from the world's big
The mind-blowing science of black holes
What we know about black holes is both fascinating and scary.
MICHIO KAKU: First we think that out of the Big Bang came dark matter, invisible matter. If I held dark matter in my hand it would literally ooze its way right though my fingers, go right to the center of the Earth, go to China and then go back and forth between China and my hand. That's dark matter. We think that dark matter began to clump first because of gravity. Then matter was attracted to the clumpiness creating the super massive black hole and then later the galaxy itself began to form. We have computer simulations about this, but still the relationship is not yet clear. Now remember, stars. We know almost everything about stellar evolution. That's because the pentagon has given us physicists billions of dollars to model hydrogen bombs, and a star is nothing but a hydrogen bomb. However, a galaxy consists of over a hundred billion stars so it's much more difficult to tell which came first, the black hole or the galaxy itself.
BILL NYE: The way I like to describe a black hole. It's a star. A black hole is a star. Now when you and I think of stars we think about the sun which is giving off all this light. But the other thing about the sun to keep in mind is it has a lot of gravity because it's huge. One of Einstein's discoveries, Albert Einstein's discoveries was that gravity changes the path of light. It can bend light. It's just not in our everyday experience. To measure it we usually find objects way out in space and we have known brightness and we see where we think they're going to be and then where they really appear to be and then we infer or figure out that they're not where we thought they were going to be because gravity bent the beam of light. It's amazing. Anyway, so a black hole is a star so massive that not even light can escape from it.
MICHELLE THALLER: What you're looking at is something called the shadow of a black hole. Now, black holes tend to have material orbiting around them. Black holes have a lot of gravity and gas begins to fall in towards the black hole and it begins to spin up into a disk around the black hole. And as that gas gets closer and closer to the black hole its accelerated faster and faster. And so in this disc of gas some of it is traveling very close to the speed of light. You have a lot of friction. You have lots of things rubbing up against each other at very high speeds and incredible amounts of heat and light are generated in this disk. So black holes usually are surrounded by disks of very, very bright, very hot material and that's how we find them. Black holes themselves give off no radiation at all. Any light gets absorbed into the black hole and when I say light I mean every possible form of light from gamma rays, x-rays, infrared light that we think of as heat, radio waves. Nothing comes out of a black hole at all. So what you're looking at in this image is the black hole is sort of framed by this bright ring. And that bright ring is this hot material that's orbiting around the black hole.
One of the first things you'd say well okay, it's really kind of a wonderful stroke of luck that the particular black hole we're looking at the ring was right face onto us. You see this bright ring exactly around the black hole. And, in fact, that's probably not the case. The disc of material could be at many different orientations around the black hole. Light itself has no mass. Light should not be attracted by gravity, right. I mean gravity is the force between two things that have mass. Light has no mass. It just flies straight through space. So why should light be affected by a black hole? And amazingly this is what happens. A black hole's gravity is so strong it actually bends the space itself. So light thinks it's traveling through straight space, just traveling in a straight line. The disk can be pretty much any orientation you like. What will happen is light from any part of that disk will get bent around the black hole. So you'll be able in a very real way to see the underside of the disk at the front of the black hole. The backside all the way over the front because light itself is being bent around. So if there's any hot, glowing material at all you're going to see it sort of surrounding the entire black hole because the light's been bent around it.
KAKU: We're not swallowed up by a black hole because we orbit around them. However, are there wandering black holes? And the answer is yes. In fact, we've been able to track wandering black holes as they wander through the galaxy. One day one of them may catch up with us and eat us for breakfast and it wouldn't even burp in the process. Now, a black hole is black. It's invisible so how the hell do we know that there's a wandering black hole in our vicinity? The answer is quite easy. It was found by accident. By taking a picture of the night sky and taking the same picture at a different time you see a distortion. A distortion of light and then like time lapse if you put these photographs together you see that the distortion goes in a straight line. And then you say aha, that's the black hole. Even though it's invisible it distorts light. For example, many people wear glasses. There's glass inside your glasses, but how do you know that? How do you know that there's glass inside your glasses when glass is invisible. Well, it's obvious. Glass distorts light. That's how you know that something that is invisible is actually there.
And the same thing with black holes. They are invisible but they distort starlight as they move. So one day if a wandering black hole snuck up behind is how would we know? First of all Pluto and Neptune would begin to perturb. Some of them would be, in fact, flung into outer space. As the black hole got closer and closer to planet Earth we would see more and more disruptions in the solar system as more planets got flung into outer space. And, in fact, as it whizzed by the Earth it could even gobble up the Earth, in fact, eat up the sun and hardly even notice. And so the appetite of a black hole would be enormous and it's something that at some point in the future we may encounter.
THALLER: If you were around a black hole which is a dead star and say the mass of the black hole was about 20 times the mass of the sun. A black hole like that is actually not very physically large. You have all that mass, but the black hole itself may only be say on the order of about 30 miles across. That means you have all that mass packed into a tiny little area. If you were nearby a black hole that means there really would be a detectable gravity stretching across something as small as your body. And not just the water in your body would feel that. As you got closer and closer to a black hole you would actually feel your head stretched away from your feet. There would be tidal forces just like the Earth goes through with the sun and the moon, but next to a black hole the gravity is so extreme there would be tides over something as small as a human body. Get closer and closer to a black hole and your head keeps getting stretched more and your feet keep getting stretched that way and you would actually turn you into a stream of particles. Scientists have a really cool name for this. It's called spaghettification from the word spaghetti. If you got close to a black hole there would be tides over your body that small that would rip you apart into basically a strand of spaghetti that would fall down the black hole.
CHRISTOPHE GALFARD: Picture yourself in outer space. There is a black hole right in front of you. You don't see anything. No light can come out of it so it's like a dark patch that distorts the stars that are around. The matter that surrounds you, the light that surrounds you obeys a different kind of law. They obey quantum physics. They obey the law of the quantum world. And everything we had known about black holes until the mid-1970s was only related to gravity. Now what Hawking did at the mid-1970s is to add some quantum aspects to all this. He took a quantum particle and threw it in his mind towards the black hole to see what would happen to it and he found out that some part of that particle was getting out of the black hole. That the black hole was evaporating. It was not the exact same particle he had sent inside and that's what's tricky about this problem and that's what's interesting about this problem. In a way that means that the information gets bleached by a black hole. Why is that? You could imagine that it's the same with an encyclopedia that you would throw in the fire. You take an encyclopedia and you threw it in the fire it's gone. Well, not quite. If you could get back the ashes, if you could collect all the lights that was shown during the fire, if you could get the heat and everything you could build back the encyclopedia. It's not gone. It's just difficult to retrieve.
For a black hole it's worse. If you throw an encyclopedia inside what the black hole will evaporate has nothing to do with the encyclopedia whatsoever. You could have thrown in something else. So why is that a problem? It is a problem because it means that our universe has memory losses. It means that whatever a black hole has swallowed would get inside, never again back out and we would never be able to understand the past of our universe. There are some things that are not retrievable at all, not just in practice but also in theory. And as it evaporates the black hole eventually disappears completely maybe. And if it's gone where did the information go about the encyclopedia. Where did it go? We don't know.
THALLER: Information can be almost anything. All of the different atoms in my body have angular momentum. They have charge. They have mass. There's all sorts of little bits of information that make me me. At the quantum mechanic level, at the tiniest of levels there are different amounts of energy. There are different probabilities that are contained in the structure of my matter. And information in some ways is a form of energy. Energy and mass are the same thing. They're equivalent. You can actually make mass into energy and you can make energy into mass. Around a black hole where there's very hot gas, very high temperatures, very strong magnetic fields perhaps. There's a lot of energy. And that energy can actually manifest itself as particles, mass. And the energy always creates particle anti-particle pairs. They're called virtual particles. And matter and antimatter, the thing you know about it is that it annihilates immediately. So these tiny little particles come into existence then annihilate and you're back to energy. And this happens all around us all the time.
So if this happens near a black hole it's possible one of these little particles can go into the black hole and the other one escapes. And all of a sudden there's a particle that shouldn't be there. The universe basically has a new particle, energy from nowhere and how can that work? And the information theory people say that what happens is that energy has to come out of the black hole. The black hole's mass begins to decrease if there is this poor little orphan particle that shouldn't have been there in the first place. So over time tiny particle by tiny particle these black holes can evaporate away. And maybe there's something about those virtual particles that contain some information about the black hole and what fell into it. Black holes may be the key to where the next physics has to go. We all know that we need a next Einstein, a next quantum theory, something that actually describes how gravity works in very intense situations like a black hole. Now we're actually observing black holes well enough that we really have to get on this. We really have to figure out how the universe works around one of these things. And we may end up learning what the universe itself really is.
- When it comes to black holes, science simultaneously knows so much and so little, which is why they are so fascinating. Focusing on what we do know, this group of astronomers, educators, and physicists share some of the most incredible facts about the powerful and mysterious objects.
- A black hole is so massive that light (and anything else it swallows) can't escape, says Bill Nye. You can't see a black hole, theoretical physicists Michio Kaku and Christophe Galfard explain, because it is too dark. What you can see, however, is the distortion of light around it caused by its extreme gravity.
- Explaining one unsettling concept from astrophysics called spaghettification, astronomer Michelle Thaller says that "If you got close to a black hole there would be tides over your body that small that would rip you apart into basically a strand of spaghetti that would fall down the black hole."
- Experiment proves theory of how aliens might use black holes - Big ... ›
- NASA observes a black hole feasting on a star - Big Think ›
- This black hole could erase your past, open an infinite number of ... ›
Innovation in manufacturing has crawled since the 1950s. That's about to speed up.
So far, 30 student teams have entered the Indy Autonomous Challenge, scheduled for October 2021.
- The Indy Autonomous Challenge will task student teams with developing self-driving software for race cars.
- The competition requires cars to complete 20 laps within 25 minutes, meaning cars would need to average about 110 mph.
- The organizers say they hope to advance the field of driverless cars and "inspire the next generation of STEM talent."
Indy Autonomous Challenge<p>Completing the race in 25 minutes means the cars will need to average about 110 miles per hour. So, while the race may end up being a bit slower than a typical Indy 500 competition, in which winners average speeds of over 160 mph, it's still set to be the fastest autonomous race featuring full-size cars.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"There is no human redundancy there," Matt Peak, managing director for Energy Systems Network, a nonprofit that develops technology for the automation and energy sectors, told the <a href="https://www.post-gazette.com/business/tech-news/2020/06/01/Indy-Autonomous-Challenge-Indy-500-Indianapolis-Motor-Speedway-Ansys-Aptiv-self-driving-cars/stories/202005280137" target="_blank">Pittsburgh Post-Gazette</a>. "Either your car makes this happen or smash into the wall you go."</p>
Illustration of the Indy Autonomous Challenge
Indy Autonomous Challenge<p>The Indy Autonomous Challenge <a href="https://www.indyautonomouschallenge.com/rules" target="_blank">describes</a> itself as a "past-the-post" competition, which "refers to a binary, objective, measurable performance rather than a subjective evaluation, judgement, or recognition."</p><p>This competition design was inspired by the 2004 DARPA Grand Challenge, which tasked teams with developing driverless cars and sending them along a 150-mile route in Southern California for a chance to win $1 million. But that prize went unclaimed, because within a few hours after starting, all the vehicles had suffered some kind of critical failure.</p>
Indianapolis Motor Speedway
Indy Autonomous Challenge<p>One factor that could prevent a similar outcome in the upcoming race is the ability to test-run cars on a virtual racetrack. The simulation software company Ansys Inc. has already developed a model of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway on which teams will test their algorithms as part of a series of qualifying rounds.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"We can create, with physics, multiple real-life scenarios that are reflective of the real world," Ansys President Ajei Gopal told <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/autonomous-vehicles-to-race-at-indianapolis-motor-speedway-11595237401?mod=e2tw" target="_blank">The Wall Street Journal</a>. "We can use that to train the AI, so it starts to come up to speed."</p><p>Still, the race could reveal that self-driving cars aren't quite ready to race at speeds of over 110 mph. After all, regular self-driving cars already face enough logistical and technical roadblocks, including <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53349313#:~:text=Tesla%20will%20be%20able%20to,no%20driver%20input%2C%20he%20said." target="_blank">crumbling infrastructure, communication issues</a> and the <a href="https://bigthink.com/paul-ratner/would-you-ride-in-a-car-thats-programmed-to-kill-you" target="_self">fateful moral decisions driverless cars will have to make in split seconds</a>.</p>But the Indy Autonomous Challenge <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5da73021d0636f4ec706fa0a/t/5dc0680c41954d4ef41ec2b2/1572890638793/Indy+Autonomous+Challenge+Ruleset+-+v5NOV2019+%282%29.pdf" target="_blank">says</a> its main goal is to advance the industry, by challenging "students around the world to imagine, invent, and prove a new generation of automated vehicle (AV) software and inspire the next generation of STEM talent."
A new Harvard study finds that the language you use affects patient outcome.
- A study at Harvard's McLean Hospital claims that using the language of chemical imbalances worsens patient outcomes.
- Though psychiatry has largely abandoned DSM categories, professor Joseph E Davis writes that the field continues to strive for a "brain-based diagnostic system."
- Chemical explanations of mental health appear to benefit pharmaceutical companies far more than patients.
Challenging the Chemical Imbalance Theory of Mental Disorders: Robert Whitaker, Journalist<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="41699c8c2cb2aee9271a36646e0bee7d"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-8BDC7i8Yyw?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>This is a far cry from Howard Rusk's 1947 NY Times editorial calling for mental healt</p><p>h disorders to be treated similarly to physical disease (such as diabetes and cancer). This mindset—not attributable to Rusk alone; he was merely relaying the psychiatric currency of the time—has dominated the field for decades: mental anguish is a genetic and/or chemical-deficiency disorder that must be treated pharmacologically.</p><p>Even as psychiatry untethered from DSM categories, the field still used chemistry to validate its existence. Psychotherapy, arguably the most efficient means for managing much of our anxiety and depression, is time- and labor-intensive. Counseling requires an empathetic and wizened ear to guide the patient to do the work. Ingesting a pill to do that work for you is more seductive, and easier. As Davis writes, even though the industry abandoned the DSM, it continues to strive for a "brain-based diagnostic system." </p><p>That language has infiltrated public consciousness. The team at McLean surveyed 279 patients seeking acute treatment for depression. As they note, the causes of psychological distress have constantly shifted over the millennia: humoral imbalance in the ancient world; spiritual possession in medieval times; early childhood experiences around the time of Freud; maladaptive thought patterns dominant in the latter half of last century. While the team found that psychosocial explanations remain popular, biogenetic explanations (such as the chemical imbalance theory) are becoming more prominent. </p><p>Interestingly, the 80 people Davis interviewed for his book predominantly relied on biogenetic explanations. Instead of doctors diagnosing patients, as you might expect, they increasingly serve to confirm what patients come in suspecting. Patients arrive at medical offices confident in their self-diagnoses. They believe a pill is the best course of treatment, largely because they saw an advertisement or listened to a friend. Doctors too often oblige without further curiosity as to the reasons for their distress. </p>
Image: Illustration Forest / Shutterstock<p>While medicalizing mental health softens the stigma of depression—if a disorder is inheritable, it was never really your fault—it also disempowers the patient. The team at McLean writes,</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"More recent studies indicate that participants who are told that their depression is caused by a chemical imbalance or genetic abnormality expect to have depression for a longer period, report more depressive symptoms, and feel they have less control over their negative emotions."</p><p>Davis points out the language used by direct-to-consumer advertising prevalent in America. Doctors, media, and advertising agencies converge around common messages, such as everyday blues is a "real medical condition," everyone is susceptible to clinical depression, and drugs correct underlying somatic conditions that you never consciously control. He continues,</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Your inner life and evaluative stance are of marginal, if any, relevance; counseling or psychotherapy aimed at self-insight would serve little purpose." </p><p>The McLean team discovered a similar phenomenon: patients expect little from psychotherapy and a lot from pills. When depression is treated as the result of an internal and immutable essence instead of environmental conditions, behavioral changes are not expected to make much difference. Chemistry rules the popular imagination.</p>
Why Depression Isn't Just a Chemical Imbalance<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="fbc027c9358dad4a6d9e2704fc9ddb04"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GAC9ODvSxh0?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>Many years ago, my best friend tried to quit smoking. He asked for help. While I'm no addiction expert, I offered what I knew from my fitness toolkit: breathing exercises and cardiovascular training, methods for strengthening his body and mind that could, I hoped, inspire him to take better care of himself in general. He replied, "No, I meant something like a pill."</p><p>A few years later, he quit for good. After failing the cold turkey method a number of times, it finally stuck. Maybe it was watching his children grow up—the reason my parents quit when I was young. This method is not easy, however. It challenges you; it forces you to confront your demons; it drastically affects your brain chemistry. Yet, in the long run, it sometimes works. </p><p>Sometimes pills work, too. But often they do not. The journalist Robert Whitaker, author of "Anatomy of an Epidemic," discussed the clinical trial process <a href="https://bigthink.com/mind-brain/antidepressants-dangers" target="_self">during our recent conversation</a>. While the FDA process appears thorough from the outside, pharmaceutical companies only need to prove that a drug works better than placebo, not that it works for the most amount of people. He continues, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Let's say you have a drug that provides a relief of symptoms in 20 percent of people. In placebo, it's 10 percent. How many people in that study do not benefit from the drug? Nine out of 10. How many people are exposed to the adverse effects of the drug? 100 percent."</p><p>Even though some pharmacological interventions show little efficacy, and even though Xanax, an addictive and destructive benzodiazepine that only showed <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5846112/" target="_blank">short-term (four weeks) efficacy</a> in clinical trials, is being prescribed for many months and years, doctors continue to use the language of clinical neuroscience to describe mental health issues. If chemistry is the problem, people will turn to chemistry for the solution. </p><p>Perhaps we should, as psychiatrist Dean Schuyler <a href="https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/antidepressant-effects" target="_self">writes</a> in a 1974 book, recognize that most depressive episodes "will run their course and terminate with virtually complete recovery without specific intervention." The problem is that idea isn't profitable. As long as the gatekeepers continue to use the language of chemical imbalances to describe what for many is just an episodic case of the "blahs," we'll continue creating more problems than we solve.</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">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>
Here's why you might eat greenhouse gases in the future.
- The company's protein powder, "Solein," is similar in form and taste to wheat flour.
- Based on a concept developed by NASA, the product has wide potential as a carbon-neutral source of protein.
- The man-made "meat" industry just got even more interesting.
Seriously sustainable<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTk0MDIzNS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMjM4NTMzMX0.BCEfYnn6C3z1zUHIS38xOWjXktgamNBi5iyqklSMYK8/img.png?width=980" id="ea524" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="50533380eeb18eb5833b6b6aa3abec38" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Solar Foods<p>Solar Foods makes Solein by extracting CO₂ from air using <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90356326/we-have-the-tech-to-suck-co2-from-the-air-but-can-it-suck-enough-to-make-a-difference" target="_blank">carbon-capture technology</a>, and then combines it with water, nutrients and vitamins, using 100 percent renewable solar energy from partner <a href="https://www.fortum.com" target="_blank">Fortum</a> to promote a natural fermentation process similar to the one that produces yeast and lactic acid bacteria.</p><p>When the company claims its single-celled protein is "free from agricultural limitations," they're not kidding. Being produced indoors means Solar Foods is not dependent on arable land, water (i.e., rain), or favorable weather.</p><p>The company is already working with the European Space Agency to develop foods for off-planet production and consumption. (The idea for Solein actually began at NASA.) They also see potential in bringing protein production to areas whose climate or ground conditions make conventional agriculture impossible.</p><p>And let's not forget all those <a href="https://www.bk.com/menu-item/impossible-whopper" target="_blank">beef-free burgers</a> based on pea and soy proteins currently gaining popularity. The environmental challenge of scaling up the supply of those plants to meet their high demand may provide an opening for the completely renewable Solein — the company could provide companies that produce animal-free "meats," such as <a href="https://www.beyondmeat.com/products/" target="_blank">Beyond Meat</a> and <a href="https://impossiblefoods.com" target="_blank">Impossible Foods</a>, a way to further reduce their environmental impact.</p>
The larger promise<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTk0MDI0MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NjU4MTg2OX0.7dZZYT5WEV_EupBuLVFwHynarTiz8RYR9aJtC6Ts2C4/img.jpg?width=980" id="3415d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2e6eebe06d795f844752f9e9d30040d7" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Solar Foods<p>The impact of the beef — and for that matter, poultry, pork, and fish — industries on our planet is widely recognized as one of the main drivers behind climate change, pollution, habitat loss, and antibiotic-resistant illness. From the cutting down of rainforests for cattle-grazing land, to runoff from factory farming of livestock and plants, to the disruption of the marine food chain, to the overuse of antibiotics in food animals, it's been disastrous.</p><p>The advent of a promising source of protein derived from two of the most renewable things we have, CO₂ and sunlight, <a href="https://solarfoods.fi/environmental-impact/" target="_blank">gets us out of the planet-destruction business</a> at the same time as it offers the promise of a stable, long-term solution to one of the world's most fundamental nutritional needs.</p>
Solar Foods' timetable<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xOTk0MTEzMS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTU5OTU1OTMwMn0.wnXh56iO_77x2XKV2uIPf78BKw4AJLUpmiyq_JBVGvo/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=172%2C146%2C62%2C135&height=700" id="0297c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="125c9a98ec818f5c241fa28ef1423e67" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Image source: Lubsan / Shutterstock / Big Think<p>While company plans are always moderated by unforeseen events — including the availability of sufficient funding — Solar Foods plans a global commercial rollout for Solein in 2021 and to be producing two million meals annually, with a revenue of $800 million to $1.2 billion by 2023. By 2050, they hope to be providing sustenance to 9 billion people as part of a $500 billion protein market.</p><p>The project began in 2018, and this year, they anticipate achieving three things: Launching Solein (check), beginning the approval process certifying its safety as a Novel Food in the EU, and publishing plans for a 1,000-metric ton-per-year factory capable of producing 500 million meals annually.</p>
The protein powder Solein. Image source: SOLAR FOODS
SEAL training is the ultimate test of both mental and physical strength.
- The fact that U.S. Navy SEALs endure very rigorous training before entering the field is common knowledge, but just what happens at those facilities is less often discussed. In this video, former SEALs Brent Gleeson, David Goggins, and Eric Greitens (as well as authors Jesse Itzler and Jamie Wheal) talk about how the 18-month program is designed to build elite, disciplined operatives with immense mental toughness and resilience.
- Wheal dives into the cutting-edge technology and science that the navy uses to prepare these individuals. Itzler shares his experience meeting and briefly living with Goggins (who was also an Army Ranger) and the things he learned about pushing past perceived limits.
- Goggins dives into why you should leave your comfort zone, introduces the 40 percent rule, and explains why the biggest battle we all face is the one in our own minds. "Usually whatever's in front of you isn't as big as you make it out to be," says the SEAL turned motivational speaker. "We start to make these very small things enormous because we allow our minds to take control and go away from us. We have to regain control of our mind."