Daniel and Jorge Explain the UniverseDaniel and Jorge talk about aliens, answer a question from a high school class, and advise a listener about destroying the moon.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
If you love iPhone, you'll love Apple Card. It's the credit card designed for iPhone. It gives you unlimited daily cash back that can earn four point four zero percent annual percentage yield. When you open a high Yield Savings account through Apple Card, apply for Applecard in the wallet app subject to credit approval. Savings is available to Apple Card owners subject to eligibility. Apple Card and Savings by Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Salt Lake City Branch Member FDIC terms and more at applecard dot com. When you pop a piece of cheese into your mouth, you're probably not thinking about the environmental impact. But the people in the dairy industry are. That's why they're working hard every day to find new ways to reduce waste, conserve natural resources, and drive down greenhouse gas emissions. How is US Dairy tackling greenhouse gases? Many farms use anaerobic digesters to turn the methane from manure into renewable energy that can power farms, towns, and electric cars. Visit us dairy dot COM's Last Sustainability to learn more.
And friends and families walking riding on passing the roads every day. Remember they're real people with loved ones who need them to.
Get home safely.
Protect our cyclists and pedestrians because they're people too, Go safely. California. From the California Office of Traffic Safety and Caltrans.
We're just days away from our twenty twenty four iHeart Radio Music Festival, presented by Capital On.
The biggest headliners in live music will be taking over to Mobile Arena, Las Vegas.
Loss some special surprises at moments you are not going to want to miss. Stream only on Hulu iHeartRadio Music Festival and listen on iHeartRadio the most anticipated live music events of the year this Friday and Saturday, starting at ten thirty pm Eastern seven thirty Pacific.
Hey, daniels't it any aliens yet?
Not so far, at least not that I'm aware of.
Ooh, do you think you're not hearing your invitations to come on the podcast?
Well, you know, if they're hearing the podcast, maybe that's why they're staying away.
Oh no, are you seeing our podcast is keeping humanity for making first contact with an alien species?
It could be, but you know, if they don't like dad jokes or bananas or chocolate, do we really want to talk to them?
That's right. They can't be very cool if they don't like any of those things. I mean, what are we going to talk about with them?
I know that is in the end the great filter.
Hi.
I'm Hora May, cartoonist and the author of Oliver's Great Big Universe.
Hi.
I'm Daniel. I'm a particle physicist and a professor a uc Ermine, and I live five miles from the most famous chocolate covered banana joint.
Wait what, I didn't know this? What makes it the most famous one?
You'd never seen? Arrested Development.
I've seen the show. I guess I'm not a super Is that like a real thing? Like the one featured in the show is a real thing?
Oh? Yes, absolutely, it's a real thing. In fact, there are two chocolate covered frozen banana stands on Balboa Island near my house, and they both claim to be the original.
Well one of them is lying.
Then, yes, one of them is lying.
Or one of them is wrong at least, or maybe they're both wrong. Maybe the original one is in New Jersey or something.
Either way, they're feuding about bananas and chocolate.
But then, which is one featured in the show that must be the most famous one.
I'm not sure if the one featured in the show is one of the real ones or if it's a fictional stand in.
Oh interesting, So then neither of them is very famous.
The concept of Newport Beach chocolate covered frozen bananas is famous.
Have you tried it? Is it good?
You know? Not a fan of the bananas?
Is it worth going to Bubboa Island to have them?
No? Not a fan of the bananas. Even if you're covered in chocolate.
Wow. What if it's a dark chocolate that's.
Better, definitely better, but not good enough? You would stop add the banana like you need it, anything but the banana. It's just a chocolate delivery system, exactly. The banana's got nothing to represent.
I would have thought it's the food that bring us all together. Daniel, It's like this podcast is a chocolate covered banana.
I know, and it's a big joke, so you think we'd love it.
But anyway, speaking of podcasts, welcome to our podcast, Daniel and Jorge Explain the Universe, a production of iHeartRadio in which we.
Try to feed you the secrets of the universe. We dip them in chocolate, we freeze them, we do everything. We can to make them palatable because we think that everything that's out there in the universe can be understood and deserves to be understood by me and by you and by everybody out there. Explanations are possible, and you deserve to hear them.
That's right, You deserve to hear on this podcast, which is in fact, the most popular podcast called Daniel and Jorge Explain the Universe that has not been featured in a TV show yet.
That's true. That's highly qualified but also accurate.
Yeah, it's all in the details. You could read the fine prints.
We'll probably also the most successful podcast that mentions the word banana so often. There might be podcasts dedicated to bananas.
I feel like you're making an unscientific claim. Have you sampled all other podcasts to make that claim?
I have not. I'm guessing I'm definitely speculating. The first step in science is speculating, Right. Then you go out, you gather some data.
Let's see, that's your hypothesis.
I'll follow up on it.
That's your dull hypothesis.
Nature is always full of surprises, and so maybe the podcast universe will surprise me.
We'll see, we'll see. But anyways, We do like to take facts about the universe and all the amazing things that are happening out there, cover them in delicious chocolate, and then tell them to you so that you can also appreciate what's out there and the dark mysteries of the cosmos.
But this podcast isn't just us talking about the universe. It's a conversation between us and you. We want to know what you don't understand about the universe. We'd love to know what puzzles you, what you'd like to hear more about, and what explanations you find unsatisfactory. So if you have questions about how the universe works, or you've always heard something explained a certain way and it never really clicked, please write to us to questions at Danielandjorge dot com. We will write back to you and help you figure it out.
Yeah, because even though it sort of starts with guessing before guessing comes to questions, right, scientific progress starts with somebody looking at something and going, huh, how does that work? Why is that the way it is? And can I freeze it and cover it in chocolate?
Every scientific question ends with can I freeze it and cover it in chocolate?
Yes? Can you take a cork, freeze it and covered it in dark matter chocolate?
These are some dark forces we're playing with.
Yeah, it's a tasty field of research there, but yeah, it all starts with questions. And as you said, Daniel, we love to take questions from our listeners, and sometimes we dedicate whole episodes to answering them, or release trying to answer.
Them, to making silly jokes about them. At the very minimum, if I get a question that I think, hmm, I bet other people want to hear the answer to this, or I'm sure Jorge has some funny things to say about this topic, then instead of just running back to you, we will answer it here on the podcast for everybody to hear.
Wait, are you saying there are questions you get and you're like, nobody else wants to know the answer. You're like, only the person asking this question could possibly be interested in this topic.
Absolutely, people send me their crazy, detailed theories of the universe and they want specific answers to why it works or doesn't work. That's not the kind of thing we talk about on the.
Podcast, although maybe we should. I don't know. I wonder if that would make an interesting episode to get some of your theories about the universe that you get and then figure out why they're not true.
Yeah, maybe it would. And if I ever find one that is compelling that does sound great, then absolutely we'll talk about it on the podcast.
Or maybe we can. I'll shoot another podcast, you know, Daniel and Jorge shoot down your theory of everything.
Why you're wrong about the universe with Daniel.
Yes, or just why you're wrong. That's actually a pretty good idea there.
There's a podcast already called wrong about Everything.
Yeah, but we need the more famous one.
We talk about bananas more than the other one.
Yeah. We recorded in Bubble Island, which automatically makes it more famous. But anyways, we do like to ask her questions, and so today on the podcast we'll be tackling listener questions. Number fifty two. Is fifty two an important number?
Yeah, it's one more important than fifty one.
I feel like it has area fifty two connotations.
Isn't that area fifty one? Oh?
Is it? No? I'm talking about the extra secret area that people don't even know exist. It's the one after Area fifty one.
Make sure you don't tell anyone about Area fifty three. That's double extra secret. You need one more level of clearance. They know about that, don't tell me because I have no security clearance.
But yeah, we like to answer questions here and today we have three great questions from listeners. One of them is about Daniel's favorite topic, aliens. The other one is about the electromagnetic fource and why it works the way it does. And the third one is about saving humanity by destroying something that maybe a lot of.
People hold precious chocolate covered bin in is Yeah, we'll cover the moon in Chumblin. All right, Well, let's jump right in, Daniel. Our first question comes from Nick, who's from Tucson, Arizona.
Hi, Daniel and Jorgey. This is Nick from Tucson, Arizona. Growing up in a city that is so richly involved in science and astronomy, asking questions about our universe has become second nature. One of the reasons questions I've had is this, in our search for life elsewhere in the universe, we see abundant evidence that we are likely not alone in the universe. However, on the off chance that we actually are, what point do we make that determination? Given one cannot prove a negative, I'm excited to hear your breakdown of how we tackle such a dilemma. Thanks for being awesome.
All right, interesting question from Nick here. I feel like he's basically asking, how will we ever know whether we're alone in the universe or not?
It's a good question, and I think he's also asking what can we say? Is there some point at which we draw the line and say we're done looking, we've decided we're alone.
Like at some point in the future if we never hear from other aliens and kind of have to figure out that maybe we are alone? Right, Like it nobody ever comes to visit you to your house, obviously the answer is that you're the only person on earth.
Yeah, or everybody hates you. Yeah, that's the explanation. But let's keep diluting ourselves. I think this question is really interesting from the philosophical point of view, like how could you ever know whether we're alone? And also it reveals something about how we make statements in science, how you can make statistical arguments even if you can't ever make definitive arguments.
Well, Nick brings up the idea that it's impossible to prove a negative, right, it's technically theoretically possible to say, for example, that there are no pink unicorns out there in the universe, because there might be, and so you'd have to check every little nuok and cranny of the entire cosmos to be able to say that such a unicorn does not exist.
Exactly, And even checking every little nook and cranny the last cosmos doesn't prove it right, especially in a case of aliens, where the category is so broad and undefined. It's basically any sension being that doesn't come from Earth. You could have lots of different characteristics that we don't anticipate. You might imagine, oh, if we check every single planet out there and we don't find aliens, then we now we're alone. But aliens could always exist in some manner we didn't anticipate. So yeah, we might not find aliens on rocky planets, but they could exist in gas giants, or underground, or in the center of stars, or in dark matter, or in some other way we hadn't imagined. So it's impossible to ever say we are totally alone in the universe. You can discover aliens, you can meet them and conclude that they're there, but you're right that we can't technically say definitively that we are alone.
Right ever, right, Like, it's theoretically impossible.
It's theoretically impossible to make a completely definitive statement. But I also think that's too high a bar. That's not the bar we use in science, for example.
Oh, you mean being correct is too high of a bar.
Making absolute definitive statements is not the business we're in.
Right, it's not the business because you can't do it.
You can't do it.
You try to do it, you wouldn't be able to do it.
Yeah, exactly, And so instead we have statistical tools that tell us, like how confident we can be in a statement. You could never say anything really definitively, even things like the Higgs boson. When we discovered the higgs boson, we claim discovery of it, but we also said, here are the chances that we're wrong, here's the chances that the Higgs boson doesn't exist, and it just sort of looks like it.
Does, right, Right. That just kind of gets to how science actually works, which is through this idea of them all hypothesis. Right, Like, for example, even the Higgs boson, it's not like you went out there and you said, well, I have a certain degree of confidence of the Higgs boson exists. You're actually really what you're saying in your science papers is saying, we have a certain degree of confidence that not having the Higgs boson is not possible.
Yeah, we calculate very precisely the probability of having been fooled, because remember, we don't see the Higgs directly. It's not like something we can say, here is one look at it. It's not like discovering a unicorn in the forest. We only see its footprints and its hair left on trees, and we have indirect evidence, like we almost always do in science, and so we can calculate the probability of seeing that indirect evidence without there being a Higgs boson, which is not zero, and we can say, well, we can rule that out, not completely, not definitively, but we can say it's very unlikely, and we can be very specific about the level at which it's unlikely, and there's a standard threshold above which we're allowed to say we've discovered it. We've pretty much settled it. But of course it's never definitive.
Although I wonder if with something like the Higgs boson, you maybe you can't say that you've seen one, right, Like, if you collide something and you see a particle fly out of it, then the maybe you could say that it is there with a one hundred percent confidence.
We can never say that with one hundred percent confidence. The Higgs Boson lasts for like ten to the minus twenty three seconds. We can never see. We only see what it turns into, unfortunately. But that's the case of discovery, which is special and wonderful. We can also play statistical games when we don't discover something. We can say, for example, oh, there's a new particle. If it did exist, we probably would have seen it, and so we can conclude that it likely doesn't exist. And that's not getting definitive. It could be that we got unlucky or something. But it's sort of like you know, looking for Bigfoot. If you look all through the forest and you don't see Bigfoot, then you can say, well, Bigfoot might exist, but he's got to be pretty rare, or pretty sneaky, or got some camouflage technique that we didn't think of already. You can still make negative statements even if they're not definitive.
Right, But in the case of like big foot or aliens. I feel like, once you see one, then that's one hundred percent confidence that they exist. Right. I think maybe Nick is asking more about the scenario where we don't see one. So if we see an alien, then for sure we know for one hundred percent with confidence that they exist. But if we never see one, at what point, I think is the next question? Do you say, well, I guess they don't exist.
Yeah, I agree in spirit with what you're saying. I just want to put an asterisk there, because even if you see an alien, you never know one hundred percent. You could be being fooled or whatever. No knowledge really is one hundred percent definitive, but in practice we call that definitive. There are a case in the past where we found things were like, there's no way that this could have been faked, and then we you know, we're pretty sure dinosaurs are real. For example, nobody takes seriously the scenario that dinosaurs are all fake.
Yeah, Or like a whale, like we know, if we'll one hundred percent certainty that whales exist and that whales are a thing?
Yeah, right, I mean technically again, like there's always an asterisk there. You never know anything one hundred percent, but practically making the probability being fooled. They're so small we basically call it zero. Yes, you're right, but you're right. Nick is focused also on the other scenario. What can we learn from not discovering aliens? Is there some point at which and so we can make statistical statements like we know if the universe was filled with aliens and that were very loud in electromagnetism and travel with stars, very enthusiastically, we would have seen them already. And so by not having seen them, we can say, well, if those aliens exist, they must be rare, and we can say how rare they have to be for us to not see them. So we can make negative statistical statements about aliens.
Or not about aliens, but about scenarios for aliens. Right, Like, you're not saying aliens don't exist. You're just saying aliens they watch a lot of TV, broadcast TV and have spaceships that figure out inner citable travel. Those are maybe less likely, although those could still exist. You know, maybe they don't like to travel.
Yeah, exactly. You can imagine a scenario and you can say, well, what are the chance is that if that scenario is real, we wouldn't have seen aliens, and so if you imagine a scenario where aliens are visiting Earth all the time, it's very unlikely that we don't see them, and so if we haven't seen them, you can mostly rule that scenario out. But there are always other scenarios like maybe they can't travel, maybe they're weirder than we imagine, maybe they don't care to travel, they don't want to contact us, or maybe they all died a billion years ago, or they're hiding, or there's always some scenario in which aliens could exist and we haven't seen them.
So basically, if you haven't seen them, there's nothing you can say about aliens, because I feel like there's so many ifs and possibilities. You're really just starting to, you know, make statements based on subjetions that you know, you really don't have any information about.
I think the kind of stuff you can say if you don't meet aliens is pretty weak, but not exactly nothing like aliens that desperately want to come to Earth and have the capabilities to do. So, those aliens don't exist, like if they existed, they would be here, So we can rule out some scenarios. But the space of possible scenarios that we can't rule out is infinite, and it's much much bigger than the things we can rule out. So like, what fraction of the scenarios have we ruled out by not discovering aliens? Basically zero, But that doesn't mean there are no scenarios we've ruled out. We've learned a little bit by not having met aliens. I see.
I think what you're saying is that we can sort of paint, you know, very subtle shades of rarity about the idea or the question of whether aliens exist. But again, these are just kind of like shades of statements that are, you know, based on assumptions, and really nobody knows.
Really nobody knows, but you can learn something like, for example, in our book, we go into some of these scenarios, Imagine there's a civilization out there in the galaxy that builds self replicating robots, robots that go off into space and find moons and mine them and make more of them. So you can exponential number of these robots because each one makes two more, which makes two more, which makes two more, and you can ask, like how long does it take before that civilization sends a robot to every single planet in the galaxy. The answer is like tens of thousands of years. So if the galaxy is billions of years old, if that civilization exists, or at least one of them, then Earth should have some of those robots visiting us. So that hasn't happened, for example, We're pretty sure, and so we can say like, that scenario is mostly ruled out. So there are interesting scenarios that we can mostly rule out. Though you're right, we're always making statistical statements and there's lots of stuff we can't rule out.
Right, and at some point I feel like you're basically making invaluable unvaluable statements, Like at some point you're basically saying, well, if we haven't seen Superman yet, that means that there isn't an alien race out there that grew up in around the Red Sun that was about to explode and then their parents sent at this kid out in a space ship and on Earth. That's something we can say about aliens. Yes, because so far we haven't seen Superman yet.
Yes, that's true. Off the infinite list of possible scenarios, we can cross one off the list. That's progress. It's still infinitely long.
No, you can't even cross out the list.
You can paint it with a statistical rarity. Right, you can say that's much.
Less likely, not even that cat right, I mean, it's statistics. So just because you haven't rolled twelve on a die doesn't mean that you can't.
That's right. But if you've rolled the die a lot of times you never see twelve, then you can start to make statements ill possible. It's still possible, ill possible where you can make statistical statements. Right. It's not true that you can say nothing right, Right.
But I guess you can debate how useful the statistical statement is.
It's totally unsatisfying, especially in comparison to discovering aliens. Right, But it's how we make progress. Right. It also gives us inspiration, like if we can think carefully about the kind of categories we have been able to see, it makes us aware of our blind spots, like, oh, well, actually, it turns out we've only been looking for people that broadcast in electromagnetism. Let's look for messages in neutrinos or in gravitational waves. Right, inspires us to think outside the box a little bit more.
Mmmm, let me see, helps you maybe narrow the search of how you're looking for aliens?
Yeah, actually broaden the search right, consider other ways we might be contacted.
All Right, what would you say is the answer for Nick? Here?
I would say we never make that determination.
Superman does not exist.
I would take an even bet against Superman existing for sure, Yes, but we can never prove that we're totally alone in the universe.
All Right. I wonder if that's comforting or not. Would you want to know you're the only species in the universe or would we feel better knowing there are other aliens out there.
It's sort of frustrating because it's one of these questions where either answer, yes, we're alone in the universe, so we're super rare and special, or no, we're not alone in the universe, so there's other intelligent life out there. Either answer is amazing and mind blowing. So it's kind of frustrating if the answer we get instead is hmm, maybe here's some statistics.
Here are some statistics based on some guesses. Yeah, based on some comic books and sci fi novels that Daniel has read.
Yes, that's absolutely less satisfying than a definitive answer yes or no. That's pretty frustrating. I feel you, Nick, I feel you.
All right, Well, it sounds like there is no point at which we can make that determination. But at some point you kind of have to get suspicious about whether or not they do exist out there. Yeah, all right, Well, Nick is definitely not alone in having questions about the universe. Other people have questions and they have sent it to us, and we are going to answer them here on the program. So when we come back, we'll tackle two more questions about electromagicating charges and about destroying the moon. But first, let's take a quick break.
With big wireless providers, what you see is never what you get. Somewhere between the store and your first month's bill, the price you thought you were paying magically skyrockets. With mint Mobile, you'll never have to worry about gotcha's ever again. When mint Mobile says fifteen dollars a month for a three month plan, they really mean it. I've used mint Mobile and the call quality is always so crisp and so clear. I can recommend it to you, So say bye bye to your overpriced wireless plans. Jaw dropping monthly bills and unexpected overages. You can use your own phone with any mint Mobile plan and bring your phone number along with your existing contacts. So dig your overpriced wireless with mint Mobiles deal and get three months a premium wireless service for fifteen bucks a month. To get this new customer offer and your new three month premium wireless plan for just fifteen bucks a month, go to mintmobile dot com slash universe. That's mintmobile dot com slash universe. Cut your wireless bill to fifteen bucks a month. At mintmobile dot com slash universe. Forty five dollars upfront payment required equivalent to fifteen dollars per month new customers on first three month plan only. Speeds slower about forty gigabytes On unlimited plan. Additional taxi, s, fees, and restrictions apply. See mint mobile for details.
AI might be the most important new computer technology ever. It's storming every industry and literally billions of dollars are being invested, so buckle up. The problem is that AI needs a lot of speed and processing power, So how do you compete without cost spiraling out of control. It's time to upgrade to the next generation of the cloud. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure or oh OCI is a single platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, and AI needs. OCI has four to eight times the bandwidth of other clouds, offers one consistent price instead of variable regional pricing, and of course nobody does data better than Oracle, So now you can train your AI models at twice the speed and less than half the cost of other clouds. If you want to do more and spend less, like Uber eight by eight and Data Bricks Mosaic, take a free test drive of OCI at Oracle dot com slash strategic. That's Oracle dot com slash Strategic Oracle dot com slash Strategic.
If you love iPhone, you'll love Apple Card. It's the credit card designed for iPhone. It gives you unlimited daily cash back that can earn four point four zero percent annual percentage yield. When you open a high Yield savings account through Applecard, apply for Applecard in the wallet app, subject to credit approval. Savings is available to Apple Card owners subject to eligibility. Apple Card and Savings by Gold and sax Bank USA Salt Lake City Branch Member FDIC terms and more at applecar dot com. When you pop a piece of cheese into your mouth or enjoy a rich spoonful of Greek yogurt. You're probably not thinking about the environmental impact of each and every bite, but the people in the dairy industry are. US Dairy has set themselves some ambitious sustainability goals, including being greenhouse gas neutral by twenty to fifty That's why they're working hard every day to find new ways to reduce waste, conserve natural resources, and drive down greenhouse gas emissions. Take water, for example, most dairy farms reuse water up to four times the same water cools the milk, cleans equipment, washes the barn, and irrigates the crops. How is US Dairy tackling greenhouse gases. Many farms use anaerobic digestors that turn the methane from maneuver into renewable energy that can power farms, towns, and electric cars. So the next time you grab a slice of pizza or lick an ice cream cone, know that dairy farmers and processors around the country are using the latest practices and innovations to provide the nutrient dense dairy products we love with less of an impact. Visit us dairy dot com slash sustainability to learn more.
All right, we're answering listener questions here today, and our next question comes from column.
Hey, I'm Callum, and I wanted to know why specifically do positive and negative charges attract to each other? As well as why do you to negative charges and to positive charges repel from each other? How exactly does that work?
Thank you? All right? Awesome question from column here. It sort of gets into the very idea of what is the nature of forces and electromagnetic forces and charges? Right?
Yeah, it's a great question, really fun, really deep, kind of philosophical and it came to me actually originally from column's physics teacher. He said he got this question in class, wasn't sure how to answer it. Could I help him out? And so I thought, hey, let's talk about it, and he agreed to play our answer in class high Column and everybody in your class. Yeah, hello, I hope you're not disappointed. Let's give them the answer first and then we'll see.
It disappoint Do you think this is more or less exciting than the lecture that a Colin's teacher normally would have done?
Oh, I'm pretty sure Colins teacher is a fabulous lecture in addition to being good looking.
Yes, best Teacher of the Year award multiple years going or at least they will.
Yes, and probably hilarious too, right.
Yes, yes, all teachers should play our podcast on her classroom.
But thank you to all the high school science teachers out there for your service on the front lines of education.
Yeah, that's right, And for all of you students out there, if you give us a five star rating on Apple Podcasts or any of those platforms, you automatically get an a in this class.
Wow. Yeah, or hey, does not have the authority to promise that, but go ahead give us a five star rating.
Yeah, no, no, we never tell the lies here in this podcast.
Yeah, well, it's statistically possible that you could get from giving us a five star rating that we can't say definitively.
Oh my goodness, Oh my goodness. Now I feel really alone and make my statement.
Better statistics than lies.
Right, all right. I wanted to get to Colin's question. Colin wanted to know why do plus and minus charges attract and why do two charges with the same polarity repel? Like, how does that work? Why is it so binary? I guess, And what makes one combination attract and the other one repel.
Yeah, it's a really fun question because it gets to the nature of like what is charge? What do we really know about it? And it also gets to the question of like, well, why does electromagnetism attract with opposite charges and why do other forces not? You know, for example, and electromagnetism, two positive charges repel, but in gravity, two positive masses attract each other. So there's lots of different directions to go in with this question.
Right, because you have the idea that a charge is like just a property of particles, Right, they're like little labels that you attached to things to stuff out there, like electromagnetic charge or like mass, or like maybe some of the other charge forces.
Yeah, that's definitely a valid way of thinking about it, and that's the way we teach it. But I think there's a layer we need to pull apart there so we clear on which part of it is actually something we observe and which part of it is sort of an explanation we've concocted to explain what we've observed. Because in the end, charge is a tool we use to explain attraction and repulsion. That's what we see out there, see a bunch of particles. Some of them push against each other, some of them attract each other. And what we've noticed is if you put these labels on the particles, call some of them plus and some of them minus, and you come up with this explanation like charges attract and opposite charges repel, then it works. It's consistent. It explains all the attraction and repulsion that we see. So it's not like we discovered charge. What we discovered is some particles push and pull, and we came up with charge as a way to explain that.
You're saying, like the idea of a charge, which is really just it's a definition thing. A charge is maybe not something fundamental to the universe. It's just something we came up with to explain what we see. Yeah, that's the philosophical side of it. We don't know if this really is a property of the universe or just part of the story that we tell. But what we definitely see, what we observe is the pushing and the pulling, and we use charges to explain that. I think there's another important wrinkle there in something you just said, which is this are a property of the particles. It's actually really fascinating because it's a property actually of a pair of particles. Like, what does a particle do if it has charge and it's all alone in the universe. Well, it doesn't push or pull. It doesn't get pushed, it doesn't get pulled. Right, It's only when you put another charge there do they push or pull on each other. So it's sort of like velocity, where velocity is relative. You know, you can only measure a velocity of an object relative to something else. Velocity is not the property of an object. Even though we describe particles as having charge, it's only really meaningful relative to another particle. So it's more like the property of a hair of particles. Here's two that have the same charge, here's two that have opposite charge, And we've come up with a consistent explanation to describe all of that, and so we think that's probably what's going on, but you know, we don't really know. Okay, So you're saying that as scientists, we've been studying things out there in the universe, and sometimes we notice that when you have these little things particles, sometimes they repel each other and sometimes they attract each other, and we've come up with this scenario where when they attract each other it must be because they have opposite of something, and when they repel each other's when they have the same of something. Yeah, and we call that a charge.
Yes, exactly.
So to ask like, why does that happen, the answer is like, basically because it does.
Well, the answer is we see it happen, and we can tell a story about the mechanism behind it. Right, we have this idea that each particle that has a charge creates a field, and that field has a force on other particles, and so we can describe it. We can accommodate. But we're doing much better than just saying this is what happens in the universe. We're not just describing everything we see. We're really explaining it. And you can tell the difference between describing and explaining because explanations are simpler. They're not just a list of everything you've seen. They're more compact, they're more economical. So specifically, if you have like ten particles, you want to understand, there's like fifty different unique pairs of those particles. So a totally descriptive theory, one that just lists what happens between every particles would have like fifty pieces of information, wouldn't simplify anything at all. The idea of electric charge is really an explanation because by putting a plus or a minus on every particle, that's just ten pieces of information one per particle. Then the result for any pair of particle is determined by the relative charges. So it's not just a description of what happens. It's a clever, compact, economical explanation, and that's good physics. The rest is to philosophy, Right, why does the universe work this way and not some other way? That's a deeper philosophical question. We can also talk about why in electromagnetism like charges repel whereas in gravity like charges attract. That is something we do understand.
I mean, I feel like basically you're saying that the answer is because it does, Like why is it that way? Because that's what we observe. But I wonder if maybe Colin is asking more, like you know, in our knowledge and our models of quantum mechanics and particle and quantum fields, like what is the basis of a charge in that scenario? And what's the mechanism by which having a positive or negative of that charge makes you attract or repel another particle.
Yeah, and the story is fascinating and compelling. The way we talk about it is that particles have these fields around them. So electron creates an electric field, right, And it depends on the charge. A proton has a different field than an electron, and that feel can vary, you know, it can be like stronger here and weaker there, and that variation is crucial if the field is slanty. If it's like stronger in one place and weaker in another place, it will create a force on other charged particles. So the slantiness of the field is where that force comes from. Just like if you put a ball down on the ground, If the ground is leveled, the ball's not going to roll anywhere. But you put a ball down on a hill, it's going to roll downhill. In exactly the same way. You put a charge particle in space where the field has a gradient where it varies. It's stronger in one place, weaker somewhere else. It's going to feel a force pushing it to where the field is weaker depending on its charge.
Right, I feel like you're saying again, just more of like it is because it is. But I wonder if you can say something about in your math formulations of quantum mechanics for quantum particles, how do you account for a charge? Is it just like a little number you append to a particle or to like a viable that you call a particle? And then how does it come up that if you have the same as sign or plus or minors, then you repel? And how does it come out that you attractive? We have different signs?
Yes, so econo mechanics, we have these labels that we assigned to particles. And I think maybe what you're looking for, and what Colin is asking about, is like, where do these labels come from? What really is charge? Sure, they seem to work and they're compact, and we can use them to predict the forces on particles. But do we understand where the charge itself comes from? The answer is no. And here's where we get a bit philosophical, because you have to think carefully about the kind of answer you're looking for when you ask this question. Take a step back, for example, and ask a similar question, why does a proton have charge plus one? Where does that come from? Well, we know the answer. It comes from the bits. The proton is made out of the quarks, so back to the electron, or for the quarks also, what's the answer there, Well, we don't know, because we don't know what the electron is made out of, or if it's made out of anything but just the electron. So for bigger stuff that's made of small stuff, we can answer this question. We can explain it in terms of that smaller stuff. For the smallest stuff, we can't. It's just how the universe is, and that will be also true when we eventually find out what's at the foundation of the universe. It's the smallest, most basic bit of matter, we'll look at it and say why is it the way that it is? And if it really is the foundation of the universe, we'll have no answer because we can't explain it in terms of its bits, because it doesn't have any internal bits. So that's the philosophical answer. We don't yet know what's inside the electron, if anything, so we don't really have any insight into why it has charge. But zoom back off from that philosophy and you can still learn things about forces and fields and charges if you start from the charge and the field it makes that tells you something about the forces. We act as if the charge is a property of the particle, and then it creates these fields, and those fields push or pull on the other particles. But the nature of the field, whether it's electromagnetism or gravity, determines whether like charges attract or like charges repel. And that gets a little bit mathematical. It's like the structure of the field. Is it a vector field, is it just a scaler? Like is there a number or is there a direction to the field that determines the kind of particle that transmits the information. So in an electromagnetism, we have the photon, right, the photon is a complicated particle. It has spin, whereas the Higgs field, for example, has the Higgs boson, which doesn't have any spin. And it turns out it's the spin of that particle that's communicating the information that determines whether like charges attract or like charges repel.
Wait, wait, what do you mean, Like, what's the connection between the spin of something and it's charge And are you talking to actually about like particle spinning or are you talking about some thing we call spin.
Well, when we're talking about particles, they don't actually spin. They just have this thing we call quantum spin, right, And so some particles don't have any of it, we call them spin zero. Some particles have spin one, some particles have spin half. All of the particles that transmit forces like electromagnetism have unit spin spin zero, spin one, spin two. So the photon, for example, is a spin one particle, and that comes out of the nature of the electromagnetic field. Like when you make photoons, which are ripples in this electromagnetic field, you make these particles that can have spin, and that's because the electromagnetic field has vectors that can like point in different directions, whereas the Higgs field is just a number, and so the ripples you make in it don't have any spin. And then the spin of these particles that transmits the forces determines whether like charges attract or repel. So electromagnetism, because it has a photon, a spin one particle, that's what makes like charges repel.
Why is it? What's the connection there? Why does the photon having spin one make like charges repel.
Yeah, it has to do with how we construct the mathematics of the quantum field theory. Basically, you get a negative sign every time you go up in spin. So spin zero, like charges attract. You add spin to spin one, you get a negative sign. You add another spin to spin two, like the graviton, then like charges attract again. So it comes out of the statistics of quantum field theory, which I think is a little too hairy to get into.
So wait, are you saying that photons have spin?
Photons have spin? Absolutely, Photons can be polarized, right that whole episode about polarization of photons. They can spin this way, they can spin that way.
And so when when you say spin one or spin zero, what does that actually mean, like the number of dimensions or are we just creating categories to explain why something's attract and repel.
Well, spin zero means just just a number, doesn't have any spin. Spin one means it's a vector. It points in some direction. It can also point in the other direction. Spin two is for really complicated particles like gravitons. They're tensors. They're more like not a vector, they're more like a matrix, really complicated, so they can have more values of spin. A particle that's called quote unquote spin one can have zero plus one or minus one spin article. That's quote unquote spin two can have plus two plus one zero minus one minus two. So as the structure the field itself gets more complicated, the nature the particle is more complicated, and then that changes the kind of interaction that it mediates.
I see. So I feel like maybe you're saying that the answer for our high school audience here is that it's sort of related to the dimensionality of the forces that we're talking about. Like, if the force that we're talking about has a certain number of dimensions, then like charges are going to repel. If it has a different set of dimensions, then like charges are going to attract. And it's almost like it sort of goes by the odd or evenness of the number of dimensions.
That's exactly right. And you know the explanation we game earlier, like, well, this is just sort of what we see, you know, it's not just descriptive. Like we put together as simple as possible an explanation for all the pushing and pulling that we've seen, and it works together kind of beautifully. It's really compact, it's simple, it tells a really compelling story, and there's some restrictions to it. You can't just build any quantum field theory you want. They don't all work. These are the ones that work and that do explain what we see. So in that sense, maybe we are revealing something that's true about the universe. This is what's actually happening behind the scenes. Maybe charge is real and it's part of these particles. We'll never really know, of course, any more than we know if there's aliens out there or Bigfoot exists. But it's a very compelling story we're telling about how it works.
Yeah, because it's sort of based on the math. If the dimensionality, how many dimensions the force has, then like charges repel. If it's even, then the like charges attract. That's kind of a fundamental thing about the universe, right yea. Does it ties math to what we see and experience in our everyday lives.
Yeah, exactly. That's what I was trying to say earlier, is that there's only a few ways to build these theories. It's not like you can just build any theory you like, so you have an infinite number of possible explanations. There's a lot of constraints on making these theories work, so they don't break down. They don't make nonsense predictions. They also agree with everything we've seen. And so what we've seen is that the universe really constrains us rules for how you can build these theories mathematically. And that's why seeing something work in the mathematics is often a really big hint that it might reflect something in the universe. And so that's why we hope that by exploring the mathematics of these theories, we're actually investigating what's happening behind the scenes in the universe.
Yeah, all right, So then the answer for Column and Column's class and for everyone out there is that like charges repel in electromagnetism because of the number of dimensions that the electromagnetic forces seem to operate in. If the electromagnetic force is operated in a different set of dimensions or number of dimensions, then like charges would do the opposite. They would attract each other.
Exactly like they do with the Higgs field and like they do with gravity.
All right, Well, everyone gets an a.
Extra credit on the house all around.
Well, if you sat through that whole explanation and that discussion, I think everyone deserves an a What do you.
Think at least a frozen banana yeah, yeah, ana frozen banana.
Okay, all right, well, thank you Calm, and thank you Colin's teacher for bringing this up. It's great to know there are high schoolers out there that are curious about these things, and they're drilling in to the nuances and having questions about very basic things.
Mm hmm. And it also shows you how easy and common it is to ask simple questions that have tricky answers. We don't really know the answers too. Now, this is a pretty basic question, and the answers are a little bit slippery and philosophical and mathematical. So you're right there at the edge of our knowledge and our understanding.
All right, Well, let's get to our last question of today, and this one is pretty dramatic and pretty intense. It's about destroying the moon, maybe to save humankind. So let's dig into that question. But first, let's take another quick break.
When you pop a piece of cheese into your mouth, or enjoy a rich spoonful of Greeky yogurt, you're probably not thinking about the environmental impact of each and every bite. But the people in the dairy industry are us. Dairy has set themselves some ambitious sustainability goals, including being greenhouse gas neutral by twenty to fifty. That's why they're working hard every day to find new ways to reduce waste, conserve natural resources, and drive down greenhouse gas emissions. Take water, for example, most dairy farms reuse water up to four times. The same water cools the milk, cleans equipment, washes the barn, and irrigates the crops. How is US dairy tackling greenhouse gases? Many farms use anaerobic digestors that turn the methane from maneuver into renewable energy that can power farms, towns, and electric cars. So the next time you grab a slice of pizza or lick an ice cream cone, know that dairy farmers and processors around the country are using the latest practices and innovations to provide the nutrient dense dairy products we love with less of an impact. Visit usdairy dot com slash sustainability to learn more.
There are children, friends, and families walking, riding on passing the roads every day. Remember they are real people with love, the ones who need them to get home safely. Protect our cyclists and pedestrians because they're people too. Go Safely California from the California Office of Traffic Safety and Caltrans.
Want the secret to your best skin yet. I've been getting a ton of compliments on my skin lately in the secret Biosonce. This award winning skincare brand known for its science backed formulas, has been a game changer for me. The best my skin has ever looked is right after I started using these two holy grails, the biosons Omega Repair Moisturizing Cream and Marine Algai Cream. These are just my personal faves. They're clinically proven products that deliver real results. Clinical trials have shown that one hundred percent of Omega Repair Moisturizing Cream users saw an increase in skin hydration after five minutes. And if you're concerned about fine lines like me, the Marine Algai Cream users sawn ninety seven percent improvement in the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles after one use. Are you ready for your best skin ever? Head Tobiosoonce dot com and discover your next skincare obsession. And by the way, use code pod that's PA at checkout to score an exclusive surprise gift with any order that's code pod at checkout.
Have you made the switch to Nix. Millions of women have made the switch to the revolutionary period underwear from Nix. That's k Nix. Period panties from Nix are like no other, making them the number one leakproof underwear brand in North America. Their comfy, stylish, and absorbent perfect for period protection from your lightest to your heaviest days. They look, feel and machine wash just like regular underwear, but feature incognito protection that has you covered. You can shop sizes from extra small to four XL, choose from all kinds of colors, prints, and different styles from bikinis to boy shorts, thongs to high rise. You've got to try Nicks. See why millions are ditching disposable, wasteful period products and have switched to Nix. Go to knix dot com and get fifteen percent off with promo code try fifteen. That's nix dot com. Promo code try fifteen for fifteen percent off life changing period underwear. That's k nix dot com.
All right, we're answering questions from listeners, or at least the question is that Daniel feels like answering.
I answer all the questions. I just elevate some of them to the podcast.
Oh oh, this is elevating the questions. Interesting, I thought it was lowering them.
You're thinking your contribution to these is lowering our answers to them.
Possibly. Yeah, we're covering in with the Hershy's chocolate. But our last question here comes from Kim from Toronto.
Hi, Daniel and Jorge. This is Kim from Toronto in Canada. I know how much you enjoy answering ethics and physics questions from aspiring evil villains, So I have a question for the two of you. If climate change is melting the ice caps and forcing sea levels to rise at the equator, could this effect be offset at the equator by destroying the Moon safely, of course, so nobody gets hurt. And since more of the Earth's population is closer to the equator than the poles, would this potentially save the lives of those who are currently living in zones which would flood if the sea levels rise. And a question for Jorge, if I were to single handedly destroy the Moon in order to save millions of lives, would this make me a hero or a villain?
All right? A bit of a scary question here from Kim. I'm not even sure what to make of this question or what it even means, Like, how do you tie destroying the moon to saving the planet?
Well? I do like the creativity here, Like, we're facing some issues people, let's think about out of the box solutions.
Right, that's right, we have the problem of climate change. Obviously the easiest thing is to destroy the moon.
I don't know if it's the easiest thing or even on the top ten easiest solutions to climate change, but it's kind of interesting to think about.
Okay. So I think what Kim is thinking here is that climate change is the thing, and one of the consequences of climate change are rising sea levels, which is a problem. Maybe not if you're in Montana or in Siberia, but if you're in a coastal city then it's sort of a problem. And if the sea levels rise, and it's going to cost a lot of chaos and instability for billions of people, which is bad news for everybody. And so I think Kim is thinking, like, oh, rising sea levels, that sounds like something related to tides, and tides are related to the moon. What if we destroy the moon, will that solve the consequences of climate change?
Right?
I think that's what Kim is trying to propose here.
Yeah, I think the idea or the hope is that you could mitigate the impact of rising sea levels by minimizing the tides. Like, yeah, maybe the ocean is going up, but the worst is when the ocean goes up and you have high tides. If your tides aren't as higher, if you can remove the tides, then the ocean doesn't rise as much. And so you're somehow mitigating the rise in sea levels by preventing these swings in the ocean depth.
Right, right, Because I imagine that Kim has figured it out that if you remove the moon, that doesn't mean that the sea levels go down. It just means that they don't go up and down.
Yeah, that's exactly right. They don't go up and down, and so they're not as high, right. I think that's the point.
The highs are not as high and the lows are not as low. You eliminate the variation of the tides, which helps. It doesn't solve the rising sea levels because the average sea level will still rise.
That's right.
Maybe the high tide will be as bad as it would be if you had the moon.
Exactly and this relies on the sort of a simple model of the tides, where the Moon is pulling on the water and making it deeper here and narrower there, and so it's making higher tides and lower tides. And it's true that the tides can be very large and quite variable. You know, in someplace around the world, the tides can be like, you know, more than ten meters, So it can definitely be very dramatic.
Wait, you mean like in some places it can go up and down ten meters.
Yeah, exactly, tides could be very very dramatic.
Where is it? Ten meters is a lot thirty feet?
It is? I looked at a map of the tidal variations and it's sort of surprising. It's not focused on the equators. You know, there's like the inlet under Alaska is very dramatic. Actually, the waters just to the west of Central America have some of the strongest tides. Up near the northern coast of Europe has very strong tides. It doesn't just vary on latitude. Tides in the end are influenced by the moon, but there's lots of other important factors like the shape of the coast and the depth of the water, how the water likes to slash around, the temperature of the water, lots of things affect the amplitude of the tides.
Oh so then what does that mean. Does that mean that if you eliminated the moon you would still get tides.
That's also true because the Sun contributes like a third of the tidal forces. So if you eliminated the moons, you would reduce the tides, though it wouldn't be concentrated necessarily at the equator. But if you liminated the moon, you would still have tithes because the Sun also causes tides and a slightly different pattern of course than the moon, but you wouldn't get rid of them by destroying the moon.
Yeah. I remember we had a whole episode about ties and it was kind of complicated.
It's very complicated. You know, people have been trying to understand this for a long time, and Newton had the first model based on you know, gravity pulling on the water. But that's just one part of it. That's just like the input, that's how much gravity is pushing on the water. You also have to understand how the water responds, Like if you sit in your bathtub and you push on the water to make a wave, you make a wave, the water doesn't just bend under your hand and stay there. So you have to understand the water's response, all the wave equations to really understand how the tides are formed. It's very, very complicated. These days, we have a really solid understanding of it, though, which is why you can like look up the tides anywhere on Earth pretty far in the future and get a pretty good prediction.
Of it, right, although I hear the accuracy of that kind of goes up and down on when you look or where the moon is. I think what you're saying is that Kim's plan would work sort of like if you took out the moon, you wouldn't totally eliminate the tides, but you would maybe eliminate two thirds of the tide, which is sort of Kim's plant.
You would eliminate two thirds of the tides, but it wouldn't have the most impact in the coastal areas. It would have the most impact other places on Earth, which is still helpful. Right, everybody would benefit from having lower ocean levels or lower highs. I suppose, Wait, what do you mean it wouldn't affect the equator? You're saying, but tides affect the coastal areas. Right, tide affects the coastal areas. But where around the world those tides are most dramatic is not in the equator? Depends on the shape of the continents and all sorts of stuff. If you google like a tide map, you'll see these red hotspots where the tides are most dramatic, and they are not along the equator. So if he's looking to focus his efforts and help people along the equator, tides are not the way to do it.
Well, I'm not sure Kim actually is that concern about people in the quator, and specifically, I think he's just concerned about the overall consequences of climate change. And you're saying it wouldn't be focused on the equator. It would sort of spread out all over in weird places. But if you did eliminate the moon, it would lower the ups and downs with the tide.
Yeah, it would. It wouldn't reduce the tides, but of course you're also contributing lots of other potential knock on problems from getting rid of the moon, which does much more than just provide tides.
What do you mean like, what other effects would removing the moon have?
Well, the moon is crucial for lots of ecosystems. You know, provides light at certain times of night at certain parts of the month. Predators rely on the moon for hunting at night. There's a lot of biological things that are linked to the moon. You know, a lot of our cycles are linked to the moon for lots of reasons. So you get rid of the moon, it could have difficult to predict impact on ecosystems.
Mmm. I think my question is why would you even destroy the moon?
That's the engineering you man.
Let's say you like obliterated. It wouldn't all those rocks fall on Earth and kills all which I make climate change a small problem.
Yes, definitely, you'd have to do this safely. I've actually read that novel Seven Eves where their moon is destroyed and rains down rocks on the Earth. Super interesting. You know, instead of destroying the Moon, you can just like push it out into space. You don't actually have to destroy it.
Oh whoa, whoa. Interesting, Like just attach some rockets into it and have it just been out of control and shoot off Earth. Yeah, exactly what kind of energy would that take?
A lot of energy. If you want to do it quickly, if you want to do it gradually and you're happy to wait millions of years, then you know a low rocket thrust could do it. In fact, we're already losing the moon, right. It gets further and further away from us by like a centimeter per year. So Kim could also just wait a few million.
Years and then we'll all be dead from other things. I wonder if you can take all the CO two on Earth, right, take it to the Moon, build some sort of engine with that, and then you solve two problems.
Oh yeah, there you go. There's the engineering you But you know you're always creating other problems when you're disturbing the system like the moon does again, even more than like helping predators find prey, it also stabilizes the Earth's spin. The Earth spins off axis, right, so it's a little bit unstable at wobbles a little bit, and they think that the Moon helps stabilize that wobble, like absorbs some of that angular momentum. And without a big moon, the Earth's axis might tilt more and more until eventually it's tilted all the way over on its side. The way Urinus is whoa.
Well, in that case, maybe Kim will come out with the idea to make a moon to tilt this bag. I mean it. Kime seems to have pretty big ideas.
Yeah, he'll solve one problem, create another one, then solve that one create a bigger problem. I see where this is going.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Well, Kim has a second part of the question, which is, if Kim manages to destroy the moon and save people's lives, would make them a.
Hero or a villain? Yeah? And this question specifically for you?
Yeah, I wonder why specifically for me, am I the ultimate judge people's actions.
I think Kim recognized that you have a deeper appreciation of like comic book superhero lore.
Oh, I see, I see interesting. Interesting. I guess it depends on several things. Does Kim have a doctorate?
Do you.
Know most villains are called doctor something?
Oh?
Interesting?
Does Kim wear a cape and a hood? That makes a big difference.
Also, yeah, we'll get that to Kim's PR department right away.
Well, I think it depends maybe on the ultimate effect of Kim's actions. You know, maybe Kim will save millions of lives now, but in the long run, make the Earth the worst place to live interesting, in which case he'd be like a tragic hero.
So we're responsible for the unintended consequences of our actions.
I'm saying, and we would all suffer from the unintended consequences of Kim's actions.
Well, if this podcast is attracting aliens to Earth and they come and they kill us, all, are we then villains?
Only? That was your intent all along.
Daniel, I'm going to no comment on that one.
Sounds like a yes.
No comment to that as well, that's what a supervillain would say. Then supervillain has a super team of lawyers, and that's what they advise.
Yes, Yes, superheroes don't have lawyers. They're honest and forthright.
There you go, Kim, So if you have a lawyer, you're a villain.
Yeah, although Kim has been pretty forthright about their plans, so maybe. Yeah, I'm very confused. I'm very confused ethically here. Yes, I'm hoping for hero I'm pushing for hero in this one.
Yeah.
All right, Well we're all cheering for you, Kim and your plan to destroy the moon. Maybe it'd be easier if we just cut carbon dioxide emissions. Yeah, it sounds like a like an easier path here. All right, Well that's the answer for Kim, and I think that means that we've answered all the questions to stick.
That's right, we have, and we love your questions. We love thinking about them, we love talking about them, we love answering them. If you have questions about how the universe works and you want to hear us talking about them, please to me two questions at Danielhorgey dot com.
Yeah, whichever question you sent in, Daniel will give you an A and a banana.
Covered in chocolate. Yes, digital frozen banana covered in chocolate, covered in digital chocolate.
All right, Well, we hope you enjoyed that. Thanks for joining us. See you next time. For more science and curiosity, come find us on social media where we answer questions and post videos. We're on Twitter, Discorg, Instant, and now TikTok. Thanks for listening, and remember that Daniel and Jorge Explain the Universe is a production of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. When you pop a piece of cheese into your mouth, you're probably not thinking about the environmental impact, but the people in the dairy industry are. That's why they're working hard every day to find new ways to reduce waste, conserve natural resources, and drive down greenhouse gas emissions. House US dairy tackling greenhouse gases. Many farms use anaerobic digesters to turn the methane from manure into renewable energy that can power farms, towns, and electric cars. Visit you as dairy dot COM's last sustainability to learn more.
Vitamin water was born in New York because New Yorkers wanted more flavor to pair with all the amazing food in the city. Vitamin water is so New York. It's three favorite cheeses ar chop, cheese, bacon, egg and cheese, and a slice of cheese. Pizza. Drink vitamin water. It's from New York.
There are children, friends, and families walking, riding on paths and roads every day. Remember they're real people with loved ones who need them to.
Get home safely.
Protect our cyclists and pedestrians because they're people too.
Go safely.
California from the California Office of Traffic Safety and Caltrans
