes the strengthening US-Japanese partnership with Prime Minister Takayuki Sai, calling Japan the only significant military counterbalance to China in the region. Regarding the US carrier deployment near Venezuela, Kissel supports the use of deterrence but raises concerns about the legality of military strikes on alleged drug boats without a declaration of war. The political aim may be to empower Venezuelans to overthrow the Maduro regime. 1015-1030 Diplomacy and Deterrence: Trump's Asia Success and the Venezuela Crisis Guest: Mary Kissel Mary Kissel reviews President Trump's successful engagement in Asia, including the ACEN conference where trade agreements and critical mineral investments were highlighted. She notes the strengthening US-Japanese partnership with Prime Minister Takayuki Sai, calling Japan the only significant military counterbalance to China in the region. Regarding the US carrier deployment near Venezuela, Kissel supports the use of deterrence but raises concerns about the legality of military strikes on alleged drug boats without a declaration of war. The political aim may be to empower Venezuelans to overthrow the Maduro regime. 1030-1045 Canadian Media Airs Interview with Neo-Nazi-Associated Ukrainian Fighter Guest: Lev Golinkin Lev Golinkin discusses the scandal involving the Canadian Broadcasting Company, which interviewed a man associated with a neo-Nazi-led Ukrainian brigade who bore swastika tattoos. CBC subsequently blurred the symbols in the published footage. This incident reflects Canada's historical difficulty in addressing its harboring of former Nazi criminals, following the earlier scandal of Waffen SS member Ivan Hunka receiving an ovation in Parliament. Golinkin notes that while Nazi elements exist within Ukrainian forces, Russia exploits this fact for propaganda purposes to delegitimize Ukraine's struggle. 1045-1100 VCanadian Media Airs Interview with Neo-Nazi-Associated Ukrainian Fighter Guest: Lev Golinkin Lev Golinkin discusses the scandal involving the Canadian Broadcasting Company, which interviewed a man associated with a neo-Nazi-led Ukrainian brigade who bore swastika tattoos. CBC subsequently blurred the symbols in the published footage. This incident reflects Canada's historical difficulty in addressing its harboring of former Nazi criminals, following the earlier scandal of Waffen SS member Ivan Hunka receiving an ovation in Parliament. Golinkin notes that while Nazi elements exist within Ukrainian forces, Russia exploits this fact for propaganda purposes to delegitimize Ukraine's struggle.E THIRD HOUR 1100-1115 The Battle for Oceania: Remembering Daniel Suidani and Chinese Political Warfare Guest: Cleo Paskal Cleo Paskal discusses the death of Daniel Suidani, a leader from Malaita in the Solomon Islands who strongly resisted aggression from the Chinese Communist Party. Suidani's province instituted a moratorium on CCP-linked businesses. Paskal highlights how CCP proxies employed political warfare, financial pressure, and control over vital healthcare resources, such as the country's only functioning dialysis machine, to undermine him. This situation reflects broader CCP influence operations across the Indo-Pacific, including in US territories. 1115-1130 The Battle for Oceania: Remembering Daniel Suidani and Chinese Political Warfare Guest: Cleo Paskal Cleo Paskal discusses the death of Daniel Suidani, a leader from Malaita in the Solomon Islands who strongly resisted aggression from the Chinese Communist Party. Suidani's province instituted a moratorium on CCP-linked businesses. Paskal highlights how CCP proxies employed political warfare, financial pressure, and control over vital healthcare resources, such as the country's only functioning dialysis machine, to undermine him. This situation reflects broader CCP influence operations across the Indo-Pacific, including in US territories. 1130-1145 The Constitutional Authority to Deploy National Guard to Protect Federal Facilities Guest: Professor John Yoo Professor John Yoo discusses the President's inherent constitutional authority to use the National Guard to protect federal property and personnel during city disorder. Drawing on the In re Neagle case from 1890, Yoo confirms the federal government's right to use force to execute its functions on American soil. He argues that governors opposing deployment are resisting federal law enforcement, akin to segregationists resisting integration. Yoo clarifies that states can adopt "sanctuary" policies by choosing not to cooperate with federal law, but they cannot constitutionally impede federal agents from carrying out their duties. 1145-1200 The Constitutional Authority to Deploy National Guard to Protect Federal Facilities Guest: Professor John Yoo Professor John Yoo discusses the President's inherent constitutional authority to use the National Guard to protect federal property and personnel during city disorder. Drawing on the In re Neagle case from 1890, Yoo confirms the federal government's right to use force to execute its functions on American soil. He argues that governors opposing deployment are resisting federal law enforcement, akin to segregationists resisting integration. Yoo clarifies that states can adopt "sanctuary" policies by choosing not to cooperate with federal law, but they cannot constitutionally impede federal agents from carrying out their duties. FOURTH HOUR 12-1215 Global Commodities and UK Political Turmoil: Copper Prices Soar and Starmer's Tax U-Turn Guest: Simon Constable Simon Constable reports that copper prices are soaring to $5.18, up 20 percent, due to insufficient supply to meet demand from electric vehicles and artificial intelligence applications. In the United Kingdom, he notes Labour leader Keir Starmer reversed his tax pledge amidst poor productivity forecasts and failing reforms. Constable details the collapse of a high-profile China espionage case, possibly because UK espionage laws remain outdated from before World War I and China was not formally designated a hostile state at the time. He also highlights the troubling advice given by police to Israeli football fans to avoid attending a match due to safety concerns. 1215-1230 Global Commodities and UK Political Turmoil: Copper Prices Soar and Starmer's Tax U-Turn Guest: Simon Constable Simon Constable reports that copper prices are soaring to $5.18, up 20 percent, due to insufficient supply to meet demand from electric vehicles and artificial intelligence applications. In the United Kingdom, he notes Labour leader Keir Starmer reversed his tax pledge amidst poor productivity forecasts and failing reforms. Constable details the collapse of a high-profile China espionage case, possibly because UK espionage laws remain outdated from before World War I and China was not formally designated a hostile state at the time. He also highlights the troubling advice given by police to Israeli football fans to avoid attending a match due to safety concerns. 1230-1245 SpaceX Sets New Launch Records While NASA and Lunar Programs Face Delays Guest: Bob Zimmerman Bob Zimmerman discusses SpaceX setting a new record of 138 launches in one year, with Falcon 9 surpassing the total launches of the entire Space Shuttle fleet. This success is attributed to reusability, a concept NASA failed to implement profitably due to its government structure. Other topics include delays in the Griffin lunar lander, iSpace partnerships, Luxembourg's investment in space manufacturing, Russian claims about a nuclear-powered missile, and Japan's launch of an upgraded HTV cargo freighter. 1245-100 AM SpaceX Sets New Launch Records While NASA and Lunar Programs Face Delays Guest: Bob Zimmerman Bob Zimmerman discusses SpaceX setting a new record of 138 launches in one year, with Falcon 9 surpassing the total launches of the entire Space Shuttle fleet. This success is attributed to reusability, a concept NASA failed to implement profitably due to its government structure. Other topics include delays in the Griffin lunar lander, iSpace partnerships, Luxembourg's investment in space manufacturing, Russian claims about a nuclear-powered missile, and Japan's launch of an upgraded HTV cargo freighter.