Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
15: A sober look at the evidence
159 Plays4 months ago
In this episode, we delve into the scientific study of UFOs with Karl Svozil, a distinguished Austrian physicist and retired professor from the Institute for Theoretical Physics at Vienna Technical University. Despite the scarcity of rigorous studies on UFOs due to the ambiguous nature of the data and the often subjective interpretations within ufology, Svozil's new book, "UFOs: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena: Observations, Explanations, and Speculations," stands out as a beacon of rationality.
Join us as we explore Svozil's meticulous research and his efforts to bring scientific rigour to the study of UFOs. With a background that includes significant contributions to quantum theory and theoretical physics, Svozil applies his expertise to UFOs. We discuss the key findings of his book and how they contribute to a clearer understanding of UFO phenomena, cutting through the haze of dubious claims and speculative theories.
More on Karl Svozil’s work:
His book, UFOs: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena: Observations, Explanations and Speculations: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-34398-8
Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Karl-Svozil
Get in touch with the show
Twitter/X: @EuropeanUFOs
Instagram: europeanufos
Facebook: European UFOs
Email: [email protected]
Support the podcast to keep it ad-free: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/europeanufos
Recommended
Transcript
Introduction to European UFOs
00:00:05
Speaker
you Hello and welcome to European UFOs. My name is Sebastian and if you liked this episode, then please leave a review on your chosen platform. Any sharing and liking you do makes a huge difference to the algorithm and is very much appreciated. Also, if you want to support me in keeping the show at free for listeners, then please go to buymeacoffee.com. Therefore, less than the price of a coffee, you can really make a difference. The link to buymeacoffee.com is in the description.
Scientific Studies and Rational Approaches
00:00:44
Speaker
Sober, scientifically minded and rigorous studies of UFOs are few and far between. Undoubtedly there are many reasons for this. There is the notorious ambiguity of UFO data, perhaps best summarised by Major General John Sanford's famous 1952 announcement that certain reports have been made by credible observers of relatively incredible things. Notably, there is also a tendency within certain circles of ufology to interpret data to serve personal goals, sometimes steeped in quasi-religious connotations. That is why Karlsvei Seel's recent book, UFOs, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, Observations, Explanations, and Speculations, is so important.
Meet Karl Swaseel
00:01:29
Speaker
It is a beacon of rationality, cutting through the mist of dubious and often unfounded positions surrounding the subject.
00:01:36
Speaker
Carl Swaseel, who is my guest today, is a highly accredited Austrian physicist who, prior to his recent retirement, was a professor at the Institute for Theoretical Physics of the Vienna Technical University. Throughout his career, he has been a visiting scholar at many top-class physics departments, including the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley. Apart from his work in quantum theory and theoretical physics, Professor Soeil has also researched the UFO phenomenon, the results of which are published in his recent book, which we will discuss today. Hello, Professor Soeil. Great to have you on the show. How are you doing?
00:02:19
Speaker
I'm fine, at least at the moment. Perfect. Well, I heard that the weather in Austria is very nice at the moment. I can't say the same of Berlin, but um you know that's sometimes how it just goes. yeah ah Professor, you have an esteemed background in quantum physics, mathematical physics, and um you've published a lot. um hundreds of papers in in physics, you are an expert in your field. And um one question I always ask my guests to begin with is, how did someone of your calibre get involved in UFO research?
Interest in UFOs and Space Exploration
00:03:01
Speaker
Well, I have to say upfront that I'm not an experiencer. So if you meet people who allegedly have seen something that resembles a UFO or have even experienced some contact of the third kind, as Heineck said, um I am not among this group. So I'm just an observer. um And ah the second question is that ah the second answer is that I really can't tell you why I'm interested. I can give you some rationalizations, like ah which are reasonable. you know I think if such object objects exist, ah this would be of high importance for physics in general.
00:03:48
Speaker
Because um even if you don't know how they function, um if you see them operating in a particular way, you get to realize that these ways are possible physically, ah which which brings us um ah closer to the search and the quest for these possibilities, because otherwise you wouldn't probably you would outrightly reject anti-gravity or or ah diminishing inertia or anything like that.
00:04:21
Speaker
These are of course very highly speculative issues, but I believe ah it's it's like expectation value. and The probability might not be very high, but if they exist, this is ah this is of great importance. So ah this is ah the rational the rationalized answer. ah The more emotional answer is that I studied physics like many physicists, but they probably they tell you in private, some told me in private, ah the that they they have utopian goals by pursuing physics. And they ended up doing standard physics because ah we have to deal with the physics of our time and not with science fiction.
00:05:04
Speaker
But their motivation primarily primarily was science fiction. And my motivation to study physics was to enable humankind to ah to reach out
Physics and Space Travel
00:05:14
Speaker
into space. So for me, ah this is one of the most important goals of physics, to ah to to enable humanity to to go beyond the solar system, ah to to develop um ah propulsion techniques, which are more elegant than today's propulsion techniques on on fire, you know um and and to ah and and to colonize or to to reach out to to the next solar systems and beyond that, which necessitates, in my opinion, a faster than light travel.
00:05:52
Speaker
And Faster Than Light Trevor is at the moment prohibited by various theories, including the special theory of relativity. um at the and to start, um but also quantum mechanics. We have what we call a peaceful coexistence between quantum mechanics, entanglement, and and special theory of relativity, and which is not prohibited by the general theory of relativity, but the general theory of relativity.
00:06:25
Speaker
is very rich in its um in its solution structure and can have various solutions that might be interpreted as not not exceeding speed of light, but making shortcuts, things like wormholes and so on and so forth. So anyway, so ah so i i I was really, if you Ask me and more ah for the emotional component. I'm i'm interested in anything that that brings us ah further down the road to Per Aspera Dastra, to the stars.
00:07:02
Speaker
yeah so it's that Thank you, and we're here today to talk about your recent book, UFOs, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, Observations, Explanations, and Speculations. um It's an extensive and and meticulously researched book, but did you have any interest um prior to that book in UFOs? I, o well, I was always interested, you know, for instance, um when I was a student, I, I had, there was the central people, who take phyive and this had a librarian who was who became interested in UFOs, but he bought books that were of, in my opinion, scientifically low quality. And was not very well received by the other staff of the library, ah in my opinion,
Condon Report's Impact
00:07:56
Speaker
correctly. ah But um when i when I was a visiting scholar at LBL in Lawrence Berkeley Lab and and ah University of California in Berkeley, one of the first things I did was ah check out the Condon Report, which which was not available in Vienna at the time.
00:08:15
Speaker
ah but was available in in in in the Berkley Library. ah By the way, ah the most important books in Berkley were all stolen out, so so this was not considered important in the general community, so it was an advantage for me. and yeah I still remember when I checked out this book, it was quite thick. very interesting ah situation. yeah yeah and I think that's how a lot of um individuals in the field get started with UFOs. You know you pick up a book that opens up more questions than ah than delivering answers and that's how you basically get hooked. on um Speaking of the Conan report, I think it really um speaks to the quality of your book that you um
00:09:09
Speaker
um Provide a very um sober assessment of the condom report because if you listen to popular ufological narratives about the condom report it's always cast in these um extremely negative one-sided terms you know that it was kind of, um a political um game right from the start trying to deny ufos and that might be you know probably is the case but that's also and a more nuanced side to it which you bring out quite well in your brook and perhaps we can talk about this later but you have this quote in your book um we're actually at the somewhere in the condom report it says that you know um
00:09:49
Speaker
We reached this conclusion, but um you know it's up for other scientists to um have their own go at it. So I think that's that's very nice. yeah I think if you read the content report ah in a scientifically balanced view, which I pretend to do, you know but there may be other people, it's just my opinion. you know ah it's it's not It's not as devastating with regards to UFOs than it appears to be.
00:10:20
Speaker
Of course, they i mean the the general impression I got when I first read the book, and I have to um admit that I didn't go too deep into the case studies. ah so So I did what everybody did. i I read the executive summary, which was, I believe, written by Condon, or at least administered, written by Condon. um he He would not say that these phenomena are not not interesting and deserve attention scientific attention, but he would say it ah doesn't imp pose any threat to the national security or aerial security of ah the United States, which certainly is correct ah in in a certain interpretation.
00:11:07
Speaker
um and um Well, the Condon Report is like a Rosetta Stone almost in understanding um how the the state was reacting and how the scientific community was reacting and it's a very lively thing. I think there is not a good documentary as yet ah published on on that report in particular and with regards to the reception of of the members of the of the committee. There is a very nice book. ah who Unfortunately, I have forgotten the the author, but I quote it in my book.
00:11:49
Speaker
um ah about a very personal experience by one of the helpers of Condon. And he seems to be very sincere and and very very much to the methodologically scientific scientific point. And he's also um ambivalent on the topic. you know so So the Condon Report is a very interesting interesting document. and I think um ambivalence is a very apt keyword to talk about this phenomenon in general and perhaps turning to your book UFOs. um In the preface of your book, you say that this might be a book about something that doesn't exist.
00:12:34
Speaker
So, um against that background, I find it super interesting, very impressive, and I you know commend you on what you achieve to um publish this extensive piece of scholarship um with a very esteemed publishing house, namely um Springer. And so how, just because I also have a background in academia, so could you just kind of take us through the journey um of writing the manuscript, reaching out to Springer on how that came about? Because I think it's a really, in my opinion, we can't overemphasize the significance this actually has for ufology in general.
00:13:20
Speaker
Thank
Publishing Challenges
00:13:21
Speaker
you. Well, it at the moment it doesn't look as if it's that significant on my end because I i don't receive any or hardly any reaction to it. But um ah my my publishing experience with Springer is a long one. I published a long time ago. I published a book on quantum logic And I'm also, you know is as almost every scientist, I believe nowadays is approached ah by publishing houses to ah to dedicate the volume i monoography or or articles for the publishing houses. And one of that was a previous book after quantum logic that concerns causality. And um I think they they
00:14:12
Speaker
they um they they got my They trusted me from what I wrote about causality of the causality book. um They trusted me ah with writing with with the UFO book. There was a question at one point um And the UFO book was not initiated by Springer, but was initiated by myself. yeah But they as I knew the editors, um and as we both valued each other highly, I think they trusted me in starting this. i mean
00:14:50
Speaker
Although they were the editor at this point, if I interpret her correctly, still is very critical about UFOs and beliefs. This is an illusion and um and and a non-topic, but it documents her her, how should I say, professionality, that that she would consider that and and finally let me publish the book. ah So ah there was also also a question um ah because I wanted, I don't want to
00:15:28
Speaker
I mean, ah it's always good to have money, but as a scientist, I'm very interested in open access. And my my third my second book, which bring up was open access. It was financed by the European community, open access. And ah I remember discussions that I said I wanted this UFO book also open access. And we decided not to because the publishing house said, well, this is this is a book that might be interesting for the channel audience and we rather have it non-open access. So this was the only, I believe, serious ah question. I wanted open access and they didn't, but I totally understand there.
00:16:19
Speaker
their objectives and that's it. yeah i can only I can only tell you very good things about my experiences with Springer. Well, that's um that's very good to know and gives me a certain optimism that this um topic will be approachable in the future by by scientists like you. um As I said earlier, before we went live, I think the only other book I'm really aware of that was published in an esteemed publishing house is Pasalka's American Cosmic a few years ago.
00:16:56
Speaker
um And um I think there are a few more coming, not not necessarily from Pasulka, but from other researchers. I think there was recently one published in Philosophy about UFOs, but I forgot the both the title and the publishing house. But I think there is a change in academia. Yeah, yeah there is by a historian, a gradient who is rather critically on this. And and ah because you can you can consider these phenomena also from a social point, sociology, historical point of view, what is the reaction? Is this a stream of thoughts, characteristic for for the societies when we enter space, you know, of course, ah then it space reflects back and say, well, maybe we have entered
00:17:45
Speaker
we We have been contacted and so on and so forth. So one can do serious research, which is uncontroversial in this. But my my experience is um it's it's it's a Nietzschean. I would say, as Nietzsche it's nietzsche pointed out, classical tragedy ah was an amalgam, merger of Apollo andtheioniso you know and And in science, um or or if if you put it in psychoanalytic terms between neurosis and psiosis. In order to to progress in science, ah you have to transgress boundaries, which which
00:18:33
Speaker
I believe necessitates speculation and and going beyond the khanom, which sometimes might sound too weird, too speculative, and so on. But on the other hand, I think you still have to to keep a firm standing on the fundamentals and the methodology. and this is I think you have to do it both, which makes it a little bit more complicated.
00:19:06
Speaker
But ah my experience is if you are genuine and say that it's speculative, and if the speculation is interesting enough, um you you get things published, even in very high ah quality channels. i may May I just mention um one of the things I was interested because I was interested in the problems in field theory, which require renormalization and and regularization. I became interested in ah measuring the dimension of space-time and fractal space-time and so on and so forth. And and I joined ah forces with ah with Anton Selinger who later received the Nobel Prize for totally different issues. But ah we we published a paper together in the about the dimension of space-time long time ago in Fusarev letters, which is arguably
00:19:59
Speaker
the best pay best food physics channel ah that that we have still. you know and and ah but But of course, we we didn't say that this is it, but we just we just said, well, this is a speculation and this needs to be measured and so on and so forth. So I i think um if you do it diligently, you can publish almost every weird idea if you are not leaving the the methodology of science. you know I even would would go so far to say that physicists are really eager to transgress the current status of physics. Physicists are very open-minded, but of course if you tell them weird stuff that they cannot verify, ah
00:20:51
Speaker
ah that's that's not That's not enough, sorry. yeah yeah but ah But it's interesting because ah most guests I had on the podcast so far were actually physicists or mathematicians and I have the suspicion that there's a keen interest in UFOs amongst that group of researchers because what you're dealing with on a day-to-day basis has in a sense no Phenomenological um or experiential part of it, I mean it's very so basically I think what math mathematics and physics allows you to do is explore spaces that are beyond um human experience in a sense.
Physicists and UFOs
00:21:38
Speaker
and um I think that's something that kind of then lends itself quite well to exploring speculative subjects like UFOs. I think that's quite interesting just in terms of a how the scientific landscape is structured and what disciplines want to engage with UFOs. Yeah, I mean, what what makes the thing interesting for a physicist is that ultimately ah you you increase the capacity to control the world, to program our universe. I mean, as Heinrich Hertz once mentioned in Principian der Mechanik, Principus of Mechanics in the foreword, he says,
00:22:18
Speaker
and that that we are creating images, and the images may be former, but we have ah ah we have to be aware that there has to be a relation between the images and the consequences of the images and the processes and the real world. and And as it turned out, um matheized mathematics is according, there is a famous paper by Wigner, ah the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in the natural sciences, but it it turned out to be extremely extremely effective um from from the historic perspective.
00:22:58
Speaker
and um And I mean, this is an open process. It still goes on. And ah this is certainly not the end of the story. so So one has to understand one's position in physics, in my opinion, um um rather not as, let's say, um the canon of truth, you know of of of preacher of truth, but of of a sincere person that takes in what has been there historically and and imagines what could be the next the progressive research program, according to Lakatos. But the contemporaries are very rarely, almost ah at no time,
00:23:47
Speaker
ah really it aware of what will be a research program that that's progressive. we are We are deep into philosophy of science here, the discussions that took place between Lakatos, Pope, Kuhn, and Firearmd. By the way, i was ah when I was in Berkeley, I also took the chance of of listening to Firearmd. So I learned to know Firearmd personally. He gave a lecture, not very well visited, but very interesting indeed. He had also a position at the Etihad. Yeah, often it's a good sign if your lectures aren't visited. way it's but but it's not it But it's not a criterion, you know, because most most of the times elections that are badly visited are bad lectures.
00:24:44
Speaker
that's thats certainly correlation i yes and How was your work on UFOs received by um your colleagues in academia? Was there overall a positive response, neutral, negative? Would it be possible to say something about that in general? Well, my immediate colleagues know response because probably they don't know and probably they also don't care because they have their other, they have their passions, you know, in science and this is good.
00:25:16
Speaker
ah And there are some who tolerate me. They know that I'm i'm ah one of those, I'm rather an artsy physicist, you know. ah So ah so they told it they they know that I like to speculate a lot and say that I speculate. So there exists this artsy type physicists and and those that are probably more neurotic and and developing according to Kuhn those things and and post are unnecessar those So i have I didn't expect a big reaction and
00:25:56
Speaker
and ah ah was of and not receiving that. so so This is according to my expectation. but may i say i I mainly wrote the book ah for my own sake you know because I wanted to study this phenomenon. It's quite entertaining also. And I also think that ah the value of the book is for those who are interested in a deeper scientific understanding. And those are not very might not be very visible, but it might help at others as i as I documented what I discovered. Probably even only ah discovered certain books.
00:26:40
Speaker
you know um ah for For instance, this book I mentioned previously on the Condon Report, this this report by ah by a helping helping hand of Condon is interesting, who was neither pro nor a contra UFOs and just gave his experiences. Or there is another book that I i could highly recommend. um It's by the, by the, by a help by the adjutant, you would say, in in German. um it's It's by the, he was part of the royal household by Peter Horsley. ah Peter Horsley was working for um ah for ah Prince Philip and he was investigating into UFOs. The British ah historically in the 50s, 60s, had two groups ah working. One was ah from the parliament. This was the UFO club, I believe it's called. And the other one ah was so was secretly investigat investigation by the high aristocracy and in particular Prince Philip. And he has a very nice chapter, chapter 10 of sounds from another room. The other chapters are not relevant with regards to u UFOs, but they also very interesting because this this must have been a very interesting in individual
00:28:02
Speaker
and it's very reasonable and and and intelligent individual. And he wrote in and an entire chapter on the others, or the visitors. No, it's called, I think, the visitors. Yeah, and and so on. So so I think it's it was interesting for me and I hope it's interesting for others, but yeah, but whatever happens, I did it.
Advice to Young Scientists
00:28:31
Speaker
But if there were no negative repercussions, no bad reaction, and if it was relatively easy to publish it within a Steam publishing house like Springer,
00:28:42
Speaker
Would you suggest to other academics, particularly young ones, to yeah go ahead and you know get get your hands dirty with ah UFOs? Or would you say, well, it might be a bit tricky because I'm also well aware that ah you know you wrote this book towards the end of your career. What would you say to young scientists who are starting out in their career with a postdoc? Is it something you would get involved in at that point? a I recommend a two-tier strategy.
00:29:16
Speaker
you know I would not discourage anybody looking into the area, but don't base your career on that. you know i So so if you if you push me hard, I would say no, you should not go too deeply into that. you should you know these These are opportunities because you only have so much capacities available from time and from from intellectual things. And and it's like myself. you know I'm mainly interested now in quantum mechanics and quantum logics. you know And I'm still ah publishing and I believe quite successfully publishing ah things in that area. ah so So I recommend
00:30:04
Speaker
ah because I fared well with this strategy, you know to so look outside of the box and be aware that there exist things. But in order to have a career, you have to ah think of the following way. ah Physics is mainly my um ah financed by governments and by government bodies. you know I have been in such bodies. I call it Stalinist commissions. you know ah for some longer time. and And I know how the dynamics is. And and um and and and also, I have to e actually say that chances are very low that something substantial will come out of these efforts if you start on the on the Green Medal, you know, of the Green and Visa. so so i don't see So, in my opinion,
00:31:01
Speaker
um As we see now, it's mainly government driven how much the government's will will release and how much data, how much raw data you will get, let's say from the military and so on and so forth. And ah all all of this is very restricted and not in your your own possession. But on the other hand, um it's perfectly reasonable to speculate if you are, let's say, in relativity theory on on things inspired by, you know,
00:31:32
Speaker
ah issues that may not not be true. But but ah so sometimes, even if these don't exist, if if they lead through inspiration to other good things, you can publish them and so be open. But for heaven's sake, don't invest your whole career in UFOs. yeah Yeah i mean often strange things happen when you do that i mean you just have to look at um what happened to ufologist from the nineteen eighties and nineteen nineties you don't know nothing else but you know ah u virus it's not a good sign you need to have a broad horizon on things so.
00:32:15
Speaker
Yes, and but turning to your book and um getting a bit more into detail there, um you as a physicist, I would like to have a little thought experiment with you because I think it's a good way of entering your book. Let's say um someone, like a government institution or whatever, gave you a crashed flying saucer and you had all money at your disposal, you could draw on different colleagues from different disciplines. What would you do with that piece of equipment? What would be your first thoughts and um what would you as a physicist try to do with it? Well, the first principle I would i would apply to it, don't destroy it.
00:33:03
Speaker
through techniques, applying it through techniques that might be available to myself but but would be destructive to these structures. i Also, your question is a little bit incomplete because um ah most likely I would get ah access to this craft with a high level of clearance, which would be which would require me to to under sign a non-disclosure agreement.
00:33:39
Speaker
and know and i'm and then Actually, I'm not sure how I would react to that request, you know because at the moment, and nobody, I'm totally free. I mean, you have to believe me that. I mean, you can say, well, I'm an agent doing kind of misinformation ah research or or, I mean, yeah at some point you have to trust me that I'm not misinforming you. And you may not trust me, which is totally legitimate. But as I'm now, I can safely say that nobody has approached me with any kind of non-disclosure. You know, there have been personal
00:34:23
Speaker
requests of people ah not to be engaged. And i of course, I take this seriously as is as every reporter should do, and I believe. but ah But other than that, scientifically. so ah and And then, you know, The the the question is is ah is also an interesting one. The sub-question is, would you really ah um ah good I really um ah prefer ah being shown the craft and then being under the non-disclosure agreement ah type of of regulation, and which would satisfy my own quest?
00:35:10
Speaker
yeah Or would I prefer to be not shown a craft and say whatever comes to my mind?
00:35:21
Speaker
I actually understood the um question a bit, or at least my mind, it was a bit different. So I was ah starting from the very um idealistic position that we live global we we we live in a world where and this is no secret and where it's in the open domain. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. This will not happen. yeah This is this it's out of question because it's these issues, if they exist, are much too important to to be discussed openly, according to the to the to to those who who are who who are in power, I believe. But maybe this is ah this is this is ah probably a speculat a wild speculation.
00:36:05
Speaker
you know you You could say that those iron power are the most open people and they want everything to be known. But I think if you look into, um into let's say, previous handlings of technology, um let's say, paperclip and other things, it's is to be expected that they will um apply the same kind of secrecy ah that they have applied to ah to things that are well documented now. you know ah For instance, after World War II, it was the question of how to exploit Nazi technology
00:36:48
Speaker
and everybody who could, including Great Britain, USA, of course, is the most well-known, as I mentioned, project paper, but also the Soviets. you know They took whatever they they got and and and tried to exploit it for their own purposes, but I don't think that this was very openly discussed. Again, it was just um um you know a very realistic thought experiment. but um yeah but So then let's turn to um but more realistic. Under the assumption that everything is open, I i could answer your question.
00:37:38
Speaker
not my I would be extremely careful with these objects, you know as as I said before, because um the some structures that you don't even recognize as structures ah might ah might be very relevant for for further research and for the functioning of this organism, of this body. For instance, you can have this analogy and others the carcass that I think and others
00:38:09
Speaker
um ah Also, let's say if you are if you're confronted with a semiconductor device and give it to Newton, you know he he wouldn't be able even to to realize um what what kind of structures information are stored in their information processing capacities and so on and so forth. So you might ah destroy let's say an alien database by just looking at it with with let's say with a CT scanner you know or with an MRR scanner or whatever we have at the moment.
00:38:51
Speaker
ah ah The other question is, you know that this is a question that ah that that occurred to us in another study in a totally unrelated area. How would you recognize supercomputing capacities? How how would you recognize hypercomputation? you know it's it's It's not that easy because ah In some sense, you have to verify, let's say if if I give you a computer and say this is a hypercomputer and and does what no present computer can do, it's how should I do it? And one one of the techniques would be
00:39:35
Speaker
um to to start with asymmetric problems these problems that ah that are easy to construct but difficult to deconstruct. One of these issues is encryption, the RSA. RSA algorithm or a graph isomorphism. Let's say you have a graph and and you distort it in a certain way and then and then you present the original graph and the distorted graph and ask this alleged hypercomputer how to ah if it's isomorphic. Because you know the answer but it's at the moment, at least at the moment.
00:40:15
Speaker
It's difficult to to ah to compute with conventional comp computers. So this applies also ah to the to the issue, if you give me a graph ah craft, ah would I believe you that this is an alien craft? you know And the question of of belief, you know when when would you believe something ah Let's say anything, you know. ah Do you believe what the government tells you? You know that the government afterwards, ah governments often tell you, sorry, we this is not the entire truth or we even lied, you know, and they start wars.
00:41:00
Speaker
with ah with propaganda and so on. So so ah it's it's not it's not that easy. I mean, I'm not against government, you know, and sometimes I understand that they have to say because, because for instance, let's say if you, as Elizondo pointed out, if you, if you take or or or a melon, ah if If you tell it or some things openly, you tell it also to your potential enemies. And these enemies have no qualms of exploiting this information. You you you communicate to your public. So this is this is a very difficult issue. Also, ah one of my a hypothesis developed in the book is is a ah quantification of Arthur Ziegler's conjecture that no advanced technology is recognizable by the
00:41:49
Speaker
ah by the relative ancient technologies. And we we have to admit that our technologies ah is ancient relative to to the to the other technologies and and very likely our experts ah will not ah be able to decipher and decrypt this technology. ah So, one has to be a aware of that, and which includes that if you ask a current scientist like myself, you know, what is it and how does it operate, ah this scientist will most likely satisfy his or her own objections, you know. we I don't know how to express this and in English. You might help me ah with the translation. It's called Bachladen, you know.
00:42:38
Speaker
ah ah this you know He has a prey of of things that he knows, or she, and and and tells you whatever she or he knows, you know but but very likely, according to Kuhn, if this goes, this is my speculation, beyond two so two scientific revolutions which might be just within 300 years. you know this is This is totally impossible to to decipher.
00:43:09
Speaker
but Thanks a lot. I very much enjoyed um your your thoughts on this because i am you know for um for for for the general public, it's often not very transparent how scientists would approach this issue and um just getting insights into you know your stream of thought here, how you would approach us is just um very interesting. and um yeah There is this huge gap between whatever that technology may be in our current state of ah knowledge, our techniques, etc.
00:43:43
Speaker
Well, I would ever say, can you have be careful and mindful. But these things are also nice statements, you know, because, ah because yeah, yeah I mean, allegedly, if the Americans have some craft collected, they just do that, you know, they they ah they They unpack them every 10 years or so and and ask some experts, ah can you help us? ah and then And then pack them again and store them somewhere. But this is ah this is a ah this is of course a wild speculation that has no basis in official statements.
00:44:25
Speaker
and Indeed, I think it was Bob Lazar who said something along those lines. so you know But i'm i'm not I'm not supporting Bob Lazar, but but it's it's a reason error it's a reasonable strategy, I would say. Yeah. And turning to the government and um it's, it's ah well, mainly the US government and it's um and its position towards ah UFOs, um what is your general take on the most recent
2017 NYT Articles on UFOs
00:45:01
Speaker
revelations? Well, I think 2017 marked a ah particular
00:45:06
Speaker
um um moment in in the history of this topic. um Where do you see all of this going? Because I'm just going to give you a short um review of where I see it going. So I think um on the one end of the spectrum, there are there's an increasing interest in academia, which kind of is partly fueled by a more widespread public engagement with this going back to 2017. But at the same time, especially in the US, there is also kind of a splinter group within um the higher echelons of the Pentagon.
00:45:46
Speaker
um dealing with this, but from a very interesting point of view, ah which is national security. I mean, this has always been an issue, but I think, especially if you look at what Elizondo is um talking about, it often is against the background of national security. So this is kind of where I see all of this going. So you have one axis going into in the area of national security and the other one more kind of in an open science public um debate kind of thing. Where do you think we are at the moment?
00:46:22
Speaker
yeah um well ah just Just one remark, Elizondo, you quoted, Elizondo. He's a counterintelligence. He's not intelligence. He's counterintelligence. So counterintelligence is something that creates perceptions or visit ah looks at perceptions of the enemy rather than looks into the enemy. It's an interesting differentiation, maybe totally are totally irrelevant for for this topic. But ah i would unlike most commentators, I would say that these 2017 articles in the New York Times were not revealing a huge government effort, but was at least
00:47:20
Speaker
ah what was probably ah group of an of a group of people who are not in the known and try to become known. So the real program, in my opinion, you know ah might be... I'm just saying this is very speculative and highly controversial. But the but in my ah my impression is that maybe ah devils there was um i am at starting from the from the late 40s of the last 10th century, there was a splitting off of the real efforts
00:48:07
Speaker
um and um And this small group of half in the know people or in the know who ah who want to drag ah this this iceberg, you know, the what's underwater, Out of the water, ah and let's say, Senator Harry Reid was one of them. He he he was part of the Gang of Eight ah it's ah at some point, so he he probably knows much, knew much more than he could he could tell.
00:48:41
Speaker
ah but um but they they intended not to research into UFOs, but to research into research into UFOs. So it's a second degree kind of thing. And one has to probably evaluate those those efforts um those efforts in in in we which submerged no or or or like got out of, it got into the public view in this New York Times articles and so on. um ah as ah As an indication that there was a group trying, attempting to ah to to unearth the real thing, which might have started as a spin-off in the 19th century. 40s and um um also if one says well they have just wasted 22 million taxpayers dollars. This is ah I would like to quote Grash but this is I said this long time before when I heard this it's vaporware you know it's vaporware for the American military.
00:49:52
Speaker
um ah and And I think also the public perception of what was the um ah the objective of this OSAP program and AATIP, or but whatever you call it, um ah was not, was probably totally different from what most people see today, what was not to ah to to to look at the UFO case but as I said to look at the research program into UFOs but also in particular probably was about Lockheed Martin trying to ah to get rid of some of this craft stuff that they wanted to divert themselves and and and and for this they needed a v-hike and the v-hiking would be a
00:50:45
Speaker
and unacknowledged USEP, which is a very special pickle that um secret service. vi hi I mean, yeah, so so these are just speculations, but I would just point out that and what appears to be a government effort ah in UFO research was not the government because it was a small group, very small group of people who pretended to to investigate something. And um
00:51:24
Speaker
and was probably perceived by some groups of the government as not very helpful. you know You know, and indeed. And I think the public perception, thanks for pointing that out, is that, you know, starting with NIDS then up to OSAP, that they were indeed part of the, what is now called the program, which indeed they were not. yeah they they were They were outsiders trying to get into, you know. and Exactly. and and today And this is, I think, confirmed also by people like Carl Nail,
00:51:59
Speaker
ah who recently went forward. but this is This is exactly the issue of ah when you do you believe something. you know for For me, ah that tends towards the existence of of such structures. um As a believer, you know, i as a scientist, I cannot say anything. As a scientist, methodologically, I have to be very critical about these things. But as as a person, I would say, if you if I listen to what people with the credibility of Carl Nail says recently, I think there is almost no doubt that this is the case, you know.
00:52:41
Speaker
that there exist some crashed crafts and we are just looking at them and so on and visitations do exist and so on and so forth. But also I wouldn't take this with a high confidence. I just say from what I know, it's not unlikely. It's not unlikely. I mean, it's just another data point you have on what you make of it is is a different question. But um I mean, it's the same. So I think there are different categories of evidence in ufology as with any other topic, eyewitness account.
00:53:21
Speaker
yeah it Typically i a typical question that would that would probably be asked by a psychologist and particular psycho analyst would be well you know you believe in this what what do you make of it you know what is what is the meaning for you for you personally.
Beliefs vs. Scientific Skepticism
00:53:39
Speaker
is this, you know? And this is this is, I think, also a very pertinent question that everybody should ask, ah what does this mean for you? Because for me, as a physicist, it means almost nothing, because I have no access to these technologies. Nobody explains these to me. There is no parameters explaining these to me. I would very much like to know them. But for the time being, I i' am kind of stuck and and have to
00:54:08
Speaker
do i I can only advise to do good physics of our time you know and and have an open eye to that and be not ah too shocked if things turn up occasionally. but ah yeah and And would you say, this kind of brings us back to the um kind of history of science again a bit, and I mean, would you say that um the starting point of a scientific approach to UFOs is, are we starting from the position that
00:54:49
Speaker
Yes, this is a real phenomenon and now we're going to study it or is the starting position that we don't actually know what this is. Let's actually see if there is something to it because these are, depending on where you start, you will ask different questions. Well, from a scientific point of view, there cannot be any doubt that that we need to acknowledge that this is not confirmed. you know we we have to ah We have to say that this is a spec speculation. And from that, from there on,
00:55:23
Speaker
ah you have to evaluate what what you are doing. you know but So so i I would be on a very conservative... This sounds ridiculous because because at the one point I tell you that it's highly likely from my personal point of view, but from the... This sounds ambivalent that I'm telling you contradicting, so so but as a scientist, you know. Let's say if I'm in a commission and the commission expects me to distribute taxpayers money, I cannot i cannot so i have to be conservative in the sense that I have to be aware that this money has to be wisely spent.
00:56:02
Speaker
ah in in accordance with so with opportunity costs. so so i and Unfortunately, I can only say that as long as we don't get enough data, and mean for instance, ah the problem starts with ah getting radar data, even degraded radar data. but ah For instance, the the austrian Austrian military didn't even respond to my official request. i was ah I'm now retired, but but I was still active, did not even respond to my request to get some even degraded radar data on on what Norat calls um
00:56:45
Speaker
um um um ah
00:56:50
Speaker
uncategorized objects. i i want At the moment, I cannot use CT, I believe. I mean, so there exists these ah these artif artifacts, they call it artifacts, and which are filtered out by algorithms, but you should be able to, from the raw data to to to get some phenomenology behind that, some movement patterns and so on. um ah yeah i yeah i mean like I completely understand. so and I was at a conference, I think, when was a um last month, actually, it was organized by Häggankajal and Würzburg, it's very much framed from a kind of
00:57:34
Speaker
and academic physical point of view but there were also some social scientists i have a background in um and historical social science and what i found interesting but also quite disturbing to be honest is that we. um That there are completely different starting positions to this topic and this is why i just ask you where where do you start do you believe that the mission of physics is to actually. ah Prove that these things do exist or do we already accept that they exist and now we study whatever may be available.
00:58:11
Speaker
because what actually transpired at that conference is that um most of the natural scientists there, which were predominantly um physicists, had exactly your point of view, 100%. But then the social scientists had a very different perspective. For them, this was already real, perhaps not explicitly, but they were talking about social consequences and A consequence logically can only be there if something actually already exists. Not sometimes necessarily, you know if you believe in something.
00:58:53
Speaker
but they But they were often quite explicit that um in in their ontology, this already is a reality of some sort. Yeah, but yeah this this may be a wrong ontology, know they how how yeah the we which which brings us back to the question, what do you believe? It's it's all epistemology in a certain sense. I'm not going so far as to foster the French the the The French constructive is like Foucault, Derrida, but but it's ah it's a construct. And you might say, well, for the sociologists, it makes no difference whether these objects exist physically or just in the mind of the population in their emid imagination. but By the way, let let me just ah ah point out that this is UTC. It's uncorrelated targets. Yeah, UCTs that is called with NORAD. Yeah, I mean,
00:59:51
Speaker
Yeah. So ah so ah there there is a gap in the physical, with the physicists and the sociology. Yeah. Yeah, yeah but but I believe that also the physicists deep in their perception, ah deep in their personal minds, believe that there is some credence to to these effects also. But they they of course, they are totally correct ah to to not let that influence their scientific their scientific standing. And this is a recipe ah that we have fared well with these recipes. you know
01:00:31
Speaker
we have ah we we We don't believe in fairies any longer and this has given us dignity in a certain sense. It probably took away the charm of so society, of of of and of narratives. But yeah, I think one should not throw the baby too early out with the passports. But I don't want to appear ah too conservative or too denial. I myself say we have to it's Nietzsche who said you have to integrate ah both and only in this integration ah comes the classical performance, you know the the optimal performance of oh of of the intellect in my opinion.
01:01:21
Speaker
yeah leaving Leaving this difficult sphere of epistemology and the history of science, let's come back to um a couple of more concrete topics. If I could just um pick your
UFO Crash Retrievals
01:01:33
Speaker
brains on this. So, crash retrievals. What do you make of the evidence as a whole? Credible, not credible. Should we pursue it? Well, ah so far, There is no acknowledged crash retrieval officially acknowledged. what means What does that mean? ah That somebody like the CIA or the American president or... who
01:02:03
Speaker
so some power to be that that be just states that they exist craft officially, we might also not ah not be in the position to tell the public this. I mean, because they if if these things are real, there's some other agents, you might call them the others that have also a saying on this, you know. and And you have to... um I encourage the listeners to look ah into that issue ah in the shoes of these aliens, you know? And and and this is very much traumatized in this chapter of Peter Horsley. ah He met Janus and Janus told him a position that might be an alien position.
01:02:56
Speaker
and which is very reasonable and I totally understand. So we might not, you know, some national security interests might not be ah the only ah ah criteria. We might be confronted with with some totally different um ah agents in this matter.
01:03:20
Speaker
Yeah, which is, I think, um one of your um explanatory frameworks in the last part of um your book as well, perhaps, to which we can then turn. I just wanted to um address one, perhaps, final issue because, and I'm glad to see it in your book, actually, um is abductions because I think there has been a trend in ufology to kind of, you know, put abductions into one can and then look at sightings from a different perspective, which is all completely fine. But I think if you, as you did, try to give a comprehensive overview over the field, you have to include abductions. And I thought you did that in a very diligent and good way. So what's your position on the abduction phenomenon?
01:04:11
Speaker
Well, I probably should say that, um as you might have found out already, I very much like so psychoanalytic methods of of of looking at things. um and At some point, I was in these circles also, um and and I think one should acknowledge that even if those abductions don't take place in the way they are claimed, let's say, with aliens involved, ah one should take care of these humans, of these clients.
01:04:50
Speaker
um ah because those people are left alone. They have ah what John Mack said, um they have received an ontological shock um which is close to post-traumatic stress disorders and in most of the cases they are left alone. you know a I really encourage the the so the psychoanalytic or the psychology um ah profession to look deeper into that phenomenon ah regardless of whether aliens are involved or not. They exist a group of people who um who are heavily traumatized by their experiences. I, at least as far as I know,
01:05:41
Speaker
I'm not among this group, and you may also not be among this group, but um I met people in this community which credibly documented that they are traumatized and they don't receive the help they deserve, irrespective, as I said, of of alien involvement.
01:06:05
Speaker
Yeah, I was at actually um on a conference um and a couple of months ago where um the to it was an academic conference and the focus was on experiences and how they can be supported mainly in Germany and um whilst there are A couple of institutes that do provide for this, there's a shocking absence of um any sort of institutional support for for people who often went to through quite traumatic experiences. you know And not only talking about um UFO encounters, but also you know other paranormal things like poltergeist and so on. forth So for the people who experience these issues, they are very real, very visceral, and often you know shocking.
01:06:51
Speaker
But um if they go to um yeah mainstream medical professional, um you know they are um encountered with a certain degree of skepticism and perhaps put on drugs. So it's um as you said, so that's why I really welcomed that chapter in your book. It's about um providing us an open space where these individuals can share their experiences. I mean, this may also be due to the fact that the profession, who is already a little bit under strain, you know, from the natural sciences, be more, let's say scientifically, under quotes oriented, they have an anxiety to confront themselves with topics which have a boom factor, you know.
01:07:45
Speaker
as Even Freud, I think, there was a discussion between Freud and Jung. ah Even Freud, whom I value very highly, I would call myself a Freudian, probably, a late Freudian. You know, ah some of the theories of Jung look a little bit suspicious. And and by the way, it's an interesting, interesting anecdotal thing that Jung and and in Pauli. Pauli had, to because of some sexual problems, underwent ah psycho psychoanalysis and was very open to psychoanalysis.
01:08:23
Speaker
um he they They departed, they their ways departed at the topic of of of UFOs because ah because Sige Junk was very much into UFOs and Pauli even engaged in rada a professor from the, I believe, Technical University of Munich, ah who should convince Pauli that these are just aerial phenomena like
01:08:57
Speaker
like, you know, it's like inversions that get reflected in the radar and so on and so forth. And Pauli didn't believe in that. So anyway, a but but the point really is that one should take ah the melody or the suffering of these people more seriously and not, but but who should do that? i mean ah I think one should probably also a claim ah um or or expect from the community to have a more open
01:09:34
Speaker
position on that and probably they they they they comply then, ah to to not be meaning not that they should accept that these UFOs exist, but ah should accept that these traumas exist and and have to be investigated. Indeed. Thanks for this. um So having a look at the time, you've been very generous with your time, but um by way of conclusion, could you give us the um kind of summaries or your interpretive frameworks, models of um what the UFO phenomenon is about? um You list different scenarios at the end of your book, and I think they're all very pertinent and important. So could you give us an overview?
Scenarios and Contexts
01:10:19
Speaker
Well, I think this overview has been given already by Karl Nail. I would say personally, but not as a scientist. Personally, I would i would refer to the recent interview that Karl Nail gave. yeah Well, if i if I interpret him correctly, and I may not, but i i I tried to do that, he said, and this is also my general impression, that this these have already a long history, ah probably longer than our own written history.
01:11:00
Speaker
And that recently there was probably a flurry of interest because with the nuclear age, we discovered the nuclear fire. you know ah that This might have you know a nuclear explosion. This is a weird physical speculation that I i maintain, and not as a physicist, but as just as a... ah these These nuclear explosions might transfer information probably with different speeds than the speed of light um um that we are not aware of. you know we we if If you bank a bell,
01:11:41
Speaker
you know ah there might might be some electromagnetic effects that's that that if you look at it from the purely acoustic perspective might not, ah did this is a wrong analogy, but you know you you understand what I mean. So ah with this discovery of of nuclear fire me may have come i and renewed interest in this in these to control us. In my opinion, what Harnell did not say, but in my opinion, if i look so sometimes I myself feel like an alien. you know and and And I think if yeah if I look at it
01:12:23
Speaker
from from what I think is their perspective, um we pose a threat to them. you know Because if we would be able to go to them, ah they would be confronted with us. And I consider us not such a nice species. you know i I am rather pessimistic about about this this ah these effects that we might cause to them. And so they kind of want to control us in processors and which means that they might have some context. I would even go so far as saying that there exists some rudimentary context between our powers that be whatever that is, mostly governments, and them
01:13:13
Speaker
ah but on a very elementary level. And there exist these crafts, yes. ah ah There exist three indications for me that these crafts exist, which are all in line, I say. I think one is the Wilson Memo, which I quote, which is speculative and it's unconfirmed, of course. And the second one is what Grash said and and what what Lakatsky said. There's a recent book also co-authored by Lakatsky that he has opened some craft. um He was DIA, I don't think. I think he's a reasonable person. And and and also ah what Cardinal said, this this stops it. I mean,
01:13:59
Speaker
I mean, Carl Nail basically ah said that, yes, he he confirmed everything. So relative to what Carl Nail said, this is this is a closed subject. you know But of course relative to, it's like a mathematical theorem, you know ah relative to the assumptions. I mean, let's say, if I say one plus one is three, you know I have to say, I have to tell you that within piano arithmetic, If you have mod 2 arithmetic, 1 plus 1 is 0.
01:14:33
Speaker
yeah so so i so So for me, you know im I am born and i'm in in a sense, I experience myself as a person who want to understand, who really want to understand. This is my primary issue. And in order to understand, I have to be open and I have to give probabilities to that. And in my opinion, probabilities is quite high, that we have visited probabilities also quite high, that this has no consequences for the common person, you know, a living in our societies, at least in the open, and they will kick the can down the road again, and this may not be there there
01:15:17
Speaker
they their autonomous decision. There might be a parties that that really that really decide ah that are not human, that that really decide. In any case, you know, at some point I believe ah I wrote a paper on metaphysics on that. At some point we will ah we will encounter non-human intelligence created by us, you know, let's say in the form of a large language model or whatever. And this will cause also a final
01:15:58
Speaker
ah should I say, a final shock. you know there There have been ontologically shocks, humankind has been confronted with. One of them was that we we are not in the center of this universe. you know The other shock was ah that that um we we dissent from or that there is an evolution of species. you know And the third shock was ah probably that ah much of many of our motivations or reactions are based on on subconscious progress processes and and maybe we are up to one more
01:16:35
Speaker
ah um ah um saw such such discoveries that we are not alone ah either by developing on our own creations of computers, creations that that that make us believe that they are autonomously thinking and have consciousness or non-human visitors. ah and And maybe even, you know, to so put speculation to the much point, there's this SUSE, you know, Weltam-Drad, fast spender speculation matrix, you know, and that we may live in a computer-generated universe. and I'm not saying that we do, but but we we kind of, from a historical perspective, we experience the succession of shocks
01:17:31
Speaker
ah that that length that length has this formulation brought us out of ontological security, you know, kicked us out of this position of ontological security. And to we had to cope with that. And, and Mark, of course, the Harvard um A psychologist who who very much believed into contacts and enter close contacts, he termed thing ontological shock based on the length.
01:18:10
Speaker
ah notion of ontological security because ontological shock is just ah just the experience you have when you leave ontological, when you're kicked out of your ontological ah securities. Which in a sense is also, but this perhaps takes us too far, but it's also the consequence of what philosophers have called the ah meaning crisis these days. um So in the past when you had a relatively rigid ontological framework which happened to coincide with some form of religion,
01:18:44
Speaker
um these phenomena could more easily be accommodated for, whereas these days we live in a largely secular world, um which has lots of knowledge floating around, but no real um ontological framework that's also based on the experiences of people that they can then make sense of. So I think that's also where part of the ontological shock ah arises from. It's immediately, you know, Yes, exactly, exactly, yeah. But Professor Zwosil, thank you so much.
Future Work on Quantum Logic
01:19:18
Speaker
It's been a real pleasure talking with you about the science of UFOs and um also dipping our toes into more speculative topics. um Can I just ask you what's next on the agenda for you? Is there something you will pursue further now in your retirement? Or um was this a kind of finite statement on UFOs for you?
01:19:40
Speaker
Well, as for now, it I cannot go any further than that. I've published two additional articles which are very speculative, and I say they they are speculative. um ah I shouldn't say published. type it's It's on a preprint, on archive, on interdimensionality, and on which which goes back to our previous work with Selinger on this, and and the other one on antigravity, ah There is a very interesting history of anti-gravity research, which which is an own topic and which I have recently ah talked about with ah with with a colleague from Sweden, from Stockholm. He is also very interested in in this
01:20:24
Speaker
this anti-gravity research, which which may be due to lay persons, but also the Air Force was interested in it. So I have an open eye on that, and maybe something comes comes up. But basically, I think this is governmentdri if the government if the legislative body of the United States, and I have no hope for Russia and China, because there are two two secretive societies. um so So it depends very much on what the Americans are releasing. I personally, let let me just say from a physical perspective, maybe I'm totally wrong, but but I think what we should concentrate or what needs to be clarified is the role of inertia.
01:21:16
Speaker
you know Because inertia is equated in the general relativity theory with mass and attraction, of course, if you have gravitation. And inertia is a phenomenon that is amazing. You know you you almost believe ah ah that that they are telling you fairy tales. If you ask a physicist what mass is, there was another conference with a colleague from from Germany who was not into that. And I said, ah do you know what mass is? and And he couldn't believe what I told him. yeah Mass is mainly ah the mass. Do you know what mass is, if I ask you? um No, because i'm all my mind my mind isn't very ah mathematical. so Well, our perception of mass is that mainly our mass is is massive bodies. It comes from from the gluonic field in the in the nucleus.
01:22:14
Speaker
You know, so it's in the field, you know, it's not in the particles. There's another mechanism for tics, tics mechanism. But mainly it's in the, it's not even in the electromagnetic field, which I was very interested in previously. I have even asked Dirac. I once met Dirac. Dirac is a famous physicist. I also met this occasion, I met Lidina. ah but But anyway, so ah um so so the mass, so the the tale, the narrative, the physical narrative now is that mass mainly yeah comes from from the gluons that are particles that characterize the the the they they are responsible for the strong interactions which which bind the nucleus together because if
01:23:13
Speaker
if there would be a sample of protons ah ah by purely electrostatic forces, this will decay. But of course, um days the name says it already. It's in short distances, it's it's counterbalanced by the strong force, which holds the nucleus together. And this ah this is where the mass comes from. So so I think um we should we should be aware that probably much of the motion characteristics of UFOs probably comes from the manipulation of inertia. But but this this this is totally speculative and so I keep an open eye on that. I don't expect to. but What I'm now doing is I do what I can do best. This is quantum logic and quantum information theory and so on.
01:24:09
Speaker
ah But this is totally unrelated and I keep that apart from from and and it's very i satisfying and interesting as well. you know it's ah with the Germans called Denkschwert of Gabe, you know? Yes, yes. So it's a mind-sport activity indeed, yeah. Very brilliant, yeah. So, um yeah, we'll we'll definitely keep an eye on on what you are doing, um both in um in your general field of interest, but also when it comes to ufologies.
01:24:40
Speaker
So, dear listeners, do please pick up a copy of UFOs, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, Observations, Explanations, and Speculations by Professor Carl Svoetzel, was published with Springer in 2023. Yes. So, thanks a lot. It was very, very interesting today. Thank you.