 So, good evening everybody. The second life in this moment is a way also to escape from a rather green reality here. And I am afraid in Italy we are experiencing something which will become sadly familiar to all of you in the coming months. I mean, it's... This pandemic is spreading to the speed of the light. It's really one of the most unpleasant time in my personal life, I would say. In any case, it's a pleasure to be here. And I hope that... Well, I mean, at the end if you wish I can give you more detail on what's happening here in Italy, but the situation is really unpleasant. And we took all the needed measures well in advance, but not much to say. Ok, can you see the slides? Because I see them in a quite confused way. Ok, good. So, nice to be back. Thank you for inviting me again. It is always a pleasure to be in second life. Even though, as you can see from the bed shape of my avatar, I am not anymore as a frequent customer as I was in the past, but I even forgot how to assemble some details of my avatar. Must work with it. Ok, tonight I am going to speak about something completely different from what are my normal research interests. And therefore, this is not really a seminar, it's just a set of thoughts. Thoughts on which I and some friends from the philosophy department at the University are beginning to put together. And everything starts from our deep belief that even though methods and goals are often different, there is a substantial uniqueness in the way human brain, humans react to internal stimuli. And therefore, there is a very strict link, a very close link between arts, physics, biology, all sorts of sciences and human discipline. But the topic is incredibly large. We focus on two aspects, which I think are particularly interesting, because they also give very clear examples of what we mean in a unique framework in which the human being develops. Basically, these two contexts are painting and physics. But the same type of thoughts, which I will expose tonight, can be formulated, can be developed in each field. It doesn't matter whether it is literature or painting or sculpture or music. Basically, the same consideration all through in all cases. So, let's start. Let's see if everything works fine. Yes, but basically the tonight thoughts will focus on these four different points. As science influenced arts, but also as art influenced science. Usually, there is a clear cut answer to the first question and it is obviously yes, because artists use a lot of technological developments, they use new type of materials for colors, they use new type of materials for expressing themselves. They use perspective, which is based on geometry. Many artists also use math. Therefore, there is no doubt that in some sense science is influenced arts. And also, the second question, as art influenced science, is something which is a little less obvious, but the answer is yes, because science has been inspired by many needs in the fields of architecture, in the fields of music. These are trivial questions, which basically do not deserve much of your time and of my time. The second set of questions is art to art and science possible outside of a culture in the anthropological sense. And I will try to show that it is, the answer is somewhere in the middle between yes and no. Here as culture we mean what defines a culture, like the Inuit in the Arctic regions or the Native Americans in their culture. Here a set of behaviors and traditions or myths or legends, which define a culture. And so, in the same equation, which is does it make sense to keep parts and sciences separate, if so, what is the criteria to separate them? And the answer is obviously not. But not so obviously, I would say, because many people keep claiming that there is a sort of distinction. I mean, I'm sure that many of you have heard people who say, well, you know, I have an artistic temperament. I understand nothing about mathematics. Like they are two different things. And Chantal knows that I am prone to use trivial language, but this is plain bullshit. Not so, I mean, culture is just fun. Of course, we cannot control all of it because we are limited in the capability of our brain. But the intermingling of different disciplines is so strong that there is no way to separate sides from art or from any other form or from any other intellectual process. But this is a frame, the general context of the framework. Let's go to some more detailed thing. In the relationship between art and science, let's focus on some similarities which you can find in the way professionals describe their work. I mean, therefore, in the way artists define art and in the way scientists define science. Both of them are organized perception of reality. On this, there is no doubt. No one of us doubts that an artist try to represent something accordingly to some paradigm in which he developed in his brain and that this paradigm is strongly influenced by everything that artist in his life, the way he grew up, what he started. Therefore, Roy Lichtenstein is a famous artist of the 60s, he said that organized perception is what art is. Hugo Genn said something which is very familiar to what we claim in science that there are only two types of artists, revolutionaries and plagiarists. Reiner Maria Lirk, the famous writer, says that arts is an explosion of clarity. So basically it's the eureka moment. You suddenly understand something that you have never understood before. In the means of law, who is a very famous Italo-German writer, also say that art is nature as perceived to a temperament, because basically it's the same thing which Roy Lichtenstein and he are lepers. And now about science. Well, there is no art without facts and no science without facts. This is again a writer Vladimir Nabokov, but Thomas Kuhn, who is one of the most famous philosophers of science, one of the most famous epistemologists, says that there is a revolutionary science and paradigmatic one, exactly like an art. Mike Norton says that dreams are what the guy does and art is what defines us, math is what makes it all possible and love is what lights up our way. And finally, the more famous than anyone else, René Descartes says, is with me everything turns into mathematics. Philosophical issues related to scientific discovery arise about the nature of human creativity, specifically about whether the eureka moment can be analysed and about whether there are rules, algorithms, guidelines, heuristics, according to which such a novel, let's add, can be same for the encyclopedia of philosophy. Ok, so basically both fields, if we want to separate them into fields, give more or less the same description of what they are doing and what their goal methods can be different, but the final goals and the purpose is the same, the description of light. And I also would like to point out this statement from Jean Lepierge. I don't know whether you ever heard of him, I'm quite sure you have. He is one of the most outstanding figures in the field of children's psychology, basically. He has been studying the way human beings develop consciousness and thought, since more than 40 years, and most of what we know nowadays comes from his research. And he says also that human knowledge is based on vision, from vision we derive abstractions. This is true for artists, this is true for scientists, this is true for everyone else. Our paradigm, our perception of the world, our perception of society, depends on vision. If you think about it, almost all the concepts we use are based on some visual perception. Even in geometry we need to visualize vision, only in very high level, very high level mathematics, you stop visualizing things because you start understanding formulas, but all the rest is based basically on vision. And vision is what defines basically what we are in the end. I am not going to give much detail about this because that is a different topic, but nowadays it is also clear that by understanding vision we are capable to understand human intelligence and also to build the foundation for the artificial intelligence to come, which is basically the... Sorry, this is the slide which I presented in my other talks, one about the work I do, which is the way humans develop their knowledge. I mean, when a baby is born, he starts building categories on the basic... He is an empty tablet. He has no a priori knowledge. He has just very sophisticated software inside it. And by being exposed to thousands of sounds of images and so on, he trains his neural networks. And for instance, from the vision of several tens or hundreds of bottles, it defines an idea of a bottlehood which he will keep for all his life and which will allow him to recognize a bottlehood along with it. This is true for the idea of space, for the idea of time, for everything, for the idea of dog. All concepts we have in our mind are the results of a similar process where basically our brain gathers examples from external stimuli and converts them into abstract concepts. How can this help us in what we want to talk? I mean, we have to make choices in what we are going to discuss because arts and science have been around for more than a few thousand years. We have very well defined epochs in which both of them had quite a strong person. We could focus on classic Greece, we could focus on Egypt, on science and art, or we could move to renaissance. Or we could go to the later renaissance to the work by Galileo. But what I think is more useful is to focus on the most reason of this revolutionary period in which things began to change. Therefore, we shall focus mainly on the relationship between painting and physics at the beginning of last century. I want to emphasize this sentence by Pablo Picasso because it's exactly in the same line of what we are saying. I mean, many people believe that art is talent and science is a study. It's absolutely not true. Art, everything, to achieve excellence in any field you need to study a lot. It doesn't matter whether you are a scientist, it doesn't matter whether you are an artist, it doesn't matter whether you are a painter or a musician, but if you want to master a field, you need to acquire to develop an awareness of what has been done in that field and what will take place. So, I mean, I often laugh when I see people who suddenly, you know, because they are not much more to do the side, you know, to become artists in order, you know, to feel their free time. Art is a serious business, exactly like science, like mathematics, like physics, like biology. You can be an amateur, but if you want to be a professional, you need to be. To spend, let's say, your proper share of years studying what has been done before and where you are now. Because if you don't do this, you never do anything really original. OK. Please look carefully at these two paintings. I think they are the best simplification of what we are going to say. I am not going to tell you for the moment the name of the painter, but it's just to prove what I am saying, that basically an artist is not someone, a real artist, is not someone like, you know, a romantic creature, you know, and just as a talent and from one day to the other starts doing master. And remember these two paintings, please. It will be a surprise. To give you an example, I already showed this slide in my astronomical paintings and to tell you the truth, this is also where my interest in the relationship between paintings and science began. I mean, many years ago in Madrid, and there so this wonderful painting of Paul Rubens. Rubens was one of the best painters of the 17th century, which depicts Saturn devoring his children. It's fantastic. One thing, originally I was an astronomer and therefore one thing caught my attention and there are those three stars which are in the ellipses, which are above the god. Why? And this is a proof of how cultured, how deep was the culture of Paul Rubens. Look at the date, 1636. At that time there were no professional journals, there was obviously no internet and neither telephone or things like this. And the news spread of scientific discoveries and so on spread across Europe at a very low speed. To go from Florence to Paris could take even more than two weeks, four weeks of travel. Therefore, try to imagine how much time it would have taken for renews to spread across Europe. Years. Okay. Why there are these those three stars above Saturn? This planetation is quite intriguing. In, sorry, let me make the same mistake. Okay. It's quite intriguing. In 1610 Galileo Galilei sent a strange anagram to some of his courtes parlor. You know, before scientific journals were established, scientific anagrams were used to claim a priority when you had discovered something but you were not so sure about its interpretation. You didn't want to make a fool of yourself claiming that you had discovered something, but you also wanted to avoid that someone else could discover it before you. Galileo, Kepler, many others, use Christian elegans and so on. Used to say that this letter where they made anagrams which contained the discovery but were not easy to be understood. And this anagram meant something very simple. Altissimum in Latin Altissimum planetan tergeminum observati which translated it how you observe the highest and more distant planet as a triple star. When Galileo pointed this telescope to Saturn, he saw it as a triple star just because his telescope and this is something which should be remembered when we discuss Galileo, his telescope was very bad, terrible quality, terrible glass, terrible aberration and we could not see the rings which we know around Saturn. But this the planet as it is depicted on the first image on the upper left corner of the slide like a main central body with two smaller bodies on the side. The other drawings represent the way the other astronomers you see there on the right side have observed the planet. The first one to realize in 1651 that what they were observing was not you know a triple body or renown for our things ladies but the planet with the ring was Christian Eugen John Domenico Cassini sort of in 1650. No, Christian Eugen it was much time later. What does he mean? That for Rubens it was a painter who was informed on the most advanced discoveries in the field of astronomy. Rubens was working in Spain at the time I am quite sure. Galileo was in Italy communication was very slow took place through very informal very strange channels but already 20 years later Rubens was aware of the discovery of Galileo of Saturn as a triple star and when he painted the Saturn the god Saturn there in his children he also wanted to celebrate the discovery by Galileo by putting those three stars on the top of the pit. Ok. This is a typical example. Examples like this are low rover the history of science in the history of picture you can find them everywhere from the Neolithic paintings through the whole history of modern art and science. The two communities have always been very well informed of what the others were doing but the main thesis behind these the behind these presentation is another one in and let me first present the thesis and then to give some evidence about that I think we will write at the end of the longer fort we will try to write something about that but this is very useful human culture is one the social paradigm changes because of modification in environment changes in the social culture and so on and the perception that humans as a collective entity have of this change in paradigm changes and our way of representing this change obliged us to make deep changes in all fields so we have just one adjustment of the cultural paradigm to an evolving reality and this adjustment takes place in all fields arts, music, history, whatever science and in some cases artists come before scientists and in other cases science anticipate art so basically we find that in the same period there are incredible revolutions in arts incredible revolutions in science focusing on the same topics and that these revolutions sometimes take place first in arts and sometimes they take place in science but it's matter of years not all decades it's just in few years one comes slightly before the other and the fantastic example is what happened at the beginning of the 20th centuries that has been one of the most prolific, most creative moment in the human history on one end art was completely revolutionized by what we shall see in few seconds basically we left realism to move to post impressions to move to something completely different which is art and in science we moved from classical mechanics to special relativity general relativity from classical physics to quantum mechanics and in both cases the the key factors was a different perception of space and time and of light and this is quite amazing because both communities were conscious that they had to change the way they were understanding the main concept of space, time light and matter at the same moment and they did it in two completely different way at the same time in some cases physics was first and some cases art was first and I think this is the best proof that there is a hidden engine in human culture which pushes forward and with no clear cut distinction between fields and something which we used to organize our knowledge not exist at all just a few words about the starting point which is primitive art and it's very well it's believed nowadays and I think most of us agree with that that primitive art and also tribal art and most of oriental art have a completely different understanding of space and time with what respect with what we do nowadays because if you look at work of art from very early age or from farist you find that the artist does not depict the object as it is in a realistic approach but basically they try to represent what the artist feels about that object so basically these feelings these interpretation of the objects represented on pottery ropes, fabrics simple geometrical forms and each one of these forms is usually charged with symbolic meaning also what you see is that perception of space and time both primitive and oriental culture is not Newtonian at all we shall be more clear about these in a few seconds here for instance you see these fantastic drawings by Chinese painters early painters of the century where you see the immortal spluttered ink on the left which I think is fantastic something which in the west we began to see only very recently in the last 50-60 years so you know the primordial chaos which reminds us of a fractal structure you know on the right side but also if you go and see what the anthropologist say about these tribal artists see that basically they do not have a perception of reality organized in strict concepts of space and time as we do and for instance deignuit from the no-artic circle is that they don't perceive the space as static space I mean they live in an environment where there are no reference points and they do not have a well defined set of measure for space and they have no uniform division for time they basically perceive space and time which is ruled by nature and in their artworks you have something asher-like basically the object feels the space and this is really completely the opposite of what was taking place in the western art in the late 19th century let's say till the beginning of the 20th century when something happened in the west in sorry this is has nothing to do with it ok so remember this primitive art is a non-Newtonian non-Euclidean perception of space and time and space and time depend on the observer depend on the observer and are not defined in an absolute way on the other side before 1905 in physics I mean the paradigm was ruled by Newton where time and space were something completely different and it was the absolute true mathematical time basically it was a time which was defined independently of the observer outside of the observer which existed in spite of the observer and this suddenly changed in physics let's see first what happened in physics and then we go ahead in 19 blank realize that light is not a continuous but it's basically an ensemble of particles and start and basically changes the nature of light in 1905 Einstein demonstrates that this light is has also the property of a physical body and not a wave in 1905 again Einstein reformulate the concepts of space and time with special relativity saying that the space and time are no longer absolute but they depend on the relative state of motion of the observer and of the observer the main basically there is a contraction of space time depending on the speed in which two objects are moving relative to one another so basically space and time became no longer absolute but relative there was a lot you know so this understanding about the meaning of this relativity but it was a momentous development but it was not at the end of the story because in physics in the coming years there were other revolutions the Broly the Broly demonstrated that in 1924 light was both wave and particles and that particles were both wave and solid matter so basically there was no longer a clear cut distinction between particles of matter and particles of light they basically were different when shared many properties in common this led the year after the birth of quantum mechanics in by Heisenberg's Schrodinger and where the main idea is there is no longer clear cut separation between observer and observer so basically nature does not exist by itself by what we perceive of nature is affected by the observer but also nature itself is affected observer of entities and observers intrinsically coupled so this was an incredible change in the way in the way space, time, light matter had been consumed in the preceding years ok, let's see what happened in art before 1905 many things had already began happening in the field of revising the general idea of space and time but the struggle reached the peak in the years between 1905 and 1908 especially in France Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Russia where basically it became clear that the impressionist approach was over and that double perspective geometric construction which was at the base of the impressionist did not reflect anymore the needs of the current paradigm and they also realized that art reached the limit and they had to move out of the two dimensional limitation posed by the canvas and very nice thing so let me go back today to two paintings if you don't check on internet or if you don't know before can you guess who painted these two paintings I'm looking at the chat who is the painter don't check on internet what do you think it's Picasso Pablo Picasso before 1905 this is what I was telling you Picasso before revolutionizing modern art had studied for many, many years he was a fantastic painter also by himself he was also a fantastic painter by let's say classical standards he knew everything he had to know about painting he knew everything about what but at some point he felt the exception of reality he had was no longer matched by the current artistic paradigm and where was the breakpoint the breakpoint let me move my mouse ok, here 1907 two years after the Einstein paper which remember did not become very popular until many years later, let's say in 1910 at the Museum of Trocadero in Paris there was an exhibit of African masks in Minecraft which really shocked the artistic world because for the first time artists who were looking to a new way of expression this is before what had been missing in art at that point and in that art had missing what was missing was exactly the same thing which was missing in physics before 1905 a coherent representation of space, time, light and matter look at that in this, the second one is 1895 in two years later Picasso was painting the De Mausel de Vignon which is completely different what is the meaning of this revolution Picasso had been shocked by the discovery of the non-euclidean geometry of the breaking in planes and of the different perception of space and time which was present in primitive art and you can see on the right side you see the right corner of the painting you see there is the face of Mademoiselle which is identical to an African mask it took inspiration from this new understanding of and he decided together with many other painters that what was missing painting was the perception of space and perception of time and that space and time depended on the observer exactly as it was being discovered in physics let me show you a few examples Cubism basically what Picasso started was Cubism this is fantastic painting by George Brack who is depicting a village and you can see objects are composed in visual fragments you don't have anymore the house as a unique piece you decompose the house in many pieces these are redistributed over the canvas in such a way that there is no the observer there is no 3D anymore in a sequence and all fragments which compose the image are perceived simultaneously as Gertrude Stein said there is no there basically there is you are delocalized in the observer even more fascinating is this violin and candle on the left side where you can see the violin for all possible perspectives this is a way instead of rotating the object instead of looking at the object in a temporal sequence from different angles you see all angles simultaneously and you live to your brain the task of reconstructing the object look also on the right side the Diego Rivera where the gate the painting of Zapata where you see all the items all together and you have this fragmented perception of reality this was one way to react to the stimuli but there are many others let's forget this one because otherwise we run very long another one was the surrealism and relativistic distortion which was introduced by many people but mainly by Savo Tordali Savo Tordali was also depicting very clearly the disruption of time in painting here you see these clocks slowly melting down slowly adapting to the environment it was a realistic representation of what was taking place in art and that these people knew a lot about science you can also prove in this coming fantastic painting which is corpus hypercubus by Savo Tordali where the cross is transformed in a tesseract and all mathematicians in the audience know that the tesseract is a 3D dimension the 3 dimensional projection the 4 dimensional hypercube again Tordali is putting the element of perception of space and perception of time into a painting which only in appearance looks realistic just because you can recognize the bodies but the hidden meaning is very strong I mean here you have dimensionality of the image which just projects in one moment so it's really yeah it's like breaking boundaries between space and time I absolutely I read the comment in the art nouveau again starts at the international exposition in Paris, well before the physics revolution 1900 and this is absolutely transversals in architecture, painting, design and it was dictated as a reaction to the industrial revolution and it deeply changed the way things were perceived. Look at this in that period before it happened in physics remember 1900 the work by Max Planck arts had realized that the perception of light was right and they moved from impressionism to post impressionism where basically light was reproduced by colors no longer with the details but just like globes of colors very strong colors this was called fulvism fulvism it's basically that I was from beast from savage and it was a very short period but basically it was a moment where the impressionist movement ended because it had exhausted its possibility to represent the light and the artists had discovered the light at much more in need and in that time and I think this fantastic painting Matisse is really one of the left side is a clear sign that perception is a change another example we are slowly running toward the end also because it's running late I want to tell you about fulvism fulvism was a movement which started in Italy but had a huge impact all across Europe which was started by a crazy guy Filippo Tomasi Marinetti very intelligent, very smart very brilliant but completely weird who basically was impressed by the industrial revolution was impressed by the speed of the modern world by and he realized that time was crucial in art but time means movement so he represented the time not as the cubist but trying to put the movement into the painting and some of his paintings like this one by Umberto Bočoni was a famous, sorry I didn't translate it it's a famous Italian painter of the futurist movement he tried to show here the growing city and basically structure here are blurred out by the movement you don't have anymore a single object but you have just object which are evolving across the canvas here this is a cyclist by a Russian futurist painter Natalia Doncharova where you see that basically she's decomposing the cyclist in different frames like in a picture, like in a film and this is showing frame after frame so you have this tribal image so again time becomes a crucial aspect of the paintings and its relation with the observable this is something which you find nowadays everywhere I cannot see this painting very well, must be very heavy let's see the bargain while I cannot see the image but what you are saying is it's crucial the most shown lines were the the starting point of the futurism of the futurist paintings they really called them dynamic lines they called them evolution lines and they were really driving their the construction of their paintings so, sorry can you see this painting because I cannot see it very well on my PC so I think I must move to the other one it is not loading properly ok now I don't know how to load the video into the into the second life but if you click to this link the one which you see here if you wish I can try to put it in the shot it's this is a subsequent evolution of the relationship between work of art and observer this goes more on the quantum mechanics perception and this also took place more or less simultaneously where basically the work of art was not uniquely depended on the position of the observer so let me see if I if I can copy it for you in just a second I'm trying to do it ok I'm trying to find it in the original and I'll put it on the shot ok ok I think ok so ok I think you should be able to to open it from there and this is one of the many examples now we have in modern art where basically the perception of an object is not unique it depends on the observer it changes as a function of the position of the observer of the time in which it is observed and so on so it's an attempt to bring subjective perception into art and I can show you another example here this is a fantastic piece of work by Shigeo Fukuda I don't know whether why the image doesn't show you properly but please google up this guy and look at this work of art this is basically a conglomerate of works and spoons but when you lighten it from different perspective it forms different objects I'm sorry you cannot see on this image but this is really a let me see if it is in the next one I have a problem with my ah, here we are if you put the lighting in a proper place for instance it becomes a motorcycle that one, the shadow that structure becomes a motorcycle and so on and modern art is full of these things where basically it is trying to reproduce the relation between observer and the observer, look at this fantastic modern sculpture ok, what is it really, I'm not kidding I'm asking you, writing on is a piano, yeah if you look at it from a specific position that one is a mirror it's a perfect piano quite impressive isn't it and playing with perspective but something more than that and so on creating that feeling ok, so let's try to sum up something about this original this initial thoughts about something it's the idea our understanding part of the one of which we are working now it's that when society confronts with the new stimuli the interaction with the new types of images, new types of concepts which for instance arise from a huge shift in technology or a huge shift in societal structure need to be reorganized just it's a sort of compression algorithm we need to reorganize our way of perceiving reality to be able to handle it and revolutionaries doesn't matter whether they are artists or scientists create symbolic language which basically are able to express these new ideas much before words can do it and so it's a sort of preverbal state of human knowledge where images come first in words second and this applies to all field of human knowledge and just focusing but you can find similar stories in music in in everything the reflections and conclusions humans are social animals and they participated in the golden perception paradigm but when we say social paradigm there is something deeper than what we usually mean with this humans are no longer Darwinian animals you know that evolution rules the world but evolution for humans has assumed a completely different meaning because when you deal with Darwin evolution you are saying that basically if there is a change in the environment that by genetic modification the species adapt to the changing environment since we have discovered the fire it is no longer like that human beings react to a changing environment by cultural evolution so the fact that we are social animals social animals with the technology has changed deeply the way we adapt to our environment in other words if it gets cold we do not grow here we start the fire and this is really the main thing behind it as a species we need to react to a changing cultural and changing natural environment and basically the cultural environment is what matters more until we survive if the environment kills us it is a different story but as long as we can survive into the environment I mean the cultural environment is what shapes us and this forces us to go through a cultural adjustment which takes place across all boundaries of human knowledge there is a reflection there is nothing more conformist than the so-called anti-conformist because basically the anti-conformists usually are people who just are adopting a new paradigm but basically from the anthropological point of view it's nice okay exactly we are still evolving but I am very fast I am afraid I don't know what will come out of this coronavirus business because this is really going to change a lot our society okay okay so basically here I am just repeating what I was saying and I just want to show you a book which is where all these things started usually if you can find it read it it is very interesting there is a proof of what I am saying it was not written by either by an artist or by a physicist it was written by a cardiologist it's really fantastic book where some of the things I will be mentioning you can find them there but there is much more to say so thank you very much for listening and as I said you I mean this is just working progress I am done thank you questions? thank you thank you very much if you have any question I guess the other 5 minutes before my dinner time oh about the situation totally rude it's now it's bound to improve for the simple reason that we adopted the containment procedure basically we are isolated in the house you are not allowed to walk outside of your house in many parts of Italy for instance in Naples where I am I am teaching classes online I am doing exams online basically you can go out or buying essential food or drugs but you cannot walk all shops are closed with the exception of pharmacies and a few grocery stores but life is quite orderly even in Naples it's incredible the community is reacting in a wonderful way and I am afraid that there is no safe place in fact to tell you that I am scared by the level of I am Italian but I spent so much time it's a little bit at least as much as I follow news in Italy and I am really astonished by the level of incompetence of it, I mean I know it's not political correct not Trump he's been acting like there was no real danger of the virus spread all across the so I mean I'm afraid that you will lead to the same problems we are having here in Italy but don't be scared I mean just follow the rules he's isolated in the first time and life will slowly go back to a different normality because I think this pandemic is going to teach us a lot it has been changing the way we live in Italy and that is something that we never expected to tell you the truth because Italians are deeply rooted into the if the test changed our way only it can change the way of living of everyone else in the world it's it's something to be extremely careful with but for the rest I mean life is normal just social life has disappeared you know it's one advantage here in Italy is that we have a strong public health system huge I mean even if you are anomalous you are hospitalized for free and everything you get everything for free and you get fantastic treatment if you are poor and I am afraid that in reality this is not true I mean this is going to hit very badly on the poorest and on the less rich layers of the population I mean it's and I think that this pandemic will be over the intelligent people in the world should be able to rethink many their beliefs yeah people in camps in Greece agree so my friends thank you very much for being with me, thank you for giving me the opportunity to present my ideas now I must end because otherwise my wife is going to kill me because they are waiting for me for dinner thank you very much it's always a pleasure to be I hope to see all of you soon and be safe worry a little about these things make all precautions and be safe bye to everybody goodbye