#ScientificCommunity

skuaskua
2025-06-07

How much did the failure of the to accept and communicate the nature of many serious result in Trump losing in 2020 and then returning in 2024?

(This is apart from the millions of deaths that the initial COViD-19 emergency caused outside the USA.
The downstream failures around and indoor air quality remain largely unresolved.)

Hypothetical:
Trump wins 2020. Covid deaths +++. Gaza explodes in his hands.

skuaskua
2025-06-07

@JoePajak

"After William died in 1963, public health experts largely dismissed the concerns he and Mildred had raised about airborne infections – a tragic mistake that left the world unprepared for the covid-19 pandemic. But the couple did manage to persuade the scientific community that tuberculosis, at least, was airborne."

Superstition was closer to reality than science?

Seems an was stronger in the than a .

Bernd von Mallinckrodt 🦋vonmallinckrodt.bsky.social@bsky.brid.gy
2025-05-19

What if #gravity and #entropy are just two perspectives of the same oscillatory order? This white paper proposes a unified equation and invites the #scientificcommunity to critically examine this foundational hypothesis.🖖

Bernd von Mallinckrodt 🦋vonmallinckrodt.bsky.social@bsky.brid.gy
2025-05-11

Intuition meets physics: E = S × (Smax)² a metaphysical extension of Einstein’s energy paradigm. #OntologyOfVibration I invite the #scientificcommunity to explore, examine, and potentially verify this idea across disciplines. (Attached: timestamped PDF as initial documentation.)

Image Description (English):
The image features the equation E = S × (Sₘₐₓ)² centered on a deep blue, textured background. The formula is written in elegant, white serif font, conveying clarity and scientific seriousness. Below the equation, the title “ONTOLOGY OF VIBRATION” appears in capital letters, harmoniously aligned. The overall aesthetic evokes a fusion of precision and metaphysical depth, making the image suitable for philosophical-scientific presentations or posts aimed at interdisciplinary discourse.🖖Ontology of Vibration
An Epistemological Formula by Bernd von Mallinckrodt
Timestamp of initial documentation: May 11, 2025 - 08:03 CET
Formula:
E = S x (Smax)?
Interpretation:
This equation expresses an ontological perspective on energy. The symbols denote:
- E as holistic energy,
- S as the fundamental vibration of a system or entity,
- Smax as the maximal boundary vibration (resonance with the cosmos, source, or divine).
The formula proposes a metaphysical extension of classical physics, merging insights from modern science, vibration theory, and Vedantic thought. It suggests that existence itself should be understood as a vibrating structure within a holofield of potential.
Authorship:
This theory was developed by Bernd von Mallinckrodt (born September 1, 1962, in Wesel, Germany) and is hereby documented with this timestamped page as an initial conceptual record.
This page may serve as a reference for future verification or acknowledgment of authorship.
© Bernd von Mallinckrodt - Ontology of Vibration - First Edition 2025🖖
Megaphone :verified:Megaphone@lgbt.earth
2025-02-26
#ScienceUnderSiege: The Orlando Research Conference Fallout

Something alarming is happening in the #ScientificCommunity, and it’s not getting the attention it deserves. A recent #NIH-backed #neuroscience conference in #Orlando turned into a disaster. Research sessions were canceled after being mistaken for “#DEI” initiatives, and funding was pulled.

One session on the diversity of afferent firing in the cochlea (how nerve cells transmit sound) was targeted because people saw the word “#diversity” and assumed it was political. #MAGA hat-wearing hotel guests presumably unaffiliated with the conference reportedly vandalized posters.

The nescient reaction of the MAGA hat-wearing malcontents to the word “diversity”—mistaking a scientific discussion on neural firing patterns in the cochlea for a political agenda—exemplifies a dangerous blend of #ignorance and ideological rigidity. Their inability to differentiate between linguistic context and #partisan buzzwords not only disrupted legitimate research but also underscored the broader issue of anti-intellectualism undermining scientific progress.

Worse, researchers discovered their already earned funding was revoked, postdoc opportunities disappeared, and the conference felt like a #funeral for the field as careers crumbled in real time.

Meanwhile, the NIH was banned from attending due to a new administration-imposed blackout on communications and travel, delaying critical #research on #Cancer, #HeartDisease, and #Diabetes.

#Science depends on open inquiry—but now, #political interference is gutting #research. This isn’t just about one conference. It’s a direct attack on scientific progress. If we don’t stand up now, what’s next?

🔬 Science must remain free from political control.

#ScienceUnderAttack #ResearchMatters #SaveScience #FreedomOfInquiry #ScienceNotPolitics #AcademicFreedom
The Global Plant CouncilglobalplantGPC
2025-02-12

ASPB Reaffirms Its Commitment to Diversity and Inclusion

Statement from ASPB’s Board of Directors, February 11, 2025. The Society remains dedicated to fostering a welcoming, diverse, and supportive scientific community.

globalplantcouncil.org/aspb-re via American Society of Plant Biologists

Wordcloud with the words community, ASPB, scientists, biology, plant, stem, diversity and science highlighted
Niva Dailynivadaily
2024-10-05

⭕️മധ്യപ്രദേശിൽ ഡിജിറ്റൽ അറസ്റ്റ് തട്ടിപ്പ്: ശാസ്ത്രജ്ഞന് 71 ലക്ഷം രൂപ നഷ്ടം
Read full story: nivadaily.com/scientist-loses-
Join our Whatsapp group
chat.whatsapp.com/CktzgxHMaoo8

2024-08-17

🐍 Bring #EuroSciPy 2025 to your city! 🏙️

We’re seeking enthusiastic organizers to host the next edition of this vibrant conference. Showcase your city to the global scientific #Python #community and help shape the future of open-source science.

Submit your proposal today!
🚀 forms.gle/MfVMCpki225JML4o7

#ScientificPython #PythonCommunity #ScientificCommunity #SciPy #EuroSciPy2025 #CallForVenues #CallForOrganizers #FOSS #OpenSourceScience

2024-08-14

This week we are talking about our Pilot phase activities! This week it is all about WP1, Coordination!

Swipe and read to know about it!

#PSDI #science #scientificcommunity #communitybuilding #pilotproject

Matt Willemsenmattotcha
2024-03-17

The rules of invention do not reflect the realities of the inventive process. Here's how to fix it
phys.org/news/2024-03-realitie

Technische Universität Münchentu_muenchen@wisskomm.social
2023-12-18

Christian Pfleiderer, Professor of #Topology of Correlated Systems, is the new Scientific Director of Research Neutron Source Heinz Maier-Leibnitz (FRM II) from January 1, 2024. 👏 He aims to make the research accessible to the entire #scientificcommunity: go.tum.de/509989

#neutrons #physics

📷A.Eckert

Paul-Drude-Institutpdi
2023-11-17

PDI Colloquium Series on 2D Magnetic Materials and Heterostructures

From November 2023 to January 2024, scientists from across Europe will visit PDI to speak about their work in 2D Magnetic Materials and Heterostructures.

More info: pdi-berlin.de/news-events/semi

Cancer Care Parcelcancercareparcel
2023-11-06

Dr Luis A. Gomez-Sarosi discusses cutting-edge innovation to improve early cancer detection and survival:

dlvr.it/SyR479

2023-07-24

@SusanneGeu Ich hoffe sehr, dass die #ScientificCommunity sich auf Mastodon oder anderen Fediverse-Diensten einfindet. Und diese Dienste werden hoffentlich von den Wissenschaftseinrichtungen dieser Welt gehostet. Mehr zu meinen Ideen dazu auf meinem Blog unter davidlohner.de/2023/07/a-fedi-

Auf der anderen Seite fehlt ja immer noch die #Wisskomm, alsoTransfer+Sichtbarmachung von wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen in die Gesellschaft. Hier kommen wir wohl kaum um kommerzielle "soziale" Medien herum.

2023-04-30

Fascinating how scientists think… the ‘thought problems’ they sometimes employ to develop benchmarks for new theories. Like this new #physics paper in the #quantummechanics and #quantumgravity space: “Black holes resolve paradoxes by destroying quantum states” #science #scientificCommunity sciencenews.org/article/black-

2023-04-15

“Climate change is now reaching the end-game, where very soon humanity must choose between taking unprecedented action, or accepting that it has been left too late and bear the consequences. Therefore, it is all the more important to listen to non-mainstream voices who do understand the issues and are less hesitant to cry wolf. Unfortunately for us, the wolf may already be in the house.”
- Hans-Joachim Schnellhuber, founding director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research [1]

There is a 10% chance, according to #ClimateModels, that we are on course for a total collapse of #Earth's #climate (the #atmosphere - #ocean #ClimateSystem) - 6°C of #GlobalWarming above #PreIndustrial (pre-1750) levels [1]. Which is what 700 ppm atmospheric #CO2 would bring. We are projected to reach 700 ppm CO2 in 2075 (and 950 ppm by 2100) [2]. This would mean not only #EconomicCollapse and complete breakdown of #human #society, but a 6th #MassExtinction of nearly all #species. And very likely near extinction of humans. Would you board an aircraft that you knew had a 10% #probability of crashing? Well, the #IPCC and most mainstream scientists apparently would. 38% of the denizens of #Mastodon who responded to a poll I did the other day would at least consider boarding an aircraft with a 1% chance of crashing. If 1% of aircraft flights ended in a crash, that would mean over 1,000 crashes per day. At 10% probability of a crash it would be 10,000 per day. Unthinkable, right? Apparently not. Not when it comes to playing with the earth's #climate. There's still a 90% chance of this not happening, after all, the IPCC reasons. So it is not “very likely”, not even “likely”. This represents ignorance of #risk and #RiskAnalysis, ignorance of the way #probability and #statistics works in #ComplexSystems, ignorance of #FatTail probability distributions, ignorance of the fact that all #NaturalSystems are complex systems, which by their nature are subject to #TippingPoints – and a bizarre belief that the #NormalDistribution (the so-called #BellCurve) applies to natural systems, which it decidedly does not. Allow me to elaborate.

A couple of days ago, I ran a #ClimateCrisis #poll masquerading as a poll asking if you would board an aircraft which you knew had a 1% chance of crashing. The hints that this poll was allegorical were the #Climate hashtags and the link to the straightforward climate poll I ran in parallel with it.) As to the latter, which asked “Can we ignore unlikely but high risk #GlobalWarming scenarios?”, 80% of respondents to both the German and English versions said “Absolutely Not! We risk annihilation of #Earth!” Only 7% picked “the #IPCC ignores these [scenarios]. Me too.” This closely mirrors a statistically valid poll of 14,000 adult German citizens published in August 2021 in which 74% of people responded that humanity is about to face an #ecological #catastrophe [3]. But surprisingly (shockingly?) 20% of respondents to the “aircraft crash” poll said they would board the aircraft even if they knew there was a 1% chance of it crashing, and 18% said they weren't sure and “would have to think about it” (94 people responded to the “aircraft” poll, 45 to the “climate” poll). Which means 38% of people would at least consider boarding such a plane. Very bad idea.

Now #Mastodon polls are in no way statistically valid (but then neither are many commercial polls that get touted by news organizations). Nonetheless, the results are very illuminating when it comes to how the IPCC, #governments, #business, and indeed the #ScientificCommunity are dealing, or rather not dealing, with the fact that there is not a 1% probability but a 10% chance that #humans have put our planet on a trajectory in which #humans and most #species may well become #extinct sometime in the 22nd Century. And #SocietalCollapse will likely happen later in our present century. The level of ignorance of #probability and #statistics in #NaturalSystems, specifically the #ocean - #atmosphere system – demonstrated by the IPCC and many mainstream scientists shockingly parallels the ignorance of these same subjects by 38% of the respondents to the “aircraft poll”. (For one thing, there are projected to be about 40,000,000 aircraft flights in 2023 [4]. If there were a 1% chance of a crash, that would mean 400,000 crashes this year, or over 1000 crashes per day. And yet, when we look dispassionately at the #ClimateScience, we are treating the very real models of human-caused global-warming (Anthropogenic Global Warming, or #AGW) as if we've intentionally boarded an aircraft that has a 10% chance of crashing. Which would mean 10,000 aircraft crashes every day. Unthinkable, right? Surely no one would ever board an aircraft if this were the case.

In the case of Earth's climate, what would constitute a “crash”, the complete collapse of human society, nearly complete #MassExtinction of most terrestrial species, a broad band (± 20° latitude north and south of the equator) of our #oceans at hot tub temperatures, and an even broader band (± 30° N/S of the equator) which would be uninhabitable for humans, and large regions even further north and south (the #American #Southwest, the interior of #Australia, most of the #Mediterranean, #Arabia, #Spain, #Portugal, #India, #Pakistan, the south of #France, to name a few) which would be uninhabitable during the summer months? Scientists agree that 6°C of global warming above #PreIndustrial (before 1750 CE) would certainly do it; quite possibly less than that, due to positive #FeedbackLoops, but let's be conservative, like most scientists, and go with 6°C. What are the chances of that? Well, the chance of 6°C of warming within the next 100 years is 10%!

Here is an excellent graphic (see attached screenshot) from the economists Gernot Wagner's and Martin Weitzman's 2015 book “Climate shock: the economic consequences of a hotter planet” [5] (well worth a read, by the way). That doesn't quite look like a Normal distribution, does it? A pretty wonky looking “bell curve”. That's because the statistics that underlie the curve are not Normally distributed. It is not a bell curve. A Normal distribution is based upon the statistical concept known as the Central Limit Theorem #CentralLimitTheorem, and the Law of [Statistical] Universality which arises from it. And that law works great – when it is applied to data whose variables do not interact with each other or with other systems, when there are no higher order interactions of variables, when there are no #FeedbackLoops, etc. If you're looking at a distribution of the heights or weights of 1000 randomly selected #penguins, or people, the data will be Normally distributed, it will follow a “bell curve”, because the Central Limit Theorem tells us it will be so, and the Law of Universality must apply. But none of this is true for natural systems, whether a #biome, an #ecosystem, or the ocean-atmosphere system that is (primarily) responsible for Earth's climate. There is another kind of statistical universality, indeed a statistical law of universality, that applies to all complex systems, and thus all natural systems, called Tracy-Widom Universality (first elaborated in 1992 by the mathematicians Craig Tracy and Harold Widom) [6]. The statistical distributions that arise from Tracy-Widom Universality are not symmetrical “bell curves” but skewed distributions with “fat tails”. Exactly that of the statistical likelihood of reaching or exceeding 6°C of global warming as shown in Wagner's and Weitzman's figure.

Are we totally screwed? Or rather, have we totally screwed ourselves and the planet? As of now, it certainly looks that way. And perhaps we are collectively okay with this. There is after all a 90% chance we won't reach or exceed 6°C of warming. But even the mainstream climate science community acknowledges we are headed for 3°C - 4°C of global warming, and headed there very soon, which will probably be more than enough to set off the collapse of the climate, of the atmospheric and ocean circulation system. And a single species, in about 300 years time, will have managed to destroy the bluest and greenest and most living of planets, 4.5 billion years in the making. It is simply not right.

[1] breakthroughonline.org.au/what

[2] yaleclimateconnections.org/201

[3] fom.de/2021/august/deutschland

[4] statista.com/statistics/564769

[5] archive.org/details/climatesho

[6] quantamagazine.org/beyond-the-

#Klimakrise #Klimawandel #Klima #Erderwärmung #Erderhitzung #Atmosphäre #Ozean #Klimamodell

A probability distribution curve showing eventual global average surface warming of Earth based on passing 700 ppm CO2, indicating a 10% chance of reaching or exceeding 6C of global warming above pre-industrial levels. We are currently projected to reach 700 ppm CO2 in 2075.
Forschung UBTForschungUBT
2023-03-10

Die dt. Übersetzung d. "Action Plan for " ist online verfügbar. Der Plan v. @ScienceEurope, @cOAlitionS_OA, @OPERASEU & @anr soll den Ausbau des nachhaltigen & von der getragenen Ökosystems f. Diamond fördern➡️dfg.de/foerderung/programme/in

2022-11-23

Hi Hendrik @hendrikerz ! Thanks for creating the academic repository on Mastodon. 😉

I have a suggestion: have you considered the option to add a section for scientific journals and another one for research centers. 🤔

github.com/nathanlesage/academ

#AcademicMastodon #Researchers #scientificCommunity

Client Info

Server: https://mastodon.social
Version: 2025.04
Repository: https://github.com/cyevgeniy/lmst