Redefining the Imaginable in Space Exploration & Communication

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

The most enticing opportunities on earth involve finding solutions to problems that have traditionally been considered impossible. What could be better than that?


How about redefining the imaginable outside of earth’s orbit — in deep space?


Neil Mallik, Office of the Chief Engineer for Space Communications and Navigation at NASA, joins the show to chat about the commercialization opportunities available in space exploration and communication.


We discuss:

- Openings for commercialization in the aerospace industry

- The technical challenges of interconnectivity outside of Earth

- Impossible things which might become possible within the next 10 to 15 years

Never miss an episode of Over The Air by subscribing wherever you listen to podcasts.

Listening on a desktop & can’t see the links? Just search for Over the Air in your favorite podcast player.

There are gaps here that we areable to absolutely fill and so, as a result, they are capabilities thatNASA's going to be looking for going forward, and I think that really is kindof at the root of when NASA is going and I think that's thereason why it's such an exciting time to be there. R'm be here rightnow. You are listening to over the Air Iot connected devices and the journey, brought to you by vary. In each episode we have sharp, unfilteredconversations with executives about their IOT journeys, the mistakes they made, the lessonsthey learned and what they wish they'd known when they started. T minus five, four, three, two, ignite rockets. Welcome back to over theAir IOT connected devices of the journey. My name is Ryan Process, CEOvary, and my name is Luke Willem, chief product officer. Very and todaywe are very excited to be joined by Neil Mullick of the office ofthe chief engineer for space communications and navigation at NASA. Today we're going tobe talking about the other side of impossible in space exploration and communication. Neil, thanks for being on the show. Yes, Thanks Ryan, thanks Luke, it's great to be here and I'm assuming you do that for all yourguests with that with the countdown, because if you did that for my benefit, it's not like I've thought that before. I was going to say, II how often do you walk in a room and your friends immediately begana teas countdown? It's almost more like a tea countdown for me to leavethe room more than anything else, and it's me knows not again, fiveis usually at one. I think the audience is immediately probably picked up onthe British accent. We were joking in the pre interview that America makes anallot met for two people per year to come to the US and take ajob. This, you know, I think, traditionally thought of as quintessentialAmerican job. So was it you and Piers Morgan the year that you camein? No, absolutely not that. I I think I would just turnedback around and go back to England if that was true. I'm telling younow we have never derailed this quickly into an interview. Let's let's let's seeif we can't wrangle it back on the rail. So, Neil and allseriousness, you've got an incredible background. Tell us a little bit about yourselfand and how you came to be in this position NASA, and then I'vegot ton of questions for you about some of the things you guys are upto. Yeah, yeah, absolutely, all right. So, so,you know, I I'm just like every other kid that grew up. Imean I dreamed up being an astronaut when they when I was like, youknow, up the edge of nine, and then I realized I was kindof heights and then I abandoned that almost immediately. And then I actually becamea call mechanic and I actually had no intention of ever being an engineer ofany kind whatsoever. And so, as a result, my parents basically wentand found out that I actually had no desires of becoming any formal professional outsideof being a car mechanic. And so,...

...as a result, they were likeNope, you're going to go to school, you're going to do something, and you know, there's always the be a doctor, be a lawyer, be a you know, what have you. And so I was actuallyengineering route astart, taking injuring classes. It all kind of made sense tome. And Yeah, I got an electrical engineering degree, as fun asthat sounds, out of the University of London and then I moved to theUnited States and I went over to Stanford out there in Palo Alto, andI've got my master's De Green Electric Engineering. I always thought I was always goingto work in a self in industry as interesting as antenna's sound. Iwas actually fascinated by that more than anything else and I always thought, youknow what, cell phone antennas would be a cool thing to get into.And there was a recruitment fare and there was a space company that was lookingto hire our F communications engineers, and so I joined orbital sciences over onthe East Coast in Virginia and being in space since I worked there for tenyears and I moved over to NASA about six years ago. And so,yeah, that that, that's my story in the nutshell. Amazing and itone of the things that we talked about in the pre interview was, youknow, kind of a long lines of establishing yourself in a place where younever thought you'd be, you know, let alone becoming a leader in forcompanies out there interested in the aerospace, in space, you know, ingetting into this this world. What are some of the gaps that you seeand I'll say up front, not asking you to make any commitments on behalfof NASA. But you know, for folks out there that are very likeyou, had this dream, you know, their company is looking and saying kindof in this third space race or this out of a third big waveof investment in this area. Can you talk about some of those gaps thatyou see and where company might be able to get started getting into that area? We hear it very fully. Understand that NASA is not endorsing any privatecompanies, including Verry, and there's no ways listening doesn't. Thank you,Luke. Perfect, and thank you luke. Okay. Um, yeah, becauseotherwise I would not have provided a response by it and I will havesaid next. So, yeah, I wait. You said thood space race. Well, that was a that was the second one. I let don'tyou know. I space race is the wrong way to say it. Butlike I I come from what I would consider to be a NASA family andlike this is a, I don't known, area that has been close, neardear in my heart, same as yours, and I think of like, okay, the first space race that people think of, you know,got to beat the Russians. Let's get there. Kennedy said, let's doit. We got there by sixty eight or sixty nine, and it's sowe rode the the Columbia Program send some people to the moon. It's reallycool things. I view this like second phase, as like beginning to sendunmanned things and building telescopes that look, you know, looking very far afield, and I kind of see this third...

...wave and I guess this is theworld according to Ryan. So I should ask this person that we should startwith that question. Do you view this as this that, you know,this third big wave? But you know now we're starting to really think serious? Seems to me, I should say disclosure world according to Ryan, thatwe're in this third wave where, hey, let's rebegin sending people and let's havereal conversations about sending them further. And you know now we're starting toyou know, spacex is say, Hey, we're going to we're going to reuserockets to bring the size of the investment way down. Jeff bezos issaying, Hey, not only are we going to send people, but I'mgoing to be one of the people, which seems like a, I don'tknow, a major shift from previous you definitely never saw like gene crans sayinglike get me in there, guys, I'm going you know. So nowyou've got people beginning to put their money where their mouth is. It feelsto me distinctly different than the first two generations of space travel. Let's beginwith that question. Am I characterizing this even close to correctly? Yeah,actually, I think you will. I think you know. Yes, itwas the first space race, right, the race of the Moon. Thatwas number one. We won. Yeah, the second one, I think thatyou characterized was, you know, all these big missions. I thinkthere was never really any competition that. That was really just being a NASAkind of, you know, putting that Rault those out getting, you know, taking over and being able to go and devote these capabilities for you know, magnificent science and being able to do all the shuttle missions and being ableto build a space station and all those things. And I wouldn't even considerthat a race because it was really just kind of one player, and thatwas really NASA, if you want to call it the third wave here,and that is really the the rate. Not Necessary a race back to themoon. It's going back to the moon and basically building on the future for, you know, going beyond, and I think that's what you're starting tosee with NASA. NASA is doing a lot of things now. If youtake a look at what they've been doing recently and if you compare that backto the Apollo era, you know, back then everyone at NASA was reallyfocused more on the you know, let's get back to the moon, andthey had some other small projects as well relative to a pod. Now,if you take a look at what we're trying to do, it's it's crazy. It's you know, we have the space station program that we're still supporting, we have commercial cargo, commercial crew, we have a lot of science missionsthat we're still supporting. We have astrophysics, Heliophysics, we have wehave our aeronauticle division that are developing supersonic jets that have low contrails, andnow we're trying to do deep space. And so what we're trying to see, and I think this kind of goes back to what you were saying thatwas, yeah, now we're trying to find this new frontier, where thegaps going to be, where are the things that we know we should belooking at, and a lot of the things that we're trying to do iscommercialize. You can see that with the success of commercial cargo and you cansee that with the success of commercial crew. There are gaps here that we're ableto absolutely fail and so, as a result, that are capabilities thatNASA is going to be looking for going forward, and I think that reallyis kind of at the root of when...

NASA is going and I think that'sthe reason why it's such an exciting time to be there or be here rightnow. Are there are there areas that you think that are right for commercializationthat maybe have not been there previously? You know, so to today.You mentioned NASA being kind of the only player for a long time and nowyou're seeing, you know, spacex and blue origins with these others and it, but it feels like, you know, they're competing for NASA contracts. Sothe government connect, the government funded piece of this remains. Do youhave a an opinion or thought on like at what point and what thing drivesthis being a Roi driven endeavor where, Hey, this is that there's aprivate sector need that's driving these things. Word, obviously, I know launchingsatellites and so forth has has been a big piece of that. Beyond that, any thoughts on areas where this where the private sector could begin to drivethings more and more? Yeah, absolutely, and I think if you go andtake a look at the the NASA movel of how things get done,so NASA is looking to basically help industry and I think that's where a lotof the private industries can kind of go and help make things away. Thingsneed to be done. Again, NASA doesn't have all the answers to everything. So so this is the NASA approach at a you know, if Ihad to distill it into a couple of points. First one is NASA knowsthat it has a it needs to have certain capabilities, right. We talkedabout this with commercialization of taking crew to the space station. So what dothey do? They go and provide some seed money to private industry, tothe to develop a capability. Then that those companies go and come back toNASA and they sell NASA these capabilities and NASA is like perfect, this isgreat. And so NASA then goes and provides money to go and say yes, this is the service that I want, and they go ahead and buy thoseservices from those companies. With those companies. You've now developed an industry. With that industry, you now have an ability for NAS to be ableto go and buy a service as opposed to doing it themselves, and socrew transport is an example of that. You can see that with both companiesthat have been awarded those contracts and and you can already start seeing that returnon investment. We are now having regular crew transport now and we're going tobe bringing on the other provider shortly once they've complete their demonstration flight, andso, as a result, I think I think we're moving in that directionand that's essentially the part that NASA is going to be going to answer somethingthat you are so earlier. Is there other things that NASA is looking atin terms of overall gaps that we want to get be able to fill?And the and the other one is really directly in in the group that I'min and space communication and navigation. NASA's looking to commercialize space communication, atleast in the what we call near Earth Domain, which is basically anything fromthe the geosynchronous belt downwards, and being able to go and find out howdo we go and have private industry use...

...their innovations to be able to goand allow for space communications and navigations for all our lower orbiting spacecraft, andso so that's a new, interesting field. And again this is where we're lookingat private industry to be able to go and say, you know what, maybe we should think of it this way. Maybe we should think abouthandling things outside of the way nasty used to do things and using a newstrategy and having NASA be able to go and leverage that and then help fundthose activities and then developing a return investment for those companies that can make thisa promising industry going forth. I've kind of always thought about it like NASAis able to make bets that you have no idea if they're going to payoff or not, and like venture capital world or like actual financial banking world, you really want to have a pretty good success probability, and NASA putsout very hard challenges and then funds them and hopes that one out of twentyactually see real success in the field and it's kind of like Darpos, anotheragency that can push technology forward in that same kind of word. Yeah,absolutely, and I think NASA's moving back into that innovative space. They wantto be able to go and leverage the new things and the things ill aren'tnecessary try and true. They want to be able to go and see howyou go and do certain things to make things more innovative, so that waywe're not relying on things that would design them thought about thirty, forty yearsago. So you mintioned communications. I wanted to ask you about a broadtopic of like, let's call it, connecting in hard to connect places.You know, we've had a number of guests on this show that have talkedabout that being one of the key challenges of the product that they've built,you know, whether they've been subsist to here in Africa or, you know, maybe they have an ag tech product that is, you know, needingto be able to connect in these remote agricultural areas. What are some ofthe technical challenges of, for like, interconnectivity outside of Earth's orbit? Idon't know what there I imagine there's like a half dozen things that maybe wouldn'teven be obvious to someone who has spent their their whole life innovating, youknow, here on on boring old earth like. What are some of thethings that they should be thinking about that maybe aren't as obvious yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely so. So, obviously I think, you know,I think a lot of folks are away, or if they were, if they'renot. So NASA is really looking at deep space exploration right sending humansback to the moon and going beyond and going to mass and so one ofthe things that we currently have, at least on the NASA side, isthe deep space network. They've been around for the longest time. They suppulledit up the Apollo mission, and so we have these antennas located all overthe Earth, three specific places where we're able to go and point at specificplace in the deep space and be able to communicate with spacecraft. And soone of the things that we're also trying to figure out is, as webegin to the long journey in terms of how we want to go ahead andexplore, how do we go and make sure that we are able to goand connect in those hard to connect places? And so if we go and justsay focus on the moon, NASA...

...is developing a system, a frameworkcalled Lunar Net and basically what it is is essentially a framework of network ofnetworks, basically where you can go and get multiple types of assets. Itdoesn't mean just one space wealth. It could be a conglomeration of multiple assetswhere you can basically go and provide communications and navigations around the moon. Thinkabout the infrastructure around the earth and how we're able to go and connect almosteverything around the earth, spacecraft wise, around the oceans. We have assetsout there in space set are basically going providing relay services. We want tobe able to do that around the moon, and so lunar net goes and answerset. As well as providing those bidirectional communications, it provides navigation capability, so we know exactly where space raft are and we provide a trunk backto the Earth. The great thing about this is it's almost like you biquitouscommunications is like having your cell phone right. Every time you look at your cellphone, every way you go, you always see four balls or fiveballs, depending on your network service provider, of course. Well, we wantto be able to do that for our space raft and we want tobe able to do that for our actional and our Lunar Rovers and all thekeep sets that nasusponses from all these universities in high schools to be able togo and say, yeah, you can communicate, and so with that youcan cover the places around the moon, for example, that we wouldn't otherwisecover. The the fall side. We can come at the South Pole wherewe want to send crewe and then we want to be able to make itextensible enough to the point where we can take that framework and put it aroundmalls and be able to go and do the exact same thing as so that'show you go when we solve the hall to connect places. Now I've kindof generalized it because I said that's how we solve it. And for thefor the listeners, I've put the inverted commas with the with the fingers thing, because we still need to figure out how to solve it and that's whereindustry can come in and go and tell us exactly how we think we shouldbe doing it, using innovative thoughts as opposed to we've always done it thisway and using the status quote. One of the things I was thinking aboutas you were talking about that. First off, it's kind of funny tothink of space is a hard to connect place, given how much we usespace to connect the earth. The second thing I was thinking I was whenyou were talking about the deep space network. That is still how we used tothis day to connect to voyager, which is like as far out asit possibly gets for spacecraft that humans have lunched anyway, which I think issuper cool. And a problem with the Deep Space Network, as I'm sureyou're aware, is bandwidth, because because there's only the three satellites and there'sa ton of stuff that's out there that we want to talk to. Soit sounds like this is also to try to get in front of that bandwidthproblem as you put more and more aircraft, people, spacecraft and satellites other thingsthat want to start talking, just to make that ability as prevalent aspossible, because otherwise I'm pretty sure the high school students of sound the microsaid, are not going to get any bad are not going to get anyband with relative to the other priorities. Yeah, yeah, yeah, andand if I scale back the the Mombo Jumbo, I think it's really moreyou know, as you send space craft further out in the space, theamount of data you can send back get...

...smaller and smaller, and right,that's that's just physics. You can blame your physics teacher for telling you that, because that's exactly the truth. You know, it's not necessarily a boudidthissue on the DS and I you know, I know that they have high datarate capabilities. It's really more just the further out you go, thesmaller that pipe becomes, just just out of general nature. And then whenit comes to the number of missions we have to support, it's a lotand the DSENT is managing it really well. Today they had the capacity go andsupport those but as the number of missions increase and we'd start doing alot more deep space elements, we don't need more assets to be able togo and be able to go allowed the DS and the focus on the missionslike voyager right. If you take a look at those, those antennas,that's seventy meters in length. I mean just it's amazingly large and the factthat that thing can still talk to voyager is it's still amazing and it's great. So yeah, I mean so there's absolutely opportunities here that, you know, people can leverage, for sure. So like opportunities people can leverage either. Most interesting opportunities often are like solving these problems that are thought of asimpossible. The you know, the one that we're all seeing play out rightnow in real time, and I think it makes for some of the mostfascinating youtube videos that that are you could possibly ever see. Is these reusablerockets, you know, I mean their break, their landing, these thingsthat just absolutely do not look like they lend themselves to landing in any kindof organized fashion. And and yet, like it appears that spacex has pulledthis off. What are some things that you or what thing or things thatyou think of, as you know, currently sitting on the wrong side ofimpossible. So, you know, I for all of the science fiction fansout there, what you see a lot of times is like they've traveled tothis other galaxy. You know, you put them in this this condition ofstasis, you know, so we ship them out there twenty years old.Two Hundred Years later, they arrived there still twenty years old. You know, I'll for the audience that can see, they cannot see, Neil and iswill be listening to him. I yeah, you may be able tohear him rolling his eyes. I'm not suggesting that stasis will be the actualthing, but can you talk about, like what are some things that currentlysit on the wrong side of impossible that you think we may see solved inthe next ten or fifteen years. Yeah. So, so, before I answerthat question, I think someone has been either Netflix saying oh HBO maxingpassengers and or has been watching the what was it captain America? When asoldier right? Well, you know where they I really wanted you to saylove, death and robots, but it's okay, see, I don't evenknow what that is. But yeah, yeah, yeah, so, soI think one of the things that and by the way, I was eyerolling quite hard. So if anyone could actually hear that, you know,yeah, you're welcome. I think you...

...know, there are there are alot of things. I think holy wood is great when it comes to imaginingthe things that we don't usually expect. Eating you use the landing rockets analogy. I think there's a lot of people that were really surprised that, youknow, someone could actually go on land a rocket that was normally, youknow, something that you've just kind of re entered the earth after completing itsmission. So it's it's definitely possible. I think we've also redefined the imaginableand so, as a result, you know, to kind of answer yourquestion, what, what's the thing that I can see that can't be done. Well, obviously the two items that you brought up right, stasis andbeing able to go and preserve a certain age after, you know, twenty, thirty, four hundred years whatever. I think for us it's really moreI would I'll put it into more of a realistic not necessary copy done.It just hasn't been figured out, and that is how do we get humansto moss and be able to sustain it in there in the right possible wayfor us to go to mass? If you take a look at just theShar distance and looking at how the orbits, and again, I apologize, Idon't want to go and into the technical flight dynamics aspects of all thestuff, but the Mossle of it, well, it's of the earth changesquite drastically depending on when, where it is, and so, as aresult, you know, mass could be really close and so, as therewas alt, you can have a short distance to getting to Mars or itcould be relong and it could take years. Instead, the last thing you wantto do is be able to go and have a crew member go andlaunch and then, you know, celebrate four or five birthdays on this ona space craft in this more enclosed space and be able to go and landand be able to go and do all the things that they need to do. And I think a great example is the Martian if anyone watch that movie. And again, this isn't an endorsement for that movie specifically, but Ithink they really kind of captured a lot of the challenges that we would otherwisesee. Right, if I narrow it down into the fit the field thatI'm focusing on now with communications, you can see, you know, oneof the first few things out mark, whattey had to go and figure outwas how do you communicate back with earth? Then you can see that there weretime delays. We have to go and figure that out because we haven'tfigured that out. That's as of right now. We need to get itback to real time because that's what we all used to right. Everyone inthis world of Zoom and teens and WEDDEX are used to this instant feedback.We don't get that with any of these missions in deep space. So howdo we go and do that? With a crew interaction, for example,if a national goes and see something, it's going to be ours potentially minutesmaybe be depending on where Mars is in that orbit to be able to goand get a response out of mission control. So how do you change that?So those are some of the things that we haven't solved yet. Interms of things that can't be done, I would say it's going out further. How do we go to more distant places? As of right now,I don't think that can be done, not unless we go when, youknow, build our own little quantum thing, you know where, you know,like in the avengers right, where we can go straight into the intothat specific thing and you get our own...

...quantum tunnel and have iron men putsomething together. But I will tell you actually, a funnier side, relativelyfunny aside, is NASA's also working on quantum communications. How do we goand move data really quickly and be able to go and move it on photons? Again, we will say that for another podcast, maybe the late nightvery podcast perhaps. So that again. So NASA is doing a lot ofcourse, cool things and we're trying to go and do the things that noone's actually ever remained too. That's one. When you got to the quantum wormhole, I was eye rolling really hard just so everybody could hear that.Now I was doing it, because I could see you doing it, andso I thought, you know what, I'm not going to waste this opportunity. So I thought we should definitely have a sound effect so that the audienceknows when someone has made there the other person. I roll, but lookplease, because the second thing thought I was having. I recognize that you'rea communication guys as to things. One was the only way I can seereal time feedback to a crew that's on Mars actually happening is if, essentiallyit's an artificial thing in orbit, like a Serie or whatever, that's that'sreasonably able to respond to hard request that they might have, because otherwise distanceis distance and white is white. So there's not much you can do aboutthat to some degree. Any thoughts on like feasibility of them? Yeah,actually, so. And so, look, there's this is going to be kindof funny, so I'm going to go and put you put the spotlighton you. So remember when I was talking about this lunar net idea andhow extensible it was and it was like, Oh, we can go and wrapthis around Moss? That's essentially what we're trying to do. So Ithink we're going to build a emulsion equivalent called malls net, which does theessentially the same thing. You basically have the ability of being to communicate closeto real time with essentially the assets around Moss. The question is, howdo you go and have the autonomy and fault responses and all that good stuff, and that again that those are going to be some of the things thatwe need to figure out because, yeah, you're not going to be able tofigure out the the lightspeed item back to what, because it could justbe very, very long. So that hopefully answer that question in the secondone is clearly it shows that you want. Listening to what I was saying earlier, all I could think about was how we're going to protect all theseastronauts from radiation the whole time they're flying to ours. That's the number onetechnical challenge. It always comes to mind when I think of actually sending likeliving things that far space, outside of our last protective magnetosphere, cocoon ofearth. Yeah, true, but but to a calm guy, you knowif radiation, come on, isn't all communications just radiation anyway? That's justone beal to things just because that's right. All right. Well, this isa perfect question for a calm guy at NASA. One of the thingsthat's been dominating the news cycle right now is, you know, we're seeinga lot of seemingly very serious people in the Navy, naval pilots, airplanepilots, say, you know, look,...

I personally have seen unexplained phenomenon.I think the government has has transition from the acronym ufo to, youAP, I believe, unexplained aerial phenomenon. But you know, we're starting tosee a shift away from this being more of, you know, theTinfoil hat crowd and towards folks that most people would consider to be, youknow, on the more serious end of the spectrum. But you know,we also saw Neil degrasse Tyson on Bill Mars show last week say, youknow, hey, look, what do you really think is a higher probabilityexplanation that the the navigation systems in these aircraft is glitching? Okay, sothese are government acquired technologies. No offense against NASA, but the government isnot famous for always buying the best, best technical solutions. Again, nooffense NASA. We love you and appreciate all the hard work you've done.Do you think that is higher probability, or do you think that aliens arevisiting Earth and being captured on video? What can you tell us? Whereis Neil and where is NASA at on this issue? Okay, yeah,yeah, yeah, so let me let me give you the the the NASAresponse, and then I'll give you the the walled according to Nail Molick,because if I said nailed across Tyson, then I would just point you tohis to segment. But all right, so the the NASA line. Soyou AP. By the way, just say you know Ryan, because youknow I'm NASA so I can tell you this. It's unidentified aerial phenomenal.So there you go. So that helps clarify. If anyone was wondering andwas trying to Google it, I was doing it as you ask the question. So yeah, yeah, so so here's the thing. Yeah, sothat's so there are these three unclassified videos out there. It's interesting, obviously, I think so. From the NASA standpoint it's you know, NASA's alwaysbeen kind of looking forward, you know, the search for life in the universe. So you know, at this point I can tell you NASA hasnot yet found any credible evidence of any extraterrestrial life. But NASA is exploringthe solar system and looking to answer those fundamental questions, because I think that'salways been part of the curiosity and why we want to explore. So again, you know, NASA is ready to go and support the rest of thegovernment when it comes to the search for life and being able to go andhelp support any of those activities thereafter. So that's Nassa and that in again, you know, I agree with that. So the world according to Neil,and I actually second what the other nails said. So you made acomment about the glitchy video. Yeah, so, and again nothing against thethe Navy folks and our military brethren, but that's more of a navy thing, not a Nassy thing. Just just ahead some the other thing is forus. I think Neil, the Gross Tyson kind of covered it quite nicely, and that is, you know, if, if we really are seeingthese U APS ufos, why is it...

...that they're early making themselves available whenwe're flying something else, you know, and why why are the videos alwaysso so low death? I am I'm pretty sure there are more capabilities thatour our military breathren it have, and so it's always interesting that we're seeingthat. And I think you know the other the other thing from my perspectiveis you know you are fos right. What does that sound for? Unidentified? So you know, for example, if, just because I go andtake my Coffee Cup and I crunch it up and it doesn't look like aCoffee Cup anymore and I throw it across the room, it won't look likea Coffee Cup. So it will be unidentified because you can't tell the CoffeeCup it's flying and it's also an object. So that would be a ufo right. So in a way it's almost like, okay, well, youknow, if that's a u a phone than anything really see you are following, then we can start speculating. I I honestly don't believe we all alonein the UNs. That's just my postile opinion. I think you know thatthat's going to be small life forms out there. If not, well that'san interesting pot calls in itself. We just haven't found them and I thinkthese are just, you know, some data points. That's of interest,but I wouldn't you know, think that, hey, by the way, thatthey're coming and visiting US only right in front of all pilots. Youknow, that just seems a little fall fetch to me. You'll think thatthey would show up at more interesting locations, like, I don't know. Youknow, they could go and visit some monument somewhere here in the UnitedStates. They can go and see something fancy. You know, why wouldthey just go and see us in space? They would come to, you know, see something Nice. Yeah, Sharn Carroll, the cosmologist and gravitationaltheoretical physicist, does a podcast called mindscape and he was just talking literally aboutthis. One of those people are asking about Leo. What are the odds? What proof for you need to see that sort of thing? He's like, I think the probability of there being fuzzy objects on camera screens or instrumentationdevices like radar, whatever, and them not being identified and people speculating aboutthem is like near one. Like certainly that happens. The odds that intergalacticoutside space technology could fly all the way to earth and then try to hidefrom us but not hide good enough that we sort of see him? He'slike I put that at almost zero. So it would take some real convincingevidence to get him over the goal line. Sounds like you as well. I'mcertainly I followed the same camp. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Imean, you know, here's the thing. You'd think that it's they would comeup on Poles, ring cameras, for example, like walk in thestreets at certain times of the night, you know. So you know,like I said, comes a fault. Yeah, he's like he did.This was like, yeah, I think they're they're going to get here inlike nuts, be able to be seeing at all or come down and sayhello. I think the odds of there being a middle ground they're pretty low. Yeah, exactly, like what. It's almost like you coming so farand then saying, you know what, man, that's all right, I'mjust going to turn around and go back right what, like, why wouldyou do that? So you know what I've a I've one serious question.I think a lot of people out there are maybe asking this to himself,the devil's advocate. Do you not think there's a case to be made,you know, so to Luke's point about...

...like somewhere in the middle not getcaught or come say hello? You know, they're it seems like they're being capturedin the places where no one else is except for you know, airplanesthat are in the middle of nowhere, at high altitude, zipping along reallyfast. Do you not think that there's do you think there's any realistic probabilitythat they are being caught unawares and saying Oh Dang, you know, andzipping out of their real quick you do you feel like the probability of thatis like at the Ed edge of negligible? So it almost just doesn't seem tomake sense. Then again, I'm we're also trying to rationalize what itis that they're trying to do as well. Right, I think if they,if they had that human curiosity, I think they would kind of goand try to engage at some point. But again, these are like aninfluence, right, these could be like little books. Right, you know, if you go and see one of those little cicadas come out, youknow, out of you right, that that's what we think Indians are goingto be, right, that will over you. They just want to engage. But if you go and see like a little spider or you see likean animal of some kind of you try to reach for it, they goand scuttle away. Maybe that's what Adians are. Maybe this is exactly howthey interact. Maybe this is normal, maybe it isn't. Maybe we're overthinkingit and maybe someone went and caught, I don't know, like a deflatedparachute flying somewhere and that moved. And you know, maybe, y'all,they're all going to achieve things out there. You know, they could be theycould be bad tourists. You know. So, so, you know,visiting Earth is one of the areas that you can visit. You know, you save up for holiday, you get to visit a any planet galaxy. I've always wanted to go to earth and see the blue dot. Youknow, when you come to Earth and there's there's rules and you're supposed togo here at these times in these places, and but you see, yea,let's get a little bit closer. You know, this is like myyou know my dad. Would you know when he goes to national parks,he's the guy that wants to step over the rope line and take a picturewith the buffalo and I'm like, Dad, those are the people that get goredby the Bison, you know, and he's like no, come onit. So you know, the rules are for don't worry about it,you know. So, so, maybe we're looking at the like the aliens, that are the bad tourists. Yeah, I mean I would almost use theanalogy of think of think about someone coming from another country. Right,let's go and say England. Everyone and them loves to come to New YorkCity, right, everyone, because, my God, it's new or city. It's great. Well, that's almost the equivalent of saying, Hey,I've just landed at JFK, sweet, I'm in New York City, eventhough you're not really and then turning around and say, okay, I wentto see New York City and I went back right, you're not really seeinganything, right. So, yeah, it definitely is bad tourist syndrome.If we want to go and create an acronym, I know that we lovethat here. So bts, it's all. Switzerland exactly like that, by theway. Well, when the the airport to the conference in the airport, flew right back out, ever up the airport and see, there yougo, and you visited Switzerland. See, there you go. See. Yeah, Neil, I want to thank you for being on the show today. My friend, this has been a hoot. I enjoyed the pre Ienjoyed the interview, I hope the folks...

...at home have enjoyed learning a littlebit about space today. If people want to to catch up with you afterthis working folks find you. I have a linked in profile, so theygo. I'm already dating myself by just saying that alone. So you canfind me on Linkedin. Neil, Maltlich M Alik, I don't actually havea true digital profile. I'll give you the NASA one. So for usit's Nastabout Golf, obviously, and for space communications it's NASA dot golf forwardFlash Scan. That's scam all right. So if you are looking, lookingto connect with Neal Molick, it sounds like linkedin is the way to achieveit. Neil, thank you for so much for being on the show today. Folks on the show today. That's it today, folks. My NameIs Ryan and I'm luke. Thanks for listening, and I'm nail. Okay, this is I will see you guys on the Internet. You shouldn't haveto worry about IOT projects dragging on or unreliable vendors. You've got enough onyour plate. The right team of Engineers and project managers can change a pivotalmoment for your business into your competitive edge varies. Close Knit crew of ambitiousproblem solvers, continuous improvers and curious builders know how to turn your ideas intoa reality on time and up to your standards, with a focus on mitigatingrisk in maximizing opportunity, will help you build an Iot solution that you canhang your hat on. Let's bring your Iot idea to life. Learn moreat very possiblecom. You've been listening to over the Air Iot connected devices andthe journey. If you enjoyed today's episode, make sure to hit subscribe in yourfavorite podcast player and give us a rating. Have a question or anidea for future episode? Send it to podcast at very possiblecom see you nexttime.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (24)