Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1*mE6F-g4wmxWv2-Mqqkw3ew.png
(Image credit: Newsmax)

Today, April 6, 2026, the Artemis II spacecraft will carry four humans to a distance of 406,773 kilometers from Earth, the farthest humans has ever gone before.

In celebration of this accomplishment, I attach below a transcript of two recent interviews I had in the company of former NASA administrator, Jim Bridenstine with the anchor Shannon Cake on Newsmax (accessible in video format here and here). Shannon’s questions are marked with SC, while my and Jim’s answers are marked with AL and JB, respectively.

***

1*j_FzdylAM-0J7j8raDi7nw.png
(Image credit: Newsmax)

Pre-launch episode (April 1, 2026): Humans are going deeper into space than ever before — Avi Loeb and former NASA Chief Jim Bridenstine.

SC: Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine is joining us along with Professor Avi Loeb, the director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at Harvard University.

Thanks to both of you for being with us.

So, Dr. Loeb, I feel like the image that we’re getting at NASA right now is perfect for your title involving theory and computation. That’s a lot of computation going on. I think as we look on at the screen. I’m hoping you can see it too, sir. But the astronauts have been prepped. It appears they’re in their seats. There is a whole lot of controls. That is way too much for my simple math brain. But, sir, walk us through what’s happening here on the screen.

AL: This is an amazing feat that for 54 years we have been waiting for. I’m ten years older than that but there are many people that were born after the last long flight into space. And it’s really inspiring for humanity to contemplate going to space.

And I hope it will open a new page in our space exploration, of settling people on the Moon. But going beyond that, there are discussions of going to Mars. There might be space platforms that carry humans to even longer journeys altogether. I think we should not keep our minds only on what happens on this rock that we were born on.

We are often engaged with what happens here on earth through geopolitics. But it’s far more inspiring to go out to space because that would obviously be important for the long-term survival of humanity. What we are seeing is lots of details about the maneuvering of the rocket and, and how to engage with the data that comes in. And that involves computers that nowadays are far better than were used 54 years ago. We have much better technologies, but we’ve never practiced them in recent history. And Artemis II will be followed by additional launches, Artemis III and eventually settling on the Moon, bringing a nuclear reactor there, also establishing infrastructure and perhaps scientific endeavors that, the Moon is a much better platform for. There is no atmosphere there. There is no seismic noise. There are many benefits going there. One obviously is to maintain the technological superiority of the U.S., carrying the torch forward for the entirety of humanity.

SC: Yeah, I’m glad you mentioned that. The importance of getting back there first, right before anyone else. Administrator Bridenstine, we were talking with you and watching the prep go on. And sir, as you see something, please jump in and tell our audience what you’re seeing and what’s significant about it. But these astronauts, they are traveling farther from earth with a possible Moon landing in 2028.

JB: I may borrow the language from the past. It’s the right language. This is a leap forward. We need to own it. This is a great moment for the United States of America.

You can see that the astronauts are in those orange spacesuits. They’ve got their helmets on. That’s because when this vehicle launches, it is a pressurized capsule and it’s going into the vacuum of space. But if it loses pressure, you’ve got the backup system, which is your spacesuit. Those orange spacesuits are a safety function. And then you’ve got the screens that they’re manipulating. They’re doing all kinds of checks and tests. And back in the fire control room, they’re communicating with all kinds of engineers and operators that are also going through systems, checks and tests. And tonight it’s going to launch to space.

Now, it’s also true those orange spacesuits are not the same spacesuits you would use to walk on the Moon. We do need to go to the surface of the Moon.

Jared Isaacman, the current NASA administrator, has said we’re going to build a Moon base. Well, that means we need spacesuits for walking on the surface of the Moon. It’s an entirely different spacesuit, which is also different than a spacesuit for a spacewalk. But we’re going to learn all kinds of things on this flight. The astronauts, of course, are going to test the control systems to make sure that they can do what’s called rendezvous and proximity operations, ultimately for the purpose of docking to a human landing system that can go down to the surface of the Moon. And we’re going to be testing all of the ways that we live and work in space for a period of ten days, well beyond the Van Allen radiation belt into deep space, where there’s some harsh radiation environments.

But it’s only a ten-day mission, and they’re going to learn lots of data about the radiation environment around the Moon as well, bring back that data and hopefully get us prepped for 2028.

SC: Dr. Loeb, I have about 30 seconds left, sir. Just speak, if you will, and close this out. As you look at the screen, the importance of this mission, what you hope it brings and perhaps the energy in the space race that it brings to all of us, right?

AL: The U.S. definitely has to win the space race. This is inspiring for all humans on Earth. As of now, we are only contemplating round trips, but in the distant future, there will be humans that will go to these destinations on a one-way ticket, and that would be a very different trip. And hopefully they’ll have the infrastructure, the resources to stay there for a while and develop technologies and infrastructure that are really at the forefront. And as of now, we haven’t used, for example, artificial intelligence in space. We can start using that in the coming years.

SC: This takes you to a whole other level, doesn’t it? Jim Bridenstine and Professor Avi Loeb, great conversation, gentlemen. Thanks for watching walking us through this.

1*7U6TnsBIn8_bbxXYYpIGvg.png
(Image credit: Newsmax)

Moon Flyby episode (April 6, 2026): Artemis II To Make a Historic Lunar Flyby — Avi Loeb and former NASA Chief Jim Bridenstine.

SC: Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, is joining us this morning. Also with us today, the Director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at Harvard University, Professor Avi Loeb.

Gentlemen, good to see you both. Jim, the Artemis II crew getting ready for this lunar flyby. This is the farthest humans have traveled from Earth, surpassing the Apollo 13 record more than 50 years ago. The lead of NASA’s Artemis crew explains just how far they’ll reach. Listen to this.

“And then to come in for that injection, we came all the way back to Earth again. We were out there at 60,000 kilometers. We came back to within 200 kilometers of the planet. And it just felt like we were falling out of the sky, back to Earth. And I said to Reid, it feels like we’re going to hit it. It’s amazing that we’re actually going to go around and miss this thing.”

SC: But they didn’t. They took off once again. But boy, so close to home, right? How incredible historic is this achievement? Jim, let’s start with you.

JB: Obviously this is what it’s all about tonight. Obviously, we have the launch, which is super exciting. We’re going to have the entry, descent and landing, which is also exciting. But the mission is really about going to the Moon. And tonight we go to the Moon. The astronauts are going to see an Earth set and they’re going to see an Earth rise. At the same time, while they’re behind the Moon, it’s going to be a blackout.

They’re not going to have a signal. And so that means for a period of 40 minutes, our astronauts are not going to be able to communicate back to the Earth. But in that time, records are going to be broken. They’re going to fly closer to the Moon than at any point on this journey. And at the same time, they’re closest to the Moon. They’re going to be farther from the Earth than any humans in the history of the Earth, which is a magnificent achievement. So, there are so many different things that are going to happen tonight. This is what it’s all about.

We are super excited about it.

SC: Absolutely we are.

Dr. Loeb, let me bring you into the conversation. Tell me, what are they going to have to work fast. As Jim just laid out, there is a lot of things happening simultaneously and the window is short. What are they trying to capture and how significant is it?

AL: This is a very exciting day. One day after rising to the Moon on Easter, the astronauts will observe the Moon’s far side from about 4,000 to 6,000 miles away, viewing never seen before terrain, including craters, frozen rock flows and massive basins. And they will document high elevation craters, ancient volcanic structures, potential meteorite impact flashes. Altogether, it would be also exciting for our scientific understanding of the Moon.

But all in all, this is the first step in coming close to the Moon. The next step is such a mission with the lander and ultimately establishing a base on the Moon with a nuclear reactor and with scientific infrastructure. And frankly, I will be delighted to go on a one-way trip to the Moon once the infrastructure is there.

SC: Would you really? I think I’d want to be able to come back. I don’t know about you, Jim. One way. But that’s what we’re going for, right? That’s kind of the plan is to be able to, you know, see what we can do to set up on the Moon.

On board the Orion, Jim, the crew practiced putting on these pumpkin-colored pressure suits in case of emergencies. They did that in the last 24 hours. What kind of situations could or would arise that would necessitate that?

JB: Well, imagine if they were to hit like a micrometeoroid or something and they lost pressure for a period of time. The capsule is designed to quickly create more pressure so that not all is lost. But at the same time, they’ll need to quickly put on their spacesuits, which, of course, are designed to be pressurized so that they’ll have everything they

need to survive and come home safely in their pressurized suits. So that’s what that’s all about. They’re practicing now. You’ll see them wear the suits on launch and on reentry just in general, but they also practice around the Moon. I would also say when we talk about this lunar base that we’re going to build, our astronauts tonight are going to look down and they’re going to see portions, small slivers of this south pole of the Moon. That’s where there’s hundreds of millions of tons of water ice, which, of course, is not just water to drink. It’s also oxygen to breathe and its hydrogen for fuel. And all that is present on the south pole of the Moon. So, they’re looking for opportunities for the future to land and build that lunar base.

SC: Wow. Let’s talk about that,

Professor, a little bit further. You were talking about the plan, the stages. Artemis III would then launch and test rovers, if I’m understanding that correctly, and then perhaps,

you know, get maybe boots back to the Moon again with Artemis IV. Is this what the plan is, and are we on track?

AL: Yes, but it’s a very different plan than the Apollo missions in the sense that the idea is to establish a base, establish the superiority of the United States technology and science in leading humanity into space. And that means putting also scientific infrastructure there. There are various proposals for taking advantage of the lack of an atmosphere on the Moon and the lack of any seismic noise from earthquakes and so forth.

Altogether, it’s an amazing opportunity as a first step towards Mars. Eventually, we might go to Mars. These are two rocks that happen to be closest to Earth that nature gave us an opportunity to land on. But ultimately, the way I see it is the initial steps towards establishing a space platform that carries humans or robots with AI out of the solar system.

You know, the Milky Way is a far greater landscape. There is much more real estate out there, and it’s for humanity to take.

SC: It is extraordinary to think about when you lay it out like that and the incredible opportunity.

Jim, I know that NASA, they scrapped a planned trajectory correction over the weekend. What was that about? And does it mean that they’re back on course and there’s no longer any sort of threat? And was there ever a threat?

JB: Oh, no, they just hit the numbers so perfectly. They didn’t have to actually do a course correction which is remarkable. What that means is that the systems are working. They’re working exactly how they’re supposed to work, and they didn’t need a course correction.

All of that, I think, is very, very positive news. It actually is good for saving fuel for future missions. We can have even better confidence on how our systems operate and the data that we’re able to collect and utilize in these missions.

Just to be clear, Artemis III is going to be a mission to Earth orbit, where the Orion crew capsule is going to interact in Earth orbit with a landing system for the Moon. And Artemis IV and V are intended to be Moon landings. So, there’s a rapid sequence of events that’s going to happen here. And it’s going to require all of America to get behind us to move as

quickly as possible. Because the goal is, in fact, to not just orbit the Moon, but land on the Moon before China and start operating a lunar base on the South Pole.

It has been really exciting to see new life really back in NASA’s lungs and then the partnership that has also occurred with private industry.

SC: Final thoughts, Dr. Loeb. We have a few seconds left.

AL: Clearly the technology that is being employed right now is far better than back in the 1960s and 1970s. For example, about 38 gigabytes of data are being transmitted per day from Orion. That’s why we see such beautiful images. This laser communication will be very useful in the future for quantum computing and communication infrastructure.

There are lots of technological advances being used on this mission, and we should all salute NASA for doing such a fantastic job.

SC: It’s been fun to watch and much more to come, and it’ll be an exciting day, I know, for the two of you and the entire world. Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, Director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at Harvard University, Professor Avi Loeb.

Gentlemen, thanks so much. I had a great conversation with you last week when I hosted another show, and I asked our team to bring you both back. It’s really wonderful to have you on the morning with us. Appreciate your time, always.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

1*grMVAGuoEmk9A0uQcoJlcg.jpeg
(Image Credit: Chris Michel, National Academy of Sciences, 2023)

Avi Loeb is the head of the Galileo Project, founding director of Harvard University’s — Black Hole Initiative, former director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and the former chair of the astronomy department at Harvard University (2011–2020). He is a former member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies. He is the bestselling author of “Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth” and a co-author of the textbook “Life in the Cosmos”, both published in 2021. The paperback edition of his new book, titled “Interstellar”, was published in August 2024.

Professional website:

https://lweb.cfa.harvard.edu/~loeb/

Social media:

https://avi-loeb.medium.com/
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfessorAviLoeb

https://open.spotify.com/show/1zhndXkvSY2b8FdjspFpCd
https://x.com/ProfAviLoeb

stat?event=post.clientViewed&referrerSou

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By UAPResearcher
      Danny's analysis in the video suggests that there are substantial roadblocks preventing UFO disclosure from gaining the momentum it needs within the White House. He highlights various factors that contribute to the current stagnation, suggesting that despite the increasing public interest and the release of documents by the Department of War (DOW), the government's response remains lackluster. This situation feels particularly pressing given the ongoing discussions about transparency and accountability in government concerning UAPs.
      One key point raised is the disconnect between public pressure for disclosure and the internal dynamics of government agencies. Danny argues that, although there are efforts to push for transparency, bureaucratic inertia and perhaps even political maneuvering may be holding back meaningful disclosure. This raises questions about who truly drives the conversation around UAPs and what influences their decisions.
      The video references the sixth tranche of records released by the DOW, which could provide more insight into past military encounters with UAPs. However, the effectiveness of these releases depends on how they are perceived and acted upon by policymakers. While documents can reveal historical data, their interpretation and the political context in which they are released are crucial for understanding their impact on public discourse.
      Danny emphasizes the need for a more coordinated approach within various government factions to facilitate open discussions about UAPs. This notion sparks thoughts about the past UAP hearings conducted by Congress, which aimed to create a unified stance on the phenomena. Yet, the lack of follow-up or actionable outcomes from those hearings raises doubts about whether the government is genuinely committed to transparency.
      As we consider the implications of Danny's insights, it's important to recognize the limitations of the evidence presented. While the video suggests that disclosure could realistically happen before January, it does not detail specific actions or timelines that could lead to such a development. The lack of concrete steps from the government leaves much open to interpretation, which is a significant barrier for those who seek clarity on the issue.
      As the conversation around UFOs continues to evolve, one must wonder: what specific actions should be prioritized to break the current stalemate in UAP disclosure? Moreover, how can we ensure that public interest translates into policy changes rather than mere rhetoric? These questions remain pivotal as we navigate the complexities of government transparency in relation to UFOs.
    • By DeepSkyExplorer
      The video titled 'Aliens in the Ocean, and a War for Earth' brings up an intriguing narrative surrounding the so-called Friendship Case. This case claims that for over two decades, humans in Italy were involved in a secret alliance with an alien civilization known as the Friends, who supposedly reside in vast underground bases beneath the Adriatic Sea. The premise is that humans delivered supplies like fruit, water, and chemicals to these aliens, fostering a relationship that could potentially change our understanding of extraterrestrial life.
      One of the more striking claims is that the Friends could teleport supplies and read minds, attributing to them a level of technology that far surpasses our own. This raises questions about the nature of such interactions and whether they could even be classified as a partnership, or if they lean more toward exploitation. It’s fascinating to think about what kind of agreement could lead to such a level of trust between two vastly different species. The reliance on human trust as a foundation for this alliance is particularly interesting; could we really trust an alien civilization, and how would that trust be established?
      However, the video also dives into the evidence surrounding the Friendship Case and discusses where it potentially falls short. The concept of a hidden alien civilization living beneath the sea is certainly captivating, but what tangible proof do we have of their existence? While the narrative builds a strong story, one has to critically assess the sources of evidence presented. The lack of physical proof could easily undermine the validity of such claims, leading one to wonder if they are more folklore than fact.
      Moreover, the idea of aliens reshaping the ground to build their hidden world is captivating but also raises questions about the possible ecological and societal impacts of such activities. If there truly were advanced beings living under the Adriatic, how would their presence affect marine life, environmental regulations, and human communities above? These are not just abstract considerations but real-world implications that go hand-in-hand with the idea of extraterrestrial life.
      Viewer reactions to the video seem divided, with some intrigued by the idea of a secret alliance, while others are skeptical of the claims made. This spectrum of perspectives highlights the ongoing debate about what constitutes credible evidence in the realm of alien life. As we navigate the complexities of such narratives, recognizing the distinction between fiction and possible reality becomes essential.
      As we explore the Friendship Case further, it poses an important question: What would it take for humanity to genuinely accept and trust an extraterrestrial civilization? This dilemma goes beyond one narrative and dives deep into our values, ethics, and readiness to embrace the unknown. It’s a thought-provoking topic that keeps the conversation about alien life and interspecies relationships alive and relevant.
    • By UAPResearcher
      One detail that caught my eye in a recent Reddit post is the claim about the best UFO ever recorded, highlighted by the uploader's adjustment of brightness in the footage. This might seem like a minor editing tweak, but it can significantly impact how we perceive and interpret the object in question. The adjustments could either enhance visibility or create artifacts that mislead viewers.
      The post doesn’t provide much in the way of context or provenance for the footage, which raises some questions. Who captured the video? Without this information, it’s hard to assess the authenticity of the claim. The original footage’s conditions—like lighting, distance, and camera quality—are crucial for evaluating whether this indeed represents something extraordinary or if it can be explained by more mundane causes.
      Furthermore, it’s important to consider how viewers react to enhanced footage. Often, enhancements can reveal details that were previously hidden, but they can also exaggerate features that don't exist. This is especially relevant in UFO sightings, where public interest can lead to a rush of interpretations without a solid grounding in the original evidence.
      In this case, the community's reactions range from excitement about a potential sighting to skepticism regarding the photo editing involved. Some commenters argue that without knowing the original context, we can’t come to any solid conclusions. Others seem eager to see it as a significant sighting. This disparity underlines a common issue in UFO discussions: the balance between enthusiasm for the unknown and the need for rigorous evaluation of evidence.
      This brings up an essential question: can we truly rely on video footage that has been edited without a clear understanding of the original source?
       
       
    • By CosmicSignals
      Just came across the latest government report on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) released by the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and, honestly, I find myself both intrigued and skeptical about some of its findings. The document outlines several military encounters with UAP, yet it seems to lack substantial details regarding their origins or the technology involved. It's frustrating to see a continuation of vague descriptions without definitive conclusions.
      The report, while acknowledging the reality of these phenomena, does not appear to provide the clarity many of us have been hoping for regarding their nature. There's mention of some UAP being potentially linked to foreign technologies, yet the lack of concrete evidence leads me to wonder: are we simply looking at advanced military drones or something entirely different? This ambiguity makes it hard to gauge the true significance of these encounters.
      Moreover, the report touches on whistleblower claims, highlighting the ongoing struggle for transparency within government circles. While it's exciting to think that insiders are stepping forward with information, it also raises the question: how much of what is disclosed is truly reflective of the reality, as opposed to speculation or misinterpretation? The potential for biases in reporting is a concern that cannot be overlooked.
      Interestingly, the document reinforces a call for further investigation into UAP incidents, which might lead us closer to understanding their implications for extraterrestrial life. If some of these phenomena are indeed originating from non-human intelligence, it could revolutionize our understanding of life beyond Earth. However, should we treat each encounter with skepticism until more concrete evidence is presented? It feels like we are in a liminal space where the potential for discovery is exciting, but the reality is still shrouded in uncertainty.
      What do you all think about the implications of these government reports? Are we edging closer to a breakthrough in identifying extraterrestrial technology, or are we merely witnessing the unveiling of more advanced human-made crafts? I’d love to hear your thoughts and interpretations based on the findings of this latest AARO report. You can check it out for yourself at [war.gov/UFO](https://www.war.gov/UFO/search/uap/).
    • By CosmicSignals
      I’ve just gone through the latest UAP report released by the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), and honestly, it leaves me with a mix of skepticism and intrigue. While it provides a wealth of data concerning unidentified aerial phenomena, I can’t help but feel that there’s a significant amount of information that remains unexplained or deliberately obscured. The report highlights several incidents involving military encounters with UAPs, some of which were captured on radar and infrared systems, yet it stops short of providing definitive conclusions about the nature or origin of these objects. It’s almost as if we’re being shown just enough to keep us curious, but not enough to truly understand what we’re dealing with.
      One aspect that stood out to me was the mention of ‘anomalous behaviors’ exhibited by these UAPs. The report describes maneuvers that defy our current understanding of aerodynamics. While many skeptics might attribute these observations to experimental military technology or atmospheric phenomena, it raises the question: could we be witnessing interactions that hint at advanced technologies beyond our current capabilities? The possibility of these objects being of non-human origin, while still speculative, invites a deeper inquiry into their implications for our search for extraterrestrial intelligence. If these UAPs are indeed manifestations of advanced civilizations, it could redefine our understanding of life beyond Earth.
      Moreover, the report’s lack of clarity on key incidents and the absence of conclusive evidence about the technical specifications of these UAPs limits our ability to assess any potential communication or signals that could come from them. As someone who is very interested in SETI and the search for technosignatures, this is particularly concerning. Are we inadvertently overlooking potential signals or biosignatures that could be associated with these phenomena, or are we simply not equipped to recognize them? The AARO’s approach to transparency is commendable, yet it also makes me wonder if they have more information that they aren’t ready to share with the public.
      Another critical point raised in the report is the acknowledgment of the need for a structured framework for investigating these UAP encounters. The AARO emphasizes that a systematic approach is essential for scientific inquiry, which is a positive step forward. However, without a clear and open dialogue about findings and methodologies, how can we, as a community dedicated to astrobiology and the search for life beyond our planet, effectively contribute to or understand these investigations? The complexities involved in dealing with UAPs require not just military oversight but also public engagement and scientific collaboration.
      As we move forward, I think it’s crucial that we maintain a critical lens towards these disclosures. While they signal a shift in government transparency regarding UAPs, the reports still feel like a puzzle with missing pieces. The tantalizing hint that there may be advanced civilizations interacting with us, even in a limited capacity, should serve as a catalyst for more rigorous scientific scrutiny. We need to ask ourselves, what does it mean for humanity if these phenomena are indeed linked to extraterrestrial technology? And how do we ensure that our search for contact does not lead to misinterpretation of natural or man-made phenomena?
      I encourage everyone to check out the full report for yourselves [here](https://www.aaro.mil/Next-AARO-Home-redesign/Next-Parent/Next-UAP-Report-Documents/). What do you think about the government’s handling of UAP data? Are we on the brink of uncovering something monumental, or are we simply being led on a wild goose chase? Let’s discuss how we can bridge the gap between government findings and the broader scientific community’s engagement with these fascinating questions about the nature of UAPs and, potentially, extraterrestrial life.
      Source: https://www.aaro.mil/Next-AARO-Home-redesign/Next-Parent/Next-UAP-Report-Documents/
×
×
  • Create New...