The Right Way To Open A Shaken Soda Can

0:00Welcome to The Rest Is Science. I am Michael Stevens. I'm Hannah Fry. And today, I've got a can of a carbonated beverage. We can talk about how many calories there are in there. Nope. Hey, don't shake it. Don't shake it up, right? Oh yeah, I can feel how tight it's getting. Can you? All right, now do you want to open it? No! Good, because I don't want you to open it, not yet. Instead, I'm going to try a little life hack to fix this and make it safe to open okay now have you heard of this before tapping the sides yeah or tapping the top is the one that tapping the top is terrible is it does not work tapping the sides is where it's at right should i tell you why now or should i just go ahead and surprise everyone with how well it works there's no way

0:46that's gonna fizz surely so yeah i shook it really a lot i mean that was intense i'm gonna move my laptop out of the way move your laptop out of the way but i trust the science okay you ready yeah go okay okay compared to what i was expecting. Compared to what you were expecting? Wouldn't that have been even cooler if it didn't make any noise? But I mean, that's not too bad. That was amazing. Do you know why that works? Do you know the phrase that some people, I don't know if you'll have this in America, but the phrase that's used to describe what you just witnessed there is a nun's fart. Do you know this? No. Am I the only one who's what is a nun's fart you've heard that phrase pleasant you've never heard that phrase yeah like

1:34like it's not good but it's not as bad as it was just like a really gentle release of air oh you know like it wasn't like, it wasn't aggressive. I get it. But I think nuns should feel comfortable flatulating however loudly they want. I completely agree. Okay. So I had this friend when I was at uni, a friend who was studying to be a medic and they were like top of their class, aced it, aced it, aced it, aced it. And the consultant in the hospital who they were working under came to find them one day because they were like, I've got a genuine treat for you. There is a nun who needs to have a rectal exam, right? And that is how you stun Michael Stephenson's silence. That's how you leave me with nothing to add.

2:29This episode is brought to you by Cancer Research UK. All right, here's something really cool. The earliest written description of cancer that we've ever found is from an ancient Egyptian papyrus that was around before even Cleopatra was on the throne. It described tumors being removed by a tool that they called the fire drill, which we think was used to burn off diseased tissue. Beating a disease that's so ancient and complex with over 200 different types, it's not going to happen overnight. But thanks to research, cancer treatment has advanced a lot. And Cancer Research UK is driving further innovations like cancer sniffsniffing robots and drugs made from gut bugs that could change the future of medicine. Over the past 50 years, Cancer Research UK's

3:11work has helped double cancer survival in the UK. And today it's continuing to save and improve lives around the world. For more information about Cancer Research UK, their research and breakthroughs, and how you can support them, visit cancerresearchuk.org slash rest is science. Hi, this is Gary Lineker from Goalhangers. The rest is football. This episode is brought to you by WISE. It's only when you start moving money between currencies that you really think about the exchange rate, the fee, and what might be hidden away in the small print. Whether you're living abroad, paying someone overseas or just trying to manage your money across borders, you want a fair exchange rate, an easy transfer and no surprises along the way. Wise keeps things simple. Wise is a smart way

3:57to move the currencies you need around the globe. It works in more than 160 countries and with over 40 currencies. Most transfers arrive instantly. Wise uses the mid-market exchange rate, like the one you see on Google, with no markups or hidden fees. So when money needs to move, you can see the rate, know the fee, and get on with it. Join millions saving billions on hidden fees by downloading the Wise app today. Be smart. Get wise. T's and C's apply. Again, smiles and says, dang, that's a good offer. The highest form of approval. No haggling. No hassle. No one called him boss. He's still on the couch. Astonishing. Sell your car today on Carvana.com. Pickup fees may apply. I think that's quite interesting scientifically, personally.

5:08Are you saying that nuns actually have great farts? Yes. Like gentle farts? I guess I could believe. I don't want to stereotype nuns, though. Okay, look. If you're a nun who listens and this is bothering you because you think your farts are a little like louder or smellier than they should be. It's okay. You're still a valid nun. I'm not commenting on the smell. I'm merely commenting on the smell. I'm commenting on the smell. Okay. But is it real? I can see Lauren in the corner of my eye. Okay. So our fact checkers are saying that a nun's fart is not a thing. I'm sorry. I'm done. That you have created this in your own mind as a saying. No. Look, when you open a bottle of champagne and it goes,

5:51then you say, oh, like a nun's fart. I didn't make this up. Look, I'm not an expert here. I'm sure there are people in the comments with opinions. Look, if you happen to be sort of a colorectal surgeon and you've got evidence, then we want to hear it. Let us know. Do nuns farts earn their name as a nun fart? But look, why does tapping the sides work? Well, at the end of the day, here's what's happening. When you've got the liquid in the can, I'll pour it into this cup so we can look inside. Yes, please. When you shake it up, the carbon dioxide gas that's dissolved in the liquid collects on little imperfections on the glass. Yes, stuck to the side. It's stuck onto these sides. So if I like, I don't know, I'm trying to make this like shaky,

6:42but you'll notice that you get bubbles on the outside. When you then release the pressure at the top, those bubbles along the sides expand rapidly and that creates the foam. That creates the geyser that comes out. But if you tap the sides, and you can try this with a clear glass, you can watch that when you flick the sides, the bubbles get released and then go up to the top. So all that gas that came out when I shook the can, still out of the liquid, but it's all collected at the top of the can. So when I open it, the gas all comes out, but no foam and liquid does too. So essentially, you're getting rid of the nucleation sites on the side. Well, the nucleation site is still there. It's just there's no more gas caught on

7:25that site because you flicked the bubbles off the site and they floated to the top. Amazing. If you tap the top, you're not cleaning the bubbles off the sides. The vibrations might still cause some bubbles to leave the side. So it's still better than nothing. But the sides and even the bottom is what you want to do. You want to clean them so there's no gas mixed in and in bubble form in the liquid to then expand and bring the liquid up with it. Got you. Okay, well, this is a good trick. This presumably works for any drink that has got carbon dioxide dissolved within it. The only other solution is to just wait. If you wait like 10, 20 minutes, the gas will re-dissolve back in and you can open

8:07it without an explosion. So I see why it fizzes up. I understand that, right? That you've got little pockets of air that are rapidly expanding and thus causing all this foam. I get that. I think what I'm asking is, why does the act of shaking, what does the act of shaking physically do to the contents of the inside the can? Clearly you're not adding anything to the contents by shaking, but I guess the gas when it's dissolved takes up less room. And then once it leaves as a gas and like the molecules stick together. When you open a can, the liquid is not like right at the very top, is it? There's like a little gap. Yeah, there's a little bit of air. That's why you can take a full can and you can hear it slosh in there.

8:54Right. So you're taking the air and mixing it into the liquid, I guess. The air that would sit at the top. There's a little layer of air. As you shake it, that air gets mixed in with everything else. I couldn't really describe it. I don't totally know why a mechanical, like, nucleation site, an imperfection in the metal, a scratch, causes the gas to appear out of the liquid. Same with why a Mentos dropped into Coke. Mentos is just somehow covered in nucleation sites and just an enormous amount of gas gets produced. But I don't know why. It's just really hairy. Mentos is just really, really sort of has all of these little air pockets in it. But why is it that when this hairy surface comes into contact with a gas dissolved

9:41in a liquid, the gas goes, whoa, I'm out? Yeah. I don't know. I think that is just because carbon dioxide is really unstable. And so it kind of kickstarts it. But there's different ways, right? Because there's dissolved as tiny air bubbles that are just separated and suspended within the liquid. And then there's dissolved in the sense of it's no longer just carbon dioxide, it's a new molecule. Tell you one more thing about Coke cans. Have you noticed how you can stand on a full Coke can, but on an empty one it crushes under your weight? That makes sense though, right? Like, I can't crush the full can because I can't compress the water. Right, because there's pressure inside it. Yeah. Whereas when you release that pressure-

10:24It's so much stronger. Right. Okay, so here's pressure inside it. Yeah. Whereas when you release that pressure… It's so much stronger. Right. Okay, so here's the thing about aircraft. Same story. Inside an aircraft, it's so much stronger when it's pressurized within than if you have like an open fuselage. It's also much more comfortable. Right. You can effectively be, your body can effectively be at, you know, 5,000 feet or whatever it might be while you're physically much higher in the atmosphere. The only thing about this, right, is that if you imagine like releasing all the pressure and then blowing up again and then releasing all the pressure and then blowing up again and then releasing all the pressure and then blowing up again, it ends up with a bit of a mess. Yeah. And it's the same thing with aircraft.

11:07You have to be really careful because you're inflating it, deflating it, inflating it, deflating it all the time. Right. And a lot of the skin of aircraft, particularly older designs of aircraft, is panels, metal panels. I think it is actually aluminium, some of it. These aluminium panels that are riveted is actually aluminium, some of it. These aluminium panels that are riveted onto the surface into the structure. And so as a result, you have to be extremely careful about how far you inflate the fuselage of your aircraft so that you don't end up causing structural damage like this. However, and this is the reason why one aircraft is way superior to every other. And I was on one of them on my flight out here.

11:47Were you? Because you told me if they have the windows that like magically change. Yes. They become darker. Yes. You don't have a window shade that I was on the right kind. And yeah, it just felt wonderful. Okay. Should we have a little break? Go into the questions? Yeah. All right. Let's do it. This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome.

12:36Check responses, setup required, compatibility and availability varies 18 plus. When you're building a company, you learn that trust is what closes deals. You may have the best product, but buyers won't sign without proof that your product is secure, especially if it has AI. Vanta gets you compliant fast with SOC 2, ISO 27001, and more, and keeps you secure with continuous monitoring. Hyperbound, a YC-backed startup, used Vanta to unlock the Fortune 100 in under a year. Snowfire got audit ready in a month and closed a multi-million dollar deal. Trust matters. Get started at Vanta.com. When an intruder approaches a home, they expect a camera. What they don't expect. Stop. This is SimpliSafe. Police are on the way.

13:12Using smart AI cameras, live US-based agents help deter intruders in under 30 seconds. Don't just record a break-in. Stop it from ever happening. Plan starting around a dollar a day. Right now, get 70% off your new system with professional monitoring at SimpliSafe.com slash Spotify. 30 seconds response time requires monitoring plan with outdoor protection starting at $49.99 a month. Visit SimpliSafe.com slash licenses for alarm license information. Okay, should we do some questions? Let's it right here's one from benjamin on email benjamin says ever since i was little i have held science and scientists in the highest regard with an almost religious amazement admiration and trust over the past five or six years though

13:59as i learned more about things like replication crises and counterproductive incentives in the funding and publication processes i find it harder to trust the scientific establishment and related media and government organisations. So my questions, practically, how do I know when and if I cross the line from healthy scepticism to paranoia? Emotionally, how can I deal with the feeling of my faith in science being shaken what a great question yeah i've actually been thinking about this a lot recently you know like a lot and i don't have a firm answer but i have thoughts okay yeah what do you think because first of all i'd say as soon as you have a religious faith in something you've set yourself up for a problem

14:43especially if that something is not an actual God. Scientists are people. And scientific progress, as Planck told us, happens one funeral at a time. Yes. Okay? Yes. So, yeah, humans are wrong. Scientists try their best, but we all have biases. We all have prejudices. And that comes through even in science, even in math. Yeah. We should probably say what the replication crisis is for those who haven't been following every twist and turn of scientific common subjects in science in the last however long. Well, yeah. A lot of psychological experiments from decades ago that became staples of textbooks that we all just accepted as like, yep, that's what people do. That's how we behave. That's how we perceive have not been replicated since they were first put down in those textbooks.

15:37We've revisited them lately and been like, oh, yeah, let's try this study. Let's see if this is really how people assign motivations to each other. And it just isn't. This one study that was done on like 12 college kids in 1957 did not, as it turns out, completely explain all of human behavior. Exactly. I mean, surprise. But it's not only because it was something really fundamental about the way that science was structured. Because the problem with, if you are looking at where stars are in the sky or coming up with a precise calculation about the way that space-time warps with two black holes, you are within a very narrow window. You can make your measurement, you can come to conclusions with some confidence that what you are saying is correct. When you

16:32are dealing with people, it's a whole different game, right? It's messy, it's all over the place. People don't give you the same response two times in a row and so on and so on and so on. And so as a result, what scientists did is they said, okay, we're going to draw a line in the sand and if we would expect to see this evidence, if it was just a complete fluke, less than one in 20 times, then that's good enough. That's evidence for us. So the example that I like to give my students is gingers are about 1% of the population. If you have two gingers in a room, that's pretty suspicious. If you start to get like five gingers in a room, something's going on. So what science did is they worked out a way to say, if something is so unlikely that there

17:21must be something going on that you're like, okay, I'm really suspicious now they worked out where to draw that line and the line that they drew was they said we will accept one in 20 right that's that's kind of where the line is yeah the only problem is that when you add in the whole of scientific the sort of scientific establishment like people trying to get grants people trying to get things published you If you try something 20 times, that means just by fluke alone, one of them is going to look like a real result when it isn't. And then if you have an entire population of scientists who are just trying this, try this, it means that so many of these fluke results, that's just like, sometimes you're

18:06just in a room and there's five gingers, you know? Sometimes that just happens. Sometimes you're in Ireland, okay? Sometimes you're in Ireland, exactly. And like, yeah, I think so much of, I put a lot of the blame on the fact that the actual research, the actual papers are usually behind a paywall. It's completely obnoxious that I'll hear about something. I'll read an article from the guardian and they will say, whoa, you know, within a 95% confidence interval, like this is causing this. And I'm like, wow. But then I find the paper and I can only read the paper if I pay $98 per month and I subscribe to this service. So I will illegally get the paper. I'll read it. And the paper does not make the claim

18:52that the article made. The paper says, well, we were really interested in this one really specific thing and we wanted to add some data and we tried this and there's all these other reasons that could be explaining it, but it seems like this might be in favor of this. But we need at least 2000 more data points. And I'm like, this is science. That's science. But it gets filtered down to the rest of us as, whoa, green M&Ms are poison. But when you read the paper, the paper is like green M&Ms are not poisonous. However, there is a weird thing that's statistically happened in this one study that we did. And we wanted to show the methods so that other people can learn from this and do more studies. And that's all it says.

19:33Right. Right. Totally agree. But so there was this, I mean, they called it a crisis, the replication crisis where suddenly psychology in particular, but other subjects too, looked at everything they had and were like, okay on a second how much of this stuff is actually real like how much of this stuff is just flukes that we have published because it sounds because of course it's publishing the most interesting things we're publishing like the most kind of strange results um and a lot of science did fall a lot of science fell i mean mostly it was at the sort of more human-y end of things, psychology, some sort of medicinal studies as well, right? But things like maths were absolutely fine. Physics was largely

20:13untouched. And I think that what this does for me is it reiterates what science should really be, which is it should be an engine of doubt. Right. Exactly. It should be that at the centre of science, the thing that drives progress forward is intelligent doubt. It's continually asking more and more questions, continually wondering if there's more, continually trying to find out more. And so I think that actually science as a whole is really one of the only institutions that we've ever created as humans that has worked out how to turn doubt into something incredibly positive. I mean, there's a couple of others, right? Like the airline crash report industry is pretty good at it too. But I think science is really good at continually questioning itself.

21:10Scientists, not so much. Science, much better. Wisdom of the crowds. Right. You get one scientist, you've got one person. If you get a thousand scientists, you've got a whole new super organism. The final thing I would say about all of this though, is that that comparison that was made between having faith in science and sort of having a kind of religious faith. I do also think, and I say this as somebody who's brought up Catholic, but is no longer religious at all. I think it's really easy to assume that, oh, I've left faith behind because I'm no longer religious. I have science. That's what I believe in. I actually think that we're kidding ourselves if we make that assumption. If we try and claim that modern society isn't held up by faith at every conceivable level, I think we're really

22:08fooling ourselves. You know, I believe in science too, right? But I also know that science itself takes quite a lot of faith. Like why is the speed of light an absolute limit? Like why that number? You know, what happened before the big bang? Like there's certain elements of, I mean, there's all kinds of elements of science that I don't personally know or understand, but I have to like have faith that the people who do understand it, understand it themselves. You know, all I think that you're doing, if you believe in science as opposed to believe in religion, is I think that you've just got a different starting point for your faith. Yeah, right. You take some different things to be sacred and beyond question. And that can get dangerous when you're like, ah, no, I'm going to support

22:50this particular scientific hypothesis because it's like my favorite sports team. And I'm just all in it for that reason. And I'm going to pretend like you're unscientific for questioning it. But you're right. There's a kind of intelligent doubt that isn't just a, I don't believe it unless it's what I want to believe. That's not intelligent doubting. But there's a kind of, let's question this and really be sure. How can we really be sure? If this is true, then this other thing shouldn't be true. Let's test that. It's a process. Science is a way of knowing. It's not the same as knowing through revelation. Oh, I was told in a dream or well, this old book says so. I also think that science and religion aren't a one or the other

23:40thing. Non-competing majesties. Yeah. I think that they are co-monarchs and they both have an element of each other in them. Yeah, I think you're probably right. Anyway, sort of gone full circle back to nuns, haven't we? Yeah, we have. Next question. This came in from Vikram, who says, I've always been fascinated by Archimedes' famous quote, give me a place to stand and a lever long enough and I will move the earth. I was wondering how literally this can be interpreted from a physics perspective. If we can imagine an impossibly strong, perfectly rigid lever with a fulcrum somewhere outside of earth, could this actually work in theory? No, not the way you're describing describing it but also not even in any way like

24:28i love that idea right like a lever amplifies force so almost magically that we can use levers to lift a car right and so archimedes was like, wow, I could lift something as heavy as the planet Earth if you gave me a lever long enough. And that whole quote is like this real triumph of science and engineering over nature, right? Give me a lever long enough and I will move the world. But Vikram in the question says, if I had like an infinitely strong, perfectly rigid lever, boom, you've already lost. The lever cannot be totally rigid. If it was totally rigid, one, it would violate physics completely. Because that would mean that moving one end would cause the other end to move instantaneously.

25:24So you would be sending information through that lever faster than light. I can't describe this in all the detail that I want to because it's the topic of my next long video. Right. I know you've been playing with levers for a while. For a long time. I've seen into your workshop and there were levers all over the place. And pendulums and hoops and disks. Right. But the point is, we don't even need to focus on that right now. The problem is, okay, so you want to lift the world. First of all, against what? Like, the Earth can't be put on a table. Because a table large enough to hold the Earth would collapse into a planet itself. All right. So whatever. But that's that's just kind of a joke. The point is, if I want to lift something arbitrarily heavy and I have a surface to

26:15do it on, the other problem you get is that the lever itself winds up having to weigh so much that and I saw, oh, oh man there's a great video where someone broke this down and they were like to lift the empire state building with a sheet of paper you would need a lever made of more matter than the entire planet earth or something wait with a sheet of paper i don't understand so you you've got a fulcrum right next to the empire state building and a lever and a beam that goes underneath the building. And then it goes really long out the other way. And then you drop a piece of paper. Drop a piece of paper on that end and it lifts the Empire State Building. The problem is levers themselves also have weight.

27:00And so just by installing that lever, you're going to start lifting the Empire State Building because of the mass of the lever beyond the foreground. This was a problem that I had with one of the levers I built. It was so big it left the gravitational pull. No, it was just so big that it lifted everything because it was already so big. And I'm like, no, no, no, I want to be able to push. So I had to make the lever smaller and less effective so that I could actually have a role in the lifting. To basically answer your question, in a way, lifting the world with a lever is a great way to describe how mechanical advantage has like no bound. But yet it does, even even theoretically a lever that long if it was rigid it would not

27:49work as a lever it would be a physically impossible object maybe we just kind of leave it there here's what i'm hearing archimedes was an idiot that's uh no he wasn't i love i love i'm hearing louder I love how that teaches leverage and imagination, but it just falls apart as an actual experiment we could do even in our own minds. I also think if you were capable of building a sort of impossibly strong, perfectly rigid lever and installing a fulcrum somewhere outside of the earth. I would say you're putting your effort into the wrong thing. You could have built, I don't know, a giant pair of sunglasses to put around the sun. Now we're talking. Right? Now we are talking. You could have built a sky hook or two or twelve.

28:44You know, there's other things. Okay, here we go. Last question. This is from Nils Moody on Reddit, of course, with a name like that. What is your strategy when curiosity and wonder seems to dwindle? Oh. Do you have an example of when that would happen? I think there are people on Earth who have a lot of influence, but have no curiosity. I agree with that. But are there times when all of us as a society don't have enough curiosity? Gosh, that's such an interesting way of thinking about it. The way I took that question on the surface was within you as an individual right and i was thinking well yeah when i'm really tired or like when there's lots of stuff going on right but i love the idea of

29:32thinking at a society level yeah i think you know what actually i think that this does link back to that first question about doubt i think that for me doubt and and curiosity go hand in hand in a lot of ways. When you think that there is always something more to discover, you're insatiable for the next thing. I think that's how curiosity appears. I think there have been times in the past, historically, when self-d in sort of societal cultural decisions has gone down. And I think curiosity goes down at the same time. I'm thinking about really bad, I've got bad, bad things in my head here. But I think when you're really certain that another people, another country, another whoever are whatever story you want to tell yourself,

30:23and don't have curiosity for who they actually might be, I think that's when doubt's gone down. I think you're right. Because what I'm thinking of are two books. One is Hannah Arendt's Life of the Mind. The very first chapter in that book, she talks about evil being such a non-storybook thing that it's just flat-out thoughtlessness. I'm not going to question this. It is what it is. And then I just finished reading Perfect Soldiers, which is a book about the life stories of the 9-11 hijackers. And that guy's like right off the bat, he's like, okay, I've studied everyone involved. And like the one thing they all had in common was certainty. They were certain that what they believed was the only correct answer.

31:17Gosh, that's so interesting. It wasn't, it wasn't any particular religious or political belief. It was their certainty in the belief. And he's like, that's always the problem. That's all I have to say about this. That's amazing. I sat next to dinner once to a guy who was really high up in the Red Cross, and it would be his job to go into war zones and to negotiate with people who were even committing genocide. Like really horrific, horrific stories with horrific people. And it was his job to go in and negotiate with them to allow access for the Red Cross to give aid to whoever needed it, regardless of what side they were on. And he said something really interesting, which is that in order to make a soldier, in order to make it so that a human is capable of

32:11committing those acts on another human, you really only have two choices. Either you have to psychologically mess them up so much, so this is like the child soldier thing that happens in places around the world where you expose them to such brutal acts that you deliberately psychologically damage them, turn them into madmen, essentially. That's one route. Or the other route is that you turn them into machines, you turn them into robots. And for that type, this is the marching like, this step, this step, this step, this step. You take your gun, you strip it down, you put it back together, you strip it down, you put it back together, you strip it down, you put it back together, you strip it down, you put it back together, over and over and over and

32:58over again until the act disentangles itself from your consciousness of the act itself so that you are completely robotic in your actions the other thing he said that really stuck with me was that when you get inside and he had met some horrific people like really big sort of famous names of like tyrants like horrific people and he said that when you when you get in there that's one they described as like this palace and it was like mad max all of these unbelievably expensive vehicles and they were basically committing genocide i mean they actually were committed genocide and he got into layer and layer and layer and layer and Once he got in, he was like, it was just a really sad little man

33:46inside. The most horrific people you can imagine. He was like, it was actually just a sad little man. So what do you do when people become sad little and curious people? I don't know. I feel like you need to allow more modes of thought and action. Don't circumscribe people. Allow them to go, oh, I have the freedom to be different than that. I think a lot of the things that we today have less of are ways of life. There's like one option. For example, not even just a few decades ago, selling out used to be a major problem. But today, the more ads and brands you have, the better you're doing. Get that bag. Because what else are you supposed to do? If you're a band, where do you put your music except one of the major streaming platforms?

34:48Like, yeah, you could press your own vinyls and like hand them out on the street. But we've just become so stuck into having only those options that I think we just accept them. That we become, we say, well, that's, it's sacred. We don't even, we aren't even curious about what other options there could be. And so unless we, as a society, allow people to explore weird things out beyond the pale, we will become less and less curious. This answer brought to you by... This answer brought to you by the curiosity box. I mean, this went in a dark direction, didn't it? This went in a very different direction. I think it went in a dark direction, but it found a little bit of light in the darkness. Yes, I think so too.

35:37And that light is known as an annual membership to the Curiosity Box. I think you're right though. It's the opposite of what the Red Cross guy said. You don't want to end up being robotic. You don't want to end up in a situation where you're following action after action after action after action without any curiosity about why you're doing it or whether you should be doing it. I think it's about really recognizing that you can choose your own path. And I think that actually having curiosity about ideas, curiosity about science, about philosophy is a really good way to start. Because the thing, selling out doesn't mean selling stuff that you make. It means changing your values because you got paid some money.

36:26So if we made our own merch like that's not selling out but if we started selling rfk jr's book to science then we've like abandoned our principles i do think that a society is healthier and bluntly happier when they ask more questions, when they are more curious. And I think that in the tiniest possible way that we can contribute to a culture which allows room for that, I do actually bluntly, maybe this is just on my bad days when I want to feel like I'm doing something good for the world, but I do actually bluntly, maybe this is just on my bad days when I want to feel like I'm doing something good for the world. But I do actually think a little bit that the stuff that we do does do that a tiny bit.

37:13We make silly little Instagram shorts that aren't important, don't change the world, but they're better than the slop that's out there. I don't know. I think they can change the world. I think they're part of the world, even if they're silly and small. That's what the world is. It's a bunch of silly and small stuff. And at the very least, we're kind of putting out another perspective, you know, another little hook that makes things less smooth and makes it more curious. But it can't just be us. Yeah. It has to be you. And your questions, which you reliably send us in to the rest of the time at girlhanger.com. And we enjoy every single one of them. And we enjoy all the questions on the subreddit and you guys

38:05have these conversations about them and they can be about the most trivial things but yet the act of talking about them is not trivial at all that's like community exactly so thank you yeah genuinely thank you um and we will see you next week. T'was many nights before Christmas, and one woman knew she needed a tree, so to Wayfair she flew. She found more decor and added to cart. Merry Christmas to all. Get your Wayfair head start. For holiday decor you can count on, Wayfair she flew. She found more decor and added to cart. Merry Christmas to all. Get your Wayfair head start. For holiday decor you can count on, Wayfair delivers. Carhartt's holiday gift guides were built in collaboration with the greatest gift giver of all time, Santa Claus himself.

38:58Old St. Nick counts on Carhartt's durable gear to have his back through rain, sleep, and snow on the biggest night of the year. Because when everyone's counting on you to do your job, what else would you wear to work? Tap the banner to grab a gift for every hardworking person on your holiday shopping list, or head to Carhartt.com. When you spend enough time around great companies, you notice that the best ones treat trust as a growth strategy, not a box to check. Vanta helps companies build and prove trust from day one. Its agentic trust platform connects compliance, risk, and trust at enterprise scale. Vanta delivers a 526% return on investment over three years and pays for itself in just three months. Learn why over

39:4416,000 of the fastest growing companies use Vanta at Vanta.com.