How close are we to humanity’s potential self-destruction? We’ll find out Tuesday morning when the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reveals the new time on its 78-year-old Doomsday Clock.

This setting is the result of extensive research, dialogue, and deliberation by a group of distinguished scientists and Nobel Laureates worldwide. The clock represents a metaphor for the proximity of human self-destruction.

For the last two years, the time has been set at 90 seconds to midnight, symbolizing a dire risk to humanity—either intentional or accidental.

The updated time will be disclosed during a live webcast on Tuesday at 10 a.m. EST. Until then, it remains a closely guarded secret, known only to around twenty scientists and a few staff members involved in the decision.

What is the Doomsday Clock?

Initially, the Doomsday Clock focused solely on the threat of nuclear disaster. In recent decades, other concerns have been included: climate change, artificial intelligence, and the spread of misinformation.

Every year, the Science and Security Board asks two critical questions:

• Is humanity at a lower or higher risk this year compared to the previous year?
• Is humanity safer or at greater risk compared to the 78 years since the clock’s inception?

The answers to these questions help determine the clock’s setting for the upcoming year.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which has managed the clock since 1947, uses it as a metaphor to illustrate humanity’s proximity to self-annihilation.

What Inspired the Doomsday Clock?

In 1945, on the anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, scientists involved in the Manhattan Project—who created the first atomic bombs—started a mimeographed newsletter known as The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

Two years later, reflecting on the use of atomic bombs in Japan, these scientists convened to discuss the existential threats posed by nuclear conflict.

“They were concerned that the public was not aware of how close we were to the end of civilization as we knew it,” said Rachel Bronson, the current president and CEO of the Bulletin.

Martyl Langsdorf, an artist and spouse of Manhattan Project physicist Alexander Langsdorf Jr., conceptualized the clock as a way to visualize the looming threat.

They named it the Doomsday Clock.

“It conveyed the idea that if we didn’t take action, it would continue to move toward midnight, leading us potentially to an apocalypse,” said Bronson.

What Does Midnight Symbolize on the Doomsday Clock?

The clock evaluates only risks that humans create for themselves. For instance, it does not consider an incoming meteor but does account for the risk posed by dangerous virus enhancements.

From the 1950s to the 1980s, the threat of nuclear war felt imminent. Although it may seem less pressing today, the danger still exists, according to Robert Socolow, an environmental scientist and professor emeritus at Princeton University.

“The nuclear threat is hard for younger generations to grasp, as their grandparents and parents lived in constant fear of it. But they should be concerned,” he stated.

Today’s risks differ from those of the past; instead of primarily fearing the Soviet Union, we now face dangers from non-state actors, such as terrorists, and countries like North Korea, which might possess hazardous weapons.

What Is the Current Status of Nuclear Threats?

The original concept of the Doomsday Clock revolved around the threat of nuclear destruction. As President Donald Trump began his second term, the outlook regarding nuclear threats remains uncertain.

The last active nuclear arms control agreement, New START, which regulates U.S. and Russian nuclear warhead limits, is set to expire in early 2026.

During a recent World Economic Forum, the U.S. President expressed a desire for denuclearization and mentioned discussions with leaders from Russia and China. However, newer appointees, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have expressed skepticism about future arms reductions. The Pentagon’s head indicated arms control efforts should only be pursued when beneficial, noting that both China and Russia have rejected U.S. attempts for meaningful dialogue since 2020.

Moreover, North Korea’s nuclear arsenal continues to raise security and diplomatic concerns for the U.S. and its allies, echoing the apprehensions felt during Trump’s first term.