Big Think Interview with John Waters
John Waters is an American filmmaker, writer, and artist who rose to fame in the early 1970s for his transgressive cult films, which have earned him the titles "pope of filth" and "prince of puke." Waters's 1970s and early '80s trash films feature his regular troupe of actors known as Dreamlanders, most famous among them being the drag queen Divine. In 1988, Waters had his biggest mainstream hit with "Hairspray," which was turned into Tony Award-winning Broadway musical in 2003 and then remade as a movie musical in 2007. In 2010, Waters published the unorthodox memoir "Role Models," in which Waters interviews and writes about his influences as a means of telling his own life story.
John Waters: I’m John Waters and hopefully I can be your filth elder.
Question: What makes art successful?
John Waters: Well in art certainly, contemporary art’s job is to wreck whatever came before it. And from the very beginning after the Old Masters, from then on, each generation wrecked that. That something that’s pretty and beautiful is probably the worst thing that you could say today in contemporary art about something, unless it’s so pretty it’s nauseating.
So, and people that... most people have great contempt about contemporary art and I find that hilarious because I did a piece, it said "contemporary art hates you." And it does hate them because you can’t see it. You don’t know the magic trick; you haven’t learned the vocabulary, you haven’t learned the special way of seeing something that changes it. And that is like joining a biker gang; that is. But you do have to be able to appreciate all kinds of taste. And the contemporary art that I like best is the kind that initially angers you. And say, “Oh now, this is..." but now that’s so great.
I saw a painting last night that was so... that I really want to buy, but it’s a dilemma. It’s by Karen Sander, an artist I like and collect, but this painting; she just took a blank canvas and left it outside until it got mold and everything, and it’s really ugly. But I thought she had struggled... she didn’t do one thing. But the problem with buying it is, is that the mold will spread in your house, and it’s toxic. So this to me is the best art piece I’ve seen all year. I’m still trying to figure out how I can own it without poisoning myself.
Question: Does your art seek to make people angry?
John Waters: I always wanted to make people angry and make them laugh though, to be surprised. I mean, my early movies were made for a hippie audience. That’s who went to midnight movies. But I was a.. look I guess like I had been... I had long hair. I thought the revolution was coming, but I was a Yippie you know, and so I made fun of Hippies by making violent movies, like “Multiple Maniacs” and “Pink Flamingos,” but the Hippies always liked it. The same way today.
In my book, "Role Models," I have chapters that are fairly rude about outsider pornographers and men that go down in outhouses and shit on them, but no one seems to object. It was on the Best Seller List in the Midwest, I think. Isn’t that amazing that’s in libraries... And I wrote a very impassioned piece about trying to free one of the Manson women, which not anybody got that controversial about that. The only thing I’ve said on the book tour that were the cause of people going crazy was, in San Francisco, I said I thought they had good public transportation. And then there were all these blogs that said, “Has John Waters lost his mind?” So I thought that was the only controversial thing I said. So things are... it’s odd, people I guess if they buy my book, they expect to be a little bit surprised. That’s what they’re paying the money for. They’d be disappointed if they weren’t.
Question: Is your work anti-ironic?
John Waters: I think there’s not an ironic sentence in "Role Models." I don’t write about anybody that’s so bad they’re good. And even in my movies, in Baltimore and all that kind of thing. I’m looking up to those people. I’m asking you to come into their world and marvel. I’m never asking you like reality television, to look down on them and make fun of them and feel superior. I think that’s a big, big difference. I don’t think, even my most extreme films were every mean spirited, really. I mean, in “Pink Flamingos,” Divine was minding her own business, writing her memoirs. In “The Woodsman” she was challenged by a jealous pervert. I think my movies are politically correct in a weird way and moral.
Question: How are your films moral?
John Waters: Well the morality of my movies is: "Mind your own business!" You don’t know what caused people to act the way they do and so until you know all that and you’ve heard all the evidence, it’s none of your business. I couldn’t believe that everybody went crazy about Tiger Woods. Well, he didn’t run for Pope. I don’t care who he slept with. He shouldn’t care who I sleep with. They all said he was great, too. That’s the thing, what’s he upset about. Every person said he was the best fuck ever.
Question: Next month in Canada you are presenting Pier Paolo Pasolini’s film “Salo,” which is considered one of the filthiest films ever made. What makes it great?
John Waters: “Salo” is a beautiful movie though. I mean, “Salo”, that last shot of the two soldiers dancing in that beautiful set. I mean, Pasolini, I mean, he’s a Catholic saint to me, I mean. I want my gravestone to look like his. I pray to Pasolini. I mean, so I think that movie is a beautiful movie, a beautiful movie. And unfortunately, you know, he was murdered by a hustler almost right after he made that movie. So, he died for our sins.
Question: Why should filmmakers make obscene films like “Salo”?
John Waters: Well, to me Pasolini is not... I don’t think “Salo” is obscene. I think it can use obscenity in a way to make a point about fascism, I mean about fantasies, about power, that’s a movie about the pornography of power really. So I think it uses the very extreme sexual subject matter in a very intellectual way.
But I think even the worst porn, which is usually heterosexual because it’s very anti-woman. I read somewhere, somebody said, "They don’t make love in those movies, they make hate.” And that is true. But I think for the freedom of the press, we have to put up the worst of pornography because though, artists when they’re young don’t have the money to fight the law, but pornographers' mafia lawyers do. So they fight the law and change it so artists can use the same subject matter. I think we have to put up with the limits of freedom. I mean, burning... you know, the Bible, the Koran, everything. I think you should be able to burn anything you want actually. I actually think you should be able to yell, “Fire” in a crowded theater.
You know, these people that do it are just publicity hounds. It’s like Fred Phelps, that group you know, that god hates fags and then he goes to Marine’s funerals that aren’t gay, which I understand the rage of those parents. However, he came to Provincetown, a very gay place, and just had signs “God hates fags” and not one person, just everyone passed him and no one said one thing and he left. No one complained, no one did anything, no one reacted. He’s there for you to react to. The same way these people, these tiny little crackpot evangelists like Elmer Gantry types that go and do this, they want you... that’s the only way they get noticed. So you’re rising to the bait if you flip out about it.
Question: What are the most “obscene” films ever made?
John Waters: Certainly, probably “Salo,” probably either an early Kenneth Anger movie or an early Jean Genet movie, “Fireworks” or Chant d’amour those movies which were so beautiful, they were like poetry and illegal and so great. I guess you know, the early porn that changed everything, like “Mona,” which was a heterosexual movie that... just the title makes me laugh. It was the first movie that legally showed penetration in New York City that wasn’t in a documentary. The law was changed by a movie called “Pornography in Denmark,” that was a documentary. So things had to be, at the time, socially redeeming. So that was the ludicrousness of it, that’s why even Warhol did "Nude Restaurant" where everybody sat around nude and talked about Vietnam, which was very funny.
I don’t know, I don’t think any of those movies are really obscene, but certainly there’s a movie, “Salo” some people would certainly think, there’s this other one about... what is it called, oh I’m just forgetting... but there was this kid that fantasized about his torture in the concentration camps... what’s that one called? That’s a shocker. There are shockers, certainly, I think “Irreversible,” I think is a great, great shocker. That’s a great movie. I’d put that at the top of my list.
Question: Do celebrities deserve privacy?
John Waters: To me, it isn’t my business of who a celebrity sleeps with. Who David Letterman slept with, or his marriage—unless he uses a moral stance to put down other people, then it is very much my business to do that, I think. People that come out against gay rights that are blowing people in bathrooms. You know, I’m happy they’re blowing people in bathrooms. I mean, I don’t care if they do that. I almost have nostalgia for that. I never go in a bathroom anywhere where I see perverts anymore. It’s been cleaned up. It’s online now. So I miss perverts in the real world. I miss seeing them.
However, if you are into that scene, I mean I could have – who was the guy in the airport? Larry Craig. I could have told him how you do that. You stand and you... one guy sits on the toilet... blowing and the other guy stands up with both legs in a shopping bag, in separate shopping bags, so when you’re outside the booth it only looks like there’s one person in there. I mean, it’s easy to get away with that stuff if you want to do it. But you just have to plan. You can’t be an amateur at it like he was.
Question: What was it like growing up as John Waters in suburban Baltimore?
John Waters: As a child—I wrote a lot in "Role Models" about my childhood—is that I was lucky enough that my parents made me feel safe. They were horrified by my interests. I was born six weeks early, right from the beginning there was trouble. So, but yet, my mother dropped me off at a bar downtown because she thought maybe I could find bohemia because she couldn’t think of anything else. She was so terrified because I was a pretty insane kid. But I had a career in show business really early, as a puppeteer for children's birthday parties. So I know what I wanted. I always said I should have quit school in sixth grade once I learned to read and write because... you go to school to figure out what you want to do. I knew what I wanted to do.
So... and I think that any kid that rebels, you should be glad if he’s your kid because he’ll succeed later. The kids that reach their peak in high school, it’s downhill. Completely. I never go to my high school reunions. As I said in the book, I don’t want see – the only thing you want to see are the people you wanted to have sex with then and I’ve already driven by their house and stalked them. I know what they look like. And the problem is, you realize it’s their children that looks like them and then that could really be touchy. And, grandchildren today.
But I have someone that went to the reunion and he read me the little thing about the guy that was the biggest star and the jock and everything. And they said, “What are your interests?” And all he could think of was "doing things around the house." That is the most pitiful, pathetic thing, chores. A reason to live.
Question: Have you mellowed with age?
John Waters: Well mellow, what did Woody Allen say? Mellow, that means you rot. I don’t have certainly the anger I had at 20. I’ve said it a million times, but it’s really one of the most truthful things I ever said, a 20-year-old that’s angry is sexy, a 64-year-old man that’s angry is an asshole. If you haven’t gotten over some things, you can blame your parents 'til you’re 30, but after 40, forget whining about anything. Everybody’s dealt a hand, everybody has ups, downs, you can’t order up your kids, you can’t order up your parents, you just popped here. And you’re cast, what’s ever in you and you’ll have to make the best you can with that character.
So, yes, I’m not... I’ve had a good life, you know. I have.. I’ve been able to do what I wanted to do. So what do I have to be bitter about really, I mean.
Question: You must know some great offbeat bars around the country. What are they like?
John Waters: I do, but I don’t know that there are any left in New York, really. There’s places I go, but they’re all filled with irony. They’re all faux-something. The fact that you move to New York makes you faux-something. There’s bars in Baltimore that I take New York friends to that are really alarmed by them. They can’t believe they’re out... that would be impossible to have in New York because they’re blue collar bars. They’re like, they don’t have that here. Maybe they have it in Queens, but they’re not going to have it in Manhattan. You can’t even have hipster bars here. You have to live in Brooklyn because it’s too expensive to live in Manhattan.
So, I’m just saying, I do know there’s bars in Baltimore. I know a few in San Francisco where I live. I know really none in Manhattan. I mean, there’s places I go that I like, but I can’t say that I know a real dive bar that is filled with characters that are New York characters. There probably is, I don’t know it.
Question: What makes a bar great?
John Waters: For me, undiscovered... Blue-collar definitely. A certain tension from the type of people that go there, and rap music. I always love to have rap music. It keeps away a lot of people I don’t like. I especially love gay bars that have rap music. That really works. There’s only, I’ve only been to about two in my whole life... And not a totally black one either. Just like where it plays. Because rap music, for some reason, really alienates gay people, which makes me laugh.
Question: What else makes John Waters laugh?
John Waters: Wit makes me laugh, not jokes. I hate when people say, I have a joke to tell you. I go, "ah, la, la, la, please." I hate it when somebody tells me a joke because they’re never funny. But I like people’s wit, I like to be surprised. Or I like somebody that is totally clueless that says something that takes my breath away, just overheard dialogue, like the guy I asked in the bar, “What do you do for a living?” And he said, “I trade deer meat for crack.” He was serious. He wasn’t telling me this... but what dialogue. I could inspire an entire movie from that one line because there’s a lot of backup questions there. But unfortunately, he was at my house and my friends said, “I’ll get rid of him because there were a bunch of people that came over after a bar... not for anything as exciting as you might imagine.
Question: How did you come out?
John Waters: Coming out! It’s just so square to me. I mean, I always was gay. I knew I was gay the moment I saw Elvis Presley, when I was probably about 10 years old. I thought, what the hell is that? But I know it’s important to some people, but I just... no one, I never just came out and made it a ceremony or an announcement. Like when people say, “Are you a bottom or a top?” What is it, a political party? It depends. It’s amazing to me the seriousness with these questions we’re asked about. To me, most of the gay people I know sort of just always were, but they didn’t only hang around with gay people, they hung around with straight people that... I’m for mix. I’m against separatism of any kind. I don’t like men that call women fish and I hate that. I hate separate lesbians that hate men. I like them better though. But I know it’s important to people. No one ever asked me if I was gay because they thought something was worse than that. They were afraid to hear the answer. I was on the cover of the Advocate and it said, “The World’s Most Out Director,” but they never asked me if I was gay. They never asked me a gay question. I was waiting.
And my father once said, "Do you have to say it in USA Today?" so I didn’t. I thought that was fair, you know. He doesn’t care if I’m on the cover of Out because his friends don’t see that. So I thought it was a funny question. I honored that, sure. USA Today would never ask you that question anyway.
So I’m for it, but I kind of just always felt like I always was. I mean, I was on the cover of a gay magazine in like 1972, something called Gay Times and it wasn’t because I was brave, just nobody else wanted to put me on the cover. Really. So, and my films have... I've always said that my audiences, even gay people that don’t get along with other gay people, black people that don’t get along with other black people. Minorities that can’t stand even the rules of their own minority. And I’m one of them. Too much gaily correctness makes me crazy too. You now, that GlAAD came out against this tranny movie? Oh please, we have more enemies than that. It was like, what, are gay people losing their sense of humor they have to be perfect now? I’m for gay villains. I think it’s healthy to admit there’s bad gay movies. Gay’s not enough, it’s a good start.
Question: As gay culture has entered the mainstream has it become more homogenous?
John Waters: I think, yeah. I don’t understand what gay people want to be like everybody else. To me, we were outlaws, we used our wit for fighting words, you know, act up, act bad I wanted. But I understand that people... straight, gay, people want to get married, they want to have children. I’m for that, I’m all for that. I’m for like, why would anyone be against gay adoption? I can’t understand it, or when celebrities get babies. Madonna’s child won the lottery, if you ask me. The one she just got in Africa. I’m for anybody getting any kid, if they can love it. And I’m for abortion. If you can’t love your kid, don’t have it because it will grow up and kill us.
Question: Do you think Sarah Palin is a fan of your work?
John Waters: I don’t. But I don’t even care about her. I care deeply about Little Levi. And he... I think he’s cute and I love how he tortures her. I think he’s going to age really badly. You can tell he already has a receding hairline. He’s going to be fat and bald soon. So he better show us his asshole soon. Because he said he was going to show us his penis, he never did, so that will be any minute. But I’m waiting for the day that once little Levi shows the world his asshole, then I’m ready to meet him.
Question: Do you vote?
John Waters: Sure, I mean I sometimes vote a couple of times in elections. I haven’t done that in a while, but I have done it. For Shirley Chisholm I did it a couple of times in California a long time ago, before picture ID ruined everything.
Question: What inspires you to vote multiple times?
John Waters: Well a passion for a character. Shirley Chisholm was a great black woman that wore crazy hats and I just loved her campaign. It was just her picture and it just said, “Outrageous.” This was in like, the 1970’s or something, a really long time ago. So I just borrowed everybody’s ID that said they weren’t going to vote that sort of looked like me because they didn’t have picture then, and you just go to their polling place. I figure if you care that much, it makes up for the apathy of some of your neighbors. I don’t think it’s so wrong, really.
Question: What’s wrong with politics in this country?
John Waters: Well, it’s funny because right now, it’s 50/50. The people... people hate Obama as much as we hated Bush. It’s just switched, and it might go back, unfortunately. It’s just going to be back and forth like that that forever. It’s right down the middle, it’s half-and-half. I think Obama’s doing a good job, you know, he inherited the exact opposite and hadn’t had that much time.
But I was just at hateful about Bush as people are about him. So I... and they at least the Republicans rioted, which I gave them respect for when they passed the... but because they passed a health law, that was the oddest ting to riot about. That poor people could have health care, that made people break windows? It seems to me... but I’m happy they broke windows. Why didn’t we do that when Bush was President? Why didn’t we riot? So, I think you can learn from Republicans.
I’m friends with Republicans. One of my assistants is a Republican. Liberals can get on my nerves a little bit when they never imagine that anyone they ever meet could be a Republican. I don’t talk about politics a lot with my assistant, 'cause we’re not going to argue about it. She has every right to be a Republican. But at the same time, there are some liberals that never imagine anyone else could not think like them. And I don’t like to watch TV where the commentators are completely on my side or completely against. And I can’t find a show where they are... they’re just regular because I don’t know how they feel anymore. I don’t read opinion pieces. I have faith in my own opinion. I know I’m right. I don’t want to read what someone else ahs to say. Although I do read the really well-written think pieces in the Wall Street Journal, even though they are usually the exact opposite of how I feel, but I think that’s the smartest thing is to find out how people who don’t believe in anything you believe in, the smart ones, how they write because then you can learn how to fight that.
Recorded September 10, 2010
Interviewed by Max Miller
A conversation with the filmmaker.
Dominique Crenn, the only female chef in America with three Michelin stars, joins Big Think Live this Thursday at 1pm ET.
Astronomers spot an object heading into Earth orbit.
Minimoons<p>Scientists have confirmed just two prior minimoons. One was <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_RH120" target="_blank">2006 RH120</a>, which orbited us from September 2006 to June 2007. The other was <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_CD3" target="_blank">2020 CD3</a>, which got stuck in the 2015–2016 timeframe, and is believed to gotten away in May 2020.</p><p>2020 SO, the new kid on the block, is expected to arrive in October 2020 and pop out of orbit in May 2021.</p><div id="37962" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f4c0fc8a2cba6536ea4cd960ebed3e6e"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1307729521869611008" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Asteroid 2020 SO may get captured by Earth from Oct 2020 - May 2021. Current nominal trajectory shows shows capture… https://t.co/F5utxRvN6Z</div> — Tony Dunn (@Tony Dunn)<a href="https://twitter.com/tony873004/statuses/1307729521869611008">1600621989.0</a></blockquote></div>
Identifying 2020 SO<p>The first clue 2020 SO isn't your ordinary asteroid is its exceptionally low velocity. It's traveling much more slowly that a typical asteroid — their <a href="https://www.lpi.usra.edu/exploration/training/illustrations/craterMechanics/" target="_blank">average rate of travel</a> <a href="https://www.lpi.usra.edu/exploration/training/illustrations/craterMechanics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"></a>is 18 kilometers (58,000 feet) per second. Even <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_rock" target="_blank">moon rocks</a> sent careening into Earth orbit by impacts on the lunar surface outpace pokey 2020 SO.</p><p>For another thing, 2020 SO has an orbital path very similar to Earth's, lasting about one Earth year. It's also just slightly less circular than our own orbit, from which it's barely tilted off-axis.</p><p>So, what is it? <a href="https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/ca/" target="_blank">NASA estimates</a> that the object has dimensions very reminiscent of a discarded Centaur rocket stage from the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Surveyor 2 mission</a> that landed an unmanned craft on the moon. Back in the day, rocket stages were jettisoned as craft were aimed toward their desired position. This stuff, if released high enough, remains in space. It appears that this Centaur rocket, launched in September 1966, is now making its way back homeward, at least for a little bit.</p><p>When 2020 SO arrives at its closest point in December, the rocket is expected to be about 50,000 kilometers from Earth. Its next closest approach is much further: 220,000 kilometers, in February 2010.</p><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDQzMDk3NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyODg1MTQ1MX0.HGknDwqp0GmeuczKY_AS7vrPG7KMFUc_XO95tNoI2xo/img.jpg?width=980" id="e5cda" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="85eb1f790d8c3ee5b261f7ba13eaa5e1" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="Centaur rocket stage" />
Centaur rocket stage
What we may be able to learn<p>Earthly space programs being as young as they are, scientists would love to know what's happened to our rocket during a half century in space.</p><p>While 2020 SO won't get close enough to drop into our atmosphere, its slow progress has scientists hopeful that they'll still get some kind of a decent look at it.</p><p>Spectroscopy may be able to reveal what the rocket's surface is like now — has any of its paint survived, for example? Of course, being out in space, it's likely to have been hit by lots of dust and micrometeorites, so the current state of its surfaces is also of interest. Experts are curious to know how reflective the rocket is at this point, valuable information that can help planners of future long-term missions anticipate how well a craft out in space for extended periods will remain able to reflect sunlight.</p>
From cryonics to time travel, here are some of the (highly speculative) methods that might someday be used to bring people back to life.
- Alexey Turchin and Maxim Chernyakov, researchers belonging to the transhumanism movement, wrote a paper outlining the main ways technology might someday make resurrection possible.
- The methods are highly speculative, ranging from cryonics to digital reconstruction of individual personalities.
- Surveys suggest most people would not choose to live forever if given the option.
Immortality and identity<p>The paper defines life as a "continued stream of subjective experiences" and death as the permanent end of that stream. Immortality, to them, is a "life stream without end," and resurrection is the "continuation of that same stream of experiences after an arbitrarily long gap."</p><p>Another key clarification is the identity problem: How would you know that a downloaded copy of yourself really was going to be <em>you? </em>Couldn't it just be a convincing yet incomplete and fundamentally distinct representation of your brain?</p><p>If you believe that your copy is not <em>you</em>, that implies you believe there's something more to your identity than the (currently) quantifiable information contained within your brain and body, according to the researchers. In other words, your "informational identity" does not constitute your true identity.</p><p>In this scenario, there must exist what the researchers call a "non-informational identity carrier" (NIIC). This could be something like a "soul." It could be "qualia," which are the unmeasurable "subjective experiences which could be unique to every person." Or maybe it doesn't exist at all.</p><p>It's no matter: The researchers say resurrection, in some form, should be possible in either scenario.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"If no 'soul' exist[s], resurrection is possible via information preservation; if soul[s] exist, resurrection is possible via returning of the "soul" into the new body. But some forms of NIIC are also very fragile and mortal, like continuity," the researchers noted.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"The problem of the nature of human identity could be solved by future superintelligent AI, but for now it cannot be definitively solved. This means that we should try to preserve as much identity as possible and not refuse any approaches to life extension and resurrection even if they contradict our intuitions about identity, as our notions of identity could change later."</p>
Potential resurrection methods<p>Turchin and Chernyakov outline seven broad categories of potential resurrection methods, ranked from the most plausible to most speculative.<br></p><p>The first category includes methods practiced while the person is alive, like cryonics, plastination, and preserving brain tissue through processes like chemical fixation. The researchers noted that there have been "suggestions that the claustrum, hypothalamus, or even a single neuron is the neural correlate of consciousness," so it may be possible to preserve just that part of a person, and later implant it into another organism.</p><p>Other methods get far stranger. For example, one method includes super-intelligent AI that uses a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere#:~:text=A%20Dyson%20sphere%20is%20a,percentage%20of%20its%20power%20output." target="_blank">Dyson sphere</a> to harness the power of the sun to "power enormous calculation engines" that would "reconstruct" people who collected a sufficient amount of data on their identities.</p>
Turchin<p style="margin-left: 20px;">"The main idea of a resurrection-simulation is that if one takes the DNA of a past person and subjects it to the same developmental condition, as well as correcting the development based on some known outcomes, it is possible to create a model of a past person which is very close to the original," the researchers wrote.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"DNA samples of most people who lived in past 1 to 2 centuries could be extracted via global archeology. After the moment of death, the simulated person is moved into some form of the afterlife, perhaps similar to his religious expectations, where he meets his relatives."</p><p>Delving further into sci-fi territory, another resurrection method would use time-travel technology.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"If there will at some point be technology that allows travel to the past, then our future descendants will be able to directly save people dying in the past by collecting their brains at the moment of death and replacing them with replicas," the paper states.</p><p>How? Sending tiny robots back in time.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"A nanorobot could be sent several billion years before now, where it could secretly replicate and sow nanotech within all living being[s] without affecting the course of history. At the moment of death, such nanorobots could be activated to collect data about the brain and preserve it somewhere until its future resurrection; thus, there would be no need for forward time travel."</p>
Pixabay<p>The paper <a href="https://www.academia.edu/36998733/Classification_of_the_approaches_to_the_technological_resurrection" target="_blank">goes on to outline some more resurrection methods</a>, including ones that involve parallel worlds, aliens, and clones, along with a good, old-fashioned possibility: God exists and one day he resurrects us. </p><p>In short, it's all extremely speculative.</p><p>But the aim of the paper was to catalogue known potential ways humans might be able to cheat death. For Turchin, that's not some far-off project: In addition to studying global risks and transhumanism, the Russian researcher heads the <a href="http://immortality-roadmap.com/" target="_blank">Immortality Roadmap</a>, which, similar to the 2018 paper, outlines various ways in which we might someday achieve immortality.</p><p>Although it may take centuries before humans come close to "digital immortality," Turchin believes that life-extension technology could allow some modern people to survive long enough to see it happen. </p><p>Want a shot at being among them? Beyond the obvious, like staying healthy, the Immortality Roadmap suggests you start collecting extensive data on yourself: diaries, video recordings, DNA information, EEGs, complex creative objects — all of which could someday be used to digitally "reconstruct" your identity.</p>But odds are you're not interested. Although Turchin and other scientists are bent on finding ways to avoid death and extend life indefinitely, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/may/16/dying-still-taboo-subject-poll" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">surveys</a> <a href="https://quillette.com/2018/03/02/would-you-opt-for-immortality/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">repeatedly</a> <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutesvanity-fair-poll-the-afterlife/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">show</a> that most people would not opt to live forever if given the choice.
Astronomers find these five chapters to be a handy way of conceiving the universe's incredibly long lifespan.
- We're in the middle, or thereabouts, of the universe's Stelliferous era.
- If you think there's a lot going on out there now, the first era's drama makes things these days look pretty calm.
- Scientists attempt to understand the past and present by bringing together the last couple of centuries' major schools of thought.
The 5 eras of the universe<p>There are many ways to consider and discuss the past, present, and future of the universe, but one in particular has caught the fancy of many astronomers. First published in 1999 in their book <a href="https://amzn.to/2wFQLiL" target="_blank"><em>The Five Ages of the Universe: Inside the Physics of Eternity</em></a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Adams" target="_blank">Fred Adams</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_P._Laughlin" target="_blank">Gregory Laughlin</a> divided the universe's life story into five eras:</p><ul><li>Primordial era</li><li>Stellferous era</li><li>Degenerate era</li><li>Black Hole Era</li><li>Dark era</li></ul><p>The book was last updated according to current scientific understandings in 2013.</p><p>It's worth noting that not everyone is a subscriber to the book's structure. Popular astrophysics writer <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/ethansiegel/#30921c93683e" target="_blank">Ethan C. Siegel</a>, for example, published an article on <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/07/26/we-have-already-entered-the-sixth-and-final-era-of-our-universe/#7072d52d4e5d" target="_blank"><em>Medium</em></a> last June called "We Have Already Entered The Sixth And Final Era Of Our Universe." Nonetheless, many astronomers find the quintet a useful way of discuss such an extraordinarily vast amount of time.</p>
The Primordial era<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjkwMTEyMi9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyNjEzMjY1OX0.PRpvAoa99qwsDNprDme9tBWDim6mS7Mjx6IwF60fSN8/img.jpg?width=980" id="db4eb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="0e568b0cc12ed624bb8d7e5ff45882bd" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Sagittarius Production/Shutterstock<p> This is where the universe begins, though what came before it and where it came from are certainly still up for discussion. It begins at the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago. </p><p> For the first little, and we mean <em>very</em> little, bit of time, spacetime and the laws of physics are thought not yet to have existed. That weird, unknowable interval is the <a href="https://www.universeadventure.org/eras/era1-plankepoch.htm" target="_blank">Planck Epoch</a> that lasted for 10<sup>-44</sup> seconds, or 10 million of a trillion of a trillion of a trillionth of a second. Much of what we currently believe about the Planck Epoch eras is theoretical, based largely on a hybrid of general-relativity and quantum theories called quantum gravity. And it's all subject to revision. </p><p> That having been said, within a second after the Big Bang finished Big Banging, inflation began, a sudden ballooning of the universe into 100 trillion trillion times its original size. </p><p> Within minutes, the plasma began cooling, and subatomic particles began to form and stick together. In the 20 minutes after the Big Bang, atoms started forming in the super-hot, fusion-fired universe. Cooling proceeded apace, leaving us with a universe containing mostly 75% hydrogen and 25% helium, similar to that we see in the Sun today. Electrons gobbled up photons, leaving the universe opaque. </p><p> About 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the universe had cooled enough that the first stable atoms capable of surviving began forming. With electrons thus occupied in atoms, photons were released as the background glow that astronomers detect today as cosmic background radiation. </p><p> Inflation is believed to have happened due to the remarkable overall consistency astronomers measure in cosmic background radiation. Astronomer <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGCVTSQw7WU" target="_blank">Phil Plait</a> suggests that inflation was like pulling on a bedsheet, suddenly pulling the universe's energy smooth. The smaller irregularities that survived eventually enlarged, pooling in denser areas of energy that served as seeds for star formation—their gravity pulled in dark matter and matter that eventually coalesced into the first stars. </p>
The Stelliferous era<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjkwMTEzNy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMjA0OTcwMn0.GVCCFbBSsPdA1kciHivFfWlegOfKfXUfEtFKEF3otQg/img.jpg?width=980" id="bc650" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c8f86bf160ecdea6b330f818447393cd" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Casey Horner/unsplash<p>The era we know, the age of stars, in which most matter existing in the universe takes the form of stars and galaxies during this active period. </p><p>A star is formed when a gas pocket becomes denser and denser until it, and matter nearby, collapse in on itself, producing enough heat to trigger nuclear fusion in its core, the source of most of the universe's energy now. The first stars were immense, eventually exploding as supernovas, forming many more, smaller stars. These coalesced, thanks to gravity, into galaxies.</p><p>One axiom of the Stelliferous era is that the bigger the star, the more quickly it burns through its energy, and then dies, typically in just a couple of million years. Smaller stars that consume energy more slowly stay active longer. In any event, stars — and galaxies — are coming and going all the time in this era, burning out and colliding.</p><p>Scientists predict that our Milky Way galaxy, for example, will crash into and combine with the neighboring Andromeda galaxy in about 4 billion years to form a new one astronomers are calling the Milkomeda galaxy.</p><p>Our solar system may actually survive that merger, amazingly, but don't get too complacent. About a billion years later, the Sun will start running out of hydrogen and begin enlarging into its red giant phase, eventually subsuming Earth and its companions, before shrining down to a white dwarf star.</p>
The Degenerate era<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjkwMTE1MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNTk3NDQyN30.gy4__ALBQrdbdm-byW5gQoaGNvFTuxP5KLYxEMBImNc/img.jpg?width=980" id="77f72" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="08bb56ea9fde2cee02d63ed472d79ca3" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Diego Barucco/Shutterstock/Big Think<p>Next up is the Degenerate era, which will begin about 1 quintillion years after the Big Bang, and last until 1 duodecillion after it. This is the period during which the remains of stars we see today will dominate the universe. Were we to look up — we'll assuredly be outta here long before then — we'd see a much darker sky with just a handful of dim pinpoints of light remaining: <a href="https://earthsky.org/space/evaporating-giant-exoplanet-white-dwarf-star" target="_blank">white dwarfs</a>, <a href="https://earthsky.org/space/new-observations-where-stars-end-and-brown-dwarfs-begin" target="_blank">brown dwarfs</a>, and <a href="https://earthsky.org/astronomy-essentials/definition-what-is-a-neutron-star" target="_blank">neutron stars</a>. These"degenerate stars" are much cooler and less light-emitting than what we see up there now. Occasionally, star corpses will pair off into orbital death spirals that result in a brief flash of energy as they collide, and their combined mass may become low-wattage stars that will last for a little while in cosmic-timescale terms. But mostly the skies will be be bereft of light in the visible spectrum.</p><p>During this era, small brown dwarfs will wind up holding most of the available hydrogen, and black holes will grow and grow and grow, fed on stellar remains. With so little hydrogen around for the formation of new stars, the universe will grow duller and duller, colder and colder.</p><p>And then the protons, having been around since the beginning of the universe will start dying off, dissolving matter, leaving behind a universe of subatomic particles, unclaimed radiation…and black holes.</p>
The Black Hole era<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjkwMTE2MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMjE0OTQ2MX0.ifwOQJgU0uItiSRg9z8IxFD9jmfXlfrw6Jc1y-22FuQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="103ea" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f0e6a71dacf95ee780dd7a1eadde288d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Vadim Sadovski/Shutterstock/Big Think<p> For a considerable length of time, black holes will dominate the universe, pulling in what mass and energy still remain. </p><p> Eventually, though, black holes evaporate, albeit super-slowly, leaking small bits of their contents as they do. Plait estimates that a small black hole 50 times the mass of the sun would take about 10<sup>68</sup> years to dissipate. A massive one? A 1 followed by 92 zeros. </p><p> When a black hole finally drips to its last drop, a small pop of light occurs letting out some of the only remaining energy in the universe. At that point, at 10<sup>92</sup>, the universe will be pretty much history, containing only low-energy, very weak subatomic particles and photons. </p>
The Dark Era<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjkwMTE5NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0Mzg5OTEyMH0.AwiPRGJlGIcQjjSoRLi6V3g5klRYtxQJIpHFgZdZkuo/img.jpg?width=980" id="60c77" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7a857fb7f0d85cf4a248dbb3350a6e1c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Big Think<p>We can sum this up pretty easily. Lights out. Forever.</p>
Archaeology clues us in on the dangers of letting viruses hang around.
- A University of Otago researcher investigates the spread of disease in ancient Vietnam.
- The infectious disease, yaws, has been with us for thousands of years with no known cure.
- Using archaeology to investigate disease offers clues into modern-day pandemics.
History-Changing Archaeological Finds<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ed6ad05071e93f257aa0b73f4001c805"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gydYHHfnLhE?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>While we rightfully look toward infectious disease experts during times such as now, archaeologists also have plenty to offer. A <a href="http://journals.upress.ufl.edu/bioarchaeology/article/view/1173" target="_blank">new research article</a>, published in the journal, Bioarchaeology Journal, turns back the clock to ancient Vietnam. The findings offer important clues about why we need to eradicate COVID-19.</p><p>Lead author Melandri Vlok, a PhD student at the University of Otago in New Zealand (with support from researchers in Australia, Vietnam, Japan, and the UK), investigated a case of yaws that ran through the Neolithic archeological site of Mán Bạc in Northeast Vietnam. </p><p>Yaws remains a common infectious disease in at least 13 tropical countries, with up to a half-million infected each year. Hard skin lesions form on the victim's bodies; they can form painful ulcers. While lesions usually subside within six months, bone and joint pain and fatigue are common. Some cases last many years and result in permanent scars. On occasion, death follows a long battle. </p><p>Subsistence farmers in mainland China have long battled the environment. Finding the right soil and water sources for their crops has been a generational battle. Roughly 4,000 years ago, such farmers made their way into Mainland Southeast China (modern day Vietnam), where, as Vlok writes, "genetic admixture and social transition occurs between foragers and farmers." In 2018, Vlok traveled to Mán Bạc to study the remains of seven skeletons, which included two adults, two adolescents, and two children.</p><p>Her findings help give us perspective on today's proliferation of the coronavirus. As she <a href="https://www.otago.ac.nz/news/news/releases/otago744185.html" target="_blank">says</a>, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"This matters, because knowing more about this disease and its evolution, it changes how we understand the relationship people have with it. It helps us understand why it's so difficult to eradicate. If it's been with us thousands of years it has probably developed to fit very well with humans." </p>
My Son Sanctuary, Quang Nam, Vietnam.
Credit: Mrkela / Shutterstock<p>Yaws is not the only disease considered in the article. Tuberculosis, brucellosis, and cancers were also discussed. The goal of the research was to identify disease spread through cultures and the chronic problems left behind, sometimes for millennia. Vlok notes how temperature fluctuations in the Mán Bạc region affected a variety of diseases. Yaws appeared to have spread easily due to an abundance of water and vegetation, combined with increased population density—children are more likely to spread this disease.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Pre-industrialized agricultural communities have also been associated with increased incidence of yaws. The coastal region is also slightly warmer and more humid than inland northern Vietnam and therefore more conducive to the spread of yaws."</p><p>The Climate Clock is <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/09/21/climate-change-metronome-clock-nyc/" target="_blank">ticking down</a>. We're already experiencing the ravages of this global shift, and it's not going to get any easier if interventions are not immediately legislated. While no single science will help us wrap our heads around the immediate future, Vlok suggests factoring in archaeology. Past precedent matters.</p><p>Gazing back a few hundred generations offers important clues for the future—really, the present—that we must confront. A concerted effort by the World Health Organization in the 1950s couldn't eradicate yaws. Diseases that have an opportunity to hang around will exploit every advantage it can. The blasé attitude too many Americans currently hold about the novel coronavirus's dangers is going to have a reverberating effect through the generations. As Vlok concludes, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"This shows us what happens when we don't take action with these diseases. It's a lesson of what infectious diseases can do to a population if you let them spread widely. It highlights the need to intervene, because sometimes these diseases are so good at adapting to us, at spreading between us."</p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>