speech on importance of universe

Suggested Searches

• Climate Change
• Expedition 64
• Mars perseverance
• SpaceX Crew-2
• International Space Station
• View All Topics A-Z

Humans in Space

Earth & climate, the solar system, the universe, aeronautics, learning resources, news & events.

NASA’s Fermi Mission Sees No Gamma Rays from Nearby Supernova

The Ocean Touches Everything: Celebrate Earth Day with NASA

The April 8 Total Solar Eclipse: Through the Eyes of NASA

• Search All NASA Missions
• A to Z List of Missions
• Upcoming Launches and Landings
• Spaceships and Rockets
• Communicating with Missions
• James Webb Space Telescope
• Hubble Space Telescope
• Why Go to Space

Astronauts Home

• Commercial Space

Destinations

Living in Space

• Explore Earth Science
• Earth, Our Planet
• Earth Science in Action
• Earth Multimedia
• Earth Science Researchers
• Pluto & Dwarf Planets
• Asteroids, Comets & Meteors
• The Kuiper Belt
• The Oort Cloud
• Skywatching
• The Search for Life in the Universe
• Black Holes
• The Big Bang
• Dark Energy & Dark Matter
• Earth Science
• Planetary Science
• Astrophysics & Space Science
• The Sun & Heliophysics
• Biological & Physical Sciences
• Lunar Science
• Citizen Science
• Astromaterials
• Aeronautics Research
• Human Space Travel Research
• Science in the Air
• NASA Aircraft
• Flight Innovation
• Supersonic Flight
• Air Traffic Solutions
• Green Aviation Tech
• Drones & You
• Technology Transfer & Spinoffs
• Space Travel Technology
• Technology Living in Space
• Manufacturing and Materials
• Science Instruments
• For Kids and Students
• For Educators
• For Colleges and Universities
• For Professionals
• Science for Everyone
• Requests for Exhibits, Artifacts, or Speakers
• STEM Engagement at NASA
• NASA's Impacts
• Centers and Facilities
• Directorates
• Organizations
• People of NASA
• Internships
• Our History
• Doing Business with NASA
• Get Involved
• Aeronáutica
• Ciencias Terrestres
• Sistema Solar
• All NASA News
• Video Series on NASA+
• Newsletters
• Social Media
• Media Resources
• Upcoming Launches & Landings
• Virtual Events
• Sounds and Ringtones
• Interactives
• STEM Multimedia

NASA’s TESS Returns to Science Operations

NASA’s Near Space Network Enables PACE Climate Mission to ‘Phone Home’

NASA Photographer Honored for Thrilling Inverted In-Flight Image

NASA Open Science Initiative Expands OpenET Across Amazon Basin  

NASA Motion Sickness Study Volunteers Needed!

NASA Selects New Crew for Next Simulated Mars Journey

Tech Today: Taking Earth’s Pulse with NASA Satellites

Kate A. McGinnis: Ready to “Go” with PACE Testing

A.3 Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry Inclusion Plan Correction

NASA’s Ingenuity Mars Helicopter Team Says Goodbye … for Now

Comet Geyser: Perseverance’s 21st Rock Core

NASA’s Dragonfly Rotorcraft Mission to Saturn’s Moon Titan Confirmed

Astronauts To Patch Up NASA’s NICER Telescope

NASA’s Roman Space Telescope’s ‘Eyes’ Pass First Vision Test

Amendment 10: B.9 Heliophysics Low-Cost Access to Space Final Text and Proposal Due Date.

NASA Langley Team to Study Weather During Eclipse Using Uncrewed Vehicles

ARMD Solicitations

Earth Day 2024: Posters and Virtual Backgrounds

NASA Names Finalists of the Power to Explore Challenge

NASA Partnerships Bring 2024 Total Solar Eclipse to Everyone

NASA Receives 13 Nominations for the 28th Annual Webby Awards

A Solar Neighborhood Census, Thanks to NASA Citizen Science

La presentación del X-59 de la NASA personifica la tradición aeronáutica

Why go to space.

The reasons to explore the universe are as vast and varied as the reasons to explore the forests, the mountains, or the sea. Since the dawn of humanity, people have explored to learn about the world around them, find new resources, and improve their existence.

Why We Go to Space

At NASA, we explore the secrets of the universe for the benefit of all, creating new opportunities and inspiring the world through discovery.

NASA’s exploration vision is anchored in providing value for humanity by answering some of the most fundamental questions: Why are we here? How did it all begin? Are we all alone? What comes next? And, as an addendum to that: How can we make our lives better?

NASA was created more than half a century ago to begin answering some of these questions. Since then, space exploration has been one of the most unifying, borderless human endeavors to date. An international partnership of five space agencies from 15 countries operates the International Space Station, and two dozen countries have signed the Artemis Accords, signaling their commitment to shared values for long-term human exploration and research at the Moon. Through space exploration, we gain a new perspective to study Earth and the solar system. We advance new technologies that improve our daily lives, and we inspire a new generation of artists, thinkers, tinkerers, engineers, and scientists.  

Benefits to Humanity

Space exploration unites the world to inspire the next generation, make ground-breaking discoveries, and create new opportunities.

Technologies and missions we develop for human spaceflight have thousands of applications on Earth, boosting the economy, creating new career paths, and advancing everyday technologies all around us.

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video

Benefits to Science

The pursuit of discovery drives NASA to develop missions that teach us about Earth, the solar system, and the universe around us.

Science at NASA answers questions as practical as hurricane formation, as enticing as the prospect of lunar resources, as surprising as behavior in weightlessness, and as profound as the origin of the Universe.

Unite with us on our journey to explore.

Discover More Topics From NASA

Explore Cosmic History

Study how the universe evolved, learn about the fundamental forces , and discover what the cosmos is made of.

The origin, evolution, and nature of the universe have fascinated and confounded humankind for centuries. New ideas and major discoveries made during the 20th century transformed cosmology – the term for the way we conceptualize and study the universe – although much remains unknown.

Big Bang Stories

What is Dark Energy? Inside our accelerating, expanding Universe

NASA’s Webb Identifies the Earliest Strands of the Cosmic Web

Lunar Crater Radio Telescope: Illuminating the Cosmic Dark Ages

Roman Space Telescope Could Image 100 Hubble Ultra Deep Fields at Once

NASA’s Roman Space Telescope to Uncover Echoes of the Universe’s Creation

Discover More Topics From NASA

Dark Matter & Dark Energy

Black Holes

• Family & Parenting
• Health & Wellness

Stephen Hawking: Questioning The Universe at TED (Full Transcript)

• April 2, 2016 11:49 am October 6, 2023 1:20 am
• by Pangambam S

Here is the full text and summary of Stephen Hawking’s talk titled “ Questioning The Universe “ at TED Talks conference.

Listen to the MP3 Audio here:

TRANSCRIPT: 

There is nothing bigger or older than the universe. The questions I would like to talk about are: one, where did we come from? How did the universe come into being? Are we alone in the universe? Is there alien life out there? What is the future of the human race?

Up until the 1920s, everyone thought the universe was essentially static and unchanging in time. Then it was discovered that the universe was expanding. Distant galaxies were moving away from us. This meant they must have been closer together in the past. If we extrapolate back, we find they must have all been on top of each other about 15 billion years ago. This was the Big Bang, the beginning of the universe.

But was there anything before the Big Bang? If not, what created the universe? Why did the universe emerge from the Big Bang the way it did? We used to think that the theory of the universe could be divided into two parts. First, there were the laws like Maxwell’s equations and general relativity that determined the evolution of the universe, given its state over all of space at one time. And second, there was no question of the initial state of the universe.

We have made good progress on the first part, and now have the knowledge of the laws of evolution in all but the most extreme conditions. But until recently, we have had little idea about the initial conditions for the universe. However, this division into laws of evolution and initial conditions depends on time and space being separate and distinct. Under extreme conditions, general relativity and quantum theory allow time to behave like another dimension of space. This removes the distinction between time and space, and means the laws of evolution can also determine the initial state. The universe can spontaneously create itself out of nothing.

Pages: First | 1 | ... | Next → | Last | View Full Transcript

Learn to Speak the Language of the Universe With This Mindblowing New Book

Magnitude helps you imagine the outer limits of time, speed and distance—without breaking your brain

When you spend all your time talking about the universe, there are a few questions you end up getting a lot. Namely: How big? How far? How old? How fast?

Kimberly Arcand and Megan Watzke, both science communicators for NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory, get those questions all the time—at talks, events, or via email and social media. So last year, they decided to answer them in the most engaging way possible. In a visually stunning book called Magnitude: The Scale of the Universe  they explore the full range of scales we’ve measured in our Universe in four main sections covering: Quantities, Rates and Ratios, Phenomena and Process, and Computation.

Their project harkens back to Powers of Ten , the 1977 short film that illustrated the scale of the universe by starting from a picnic on a Chicago lakeside, and periodically expanding the frame by a factor of ten.

“Eames Demetrios, the grandson of Charles and Ray Eames who made the original 'Powers of Ten' film, argues that understanding scale is a form of literacy. And I think he’s absolutely right,” Watzke tells Smithsonian.com. “If you want to become literate in a foreign language, you can start with some common phrases. From there you can add more words, grammar, etc. Over time you can build fluency. We hope that people can use Magnitude as a starting point to learn how to ‘speak’ scale and gain a deeper understanding and comfort level with it over time.”

The illustrations in the book are by Katie Peek, a former astrophysicist who later transitioned to data visualization and science journalism. “The look was an iterative process,” Peek says. “The core of the book—Megan and Kim's idea—was to move from the very small to the very big in about ten steps for each chapter. One of my favorite innovations in the layout came from [the design company] Alexander Isley. They created a lovely progression of illustration sizes in each chapter, so the small values begin with a narrow picture, and the large values have a much bigger picture. It's a subtle nod to what Kim and Megan set out to achieve.”

Magnitude is a journey across time and space, the familiar and the unfamiliar. Best of all, it’s meant for curious people of all ages and interests and expertise levels, not just scientists. “It’s something you can pick up for just a few minutes and get a glimpse of a topic, or do a deeper dive into the book at a longer stretch,” says Arcand.  Get a taste for yourself by exploring selected pages from the book. Explanations and units are below; click the page for a larger view.

Distance:  Measured in meters (m).

The range of distances humans have measured spans 40 orders of magnitude. Starting with the wavelength of the first gravitational wave signal detected by LIGO in February 2016 (10 x 10^18m) and ending with the distance to the farthest galaxy ever detected (1.25 x 10^26m). [That distance record was broken by the Hubble Space Telescope in March 2017, after the book went to print]. 

The longest bridge in the world is located in China and spans 160 kilometers. You would need 400 Danyang-Kunshan Grand Bridges end-to-end to cross the Atlantic ocean at its narrowest point from southwest Senegal in West Africa to northeastern Brazil in North America. 

Time:  Measured in seconds (s)

We’ve measured time over more than 55 orders of magnitude. Did you know that in the time it takes a hummingbird to beat its wings once, your body can produce 25,000 red blood cells? Furthermore, during the 2016 Olympic games, Usain Bolt’s set a new world record for the 100-m race, completing it in 9.81 s. In that same amount of time, the same hummingbird would have beaten its wings almost 800 times. 

Temperature:  Measured in degrees Kelvin (K).

The coldest human-made) temperature we’ve ever recorded on Earth was in a laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where researchers cooled sodium molecules to 0.00000005 K (or 500 nanokelvins). The coldest natural temperature recorded (at ground-level) was 184 K, as measured at Vostok Station in easter Antarctica in July 1983. Vostok is also the source of the ice cores that provide historical temperature and CO2 records on Earth for the past 400,000 years. As you read this, your average body temperature is twice as warm as the temperature recorded at Vostok Station. 

Speed:  Measured in meters per second (m/s).

Ever heard the phrase "slow as watching the grass grow”? Arcand and Watzke have quantified that for you. It turns out that grass grows at 2 x 10^-8 m/s, or 2 to 6 inches per month, which somehow seems faster than it should. Returning to Usain Bolt, his fastest speed ever recorded was 12.4 m/s in the 100-m sprint at the 2009 World Championships in Berlin, Germany. Unfortunately for Bolt, the fastest animal on Earth, the cheetah, can run the same event in less than half the time at a top speed of 27 m/s. Interspecies Olympics anyone? 

Density: Measured in kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m^3).

The more mass you can pack into a given space, the higher the resulting density. While space is often described as a vacuum, it’s not completely void of mass. If you average out all the mass both condensed into stars, planets, rocks and dust with the vast amount of space between them, you get an average of 3 x 10^-27 kg/m^3. That’s roughly less than one atom per cubic centimeter. Looking at planets in our own Solar System, at 687 kg/m^3, Saturn is less dense than water so it would theoretically float in an astronomically large bathtub. Humans are 1.4 time denser than Saturn at an average of 965 kg/m^3, but we float in bathtubs, rivers, lakes and oceans too because (fresh) water has density of 1000 kg/m^3. Now I really want to take a bath with in space. 

Rotation:  Measure in Hertz (Hz), aka rotations per second (1/s). 

Rotational speed tells how long it takes a given object to turn once on its axis. We are most familiar with Earth’s rotational speed, roughly once every 24 hours, which translates to 0.0000115 Hz or 1000 times slower than a vinyl record. The highest performance cars in the world (Formula One) have engines that run up to 250 Hz, that’s 15,000 RPM. But even faster than that are the tiny molecular motors that propel E. Coli bacteria around your large intestine, which rotate at 270 Hz. If you hold really still, maybe you can feel them racing around in there.

Magnitude: The Scale of the Universe

In Magnitude, Kimberly Arcand and Megan Watzke take us on an expansive journey to the limits of size, mass, distance, time, temperature in our universe.

Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

A Note to our Readers Smithsonian magazine participates in affiliate link advertising programs. If you purchase an item through these links, we receive a commission.

Are We Alone in the Universe?

(And why do we care so much?)

Share this page

When they first began their science careers, neither Phillips Professor of Astronomy Dimitar Sasselov nor sixth-year graduate student Elisabeth Newton intended to search for extraterrestrial life—but that is exactly what they are both doing today.

“My initial interest was in the physics of stars and cosmology,” says Sasselov.

“I majored in physics in college,” says Newton, “and astronomy offered the most interesting physics.”

Now working at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA), Sasselov and Newton are engaged in a quest to answer one of the most fundamental questions facing humanity: Are we unique—and alone— in the universe, or are we ordinary, with an expansive social network waiting for us “out there?”

Sasselov, Newton, and their colleagues now believe that the answer to that question is tantalizingly close after thousands of years of speculation, theorizing, and—finally— some solid scientific research.

What at first appears to be a very modern query is actually ancient in its origins. Since human beings began to ponder the “big questions,” the desire to understand what exists beyond the confines of the Earth continually surfaces. According to Michael J. Crowe (author of The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750–1900), no less a philosopher than Aristotle argued in the 4th century BCE that a so-called “plurality of worlds” could not exist because every solar system required a Prime Mover to keep it going, and he had trouble imagining an infinite number of those.

Since human beings began to ponder the “big questions,” the desire to understand what exists beyond the confines of the Earth continually surfaces

Around the same time, Epicurus penned a remarkably modern rejoinder to the Aristotelian perspective. He suggested that atoms were infinite in number and argued that “…there are infinite worlds both like and unlike ours.” Epicurus asserted that some of these worlds would sustain life similar to Earth.

Aristotle and Epicurus shared common ground in that they had absolutely no observational data on which to base their opinions, meaning that the controversy surrounding the possibility of extraterrestrial life raged on right through the Middle Ages and Renaissance up to our own time.

For example, Cornell Professor Carl Sagan, whose Public Television series Cosmos brought the concepts of astronomy to a broad audience, advanced a principle of mediocrity that echoed the writings of Epicurus. He argued that there was nothing special about our solar system or planet—there are billions and billions of stars in the universe, with many planets capable of sustaining life and intelligence.

Cosmologists John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler countered with the Anthropic Cosmological Principle, arguing that even with a universe full of planets, generating life on one is difficult—and it’s a big leap from single-celled organisms to large-brained mammals who can debate cosmology. We should therefore reserve judgment as to whether we are alone or only one overachieving species among many.

Aristotle and Epicurus would be impressed to find that their argument continues 2,000 years after their deaths.

The Breakthrough

Until 1992, we couldn’t say with certainty whether any planets existed outside our own solar system. This all changed, however, with the confirmed sighting of several such planets (known as extrasolar or exoplanets) orbiting the dense remnant of a supernova explosion in the constellation Virgo. While few believed that these highly irradiated, hostile worlds could support life, their mere existence set off the first of several tectonic shifts in thinking in the field.

In 1995, astronomers announced the first exoplanet orbiting a star similar to our Sun. A rush of discovery followed, accelerating in 2009, when NASA launched the Kepler space-based telescope to search for nearby Earth-like planets. By late 2015, researchers had found nearly 2,000 exoplanets in all, with a growing number of them similar to Earth. Most were detected by Kepler, located via a technique known as the transit method.

When a planet passes—or transits—in front of its sun, the starlight dims perceptibly. Exoplanet hunters can determine many things about their quarry from this simple piece of information, including the planet’s diameter, temperature, and the length of its year. These factors add up (or don’t) to the planet’s habitability.

At first, we had the clear motivation to use the tools of remote sensing to find exoplanets as the critical step in the life search. Now we know that exoplanets are common, and the search can begin in earnest.

For scientists who, unlike Aristotle and Epicurus, need data to do their work, finding these first planets marked the beginning of a golden age. “The discovery of exoplanets shifted my attention away from cosmology,” says Sasselov. “Since I was studying stars, it was a natural transition for me, because we now knew that some of those stars had planets, and my experience could help in the search.”

By 2002, Sasselov had left cosmology behind to work on exoplanets exclusively. He believes the lure of the chase for researchers has grown stronger in the past decade for a simple reason: “We are moving closer to the discovery of and ability to study Earth-like planets.”

This is, of course, the Holy Grail of exoplanet research—finding “Earth 2.0,” as some call it. In detecting life similar to that on our home planet, we hope to find similar intelligence. And if that happens, humanity will finally know that we are not alone.

Seizing the moment, Sasselov began conferring with chemists and geochemists about how to detect life on these exoplanets. His conversations resulted in the creation of Harvard’s interdisciplinary Origins of Life Initiative in 2006.

“At first, we had the clear motivation to use the tools of remote sensing to find exoplanets as the critical step in the life search,” says Sasselov. “Now we know that exoplanets are common, and the search can begin in earnest.”

Moreover, one of Sasselov’s colleagues, Nobel Prize–winner and Harvard Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology Jack W. Szostak, found that he could create self-replicating molecules in his lab with far less effort than expected. “This showed,” says Sasselov, “that the enabling conditions for life are not overly strict.”

As an undergraduate at the University of California at Santa Barbara, Elisabeth Newton found herself excited by the possibilities the search for exoplanets raised. She decided to move across the country to study at Harvard and in the CfA, where her path and Sasselov’s would eventually intersect. “I had been studying galaxies, but wanted to shift the focus of my research to exoplanets,” she remembers. “My advisor recommended I apply to work with Harvard’s David Charbonneau, one of the pioneers in the field.”

Just as Sasselov found that his study of stars led to exoplanets, Newton’s interest in exoplanets turned her attention to red dwarf stars.

Why red dwarfs? As it turns out, it is easier to find Earth-sized exoplanets circling a red dwarf than around a star like our own Sun.

“Red dwarfs are the most numerous kinds of stars in the galaxy and because of their small size, it is much easier to spot a planet as it transits,” Newton explains. “They also emit much less radiation than our Sun, so the so-called habitable zone is much closer to the star. Around a red dwarf, a potentially habitable exoplanet has an orbital period of just a few weeks, as opposed to one year around a Sun-like star. This means we can make many more observations in a much shorter period of time.”

The red dwarf study evolved into Newton’s dissertation, which she is now completing. Being a graduate student during one of the greatest periods of discovery in astronomy has been a tremendous—and challenging—experience. “As I look back on my tenure at the CfA,” she says, “it’s been an exciting and intense time.”

Super-Earths

Sasselov has become a leading expert on so-called Super-Earths, rocky planets that are somewhat larger than the Earth, but similar in other ways. Their size turns out to be useful in retaining an atmosphere, an essential component for maintaining life. Sasselov wrote a book about them ( The Life of Super-Earths ), and developed the class “Super-Earths and Life” for the online edX platform. Knowing of Newton’s red dwarf work, he invited her to help him write the course, which did very well in its first year, with about 1,500 students completing it.

Sasselov asserts that the “plurality of worlds” debate is over, ended thanks to the rapid-fire discovery of planet after planet, many of which seem capable of sustaining life. “It is no longer a question of if we will find life on other planets, but more a question of when ,” he says. “I want to make it happen sooner rather than later!”

The next great challenge, he says, is to find biosignatures in the atmospheres of the Super-Earths and any other planets that might harbor life.

From Life to Intelligence: SETI

On Earth, it has taken millions of years of evolution for the earliest forms of life to develop into intelligent creatures capable of contemplating the entire process and asking questions like, “Are we alone in the universe?” Speculating that intelligent entities in other star systems might be sending out radio signals that human beings could read and interpret, astronomers launched a scientific search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) in the 1960s. While SETI has not produced definitive results during its 50-year existence, hope remains in the form of an investment from Russian billionaire Yuri Milner, and the imprimatur of famed physicist Stephen Hawking. The Breakthrough Listen project, with $100 million in funding, could revitalize SETI worldwide.

Sasselov supports Breakthrough Listen, but prefers his current approach. “At the moment, I am looking at the easier task—detecting life,” he says.

And Why Do We Care?

Most of those involved in the search for life and intelligence in the universe probably don’t ask themselves, “Why am I doing this?” The answer seems obvious: Who wouldn’t want to know more about our place in the cosmos? Whether the answer is “yes” or “no,” Elisabeth Newton acknowledges that the implications are enormous. “I can’t even begin to comprehend what it would be like to discover life or intelligence elsewhere,” she says, “but it will have a profound impact on society.”

On Earth, it has taken millions of years of evolution for the earliest forms of life to develop into intelligent creatures capable of contemplating the entire process and asking questions like, “Are we alone in the universe?” 

Dimitar Sasselov continues to ponder the “why” question, and in his book on Super-Earths, he offers a cogent answer. “It is the age-old question of ‘the Other,’” he says, “but on a grand scale.”

Sasselov explains that the Other is how a conscious human being perceives his or her own identity. This identity comes front and center in “first encounters,” such as those between Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis , Mayans and Spanish conquistadors, English colonists and Native Americans.

In our interconnected world, human beings know too much about one another to experience these encounters—but space offers new possibilities. “The discovery of new worlds orbiting distant stars offers a fresh opportunity to contemplate a first encounter,” Sasselov says. “As in the past, humans approach it with both insatiable curiosity and fear, with mixed, very strong emotions.”

Yet, approach it we inevitably will. Sasselov sees his search, and that of Newton and their colleagues, as ultimately fueled by the human drive to understand ourselves.

Are we alone? Soon, very soon, we may know.

Photos by NASA, Kris Snibbe, Ben Gebo

Get the Latest Updates

Join our newsletter, subscribe to colloquy podcast, connect with us, view the entire issue, view all issues online, related news.

Realizing the Promise of Gene Editing

Nobel laureate Jennifer Doudna, PhD '89, on how new technologies could treat and even cure diseases and the need for equitable access to treatment.

Fruitful Research

Repouliou studies fruit flies to uncover the molecular mechanisms that enable proteins to work.

Cold Facts about Global Warming

Research by PhD student Kara Hartig could help forecasters predict weather patterns as climate change makes them more extreme.

How Animals Communicate

PhD student Ciara Sypherd unravels the mysteries of animal communication and cognition, bringing us closer to understanding the intricate languages of our non-human counterparts. 

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

13.7 Cosmos & Culture

Evaluating our importance in the universe.

Marcelo Gleiser

ESA astronaut Tim Peake posted this Jan. 29 photo on his social media channels, commenting: "Beautiful night pass over Italy, Alps and Mediterranean." ESA/NASA hide caption

ESA astronaut Tim Peake posted this Jan. 29 photo on his social media channels, commenting: "Beautiful night pass over Italy, Alps and Mediterranean."

For the past two weeks we've been exploring some of the questions related to life's origin on Earth and possibly elsewhere.

We know life was present on Earth at least 3.5 billion years ago. It may have been present even earlier, but results remain controversial. The window of opportunity for life to emerge and take root here opened after the Late Heavy Bombardment calmed down some 3.9 billion years ago. Before then, conditions were too harsh for living creatures to survive; if anything lived, it was most probably destroyed, leaving no clues. Life's early history is written in rocks. As primal rocks melted and got mixed and remixed in a churning inferno, life's early experiments were erased into oblivion.

We can't know what really happened to life that early on. We can study possible metabolic and genetic pathways to life, collect fossilized evidence from old rocks, and conduct experiments in the laboratory, expanding our understanding of this most vexing of questions, the transition from nonlife to life. But even if we are able to make life in vitro , we can't be sure that this is what happened around 3.6 billion years ago here.

What we do know is that the history of life in a planet depends on the planet's life history: change the sequence or intensity of events — asteroid collisions, massive volcanic eruptions, radical changes in atmospheric composition — and life's history is rewritten.

This casts the question of life here, and elsewhere, into new focus. We can state, with high confidence, that even if there are other intelligent creatures in the universe, even humanoid ones, they won't be like us. We are the only humans in the cosmos, the product of a very particular set of cosmic, geochemical and evolutionary circumstances. Life is an experiment in natural selection, and an amazingly creative one at that. There may be certain biological patterns that offer an evolutionary advantage and would be fairly common, such as two eyes or left-right body symmetry. But details will vary as they do with snowflakes, all coming from the same chemistry but amazingly diverse due to environmental details.

As we study the history of life on Earth, we also learn that for approximately 3 billion of the 3.5 billion years it has been around, it consisted of single-celled organisms. The explosive diversity of life we witness now is a recent phenomenon, at least in geological time. To go from nonliving to living chemistry, and then from single-celled to multicellular organisms, such as sponges, many extremely complex steps had to be undertaken. To go from multicellular organisms to dinosaurs and then to mammals and eventually to primates took more complex steps, all resulting from random mutations and selective pressure, all unique and unreproducible.

Life should exist elsewhere but, if it does, the probability is that it will be simple, some kind of alien bacteria. Intelligent aliens may be out there in Earth-like planets, or in more exotic environments, but if they are, they are very far away. For all practical purposes, we are alone as intelligent molecular machines capable of pondering our origins and future.

This is the striking revelation from modern science, one that should grab everyone's attention. We matter because we are rare and our planet matters because it is unique. At the very least, it should inspire us to re-evaluate our relationship to one another and to the planet, beyond petty ideologies and short-sighted tribal disputes that fill so much of our time.

Next time you hear a scientist saying something like "the more we know about the universe the less important we become," beg to differ. The reality is precisely the opposite: The more we know about the universe, the more unique we become. What we do with this knowledge is, of course, a personal choice for each of us. To have this choice is the privilege of being human.

Marcelo Gleiser is a theoretical physicist and cosmologist — and professor of natural philosophy, physics and astronomy at Dartmouth College. He is the co-founder of 13.7, a prolific author of papers and essays, and active promoter of science to the general public. His latest book is The Island of Knowledge: The Limits of Science and the Search for Meaning . You can keep up with Marcelo on Facebook and Twitter: @mgleiser .

• origin of life

Origins of the universe, explained

The most popular theory of our universe's origin centers on a cosmic cataclysm unmatched in all of history—the big bang.

The best-supported theory of our universe's origin centers on an event known as the big bang. This theory was born of the observation that other galaxies are moving away from our own at great speed in all directions, as if they had all been propelled by an ancient explosive force.

A Belgian priest named Georges Lemaître first suggested the big bang theory in the 1920s, when he theorized that the universe began from a single primordial atom. The idea received major boosts from Edwin Hubble's observations that galaxies are speeding away from us in all directions, as well as from the 1960s discovery of cosmic microwave radiation—interpreted as echoes of the big bang—by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson.

Further work has helped clarify the big bang's tempo. Here’s the theory: In the first 10^-43 seconds of its existence, the universe was very compact, less than a million billion billionth the size of a single atom. It's thought that at such an incomprehensibly dense, energetic state, the four fundamental forces—gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces—were forged into a single force, but our current theories haven't yet figured out how a single, unified force would work. To pull this off, we'd need to know how gravity works on the subatomic scale, but we currently don't.

It's also thought that the extremely close quarters allowed the universe's very first particles to mix, mingle, and settle into roughly the same temperature. Then, in an unimaginably small fraction of a second, all that matter and energy expanded outward more or less evenly, with tiny variations provided by fluctuations on the quantum scale. That model of breakneck expansion, called inflation, may explain why the universe has such an even temperature and distribution of matter.

After inflation, the universe continued to expand but at a much slower rate. It's still unclear what exactly powered inflation.

Aftermath of cosmic inflation

As time passed and matter cooled, more diverse kinds of particles began to form, and they eventually condensed into the stars and galaxies of our present universe.

FREE BONUS ISSUE

By the time the universe was a billionth of a second old, the universe had cooled down enough for the four fundamental forces to separate from one another. The universe's fundamental particles also formed. It was still so hot, though, that these particles hadn't yet assembled into many of the subatomic particles we have today, such as the proton. As the universe kept expanding, this piping-hot primordial soup—called the quark-gluon plasma—continued to cool. Some particle colliders, such as CERN's Large Hadron Collider , are powerful enough to re-create the quark-gluon plasma.

Radiation in the early universe was so intense that colliding photons could form pairs of particles made of matter and antimatter, which is like regular matter in every way except with the opposite electrical charge. It's thought that the early universe contained equal amounts of matter and antimatter. But as the universe cooled, photons no longer packed enough punch to make matter-antimatter pairs. So like an extreme game of musical chairs, many particles of matter and antimatter paired off and annihilated one another.

You May Also Like

The world’s most powerful telescope is rewriting the story of space and time

How fast is the universe really expanding? The mystery deepens.

This supermassive black hole was formed when the universe was a toddler

Somehow, some excess matter survived—and it's now the stuff that people, planets, and galaxies are made of. Our existence is a clear sign that the laws of nature treat matter and antimatter slightly differently. Researchers have experimentally observed this rule imbalance, called CP violation , in action. Physicists are still trying to figure out exactly how matter won out in the early universe.

Building atoms

Within the universe's first second, it was cool enough for the remaining matter to coalesce into protons and neutrons, the familiar particles that make up atoms' nuclei. And after the first three minutes, the protons and neutrons had assembled into hydrogen and helium nuclei. By mass, hydrogen was 75 percent of the early universe's matter, and helium was 25 percent. The abundance of helium is a key prediction of big bang theory, and it's been confirmed by scientific observations.

Despite having atomic nuclei, the young universe was still too hot for electrons to settle in around them to form stable atoms. The universe's matter remained an electrically charged fog that was so dense, light had a hard time bouncing its way through. It would take another 380,000 years or so for the universe to cool down enough for neutral atoms to form—a pivotal moment called recombination. The cooler universe made it transparent for the first time, which let the photons rattling around within it finally zip through unimpeded.

We still see this primordial afterglow today as cosmic microwave background radiation , which is found throughout the universe. The radiation is similar to that used to transmit TV signals via antennae. But it is the oldest radiation known and may hold many secrets about the universe's earliest moments.

From the first stars to today

There wasn't a single star in the universe until about 180 million years after the big bang. It took that long for gravity to gather clouds of hydrogen and forge them into stars. Many physicists think that vast clouds of dark matter , a still-unknown material that outweighs visible matter by more than five to one, provided a gravitational scaffold for the first galaxies and stars.

Once the universe's first stars ignited , the light they unleashed packed enough punch to once again strip electrons from neutral atoms, a key chapter of the universe called reionization. In February 2018, an Australian team announced that they may have detected signs of this “cosmic dawn.” By 400 million years after the big bang , the first galaxies were born. In the billions of years since, stars, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies have formed and re-formed—eventually yielding our home galaxy, the Milky Way, and our cosmic home, the solar system.

Even now the universe is expanding , and to astronomers' surprise, the pace of expansion is accelerating. It's thought that this acceleration is driven by a force that repels gravity called dark energy . We still don't know what dark energy is, but it’s thought that it makes up 68 percent of the universe's total matter and energy. Dark matter makes up another 27 percent. In essence, all the matter you've ever seen—from your first love to the stars overhead—makes up less than five percent of the universe.

Related Topics

• BIG BANG THEORY
• SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

The 11 most astonishing scientific discoveries of 2023

The universe is expanding faster than it should be

The world's most powerful space telescope has launched at last

A First Glimpse of the Hidden Cosmos

After 30 years, Hubble is still revealing new mysteries of the universe

• Perpetual Planet
• Environment
• History & Culture
• Paid Content

History & Culture

• Photography
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

• Become A Member
• Gift Membership
• Kids Membership
• Other Ways to Give
• Explore Worlds
• Defend Earth

How We Work

• Education & Public Outreach
• Space Policy & Advocacy
• Science & Technology
• Global Collaboration

Our Results

Learn how our members and community are changing the worlds.

Our citizen-funded spacecraft successfully demonstrated solar sailing for CubeSats.

Space Topics

• Planets & Other Worlds
• Space Missions
• Space Policy
• Planetary Radio
• Space Images

The Planetary Report

The eclipse issue.

Science and splendor under the shadow.

Get Involved

Membership programs for explorers of all ages.

Get updates and weekly tools to learn, share, and advocate for space exploration.

Volunteer as a space advocate.

Support Our Mission

• Renew Membership
• Society Projects

The Planetary Fund

Accelerate progress in our three core enterprises — Explore Worlds, Find Life, and Defend Earth. You can support the entire fund, or designate a core enterprise of your choice.

• Strategic Framework
• News & Press

The Planetary Society

Know the cosmos and our place within it.

Our Mission

Empowering the world's citizens to advance space science and exploration.

• Explore Space
• Take Action
• Member Community
• Account Center
• “Exploration is in our nature.” - Carl Sagan

The Planetary Society • Aug 30, 2021

Why space exploration is always worthwhile

Your guide to advocating for space in a complicated world.

Most people who love space and believe in exploration have probably heard this once or twice: “We shouldn’t waste money on space exploration when there are problems to deal with here on Earth.”

While public health concerns, social injustices, climate change, and other urgent issues are important to address, solving these problems doesn’t depend on defunding space programs.

This can be a difficult conversation to navigate, so we’ve outlined a few ideas here that you can share when advocating for space.

Space research isn’t as expensive as people think

Many countries around the world invest in space science and exploration as a balanced part of their total federal budget. Public opinion research has shown that people estimate NASA to take up as much as a quarter of the U.S. federal budget, but in fact,  NASA’s budget only represents about 0.5% of the total federal budget and the proportion is even smaller for other spacefaring nations . The correct information may go a long way to reassuring critics that space spending isn’t eating up as many public resources as they think.

The United States government spent approximately $6.6 trillion in fiscal year 2020, of which just 0.3% ($22.6 billion) was provided to NASA. In this chart, shades of blue represent mandatory spending programs; shades of orange are discretionary programs that require annual appropriations by Congress. "Defense and related" includes both the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs. Source: Office of Management and Budget Historical Tables 8.5 and 8.7.

Space spending pays off

If someone is arguing that public funds should be spent on solving the world’s problems, they should know that money spent on NASA positively impacts the U.S. economy . We get the same kind of payoff for space spending in other countries. Spending on space supports highly skilled jobs, fuels technology advancements with practical applications, and creates business opportunities that feed back into the economy. This in turn grows the pool of public money that can be spent on solving the world’s most pressing problems.

Space research directly impacts Earthly problems

When people apply themselves to the challenges of exploring space, they make discoveries that can help the world in other ways too. Studying how we might grow food in orbit or on Mars yields insights into growing food in extreme conditions on Earth , generating knowledge that can help mitigate the impacts of climate change. Medical research conducted on the International Space Station helps us understand the human body in new ways, helping save lives and improve quality of life .

This content is hosted by a third party (youtube.com), which uses marketing cookies. Please accept marketing cookies to watch this video.

Studying space helps us understand our own world

Studying the cosmos gives us an important perspective shift. When we learn about what lies beyond Earth, it gives us context for understanding our own planet. Studying the other worlds of our solar system and beyond makes it clear that Earth is a precious oasis for life. When we sent spacecraft to Venus we saw how a runaway greenhouse effect turned the world from a habitable planet to an absolute hellscape. When astronauts travel into space they see just how thin and tenuous Earth’s atmosphere is, appreciating the fragile balance in which we live . A cosmic perspective underscores the importance of protecting our planet’s habitability and encourages investment in that effort.

Studying space may one day save us all

All the social and environmental progress in the world won't help us if an asteroid impacts the Earth. We have to explore space to find and study the asteroids and comets in our cosmic neighborhood if we want to make sure we can  defend our planet  if an object ever heads our way.

Space is inspiring

Not every child who dreams of becoming an astronaut will get that opportunity. This is a sad truth that many of us know from experience. But to be inspired to aim for something so grand gives kids the motivation to study hard and gain skills in science, engineering, medicine, or other fields that benefit humanity and directly help overcome problems that we face as a species.

And inspiration isn’t just for kids. When we marvel at the beauty of Jupiter’s clouds or the mystery of Enceladus’ oceans , we get an opportunity to appreciate the wonder and majesty of this cosmos that we inhabit. The idea that life might exist elsewhere in the universe reminds us that we might not be the only planet struggling to achieve balance, justice, and sustainability. And even in the bleakest of times, there’s something beautiful about still striving to achieve something great and discover something that could change how we see ourselves and our cosmos forever.

There’s plenty of room at the table

There’s no denying that there are many important issues facing humanity that need fixing. But to deal with those problems doesn’t mean we have to stop looking up, stop exploring, and stop making discoveries.

Human civilization has astonishing capacity, and we can do more than one important thing at a time. If someone thinks that a particular issue should get more attention and investment, they can and should advocate for that. The problems we face don’t persist because we’re spending money on space science and exploration. And there’s no reason to pit our aspirations against one another.

Let’s Go Beyond The Horizon

Every success in space exploration is the result of the community of space enthusiasts, like you, who believe it is important. You can help usher in the next great era of space exploration with your gift today.

For full functionality of this site it is necessary to enable JavaScript. Here are instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your web browser .

March 7, 2017

The Most Important Idea about the Universe

It's "convergence"—the fact that seemingly disparate areas of science are fundamentally linked

By Peter Watson

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

Archimedes, Pythagoras, Democritus. The history of science famously dates back to the brilliant minds of classical Greece. Another beginning is attributed to the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century, culminating in Isaac Newton’s discovery of order in the heavens, and the founding of the Royal Society in London.

For me, however, there was a much more fascinating reboot in the 1850s, when two near-simultaneous events changed the landscape for all time and transformed our understanding of what science is . These events were: (1) the new understanding of energy and its conservation; (2) Charles Darwin’s idea about evolution by natural selection.

These breakthroughs, arriving in the same decade, were important not just for themselves, but also because each brought together what had hitherto been seen as disparate disciplines. These were the two greatest unifying ideas of all time and this was when the process of convergence was first observed.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The conservation of energy, first codified by Hermann von Helmholtz in Berlin, brought together the sciences of heat, optics, magnetism, electricity, food- and blood-chemistry. It identified the concept of “energy,” an entity which cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another.

With evolution, Darwin collected copious results from zoology, botany, geology and astronomy to show that there was an “order in the rocks”, that living forms varied across the geological ages in systematic ways and that the heavens were themselves evolving, providing ample time for natural selection to have produced its effects.

The importance of these two insights was the way they brought seemingly different activities under the same umbrella. This was doubly important because it showed that the sciences, unlike other forms of knowledge (and this is the crucial point), support one another in a reciprocal framework.

Since then the convergence has gathered pace: Niels Bohr’s discoveries showed how physics and chemistry are intimately linked (through the electrons that orbit the nucleus, which give the different elements their properties; Albert Einstein famously linked space and time, to create spacetime; and Max Planck’s discovery of the quantum, that matter is itself discrete and not continuous, linked up with Mendel’s discovery that genes produce discrete effects—blue eyes or brown, but never blends. During World War II Erwin Schrödinger showed how physics governed the characteristics of the gene. Since the war astronomy and physics have been married. “Early cosmology has become synonymous with particle physics”—this is Abdus Salam, the Indian winner of the Nobel Prize in his Dirac lecture in Cambridge, UK, in 1988.

More recently various aspects of biology—photosynthesis and the remarkable ability of birds to navigate huge distances—have been shown to be explicable by quantum physics. And psychology has been amalgamating with economics. Richard Thaler has described how the economic profession has been transformed by the experimental discoveries of behavioral science. In his 2015 book, Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics , he charts its advances over a forty-year period, from the wilderness to the point where he himself became (in 2015) the president of the American Economic Association.

Convergence is not a trivial matter. Steven Weinberg, the Nobel Prize-winning professor of physics at the University of Texas, Austin, says it may be “the most important thing about the universe.”

I agree. The way the disciplines have come together, in a reciprocal framework, has produced the greatest story there could ever be—the history of the universe 13.8 billion years ago right up until now, with all discoveries fitting on one coherent line.

This unique success means, I feel sure, that the sciences are set to invade other areas of life not traditionally associated with science: law, the arts, politics, morality, social life. Sam Harris, the American philosopher and neuroscientist, has described morality as “an undeveloped aspect of science” and believes we shall eventually be able to define “human values” satisfactorily. Patricia Churchland, the Canadian-American neuroscientist, argues that our understanding of “human nature” can be refined by neuroscience, to the benefit of all.

The latest developments are aided by the recent accumulation of big data sets and our snowballing abilities in computation. For example, mathematicians, physicists and psychologists have all examined aspects of capitalism. If there is an overriding focus it is what Science magazine, in a special issue, called “The Science of Inequality.” This stems from the realisation that under capitalism, except for a few decades following the two world wars in the twentieth century, when many industrial states were on their knees financially, the basic economic order has been a growing wealth disparity within populations.

This finding—which applies to many countries—appears solid and has emerged from a wave of big data, tax returns for the past two centuries . This richness means that, as Science put it, the “stuff of science” can be applied to it—analysis, extracting causal inferences, formulating hypotheses.

In other words, the methods of science, which have proved so successful—observation, quantification, experimental testing—are being increasingly applied in new areas. By the same token, the personality of jurors is being investigated to see how psychology influences their understanding of evidence and the bringing of verdicts. In political research, psychology—again—is being used to assess which voters vote for a candidate and which vote against , and which aspects of a candidate’s personality appeal to which type of voter. How much do politics and psychology overlap?

These are exciting but challenging times. As Robert Laughlin, the Nobel Prize-winning professor of physics at Stanford, has pointed out, all areas of life—economics no less than psychology or quantum biology—are getting more accurate and therefore more predictive. The speed of light in a vacuum is now known to an accuracy of better than one part in ten trillion, atomic clocks are accurate to one part in one hundred trillion.

If science can likewise improve accuracy in our legal, educational or financial lives, we shall be making real progress. The very existence of convergence—which lies at the heart of the scientific endeavor when we examine its history—should give us optimism for the future.

Using Stars to Understand Our Universe

The Henry Lin speeches break down the fascinations about the galaxy and how we can learn about the...

Get inspired by 4,000+ keynote speaker videos & our founder, a top keynote speaker on innovation .

Henry Lin Gives an Insightful Speech on the Galaxy

What is an Exoplanet?

What is the universe, the universe is everything. it includes all of space, and all the matter and energy that space contains. it even includes time itself and, of course, it includes you..

Earth and the Moon are part of the universe, as are the other planets and their many dozens of moons. Along with asteroids and comets, the planets orbit the Sun. The Sun is one among hundreds of billions of stars in the Milky Way galaxy, and most of those stars have their own planets, known as exoplanets.

The Milky Way is but one of billions of galaxies in the observable universe — all of them, including our own, are thought to have supermassive black holes at their centers. All the stars in all the galaxies and all the other stuff that astronomers can’t even observe are all part of the universe. It is, simply, everything.

Though the universe may seem a strange place, it is not a distant one. Wherever you are right now, outer space is only 62 miles (100 kilometers) away. Day or night, whether you’re indoors or outdoors, asleep, eating lunch or dozing off in class, outer space is just a few dozen miles above your head. It’s below you too. About 8,000 miles (12,800 kilometers) below your feet — on the opposite side of Earth — lurks the unforgiving vacuum and radiation of outer space.

In fact, you’re technically in space right now. Humans say “out in space” as if it’s there and we’re here, as if Earth is separate from the rest of the universe. But Earth is a planet, and it’s in space and part of the universe just like the other planets. It just so happens that things live here and the environment near the surface of this particular planet is hospitable for life as we know it. Earth is a tiny, fragile exception in the cosmos. For humans and the other things living on our planet, practically the entire cosmos is a hostile and merciless environment.

How old is Earth?

Our planet, Earth, is an oasis not only in space, but in time. It may feel permanent, but the entire planet is a fleeting thing in the lifespan of the universe. For nearly two-thirds of the time since the universe began, Earth did not even exist. Nor will it last forever in its current state. Several billion years from now, the Sun will expand, swallowing Mercury and Venus, and filling Earth’s sky. It might even expand large enough to swallow Earth itself. It’s difficult to be certain. After all, humans have only just begun deciphering the cosmos.

While the distant future is difficult to accurately predict, the distant past is slightly less so. By studying the radioactive decay of isotopes on Earth and in asteroids, scientists have learned that our planet and the solar system formed around 4.6 billion years ago.

How old is the universe?

The universe, on the other hand, appears to be about 13.8 billion years old. Scientists arrived at that number by measuring the ages of the oldest stars and the rate at which the universe expands. They also measured the expansion by observing the Doppler shift in light from galaxies, almost all of which are traveling away from us and from each other. The farther the galaxies are, the faster they’re traveling away. One might expect gravity to slow the galaxies’ motion from one another, but instead they’re speeding up and scientists don’t know why. In the distant future, the galaxies will be so far away that their light will not be visible from Earth.

Put another way, the matter, energy and everything in the universe (including space itself) was more compact last Saturday than it is today.

Put another way, the matter, energy and everything in the universe (including space itself) was more compact last Saturday than it is today. The same can be said about any time in the past — last year, a million years ago, a billion years ago. But the past doesn’t go on forever.

By measuring the speed of galaxies and their distances from us, scientists have found that if we could go back far enough, before galaxies formed or stars began fusing hydrogen into helium, things were so close together and hot that atoms couldn’t form and photons had nowhere to go. A bit farther back in time, everything was in the same spot. Or really the entire universe (not just the matter in it) was one spot.

Don't spend too much time considering a mission to visit the spot where the universe was born, though, as a person cannot visit the place where the Big Bang happened. It's not that the universe was a dark, empty space and an explosion happened in it from which all matter sprang forth. The universe didn’t exist. Space didn’t exist. Time is part of the universe and so it didn’t exist. Time, too, began with the big bang. Space itself expanded from a single point to the enormous cosmos as the universe expanded over time.

What is the universe made of?

The universe contains all the energy and matter there is. Much of the observable matter in the universe takes the form of individual atoms of hydrogen, which is the simplest atomic element, made of only a proton and an electron (if the atom also contains a neutron, it is instead called deuterium). Two or more atoms sharing electrons is a molecule. Many trillions of atoms together is a dust particle. Smoosh a few tons of carbon, silica, oxygen, ice, and some metals together, and you have an asteroid. Or collect 333,000 Earth masses of hydrogen and helium together, and you have a Sun-like star.

For the sake of practicality, humans categorize clumps of matter based on their attributes. Galaxies, star clusters, planets, dwarf planets, rogue planets, moons, rings, ringlets, comets, meteorites, raccoons — they’re all collections of matter exhibiting characteristics different from one another but obeying the same natural laws.

Related news

Scientists have begun tallying those clumps of matter and the resulting numbers are pretty wild. Our home galaxy, the Milky Way, contains at least 100 billion stars, and the observable universe contains at least 100 billion galaxies. If galaxies were all the same size, that would give us 10 thousand billion billion (or 10 sextillion) stars in the observable universe.

But the universe also seems to contain a bunch of matter and energy that we can’t see or directly observe. All the stars, planets, comets, sea otters, black holes and dung beetles together represent less than 5 percent of the stuff in the universe. About 27 percent of the remainder is dark matter, and 68 percent is dark energy, neither of which are even remotely understood. The universe as we understand it wouldn’t work if dark matter and dark energy didn’t exist, and they’re labeled “dark” because scientists can’t seem to directly observe them. At least not yet.

How has our view of the universe changed over time?

Human understanding of what the universe is, how it works and how vast it is has changed over the ages. For countless lifetimes, humans had little or no means of understanding the universe. Our distant ancestors instead relied upon myth to explain the origins of everything. Because our ancestors themselves invented them, the myths reflect human concerns, hopes, aspirations or fears rather than the nature of reality.

Several centuries ago, however, humans began to apply mathematics, writing and new investigative principles to the search for knowledge. Those principles were refined over time, as were scientific tools, eventually revealing hints about the nature of the universe. Only a few hundred years ago, when people began systematically investigating the nature of things, the word “scientist” didn’t even exist (researchers were instead called “natural philosophers” for a time). Since then, our knowledge of the universe has repeatedly leapt forward. It was only about a century ago that astronomers first observed galaxies beyond our own, and only a half-century has passed since humans first began sending spacecraft to other worlds.

In the span of a single human lifetime, space probes have voyaged to the outer solar system and sent back the first up-close images of the four giant outermost planets and their countless moons; rovers wheeled along the surface on Mars for the first time; humans constructed a permanently crewed, Earth-orbiting space station; and the first large space telescopes delivered jaw-dropping views of more distant parts of the cosmos than ever before. In the early 21st century alone, astronomers discovered thousands of planets around other stars, detected gravitational waves for the first time and produced the first image of a black hole.

With ever-advancing technology and knowledge, and no shortage of imagination, humans continue to lay bare the secrets of the cosmos. New insights and inspired notions aid in this pursuit, and also spring from it. We have yet to send a space probe to even the nearest of the billions upon billions of other stars in the galaxy. Humans haven’t even explored all the worlds in our own solar system. In short, most of the universe that can be known remains unknown .

The universe is nearly 14 billion years old, our solar system is 4.6 billion years old, life on Earth has existed for maybe 3.8 billion years, and humans have been around for only a few hundred thousand years. In other words, the universe has existed roughly 56,000 times longer than our species has. By that measure, almost everything that’s ever happened did so before humans existed. So of course we have loads of questions — in a cosmic sense, we just got here.

• 'All these worlds are yours'

Our first few decades of exploring our own solar system are merely a beginning. From here, just one human lifetime from now, our understanding of the universe and our place in it will have undoubtedly grown and evolved in ways we can today only imagine.

Next: The Search for Life: Are We Alone?

Exoplanet News

Explore Alien Worlds

Exoplanet Travel Bureau

Strange New Worlds

Historic Timeline

Speech on Astronomy for Students

With the ambitious plans of space pioneers such as Elon Musk, the frontiers of space are making headlines again. SpaceX has captured our imaginations and the hope of putting a man on Mars could be achieved in many of our lifetimes. This brings the subject of astronomy into our thoughts. Without knowledge of astronomy dreams of space travel would be irrelevant.

Astronomy, it has been said, is the oldest and the noblest of the sciences. However, it is one of the few sciences for which most present-day educators seem to find hardly if any, a room in their curriculum of study for the young, in spite of its high educational and important value.

It is, we are told, too abstract a subject for the youthful student without much relevance in gaining everyday life skills. This is perhaps true of theoretical or mathematical astronomy and the practical astronomy of the navigator, surveyor and engineer, but it is not true of general, descriptive astronomy. There are many different aspects of this vast science, and some of the simplest and greatest truths of astronomy can be grasped by the interested child of any age, and as we grow more information can be absorbed.

img source: esa.int

Knowledge of the sun, moon, stars and planets, their motions and their physical features, is an interesting and important education as they are as truly a part of nature as are the birds, trees and flowers, and the man, woman or child who lives beneath the star-lit heavens.

The beauties of the universe of which we are a part if ignored are like the experience of one who walks through fields or forests with no thought of the beauties of nature that surrounds them.

It can be a simple matter simple task to become acquainted with the various groups of stars as they cross our meridian (south or north), one by one, day after day and month after month in the same routine.

When the sparrow returns once more to nest in the same woods in the springtime, Leo and Virgo may be seen rising above the eastern horizon in the early evening hours. When the ponds freeze in the late autumn and the birds have gone southward the belt of Orion appears in the east and Cygnus dips low in the west. When we once come to know brilliant blue-white Vega, ruddy Arcturus, golden Capella and sparkling Sirius we watch for them to return each in its proper season and welcome them like revisiting acquaintances.

Stars of the Zodiac – Astronomy for Students

We may start studying the constellations or groups of stars at any month in the year and we will find the constellations given for that month on or near the meridian at the time indicated.

We should consider for a moment the constellations are all continually shifting westward as the stars and the moon and the planets as well as the sunrise daily in the east and set in the west. This is due to the fact that the earth is turning in the opposite direction on its axis.

In twenty-four hours the earth turns completely around with respect to the heavens or through an angle of 360°.

During the course of one year, the earth makes one trip around the sun and faces in turn all parts of the heavens. That is, it turns through an angle of 360° with respect to the heavens in a year or through an angle of 360° ÷ 12 or 30° in one month.

As a pathway of our revolution around the sun, which is also in a west to east direction, we see that all the constellations are gradually shifting westward at the rate of 30° a month. It is for this reason that we see different constellations in different months. The turning of the earth on its axis means we see different constellations at different hours of the night.

The apparent journey of the sun among the stars is called the ecliptic. the belt of the heavens eight degrees wide on either side of the ecliptic is called the zodiac. The constellations that lie within this belt of the zodiac are called zodiacal constellations. The zodiac was divided by the astronomer Hipparchus, who lived 161-126 B.C., into twelve signs 30° wide, and the signs were named for the constellations lying at that time within each of these divisions.

img source: freevector.com

Zodiacal constellations are Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius and Pisces. With the exception of Libra, the Scales, all of these constellations are named for people or animals and the word zodiac is derived from the Greek word meaning “of animals.”

Our sun is but a star-traveling through the universe. It is accompanied in its journey to unknown parts of space, that lies in the general direction of the constellation Hercules, by an extensive family of minor bodies consisting of the eight planets and their encircling moons, one thousand or more asteroids, numerous comets, and meteors without number, all moving in prescribed paths around their king: the sun.

The most important members of the sun’s family are the planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune, named in the order of their position outward from the sun.

The gravitational control of the sun extends far beyond the orbit of Neptune and there are reasons for believing in the existence of at least one or two additional planets on the outskirts of the solar system. however, there are thought to be a billion, billion planets in the universe.

Related Posts

The Genius of Nikola Tesla: An In-Depth Look at His Life and Inventions

Speech on Science

Speech on Importance of Planting Trees

About the author.

FindaSpeech

• Research and Innovation
• The Abstract
• Audio Abstract Podcast
• Centennial Campus
• Campus Life
• Faculty and Staff
• Awards and Honors
• HR and Finance
• Resilient Pack
• We Are the Wolfpack
• Service and Community
• Red Chair Chats
• News Releases
• In the News
• NC State Experts on 2022 Elections
• NC State Experts Available on Climate
• NC State Experts on Roe v. Wade
• NC State Supply Chain Experts
• Experts on COVID-19
• Hurricane Experts
• About NC State News
• Faculty Support
• Training Program

Why Figuring Out How Potassium Is Destroyed in Stars Is Important to Understanding the Universe

The following is a guest post by Will Fox, a postdoctoral research scholar in physics at NC State.

If you want to know where elements come from, look to the stars. Almost every element heavier than helium is formed through nuclear reactions in stars. But which stellar processes are responsible for these elements? Can we find patterns in how much of each element we observe in different astrophysical environments, like stars, galaxies or globular clusters?

Recently, our team of NC State researchers focused on the process of potassium (K) destruction in globular clusters, looking at one cluster in particular: NGC 2419.

Globular clusters are groups of gravitationally bound stars. Astronomers have observed clear patterns in the relative amounts of different elements from star to star. One such pattern is between oxygen and sodium: stars within globular clusters that have more sodium have less oxygen, and vice-versa. This is known as the sodium-oxygen (Na-O) anticorrelation. Several other anticorrelations have also been discovered, which indicates that unique (sometimes unknown) processes occur in specific globular clusters.

In 2012, the first magnesium-potassium (Mg-K) anticorrelation was discovered in a specific globular cluster, called NGC 2419. An overall surplus of potassium was linked to reactions from hydrogen burning at temperatures between 80 and 260 million kelvin.

But the puzzling thing is that the stars in the cluster that showed the anticorrelation are relatively young, red giant stars. The cores of these stars should not be hot enough for nuclear reactions to alter the amount of Mg and K. The leading theory involved mixing with K and Mg from old stars in the cluster, but what has remained uncertain is the speed of the potassium-destroying reaction.

So our team attempted to recreate the potassium-destroying reaction by performing an experiment on a similar nuclear reaction (39K + 3He —> 40Ca + d), at the Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory (TUNL). But don’t let all the letters and numbers confuse you – I’ll explain.

This reaction is a proton-transfer reaction, where a proton from helium-3 (3He) is transferred to potassium-39 (39K), forming calcium-40 (40Ca). This experimental reaction allows us to imitate the real reaction that occurs in a star where potassium is destroyed.

We found that not only can potassium be destroyed at lower temperatures, it is destroyed 13 times faster than previously thought at these temperatures.

The finding could change the way we model element creation in stars – not just for this specific case of NGC 2419, but also for other astrophysical models that include reactions on potassium.

You can read the paper here: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.062701 . Alternatively, the free preprint version is available at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.06754 .

• Bulletin Board
• astrophysics
• college of sciences
• the abstract

More From NC State News

David MacMillan, Nobel Prize Winner in Chemistry, Will Address Spring 2024 Graduates 

NC State Researchers Predict Active Hurricane Season 

Wolfpack Wellness Awards Celebrate NC State Wellness Initiatives 

Speech on Importance Of Technology

Imagine living in a world without technology. Hard to picture, isn’t it? Technology touches every part of your life, making it easier, faster, and more enjoyable.

Its importance cannot be overstated. From smartphones to space rovers, it shapes your today and builds your tomorrow. With technology, the impossible becomes possible.

1-minute Speech on Importance Of Technology

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Technology is like the magic wand of our times. It’s not just about shiny new phones or fast cars. It is a tool that is making our lives easier, better, and a lot more exciting.

Think about a day in your life. You wake up to the sound of an alarm, that’s technology. You step into a warm shower, thank technology for that. You call a friend living miles away, it’s all because of technology. It’s everywhere, touching every part of our lives.

Now, let’s talk about learning and knowledge. Thanks to technology, we can learn about anything, from anywhere, at any time. Imagine you are curious about the stars in the sky. With technology, you can explore the universe sitting right in your home. It is making education fun, engaging, and limitless.

What about health? Technology is helping doctors cure diseases that were once thought impossible to treat. It’s giving hope to the ill and making the world a healthier place.

And let’s not forget how technology is bringing us closer. Earlier, if a loved one lived far away, we could only write letters and wait for a reply. Now, with a single click, we can see and talk to them as if they are right in front of us. That’s the power of technology.

Sure, like everything, technology has its challenges. It’s up to us to use it wisely, for the good of all. Remember, technology is not just a tool, it’s a gift. It’s our guide to a brighter and better future.

Also check:

• Essay on Importance Of Technology

2-minute Speech on Importance Of Technology

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls,

Let’s talk about technology today. Why is technology so important? It’s like asking why we need air to breathe. Technology is everywhere around us and it affects our lives in many ways.

Imagine waking up in the morning. What’s the first thing you do? Many of us check our phones. Our day starts with technology and ends with it. It’s not just about phones and computers. Even simple things like a toaster, a washing machine, or a lightbulb – all are examples of technology.

Now think about a world without technology. No phones, no computers, no cars, no electricity. We would have to walk miles to reach school or work. We couldn’t talk to our friends who live far away. We wouldn’t be able to learn new things from the internet. Life would be very hard, wouldn’t it?

This is why we need technology. It makes our lives easier. It saves us time. It helps us do things we couldn’t do before. It connects us with people all over the world. It helps us learn new things. It makes our world a smaller and better place.

But technology is not just about making life easier. It’s also about solving big problems. Think about doctors. They use technology to cure diseases, to heal the sick. Farmers use technology to grow more food. Scientists use technology to understand the world around us.

And what about the future? Technology will play an even bigger role. It will help us fight climate change. It will help us explore space. It will help us live longer and healthier lives. The possibilities are endless.

But it’s not enough just to use technology. We must also understand it. We must learn how to use it wisely. We must make sure it doesn’t harm us or our planet.

So, let’s embrace technology. Let’s learn about it. Let’s use it to make our lives better and to make the world a better place. Because without technology, we wouldn’t be where we are today. And with technology, who knows where we can go tomorrow?

• Speech on Importance Of Speech In Our Life
• Speech on Importance Of Self Study
• Speech on Importance Of Science

We also have speeches on more interesting topics that you may want to explore.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Pro-Palestinian Valedictorian Enraged After Her Speech Is Cancelled - 'The University Has Betrayed Me'

F aculty and administrators have no one but themselves to blame. After all, they have spent decades cultivating their undergraduates' misplaced sense of self-importance. At the same time, they have taught those undergraduates to sort the human race into oppressors and victims, so it should surprise no one when the most accomplished of their graduating students think of themselves as persecuted saviors.

On Monday, officials at the University of Southern California announced that valedictorian Asna Tabassum, a 21-year-old biomedical engineering major and a pro-Palestinian activist, would not deliver the traditional valedictory address at the 2024 graduation ceremony due to safety concerns, according to the Los Angeles Times .

"The university has betrayed me and caved into a campaign of hatred," Tabassum said.

USC announced that valedictorian Asna Tabassum’s commencement speech has been canceled, stating it was “necessary to maintain the safety of our campus and students”

‘I am surprised that my own university has abandoned me,’ Tabassum said in a statement https://t.co/YE4LxVZ9UE pic.twitter.com/SSNw83Ppya

— philip lewis (@Phil_Lewis_) April 16, 2024

That alleged "campaign of hatred" stemmed from objections to her social media activity.

For instance, Tabassum's Instagram page featured a link to a website that called for the eradication of Israel .

"One Palestinian state would mean Palestinian liberation, and the complete abolishment of the state of Israel," the website read, adding that in this Israel-free world "both Arabs and Jews can live together."

Ella Echo, Vice President of USC's Trojans for Israel student group, identified that passage as particularly objectionable.

"Because explicitly in her bio, she states that she calls for the abolishment of the state of Israel, which is complete anti-Semitic, and that makes us Jewish students at USC feel unsafe, unheard, and targeted," Echo said, according to KABC-TV .

Meanwhile, Andrew T. Guzman, USC's provost and senior vice president for academic affairs, described the cancellation of Tabassum's valedictory speech as a matter of safety.

"The intensity of feelings, fueled by both social media and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, has grown to include many voices outside of USC and has escalated to the point of creating substantial risks relating to security and disruption at commencement," Guzman wrote in a statement.

The provost did not indicate threats specific to USC, instead citing "harassment and even violence at other campuses ."

All things considered, Tabassum had good reasons to feel betrayed -- though perhaps not the reasons she would think.

"I stand by exactly what I stand by. It is the very values and the very lessons USC taught me that I stand by," she said.

Among other things, USC apparently taught her to overrate her own importance and basic goodness.

She told the Times, for instance, that she intended to talk about "how we must continue to use our education as a privilege to inform ourselves and ultimately make a change in the world."

Universities do indeed teach students that they can "make a change in the world." Yet Satan's earthly dominion remains as it always has: a playground for passions, such as self-righteous anger and pride -- passions to which young people have always shown a peculiar susceptibility.

Whatever she might think, neither Tabassum nor her fellow activists have the ability to change the world for the better. Their own self-righteous anger and pride makes that impossible, as it does for all of us sinners.

Likewise, universities teach young people to divide human beings into groups, marking some as oppressors and others as victims. Since group identities (and thus oppressor/victim statuses) depend not on individual behavior but on physical characteristics, the most privileged people in the world may pose as persecuted if they belong to the right group.

Tabassum appears to have learned this well during her time at USC.

"I’m not ignorant of who I am or what I believe in and the time we are in or the place we are in," she said, referring to her identity as a young, female, hijab-wearing Muslim . “I am not ignorant of the context or environment, at the end of the day."

In a perfect world, of course, Tabassum could give her speech, and then all would treat it for the simple thing it was: a series of remarks by a 21-year-old who achieved good grades.

But Tabassum believes that she can change the world and that university officials will not allow it because of bigotry.

Her final lesson at USC, therefore, will be the most important of all. In short, what she and others say or do on a campus in southern California makes little difference. The world will not change for the better.

• International

April 14, 2024 - Iran's attack on Israel

By Jerome Taylor, Heather Chen , James Legge, Sophie Tanno, Emma Tucker , Kaanita Iyer , Paul LeBlanc , Catherine Nicholls, Maureen Chowdhury , Antoinette Radford and Eve Rothenberg, CNN

Our live coverage of Iran's attack on Israel has moved  here .

India calls on Iran to release 17 Indian crew members on board seized container ship 

From CNN's Sandi Sidhu in Hong Kong 

India has called on Iran to release 17 Indian crew members on board a container ship seized by Iran on Saturday. 

Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said that he spoke to his Iranian counterpart Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian and "took up the release of 17 Indian crew members of MSC Aries."

Four Filipino seamen were also on board the ship, according to the Philippine Department of Migrant Workers.

The department said it was working with its government, the ship owner, and the operator to release the captured seafarers.

On Saturday, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards seized an Israeli-linked container ship in a helicopter operation near the Strait of Hormuz, state news agency IRNA reported. 

Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) said there were 25 crew members on board.

Japanese prime minister condemns Iran's attack on Israel

From CNN's Junko Ogura in Tokyo 

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Sunday said he "strongly condemns" Iran's missile and drone attack on Israel.

"(The attack) further aggravates the current situation in the Middle East. We are deeply concerned and strongly condemn such an escalation," Kishida told reporters.

Kishida said Japan would continue diplomatic efforts to "prevent the situation from worsening and to calm the situation down," and "respond in cooperation with other countries."

Blinken calls British and German counterparts following Iran's attack on Israel

From CNN's Philip Wang 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with his counterparts from the United Kingdom and Germany on Sunday following Iran's attack on Israel, according to readouts from the State Department. 

All parties agreed "the importance of condemning Iran's attack in the strongest possible terms and preventing further escalation," the readout said. 

Blinken earlier held phone calls with his counterparts from Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia , in which he emphasized the importance of avoiding escalation in the Middle East and of "a coordinated diplomatic response."

US forces destroyed more than 80 attack drones from Iran and Yemen, Central Command says

From CNN's Philip Wang

US forces intercepted more than 80 one-way attack drones and at least six ballistic missiles from Iran and Yemen during its attack on Israel, according to a statement from the Central Command.

The operation included destroying a ballistic missile on its launcher vehicle and seven drones on the ground in Iranian-backed Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen, CENTCOM said. 

"Iran's continued unprecedented, malign, and reckless behavior endangers regional stability and the safety of U.S. and coalition forces," the statement added. 

Israeli and Iranian ambassadors trade accusations during UN Security Council session

From Abel Alvarado in Atlanta

Israel and Iran’s United Nations ambassadors condemned each other’s actions during Sunday’s UN Security Council emergency session called to address Iran’s attack on Israel.

Israel’s UN ambassador Gilad Erdan said Iran "must be stopped before it drives the world to a point of no return, to a regional war that can escalate to a world war." Erdan accused Iran of seeking world domination and that its attack proved that Tehran "cares nothing, nothing for Islam or Muslims" before pulling out a tablet to show a video of Israel intercepting Iranian drones above Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Erdan called on the UN Security Council to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terror organization.

“Action must be taken now, not for Israel's sake, not for the region's sake, but for the world's sake. Stop Iran today."

Iran’s UN Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani said his country’s operation was "entirely in the exercise of Iran’s inherent right to self-defense, as outlined in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations and recognized by international law."

Iravani said:

"This concluded action was necessary and proportionate," adding that the operation was “precise and only targeted military objectives” to reduce the potential of escalation and to prevent civilian harm. “Iran is never seeking to contribute to the spillover of the conflict in the region, nor does it to escalate or spread the tension to the entire region," he said.

Tehran’s attack had been anticipated since  a suspected Israeli strike  on an Iranian diplomatic complex in Syria earlier this month.

Iravani added Iran has “no intention of engaging in conflict with the US in the region” but warned Iran will use its “inherent right to respond proportionately” should the US initiate a military operation against “Iran, its citizens or its security.”

Israeli war cabinet says it's ready to respond to Iran's attack but delays immediate action. Here's the latest

From CNN staff

The hours-long Israeli war cabinet meeting ended Sunday night without a decision on how Israel will respond to Iran’s missile and drone attack , an Israeli official said.

The cabinet is determined to respond — but has yet to decide on the timing and scope and the official said the military has been tasked with coming up with additional options for a response.

Separately, a senior Biden administration official told reporters that an Israeli official told the United States that it's not looking to significantly escalate the showdown with Iran.

CNN analyst Barak Ravid said Israeli ministers Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot advocated for swift action, but US President Joe Biden's phone call with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu led to a decision to delay the response until the next day. 

Here are the latest headlines:

• Retaliation is over, Iran told US: Iran privately messaged the United States that its retaliation against Israel had concluded, echoing what Tehran said publicly, according to a senior administration official. Late Saturday, Iran said its attack on Israel is a response to Israel's strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, and "the matter can be deemed concluded." However, President Ebrahim Raisi said any “new aggression against the interests of the Iranian nation will be met with a heavier and regrettable response,” according to Iran’s state news channel IRIB. 
• United Nations response: UN Secretary-General António Guterres  called for a de-escalation of violence after Iran’s attack. Guterres said the United Nations and member countries have a “shared responsibility” to engage “all parties concerned to prevent further escalation.” He also called for a ceasefire in the Israel-Gaza conflict. “Neither the region nor the world can afford more war,” he said.
• G7 and others: Amid a flurry of diplomatic activity in response to Iran's attack, the G7 nations said they would work together to "stabilize the situation" in the Middle East, according to a statement from Biden. Also, Jordan summoned Iran's ambassador in Amman on Sunday after it intercepted Iranian drones over the country.
• Meanwhile in Gaza: As thousands of Palestinians were turned away from returning to their homes in northern Gaza on Sunday, a 5-year-old girl was shot in the head by Israeli soldiers, her mother said. Video showed a man carrying a 5-year-old girl named Sally Abu Laila, who was bleeding from her head, with people crowding around her in panic trying to cover her wound.

Also on Sunday:

• Israel decided to lift its restrictions on large gatherings and to reopen schools on Monday.
• The US Department of Homeland Security has not identified any “specific or credible threats” to the US since Iran attacked Israel.

Blinken calls Turkish, Egyptian, Jordanian and Saudi counterparts following Iran's attack 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Sunday spoke with his counterparts in Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia following Iran's attacks in Israel, according to readouts from the State Department. 

During his phone calls, Blinken emphasized the importance of avoiding escalation in the region and the importance of "a coordinated diplomatic response."

In his conversation with Jordan and Egypt, Blinken also underlined the significance of achieving an "enduring end to the crisis in Gaza."

Iran will be held responsible if any action is taken against the US or Israel, deputy ambassador warns

From CNN’s Abel Alvarado

The United States warned Iran against taking any action against the US or Israel during the UN Security Council emergency session over Iran’s attack on Israel.

“Let me be clear, if Iran or its proxies take actions against the US or further action against Israel, Iran will be held responsible,” US Deputy Ambassador to the UN Robert Wood said Sunday.

The United States is “not seeking escalation, our actions have been purely defensive in nature,” adding that the “best way to prevent such escalation is an unambiguous condemnation of the council of Iran’s unprecedented large-scale attack,” he said.

The envoy reiterated US support for Israel and condemned Iran’s attack. “Iran’s intent was to cause significant damage and death in Israel,” Wood said.

Wood also said the UN Security Council had an “obligation to not let Iran’s actions go unanswered.”

“For far too long, Iran has flagrantly violated its international legal obligations,” he said before listing occasions Iran has violated UN Security Council resolutions and international law.

Wood accused Iran of being in a “broad sense complicit” of the October 7 attack on Israel by providing “significant funding and training for the military wing of Hamas.”

He added the US will explore "additional measures to hold Iran accountable here in the UN.”

Please enable JavaScript for a better experience.

I would like to thank the Peterson Institute, and its President, Adam Posen, for giving me the opportunity today to share some thoughts about a topic of vital importance to U.S. financial stability – the orderly resolution of Global Systemically Important Banks – or GSIBs as they are called.

Prior to the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, it was generally assumed in the United States and in other major jurisdictions of the world that GSIBs were unlikely to fail.  The diversified business models of these firms combined with their diversified geographical operations supported the perception that there was little need to devote regulatory attention or resources to their potential failure.

The massive public support provided to these institutions in the United States and elsewhere to prevent their failure during the 2008 crisis shattered that perception. They could indeed fail. As a result, in the United States, Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act, enacted in 2010, provided the FDIC with dramatically expanded authorities to manage the orderly failure of a U.S. GSIB, or for that matter any financial company whose failure was deemed to pose a risk to U.S. financial stability.  Similar authorities were provided to financial regulators in other major jurisdictions of the world.

Since that time, the FDIC has been working diligently to develop the capability to use the expanded authorities provided for GSIB resolution under the Dodd-Frank Act.  Today the FDIC is releasing a paper – Overview of Resolution Under Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act – which describes the progress we have made and provides the most comprehensive explanation to date of how the FDIC expects to utilize those authorities. 

I would like to use the opportunity of this speech to explain at a high level the contents of the paper.  We believe it is of critical importance to the success of our efforts that the financial markets, policymakers, and the public have the clearest explanation possible of how the FDIC expects to manage the orderly resolution of a GSIB.  That is the goal of the paper and my comments today.

As I indicated, the ability of the FDIC and other U.S. regulatory authorities to manage the orderly resolution of large complex financial institutions remains foundational to U.S. financial stability.  While recognizing the progress that has been made toward enabling such a resolution, we also recognize that the resolution of a GSIB has not yet been undertaken.  When it becomes necessary to do so, carrying out such a resolution will come with a unique set of challenges and risks.  However, an orderly resolution is far more preferable to the alternatives, particularly the alternative of resorting to taxpayer support to prop-up a failed institution or to bail-out investors and creditors. 

With this paper the FDIC is reaffirming that, should the need arise, we are prepared to apply the resolution framework that the FDIC and other regulatory authorities in the U.S. and globally have worked so hard to develop. 

In that regard, we believe this paper is particularly timely in light of the decision by Swiss authorities last year not to place Credit Suisse into a resolution process, which the Swiss had developed consistent with the international standard adopted by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) after the 2008 crisis – The Key Attributes for Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions.  Instead the Swiss chose to facilitate an open institution acquisition of Credit Suisse with public support.  This was done despite the view, as detailed in an FSB report released last year, that the cross-border resolution framework was sound and that a resolution was ready to be implemented by the Swiss authorities. 1

In my remarks today, I will provide an overview of the resolution planning and policy developments supporting an orderly resolution of a GSIB under Title II, including the utilization of the Title I resolution plans or living wills, the development of the single-point-of entry strategy, rulemakings that have been implemented, and progress on international cooperation.

Of particular note, I will discuss in greater detail than has been provided previously the key operational steps for a U.S. GSIB Title II resolution – launching the resolution, stabilizing the operations of the failed firm, and exiting from resolution.

This discussion can get a bit technical, so please bear with me because it is important.

Resolution Planning and Policy Developments Supporting Title II

Let me begin by reviewing resolution planning and policy developments supporting a Title II GSIB resolution.

First, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act, multiple cycles of Title I resolution plans, often called living wills, have been and continue to be a very valuable part of our preparations for resolution.  These plans require the largest U.S. bank holding companies to demonstrate how they could be resolved under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code without severe adverse effects on U.S. financial stability and without taxpayer support. As part of the Title I process, the U.S. GSIBs have enhanced their resolvability in various ways including by: 

• identifying  options for shrinking and divesting their businesses in resolution to reduce their systemic footprint;
• streamlining their organizational and funding structures; 
• developing capabilities to estimate material subsidiaries’ liquidity and capital needs in resolution;
• building governance frameworks with specific triggers to promote timely action when a firm begins to encounter stress; 
• planning for operational continuity in resolution; and 
• improving transparency to markets and investors with public versions of their resolution plans and securities markets disclosures. 

While the strength of these plans and capabilities varies across firms, Title I provides a valuable process for ongoing supervisory review and improvements.  Each iteration of these plans helps to strengthen the resolvability of these large, complex banking organizations and to keep our planning up to date with the firms’ current business model and market developments. In short, the work that firms put into these plans is vital to making an orderly resolution more feasible.

Turning to Title II resolution, the FDIC’s development of the Single Point of Entry (SPOE) resolution strategy, which we announced in 2013, was a critical step forward in the FDIC’s thinking about how to address the challenges of resolving large, complex financial institutions, and remains foundational to our planning. 2  In an SPOE resolution, only one legal entity, the parent holding company is placed into resolution. 

The ownership interests in the underlying subsidiaries are transferred from the failed parent company to a new Bridge Financial Company under the control of the FDIC.  Under the SPOE strategy, material subsidiaries remain open and operating while we proceed through an orderly resolution.  This protects depositors, preserves value, and promotes financial stability.  In an SPOE resolution, the failed holding company’s shareholders and unsecured creditors are not transferred to the Bridge Financial Company, become claimants against the receivership, and will ultimately absorb the losses of the firm.  There would be no taxpayer support, and the board and senior executives of the failed firm would be removed.

To help operationalize an SPOE resolution, in 2017 the Federal Reserve and other authorities finalized a number of rules that help make SPOE work.          

• The Federal Reserve’s rule on minimum Total Loss Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) and long term debt (LTD) ensures sufficient private sector capacity is available to absorb the losses and recapitalize the institution in resolution;
• The “clean holding company rule” limits the liabilities of GSIB holding companies that are not long term debt, which helps reduce complications and competing claims of the holding company creditors in resolution; and
• Requirements for GSIBs to provide for stays on counterparty actions for Qualified Financial Contracts (QFCs), such as derivatives and repos, mean that QFCs can be easily transferred to a Bridge Financial Company or other new owner and not disrupt core financial markets.

Finally, because operations of GSIBs are global, the FDIC has invested enormous effort to promote international cooperation with our key counterpart jurisdictions. Our work together has resulted in robust mechanisms to:

• pre-position resources to support the recapitalization of subsidiaries in an SPOE resolution;
• meet regularly with home and host authorities to discuss firm-specific resolution plans in Crisis Management Groups; and 
• continue to engage with cross-border counterparts at all levels to test our operational preparedness. These engagements include biennial principal-level resolution planning exercises with our UK and European Banking Union counterparts.

Together, these planning and policy developments support the FDIC’s preparedness to undertake a Title II resolution.

Operational Steps for a U.S. GSIB Title II resolution 

A Title II GSIB resolution will be a challenging process under any circumstance, with a number of steps that need to be taken quickly and in close coordination with a range of stakeholders.  Generally, we plan for three stages of resolution: launching the resolution, stabilizing the failed firm's operations, and exiting the resolution.    Let me provide some more detail on our preparations and expectations for each of these stages. 

Launching the resolution

When a GSIB approaches failure, the FDIC and other authorities would take up that specific case to decide, under those circumstances, whether, when, and how the Title II framework would be used.  The multi-agency process and statutory factors guiding this decision are clearly laid out in Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act. This process is often referred to as the “three keys process,” because it requires recommendations from two federal agencies – the Federal Reserve and the FDIC in the case of most GSIBs – followed by a determination by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the President, to commence a Title II receivership. 3

Part of the decision making is a determination that using Title II would mitigate the adverse effects of the firm’s failure and resolution in bankruptcy.  Unlike a resolution under the Bankruptcy Code, a Title II resolution is managed by the FDIC as receiver.  It provides for the Orderly Liquidation Fund (OLF ) at the U.S. Treasury as a line of credit to the FDIC to serve as a temporary backstop source of liquidity. Any utilization of the OLF will be repaid with the assets of the failed firm with no taxpayer exposure. 

Access to the OLF requires an Orderly Liquidation Plan agreed upon with the Secretary of the Treasury that lays out the expected resolution strategy.  As described above, the FDIC expects that the Orderly Liquidation Plan would be based on an SPOE strategy , which the FDIC considers the most suitable resolution strategy in a range of potential scenarios involving resolution of a U.S. GSIB.  The SPOE strategy would mitigate financial stability risk, keep key subsidiaries open and operating, and continue critical operations. 

Launching the actual entry into resolution involves a number of steps that happen concurrently.  For a GSIB resolution using an SPOE strategy, the parent holding company of the failed GSIB is placed into receivership.  The FDIC, as receiver, would establish a Bridge Financial Company under its control, and determine the leadership and governance; transfer the operating subsidiaries to the Bridge Financial Company; and commence the claims process.

Importantly, at the point of entry, the board of directors of the failed GSIB and senior executives who were responsible for the failure would not be retained by the Bridge Financial Company.  The Dodd-Frank Act also provides authority for compensation clawbacks for senior executives who are considered to be substantially responsible for the company’s failure.  As mentioned previously, the failed firm’s shareholders and creditors will ultimately absorb the losses of the firm, with no taxpayer exposure.

The FDIC has prepared for these steps in advance.  We have drafted legal documents to establish the bridge company and its governance structure, built a program that maintains a roster of qualified and vetted executives to run the Bridge Financial Company, and retained contractors to scale up work on communications, employee retention, and claims administration.  Throughout this process, the FDIC aims for a balanced approach to bridge governance and oversight, with the FDIC retaining control over key strategic decisions and ensuring compliance with the Orderly Liquidation Plan and repayment of the OLF while the new Bridge Financial Company’s leadership manages the day-to-day operations. 

Stabilizing the operations of the firm

The second stage of resolution – stabilization of the operations – begins as soon as the firm enters resolution.  A key advantage of the SPOE resolution strategy is that by keeping material subsidiaries open and operating , it enables the firm’s material operations to continue.  The newly formed Bridge Financial Company would be backed by OLF liquidity or guarantees to the extent needed, and have a strong balance sheet with ample capital because the failed firm’s liabilities were left behind in the receivership to absorb losses, while the assets were transferred to the Bridge Financial Company. 

This puts the Bridge Financial Company in a strong position to use its internal resources to take any actions that may be needed immediately upon entry into resolution to recapitalize material domestic and foreign subsidiaries, provide liquidity support, and maintain continuity of operations. 

These actions will be supported by a comprehensive communications effort coordinated among the FDIC, other U.S. and international authorities, and the Bridge Financial Company.  This effort will be designed to provide clarity and understanding of the resolution to a range of critical stakeholders —including staff of the Bridge Financial Company and its subsidiaries, customers, counterparties, various public authorities, and the wider public. 

Let me be clear: While SPOE means the original holding company would fail, with the consequences of failure, the new Bridge Financial Company and its material subsidiaries will be open and operating. Market participants should be confident that these subsidiaries will continue providing critical services and functions to the market and fulfill contractual obligations to employees, counterparties, and customers. 

Exiting from resolution

Once the operating subsidiaries are stabilized, the FDIC and Bridge Financial Company management expect to focus on developing and implementing the restructuring and wind down plan .  Leveraging the GSIB’s Title I plan, the FDIC will have analyzed prior to the failure possible restructuring, divestiture, and wind-down actions to occur in resolution and incorporated its own expectations into the resolution strategy for the firm.  The type and extent of restructuring will depend on the nature of its business, the causes of failure, and the economic and market conditions at the time.  For example, an appropriate restructuring plan could include selling subsidiaries or specific business lines; winding down or liquidating specific portfolios, business lines, or subsidiaries in an orderly manner; or breaking up certain operating subsidiaries for sale or spin-off.

Any restructuring will aim to maintain value, continue or transition critical operations, address the causes of failure, and ensure that the entity or entities emerging from the Bridge Financial Company can be effectively resolved under the Bankruptcy Code (or other ordinarily applicable regime) in an orderly fashion.  Ongoing restructuring and divestiture requirements could also continue after exit from resolution by virtue of conditions placed on acquirers or mandated by other supervisory or regulatory requirements.

The FDIC expects to exit resolution in a timely fashion, with the failed GSIB’s shareholders and creditors, rather than the taxpayers, absorbing the losses of the failed firm.  The FDIC expects that the most likely mechanism for exiting resolution will be a securities-for-claims exchange . In this approach, new debt and equity securities in the successor company (or companies) are distributed to former creditors to satisfy the claims against the receivership.  Once the securities are distributed, the Bridge Financial Company is terminated and the successor company or companies will be owned by the former claimants. 

While the timeline may vary depending on the scenario, completion of all the steps needed for the securities-for-claims exchange—making claims determinations, estimating valuation of any successor company (or companies), and issuing and distributing new securities to claimants —will be arranged during the bridge period, which is likely to take at least nine months. 

This will allow sufficient time for the FDIC and the Bridge Financial Company to issue the audited financial statements, prospectuses, and necessary disclosures in order for the successor company (or companies) to comply with the requirements of federal securities laws. 

Again, our goal is that when a GSIB exits resolution, it no longer presents a systemic threat to the U.S. financial system and can be resolved under the ordinarily applicable resolution regime.  

Let me conclude by acknowledging that a U.S. GSIB failure will be extraordinarily challenging under any circumstances. Needless to say, we have yet to execute an orderly resolution of a U.S. GSIB. Until we do so successfully, there will be questions as to whether it can be done.

The purpose in issuing the paper today is to explain as clearly and in as much detail as possible how the FDIC expects to carry out that critical resolution responsibility.  We believe we have the authorities, resources, and capabilities to do the job if it becomes necessary.  We hope the paper generates interest in this issue.  We stand ready to engage with all interested parties to address questions and build further understanding of the FDIC’s plans and preparedness for executing our Title II Dodd-Frank Act resolution responsibilities for GSIBs.

See Financial Stability Board “ 2023 Bank Failures: Preliminary lessons learnt for resolution ” October 2023. 

FDIC’s 2013 SPOE Request for Comment – Resolution of Systemically Important Financial Institutions: The Single Point of Entry Strategy, 78 FR 76614,  http: govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2013-12-18/pdf/2013-30057.pdf    

The three keys process in DFA is similar to the voting process for approving the systemic risk exception in the FDIA which the agencies have invoked on a rapid timeframe including in the first quarter of 2023.

Klaas Knot: Central bank capital - of capital importance?

Speech by Mr Klaas Knot, President of the Netherlands Bank, at the DNB-Risk Management Workshop on "Central bank capital in turbulent times", Amsterdam, 12 April 2024.

The views expressed in this speech are those of the speaker and not the view of the BIS.

Good morning everyone. Welcome to the second day of this workshop on 'central bank capital in turbulent times'.

And this title really does sum it all up. Central banks around the world are going through some pretty turbulent times these days. With huge losses. And the Dutch central bank is no exception.

The last time the Dutch central bank faced a similar turbulent situation was roughly a century ago, in 1931 to be exact.

The turbulent times that caused significant losses back then, had to do with the gold standard.

After the First World War, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom agreed that, for the Dutch gold held in the UK, the Dutch central bank would accept pounds sterling. As a result, the Dutch central bank had a vast amount of British pounds on its balance sheet.

But by the 1930s, the British economy was in stormy weather – with high unemployment and an overvalued currency hindering export.

And even though the Dutch central bank got guarantees from the Bank of England that they would not leave the gold standard – they did so overnight, and effectively devalued the pound.

As a consequence of this devaluation, the Dutch central bank was left with huge losses. Losses that were one and a half times the size of its capital.

Today, almost a hundred years later, in a world that looks a lot different, we find ourselves again in a situation with huge central bank losses.

The Dutch central bank had to report a loss of 2.3 billion euros for 2023 – and our projected cumulative losses over 2023 until 2028 are 9 billion euros. Our neighbours at the Bundesbank reported a loss of 21.6 billion euros in 2023. And across the Atlantic, the US Federal Reserve published a loss of 114.3 billion dollars last year.

We know how we got here. And we know we have lessons to learn. So, let me begin by taking a step back.

Up until a few years ago, and especially since the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, inflation was persistently low. In response, and with the aim of countering deflation risks, stabilising our economies and safeguarding monetary policy transmission, central banks around the world expanded their toolkits to include a range of new and unconventional measures – like large-scale asset purchases and targeted lending programmes. These new measures provided central banks with policy options to pursue their price stability objective, at a time when interest rates were at their lower bound.

But these new tools – as has become apparent – have a flipside. They come with a price tag in terms of increased risks that may lead to substantial losses. 

While quantitative easing did help to stave off deflation risk, it also reshaped central bank balance sheets. Because, essentially, QE locked in low returns on a significant portion of central banks' assets – the so-called 'buy high' strategy. In the final phase of QE in particular, we bought vast quantities of bonds at relatively high prices, with very low and often negative yields. As rates on our liabilities could eventually go up, this strategy would then generate some losses. What materialised, though, was the worst case scenario. Namely, a sudden and massive spike in inflation leading to an increase in policy rates. Leading to the current huge losses.

And so, as the profitability of these new, riskier, and by now conventional monetary policy tools has proved to be lower than the profitability of traditional instruments, central banks should critically asses their capital levels. They should be forward-looking and build up their capital accordingly. In short, more risk means more capital.

Especially since central banks are not expected to return to their lean balance sheets of the pre-QE era any time soon – which means that they will face heightened financial risks for quite some time to come.

So, as we shift from a decade dominated by unconventional monetary policy to a phase of normalisation, it is imperative to consider a few key factors that influence central bank capital.

First, with its recent review of the operational framework, the Eurosystem aims to maintain structural liquidity in the financial system.

Besides weekly refinancing operations, part of this liquidity provisioning will be established through long term refinancing operations as well as a structural portfolio of securities. In implementing these operations, it is crucial for the Eurosystem to consider its capital position in relation to these structural operations.

Second, in its Strategy Review, the ECB categorised QE as a monetary policy instrument near the effective lower bound. This necessitates proactive risk assessment for potential future use of QE (note 1). But, obviously, concerns about central bank profitability must not result in a less effective monetary policy.

Third, in currency unions like the European Monetary Union, risk and income-sharing mechanisms can help achieve a fair re-distribution among national central banks. These mechanisms are essential for promoting stability and cohesion within the monetary union, as they ensure that the costs and benefits of membership are distributed equitably among all participating central banks.

In transitioning to a phase with a normalised monetary policy, these considerations will also help to normalise central bank capital adequacy. And the importance of sufficient capital goes beyond the mere accountancy aspect.

If we were a commercial bank, large losses that erode capital would lead to bankruptcy. But central banks cannot go bankrupt. One reason for this is that a central bank can create money. Thus, it cannot default on liabilities denominated in its own currency. A second reason is that, implicitly, central banks have the support of their respective governments as systemically vital national authorities.

Under extreme circumstances, a capital injection by the government may be considered. But as long as there is a realistic expectation that the net present value of future revenues – mainly from seigniorage – will be large enough to compensate for the current and projected central bank losses, financial support from a government seems unlikely to me.

Hence, central bank independence – independence from our respective governments to do what needs to be done to safeguard price stability – is not in jeopardy.

From a trust perspective, it is important to be transparent about this.

We have a saying in Dutch that, in English, goes something like this: 'Trust arrives on foot and leaves on horseback'. Well, we don't want the current turbulent times, with the current losses, to make the public's trust in our independence take off on horseback. Because it would take much longer to regain it.

I think the Netherlands offers an interesting case study in central bank transparency. For instance, on losses.

Given the current central bank losses, you would expect critical press coverage. But in the Netherlands, coverage has been relatively sparse and mild.

Most of the news outlets covered DNB's losses in a balanced way. And I think this is partly, maybe even mainly, due to our transparency on this matter. We very deliberately took the time to announce the possibility of losses. We explained the source of the losses when they occurred. And we were transparent about how we expected them to evolve.

Transparency should be a guiding principle for central banks. They should be prepared to discuss their monetary policy decisions and clearly explain how their decisions safeguard price stability, and also not shy away from considering any link with public finances and the real economy.

Equally, they should not refrain from being transparent about the potential impact of their decisions on their balance sheets and, as such, emphasise their crucial role in absorbing losses in times of crises.

Looking at the future – if QE would ever be needed again – and I think that next time around the ECB will be much more cautious – but if it were to happen, I think central banks should pursue transparency. They should clearly communicate the benefits of QE for price stability, for liquidity in the financial system, and for the economic welfare of society – and they should also proactively communicate about the impact these purchases might have on their balance sheets.

To do so, to be able to   proactively   communicate, central banks, of course, need to have an idea of the potential risks, of the potential impact of monetary policy operations on their balance sheets. And so, they should conduct comprehensive, forward-looking risk assessments. Assessments that take into account scenario analyses from their risk management departments. Assessments that may result in higher provisioning ex-ante.

Looking at QE again – from a scenario analysis point of view – QE aimed at boosting inflation may result in losses, because assets are purchased at high prices. Conversely, when asset purchases are deployed to stabilise markets, they tend to be more profitable. Because in that case, assets are not necessarily acquired at peak prices.

But the   actual   financial results of QE will depend on the   actual   timing and extent of the purchases, together with the   actual   interest rate evolution.

Indeed, there is a lot of uncertainty and in the end only one scenario will play out.

And although my colleagues from the risk management department ran through some extreme but plausible interest rate scenarios, we did not foresee the impact a pandemic could have nor did we factor in a Russian invasion of Ukraine. As such we did not anticipate the recent inflationary shock and the speed and intensity of policy rate increases. And so, we did not foresee the extent of the current losses. Had there been no such shock, and had policy rates risen gradually and to a lesser extent, QE losses would probably have been contained, and profits would even have been attainable.

But let me stress again, as much as we   can't   predict the future, we   do   need to imagine several extreme but possible scenarios. And this scenario analysis can guide us in maintaining sufficient buffers in terms of capital and provisions, and hence mitigate the impact on our balance sheets, and strengthen our resilience in case of a future crisis.

Now then, so far I have referred to central banks in general. As if there were only one type. But of course, central banks come in all sorts and sizes.

And faced with the same challenges that come with huge losses, our differences could become an asset.

Central banks could benefit from collaborating – for instance by sharing best practices or by establishing common principles. Principles, for example, on accounting standards, capital adequacy and risk management. Principles that could ensure regular evaluations and adjustments of capital levels, including provisions – all of this to maintain resilience, to absorb unexpected losses, to adapt to evolving risks, and to effectively fulfil our mandates, even in challenging economic conditions. Principles that should, of course, take jurisdiction-specific circumstances into account, as central banks have diverse mandates, operations, sizes and ownership structures.

So, going forward, central banks should establish robust risk management policies to address potentially large losses. For instance, by safeguarding structural profitability, or by establishing additional buffers, or by adopting a higher tolerance for periods with reduced or negative capital. And they should do so in a continuous and transparent dialogue with their stakeholders and the general public.

Let me wrap up.

Crises that have been   overcome, like the Global Financial Crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic, and crises that are   ongoing, like geopolitical tensions and global warming, pose a challenge to central banks – they test them to their limits. They test their ability to safeguard price stability, their resilience, and the public's trust in them.

At the same time, these very tests reaffirm the pivotal role an independent central bank plays in stabilising financial markets – in preventing or tackling deflationary or inflationary pressures – in safeguarding our economic welfare.

Nearly a century ago, my predecessor faced unexpected and huge losses. Losses that exceeded the central bank's capital. And that cost him his job as head of the Dutch central bank.

I have the pleasure of still being in office, which gives me the opportunity to speak to you today, and to wish you an interesting second day of  this workshop – a workshop with, recalling the past, an aptly-chosen topic. I would almost say, a topic of capital importance.

Note 1:  Announcement on the strategy review:  The ECB's monetary policy strategy statement  (europa.eu)

Related information

• More speeches from "De Nederlandsche Bank"
• Country page: Netherlands
• Share this page
• Sign up to receive email alerts
• Translations
• Legal information
• Terms and conditions
• Copyright and permissions
• Privacy notice
• Cookies notice
• Email scam warning