Podcasts about heisenberg

Evénements GESDA/OQI à Genève le 6 maiRencontre organisée par l'Open Quantum Institute sur les questions de gouvernance des technologies quantiques. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/gesda-global_quantumdiplomacy-sciencediplomacy-quantumgovernance-activity-7458144545340440576-nVxe Le quantique au service de l'IA et de la robotique : quels horizons ?Je participais le 12 mai au webinar Le quantique au service de l'IA et de la robotique : quels horizons ? organisé par Meanwhile France, en compagnie d'Amélie Cordier (Graine d'IA), Sacha Stojanovic (Meanwhile) et animé par Mickael Aelbrecht (Micke Science). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su7BhM8iY2o Rencontre quantique à l'Ambassade d'AllemagneLe même jour avait lieu une rencontre à l'Ambassade d'Allemagne avec les écosystèmes quantiques français et allemands, regroupant une centaine de personnes. Quandela en a profité pour confirmer ses différents partenariats en Allemagne, avec Attocube et aussi Munich où ils ont une cleanroom de fabrication de semiconducteurs.https://www.quandela.com/fr/newsroom-posts/franco-german-quantum-technology-cooperation/ QEI workshop à BarceloneIl avait lieu du 18 au 22 mai et rassemblait 112 participants et 40 intervenants, couvrant les mondes académiques et industriels. A noter les interventions de Gerard Milburn (NQCC, UK), Natalia Ares (Oxford), Chris Langer (Quantinuum), Christiane Koch (Berlin), Fernando Brendao (Amazon), et Michael Vasmer (Inria). Le résumé est sur LinkedIn et les vidéos seront bientôt disponibles.https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ezratty_the-third-quantum-energy-initiative-workshop-activity-7463937587116888064-DVNi?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAAAVgdUB3BosVI5xO_hehYGjYCuwBq1TXaA Llivre blanc Quantum computing in the net-zero transition: energy production, management, and efficiency publié par l'European Energy Research Alliance (EERA), Mai 2026 (30 pages).https://www.eera-set.eu/component/attachments/attachments.html?task=view&id=2178 Q-Expo à BilbaoCet événement organisé par QuIC avait lieu du 18 au 20 mai. https://qexpo.org/ Annonce du renouvèlement de la stratégie nationale quantique le 22 mai Le 22 mai 2026, le Président de la République annonçait le renouvèlement du plan quantique de 2021 avec un financement d'un milliard d'euros. C'était accompagné d'un investissement de 550 millions d'Euros pour la filière des semiconducteurs. L'annonce avait lieu au TGCC du CEA à Bruyères-le-Chatel.   Au passage, Nvidia a investi dans la startup Alice &Bob pour plusieurs dizaines de millions d'euros, mais le montant n'est pas public, l'implantation par Quandela de sa future usine de semi-conducteur à Munich. ColibriTD était aussi mis en avant dans les panels de la journée et annonçait une levée de fonds de 4 M€ menée par le fonds allemand Earlybird et la participation à un consortium aux côtés de MDU (Suède), l'ENAC (France) et LOBA (Portugal) avec un budget global d'environ 1 M€ (dont 255 k€ pour ColibriTD) pour développer des solutions d'IA quantique pour optimiser la gestion du trafic aérien.  Inauguration de la ligne pilote Champ'ionle 26 mai lors de cette inauguration à Villach en Autriche en compagnie d'intervenants Allemands et Autrichiens comme Thomas Monz d'AQT. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quantumtechnology-quantumcomputing-iontrap-ugcPost-7465341447311876096-hxy9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAAVgdUB3BosVI5xO_hehYGjYCuwBq1TXaA A venir :Journée en l'honneur de Philippe Grangier à l'IOGS le 4 juin. Voici le lien de retransmission en live.https://youtube.com/live/7aQScUtzvdEFrance Quantum le 16 juin. Billeets gratuits offert par OVHcloud https://www.francequantum.fr/content/full-day-standard-ticket-2026?discount=OVHCLOUDFQ&productid=a1a41d57-08d5-f011-8195-0022487f0371&qty=1Vivatech Panorama de toutes les voies technologiques de l'ordinateur quantique les 25 et 26 juin à Grenoble organisé par la Maison du Quantique Grenoble-Alpes. https://quantalps.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/quantum-technologies-deep-dive-1713265.kjspUne conférence sur la correction d'erreurs fin août à Amsterdam. France Quandela Ils publiaient en compagnie de la société allemande de « contract research » Walrus Computingun préprint d'estimation de ressources pour exécuter un algorithme de simulation d'un modèle de Heisenberg avec leur modèle FTQC SPOQC. Two Layers, No Swaps: Biplanar SPOQC Architecture Improves Runtime of Fermi-Hubbard Simulation by Boris Bourdoncle, Peter-Jan Derks, Théo Dessertaine, and Johannes Frank, arXiv, May 2026 (44 pages). Et, évolutions dans le management. Cyril Dujardin devient Directeur des Opérations, Michel Zecri vice-Président Industrialisation et Michel Paulin (ex-DG d'OVHcloud) est nommé chairman. Cyril Dujardin « supervisera les opérations mondiales de Quandela et accompagnera l'exécution de la stratégie de l'entreprise dans les domaines du produit, de la R&D, du développement commercial, des partenariats et des déploiements clien...

¿Y si la ciencia NO pudiera demostrar que Dios no existe?¿Y si el verdadero descubrimiento de la física moderna no fuera el átomo… sino el observador?En este vídeo exploramos una de las cuestiones más profundas de la historia del pensamiento: los límites de la ciencia para responder a las grandes preguntas de la existencia.Desde Newton, Descartes y Kant hasta Einstein, Heisenberg, Schrödinger y la mecánica cuántica, analizamos cómo la física moderna terminó chocando contra un problema inesperado: el YO.La mecánica cuántica, el problema del observador, el gato de Schrödinger, Kant, el idealismo, el determinismo, la libertad humana, la conciencia y los límites del conocimiento científico se cruzan en un viaje filosófico y científico que pone en duda todo lo que creemos saber sobre la realidad.Este vídeo no pretende darte respuestas definitivas.Pretende algo más importante: hacerte pensar.-----------------------Edición: Ike Leal @ikefuti

Comedian Kyle Bergstresser brings his brand of guffaws to the guys. Kevin gloats about going viral for the World's Largest Fat-Boy while Thomas and Kyle lament starting their days off poorly.The gang gets vulnerable as Thomas gives his friends some love, Kevin celebrates his partner, and Kyle talks about his Heisenberg-inspired Grandma.Kyle gets the trio to test their deception skills in a variation on Would I Lie To You.0:00 Intro and Check In16:20 Open Up30:05 Don't You Dare Lie39:43 Six Degrees of WikipediaKyle Bergstresser:https://www.instagram.com/kyle_bergstresser/https://lnk.to/KyleTheBoyKevin Ramberran:Club Soda Improv:https://www.instagram.com/clubsodaimprovThomas TolesSuperego:https://www.instagram.com/superegoimprovTrigger Happy:https://www.instagram.com/triggerhappycomedy/Motorcycle Rocketship:https://www.instagram.com/motorcyclerocketship/Secret Family Sketch:https://www.instagram.com/secretfamilysketch/Blueprint (First Draft) @ IO Chicago:https://ioimprov.com/shows/Check out our DnD show: 'What We Do in the Basement': https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/what-we-do-in-the-basement/id1552947049FOLLOW Oops All Segments on Instagram: www.instagram.com/oopsallsegmentsFOLLOW Oops All Segments on TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@oopsallsegmentsSUBSCRIBE to Oops All Segments on YouTube: www.youtube.com/@oopsallsegments

Philosophy of Physics Meets Quantum Engineering with Elise CrullWhy This Episode MattersElise Crull is Associate Professor of Philosophy at CCNY and the CUNY Graduate Center, co-author with Guido Bacciagaluppi of The Einstein Paradox (Cambridge, 2024), and was named a Fellow of the American Physical Society in 2025 for her archival work recovering voices like Grete Hermann from the foundations of quantum mechanics. She was also one of the speakers on Helgoland in June 2025 for the centenary of quantum mechanics — opening, as Sebastian notes, by thanking the organizers for the courage to invite a philosopher.This conversation matters because the truce between physicists and philosophers of physics is over. Quantum computing has turned interpretive questions — what counts as entanglement, what decoherence really is, whether causal order can be put in superposition — into engineering questions with budget consequences. If you build, fund, or write about quantum hardware, this episode will sharpen how you hear the words being used around you.SponsorThis episode is brought to you by Outshift, Cisco's incubation engine. The need for computational power is rapidly increasing in every sector. From drug discovery to material innovation to complex financial modeling, classical systems are reaching their absolute limits. It's time for a paradigm shift. The answer is a scalable quantum network, built on open standards and vendor-agnostic architecture. By uniting distributed quantum devices, you unlock limitless computational power. Learn more about the Cisco Universal Quantum Switch at Outshift.com.Go deeper with the blog post.What We Get IntoWhy "decoherence" and "noise" are not interchangeable, and why error correction strategy depends on telling them apartThe six-plus working definitions of entanglement currently circulating in physics — and why "classical entanglement" makes a philosopher's eye twitchWhat Einstein actually objected to in EPR (hint: it wasn't really determinism), drawn from Schrödinger's "Einstein-Paradoxon" correspondence folderIndefinite causal ordering: whether the experimental speedups reflect genuinely acausal physics or our stubbornly classical definitions of "cause" and "signal"How monogamy of entanglement is only monogamous with respect to a single degree of freedom — and why that nuance is already being exploited in entanglement harvestingWhy "it's just a tool" is the most insidious thing an engineer can say about quantum or AI technologyHow the standard heroic-origin story of quantum mechanics structurally erased experimentalists — many of them women like Hertha Sponer — and what that pattern predicts about quantum computing's own emerging origin storyWhat Grete Hermann did to von Neumann's impossibility proof forty years before anyone listenedWhy Crull thinks the next physical theory, whatever succeeds quantum field theory, is likely to be stranger, not tamerResources & LinksGuest LinksElise Crull — CCNY Faculty Profile — Her institutional home, with current research interests and talks.Elise Crull — CUNY Graduate Center Profile — Full publications list including forthcoming work.Elise Crull — Academia.edu — Preprint archive, including her 2024 Leggett–Garg/Feyerabend paper and earlier decoherence work.Books & PapersThe Einstein Paradox (Bacciagaluppi & Crull, Cambridge UP, 2024) — The archival reconstruction of the debate EPR unleashed; the centerpiece of the conversation.Ryckman's BJPS review of The Einstein Paradox (2025) — A scholarly assessment of what the book changes about how we read 1935."Realism with Quantum Faces: The Leggett–Garg Inequalities as a Case Study for Feyerabend's Views" (Crull, 2024) — Her most recent standalone article on macroscopic realism."Physics Scratches a Philosopher's Itch" — APS Physics (2022) — A feature on her work on indefinite causal ordering and causation.Helgoland & HistoryPhysics World: Helgoland 2025 — the Inside Story — Post-event report on the centenary where Sebastian and Elise first met.AIP: "What Happened on Helgoland" — Historiographical pushback on the Heisenberg origin myth.AIP: Crull on Hertha Sponer and the path to wave/particle duality (2026) — Her most recent piece on how standard histories minimize experimentalists.For General AudiencesStarTalk: "The Philosophy of Physics with Elise Crull" (June 2025) — Crull with Neil deGrasse Tyson, kicking off the Einstein Paradox promotion cycle.StarTalk: "How Quantum Physics Complicates Objective Truth" (April 2026) — A complementary, more recent treatment of the same themes.Key Quotes & InsightsOn what philosophy is for: "Every aspect of science we do requires interpretation, because the world isn't just out there. We make choices about how to encounter it."On decoherence vs. noise: Crull notes the question physicists at Duke recently raised with her — how do you tell the difference between decoherence and noise? — and stresses that one is something you shield against, the other is something else entirely. Error correction strategy depends on the distinction.On what really bothered Einstein: Despite the popular story, "He wasn't as concerned about determinism as you would think." What Einstein wanted was a theory whose mathematics had a one-to-one mapping to individual systems with their own states — and entanglement broke that.On indefinite causal order: Experimentalists often equate causation with signaling constraints, but "those are very different things." The superposition-of-causal-orders results may reveal less about causation than about the fact that temporal ordering itself remains defined in irreducibly classical ways.

Planck, Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac… Son algunos de los científicos más brillantes del siglo XX que alumbraron la mecánica cuántica. En la actualidad, es la base fundamental de nuestra tecnología y sociedad de la información, aunque fue muy difícil de aceptar al principio porque desafiaba la intuición clásica y el determinismo científico. El desarrollo de la bomba atómica fue la prueba experimental más cruda y aterradora de aquellas teorías. Del desarrollo de esta rama de la física, con sus protagonistas y sus complicados conceptos hemos hablado con Sonia Fernández Vidal, autora de “La sombra de los dos soles” (Destino) y comisaria de la exposición “Revolución Cuántica” en el Espacio Fundación Telefónica. Pilar Quijada nos ha informado de una nueva estrategia contra la celiaquía desarrollada por científicos del CSIC y la universidad de Barcelona. Se trata de una enzima obtenida a partir de una molécula presente en una planta carnívora, que es capaz de degradar el gluten en condiciones muy ácidas, como las del estómago. Con testimonios de Xavier Gómis-Rüth (IBMB/CSIC), Marina Girbal-González (UB) y Francisco Pérez Cano (INSA/UB). Álvaro Martínez del Pozo nos ha hablado de las lipoproteínas, moléculas que se encargan de transportar en sangre grasas insolubles como el colesterol, y entre las que se encuentran las famosas LDL y HDL. En nuestro recorrido por el grupo de los halógenos pesados en la Tabla Periódica, Bernardo Herradón nos ha contado como se obtuvieron en laboratorio los elementos químicos astato y teneso y quienes fueron los descubridores del bromo y el iodo y los métodos empleados. Hemos informado del Premio Prince Asturias a los pioneros de la secuenciación rápida de ADN, los químicos británicos David Klenerman y Shankar Balasubramanian y el biofísico francés Pascal Mayer; y del Premio CSIC-Fundación BBVA de Comunicación Científica en la categoría de investigadores a Carlos Briones, del Centro de Astrobiología y colaborador de nuestro programa. También ha sido premiado Josep Corbella, redactor de La Vanguardia, en la categoría de periodistas. Escuchar audio

Planck, Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, Dirac… Son algunos de los científicos más brillantes del siglo XX que alumbraron la mecánica cuántica. En la actualidad, es la base fundamental de nuestra tecnología y sociedad de la información, aunque fue muy difícil de aceptar al principio porque desafiaba la intuición clásica y el determinismo científico. El desarrollo de la bomba atómica fue la prueba experimental más cruda y aterradora de aquellas teorías. Del desarrollo de esta rama de la física, con sus protagonistas y sus complicados conceptos hemos hablado con Sonia Fernández Vidal, autora de “La sombra de los dos soles” (Destino) y comisaria de la exposición “Revolución Cuántica” en el Espacio Fundación Telefónica. Pilar Quijada nos ha informado de una nueva estrategia contra la celiaquía desarrollada por científicos del CSIC y la universidad de Barcelona. Se trata de una enzima obtenida a partir de una molécula presente en una planta carnívora, que es capaz de degradar el gluten en condiciones muy ácidas, como las del estómago. Con testimonios de Xavier Gómis-Rüth (IBMB/CSIC), Marina Girbal-González (UB) y Francisco Pérez Cano (INSA/UB). Álvaro Martínez del Pozo nos ha hablado de las lipoproteínas, moléculas que se encargan de transportar en sangre grasas insolubles como el colesterol, y entre las que se encuentran las famosas LDL y HDL. En nuestro recorrido por el grupo de los halógenos pesados en la Tabla Periódica, Bernardo Herradón nos ha contado como se obtuvieron en laboratorio los elementos químicos astato y teneso y quienes fueron los descubridores del bromo y el iodo y los métodos empleados. Hemos informado del Premio Prince Asturias a los pioneros de la secuenciación rápida de ADN, los químicos británicos David Klenerman y Shankar Balasubramanian y el biofísico francés Pascal Mayer; y del Premio CSIC-Fundación BBVA de Comunicación Científica en la categoría de investigadores a Carlos Briones, del Centro de Astrobiología y colaborador de nuestro programa. También ha sido premiado Josep Corbella, redactor de La Vanguardia, en la categoría de periodistas. Escuchar audio

Als die Quantenmechanik Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts entwickelt wurde, markierte sie nicht nur in der Physik einen Umbruch. Sie warf auch grundlegende philosophische Fragen zu unserem Weltbild auf. Eine Entdeckung, über die sich viele Forschende den Kopf zerbrochen haben, ist die Heisenbergsche Unschärferelation. Was die Relation besagt und was sie für unser Weltbild bedeutet, berichtet Oliver Passon von der Universität Wuppertal in dieser Folge des Podcasts. *** Ein Beitrag von Kim Hermann, gesprochen von Simone Scheuer. Aufnahme: Das Hörspielstudio Kreuzberg, Tonbearbeitung und Schnitt: Daniel Lewy. Redaktion: Welt der Physik https://www.weltderphysik.de/ Welt der Physik wird herausgegeben vom Bundesministerium für Forschung, Technologie und Raumfahrt und von der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft. *** Die Website zum Podcast: https://www.weltderphysik.de/mediathek/podcast/heisenbergsche-unschaerferelation/ Bei Fragen, Anmerkungen und Kritik schreibt uns: feedback@weltderphysik.de

This is First Aid Spray - a Resident Evil podcast by fans, for fans! Five years on, and now with Requiem to follow it, we return to Ethan's Eastern-European Expedition as we re-evaluate Resident Evil Village! Is this a fitting end to the Winters saga? Does its funfair structure still work? How does Village feel compared to RE9 and, especially, as a sequel to RE7? And do we all adequately hate the Heisenberg boss fight? In the news, the first trailer for the new Resident Evil movie has dropped and we finally have the classic games on Steam. Find more at http://FASprayPod.com Join our Discord server: http://discordapp.com/invite/M7fJsEvV9Y Support the show: http://patreon.com/FASprayPod BlueSky: http://faspraypod.bsky.social Twitter: http://twitter.com/FASprayPod Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/FASprayPod Facebook: http://facebook.com/FASprayPod TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@faspraypod YouTube: http://youtube.com/FirstAidSprayPodcast First Aid Plays: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCg3DFDvfoY6Dat6P4L_3thg Panel: Psy (https://psywhite.bsky.social), Steve (https://fbsteve.bsky.social), Mieke (http://biblicallycorrect.bsky.social) and Adam. Contributors: Mark “Emsi” Chung (http://youtube.com/EmsiYT) and Sofia Alexandria (http://instagram.com/echoes.of.sofia). (0:00) Intro (3:17) News (24:41) File Reading (25:51) Resident Evil Village - 5th Anniversary (1:17:35) File Reading (1:19:29) Resident Evil Village - 5th Anniversary- Continued Logo by Palliwags “First Aid Spray” theme by Mono Memory (http://twitter.com/MonoMemory85). All other music is ™ and © Capcom and their original composers.

Pop culture has been full of Jekylls and Hydes: Bruce Banner and The Hulk, Norman Bates and Mother, Walter White and Heisenberg, The Nutty Professor and Buddy Love. They all echo the archetype that Robert Lous Stevenson established 140 years ago in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I explore at how these variations reflect different ideas about duality, depending on how “bad” the Hydes are and what the Jekylls choose to do about their alter egos. Lewis University professor Jamil Mustafa draws parallels between the original 1886 novel and modern stories like Twin Peaks, Fight Club, and Black Swan. Plus, I talk with Yannie ten Broeke, who teaches psychology at Touro University, about why the Jekyll and Hyde archetype reflects how little we understand our own minds. This episode is sponsored by There Is No Antimemetics Division, the national bestselling science-fiction horror novel by qntm. Get your copy now wherever books and audiobooks are sold. To support the show, you can donate on Patreon where you get access to the ad-free version and our companion show Between Imaginary Worlds. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Based on decades of research, Beyond the Quantum: A Quest for the Origin and Hidden Meaning of Quantum Mechanics (Oxford UP, 2026) offers a panoramic rethink of quantum physics, with potentially revolutionary implications for cosmology, quantum gravity, and quantum technology. Properly understood, 'pilot-wave theory' provides a deeper foundation for quantum mechanics, while also going beyond it. First proposed in the 1920s by French aristocrat and physicist Louis de Broglie, and revived in the 1950s by American physicist David Bohm, the theory posits hidden particle motions we cannot currently see or control. The theory is usually regarded as merely an alternative account of the same physics we already know. In fact, pilot-wave theory implies a wealth of new and radical physics beyond the reach of quantum mechanics. Pilot-wave theory tells us that quantum physics is a special case of something broader and deeper. In more general 'nonequilibrium' conditions, Einstein's relativity and Heisenberg's uncertainty break down. Superluminal signalling becomes possible, and quantum particles can be clearly seen and controlled. This new physics could have left traces in the early universe, and it might be visible today in radiation from exploding primordial black holes. Harnessing this new physics would have transformative technological implications, in particular for communication, cryptography, and computing. Drawing intriguing parallels between the present era of quantum physics and past episodes of scientific confusion, this book tells the story of how pilot-wave theory was discovered and abandoned, revived and reconstructed, and how today it can pave the way to a new and radical physics beyond the quantum. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Based on decades of research, Beyond the Quantum: A Quest for the Origin and Hidden Meaning of Quantum Mechanics (Oxford UP, 2026) offers a panoramic rethink of quantum physics, with potentially revolutionary implications for cosmology, quantum gravity, and quantum technology. Properly understood, 'pilot-wave theory' provides a deeper foundation for quantum mechanics, while also going beyond it. First proposed in the 1920s by French aristocrat and physicist Louis de Broglie, and revived in the 1950s by American physicist David Bohm, the theory posits hidden particle motions we cannot currently see or control. The theory is usually regarded as merely an alternative account of the same physics we already know. In fact, pilot-wave theory implies a wealth of new and radical physics beyond the reach of quantum mechanics. Pilot-wave theory tells us that quantum physics is a special case of something broader and deeper. In more general 'nonequilibrium' conditions, Einstein's relativity and Heisenberg's uncertainty break down. Superluminal signalling becomes possible, and quantum particles can be clearly seen and controlled. This new physics could have left traces in the early universe, and it might be visible today in radiation from exploding primordial black holes. Harnessing this new physics would have transformative technological implications, in particular for communication, cryptography, and computing. Drawing intriguing parallels between the present era of quantum physics and past episodes of scientific confusion, this book tells the story of how pilot-wave theory was discovered and abandoned, revived and reconstructed, and how today it can pave the way to a new and radical physics beyond the quantum. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

Based on decades of research, Beyond the Quantum: A Quest for the Origin and Hidden Meaning of Quantum Mechanics (Oxford UP, 2026) offers a panoramic rethink of quantum physics, with potentially revolutionary implications for cosmology, quantum gravity, and quantum technology. Properly understood, 'pilot-wave theory' provides a deeper foundation for quantum mechanics, while also going beyond it. First proposed in the 1920s by French aristocrat and physicist Louis de Broglie, and revived in the 1950s by American physicist David Bohm, the theory posits hidden particle motions we cannot currently see or control. The theory is usually regarded as merely an alternative account of the same physics we already know. In fact, pilot-wave theory implies a wealth of new and radical physics beyond the reach of quantum mechanics. Pilot-wave theory tells us that quantum physics is a special case of something broader and deeper. In more general 'nonequilibrium' conditions, Einstein's relativity and Heisenberg's uncertainty break down. Superluminal signalling becomes possible, and quantum particles can be clearly seen and controlled. This new physics could have left traces in the early universe, and it might be visible today in radiation from exploding primordial black holes. Harnessing this new physics would have transformative technological implications, in particular for communication, cryptography, and computing. Drawing intriguing parallels between the present era of quantum physics and past episodes of scientific confusion, this book tells the story of how pilot-wave theory was discovered and abandoned, revived and reconstructed, and how today it can pave the way to a new and radical physics beyond the quantum. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Based on decades of research, Beyond the Quantum: A Quest for the Origin and Hidden Meaning of Quantum Mechanics (Oxford UP, 2026) offers a panoramic rethink of quantum physics, with potentially revolutionary implications for cosmology, quantum gravity, and quantum technology. Properly understood, 'pilot-wave theory' provides a deeper foundation for quantum mechanics, while also going beyond it. First proposed in the 1920s by French aristocrat and physicist Louis de Broglie, and revived in the 1950s by American physicist David Bohm, the theory posits hidden particle motions we cannot currently see or control. The theory is usually regarded as merely an alternative account of the same physics we already know. In fact, pilot-wave theory implies a wealth of new and radical physics beyond the reach of quantum mechanics. Pilot-wave theory tells us that quantum physics is a special case of something broader and deeper. In more general 'nonequilibrium' conditions, Einstein's relativity and Heisenberg's uncertainty break down. Superluminal signalling becomes possible, and quantum particles can be clearly seen and controlled. This new physics could have left traces in the early universe, and it might be visible today in radiation from exploding primordial black holes. Harnessing this new physics would have transformative technological implications, in particular for communication, cryptography, and computing. Drawing intriguing parallels between the present era of quantum physics and past episodes of scientific confusion, this book tells the story of how pilot-wave theory was discovered and abandoned, revived and reconstructed, and how today it can pave the way to a new and radical physics beyond the quantum.

Serie composta da 5 episodi dedicata alla storia del concetto di Massa in fisica.Prodotta da Associazione Culturale Atelier APSScritta e realizzata da Alan Zamboni.Sound design: Matteo D'Alessandro.https://www.matteodalessandro.com/Per chi volesse info sul libro “L'atomo sfuggente” questo è il link al sito della casa editrice: https://www.mondadori.it/libri/latomo-sfuggente-alan-zamboni/Il romanzo è disponibile in tutte le librerie e gli store onlinePer sostenerci: https://associazioneatelier.it/Per sostenere il progetto dedicato alla scienza a Berlino:https://associazioneatelier.it/in10cities/Per contatti: Atelier AssociazionePer donare ad Atelier APS (iscritta al RUNTS - terzo settore) il 5 per mille: CF = 98181440177

From buying in thirds instead of waiting for dips, to a dishwasher hack that still requires the humans to remember the hack, to one listener's beautifully rebalanced “harbor-and-horizon” portfolio, this month's mailbag is as motley as ever. Along the way, David cleans up a long-used reference to Heisenberg vs. Hawthorne, hears how Magical Athlete has become a family hit, and considers a pair of listener suggestions that may permanently improve the Market Cap Game Show. Companies Mentioned: ADBE, DUOL, HUBS, INTU, ISRG, MELI, NBIS, NVDA, RKLB, TSMHost: David GardnerProducer: Bart Shannon Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Also SeeJones, J. C. (2021). designing designing (1st ed.).Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350070707The Diceman speaks -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqSeFjaEczAWikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dice_ManJohn Cage's 4'33'' explained: The music of silence:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bGU9NTJlIoJohn Cage 4'33":https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTEFKFiXSx4John Cage about silence:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcHnL7aS64YMOMA: https://www.moma.org/magazine/articles/393Textile artist Matthew Harris lets a roll of the dicedictate his artistic choices. We spoke to Matthew about his unique creative process, the interplay between paper and textile, and the roles that improvisation and chance play in his art practice. https://www.fibreartstaketwo.com/articles/matthew-harrisHans Arp: https://expressivemonkey.com/element-of-chance-2/He thought that by giving up control and letting randomelements shape his art, he could tap into the heart of true creativity.Chance in Art and the indeterminacy aesthetic:https://art-newzealand.com/21-chance/The historian Mommsen estimated that chance accounts for athird of all historical effects. Strindberg wrote a manifesto on its role in art. For the Surrealists it was a means of transcending the barriers of causality and conscious volition. Richter adopted it as a protest against the rigidity of straight line thinking. Duchamp categorised some of his works as 'canned chance'. Arp revered the law of chance as the highest and deepest of laws; as did the great physicist Heisenberg, who, in 1927, sanctified chance ina mathematical formulation.Vesna Jovanovich:https://vesnajovanovic.com/2024/06/27/meticulously-planned-chance-operations/

SPONSORS: - Go to https://expressvpn.com/theoriesofeverythingyt to find out how you can get up to 4 extra months thanks to our sponsor, ExpressVPN - Accelerate your efficiency. Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial today at http://shopify.com/theories - I subscribe to The Economist for their science and tech coverage. As a TOE listener, get 35% off! No other podcast has this: https://economist.com/TOE This conversation belongs in a category I wish were larger on this channel: the experimentalist who also thinks (deeply) about foundations. Professor Aephraim Steinberg, winner of Physics World's Breakthrough of the Year in 2011, is that species! For basically 30 years, he's been measuring aspects of physics that others wouldn't touch: Bohmian trajectories, Heisenberg's disturbance bound (he showed it was wrong), even where the photon is inside the double slit (which most textbooks will tell you is impossible). His lab measured negative time — and it keeps reappearing across completely different experiments, stubbornly suggesting it means something. FOLLOW: - Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4e - Substack: https://curtjaimungal.substack.com/subscribe - Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurt - Discord Invite: https://discord.com/invite/kBcnfNVwqs - Crypto: https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/de803625-87d3-4300-ab6d-85d4258834a9 - PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=XUBHNMFXUX5S4 TIMESTAMPS: - 00:00:00 - Defining Negative Time - 00:06:50 - Quantum Trajectory Theory - 00:12:44 - The Holland Tunnel Analogy - 00:18:40 - Resonant Atomic Interactions - 00:26:05 - Superluminal Energy Propagation - 00:32:00 - Eight Velocities of Light - 00:38:00 - Causality and Retrocausality - 00:44:00 - Dwell Time vs. Delay - 00:50:24 - Time: Operator or Parameter? - 00:58:21 - Bell's Theorem and Realism - 01:04:55 - Heisenberg's Measurement Disturbance - 01:11:26 - Weak Measurement Formalism - 01:17:37 - Time Symmetry and Entropy - 01:27:07 - Bohmian Trajectories Observed - 01:35:56 - Spin-Statistics and Indistinguishability - 01:42:14 - Quantum Computational Advantage - 01:48:15 - Many Worlds vs. Complexity - 01:54:51 - Psi-Ontic vs. Psi-Epistemic - 02:01:37 - Collapsing Tunneling Particles - 02:08:48 - Larmor vs. Atto Clocks - 02:15:24 - Locality and Information LINKS MENTIONED: - Aephraim's Website: https://www.physics.utoronto.ca/~aephraim/ - Aephraim's Papers: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=PzUyb6IAAAAJ - Photon Negative Time in Atom Cloud [Paper]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2409.03680 - How Much Time Does a Photon Spend as Atomic Excitation? [Paper]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.00432 - Measuring Time Atoms Spend in Excited State [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/prxquantum/abstract/10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.010314 - Tunneling Atom Time in Barrier [Paper]: https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.13523 - Single-Photon Tunneling Time [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.708 - Traversal Time for Tunneling [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.1739 - Propagation of a Gaussian Light Pulse [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.1.305 - Linear Pulse Propagation in Absorbing Medium [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.48.738 - Eighth Velocity of Light [Paper]: https://pubs.aip.org/aapt/ajp/article-abstract/45/6/538/1045817/Eighth-velocity-of-light - Attosecond Ionization [Paper]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1163439 - Tunneling Optical Pulses Photonic Band Gaps [Paper]: https://attoworld.de/fileadmin/user_upload/tx_attoworld/publications/paper_PhysRevLett_Y1994_M10_D24_V73_P2308.pdf - Evidence of Negative Time [Article]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/evidence-of-negative-time-found-in-quantum-physics-experiment/ - Light Speed Reduction [Article]: https://www.nature.com/articles/17561 - On the Theory of Light and Colors [Paper]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/107113.pdf - Wave Propagation and Group Velocity [Book]: https://amazon.com/dp/1483253937?tag=toe08-20 - EPR Paper [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777 - Uncertainty Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle - QBism [Paper]: https://arxiv.org/abs/1003.5209 More links at https://curtjaimungal.substack.com Guests do not pay to appear. #science Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Guyrot is a Berlin-based electronic music producer and DJ. He has released music on labels such as Satya, Heisenberg, Zapped Records, Perception Records, Ultra Nights, and Whoyostro, steadily building his catalog. Keep an eye on Guyrot https://instagram.com/guyrot12 Listen to more electronic music on Intaresu https://intaresu.com

SummaryThis episode is for anyone following the quantum utility debate or curious about how quantum computers will actually contribute to scientific discovery. Arnab Banerjee — assistant professor at Purdue, guest scientist at Oak Ridge's Quantum Science Center, and one of the most-cited experimentalists working at the intersection of quantum materials and quantum computing — walks us through his career-spanning journey from growing magnetic crystals to programming qubits.You'll hear how Banerjee's frustration with classical tools that couldn't explain his own experimental data drove him to quantum computing, why a quantum spin liquid is like the vortex that forms when you throw a stone into water, and how his team used 50 qubits on IBM's Heron chip to reproduce the spectroscopic fingerprint of a real material — KCuF3 — matching data collected at Oak Ridge and the UK's ISIS neutron source. He also offers a nuanced assessment of where different quantum computing platforms excel, drawing on hands-on experience with IBM, QuEra, and D-Wave.What you'll learnWhat a quantum spin liquid actually is and why its collective behavior — like vortices on water — could enable naturally error-protected qubitsHow neutron scattering works as a quantum probe — using the neutron's own spin and de Broglie wavelength to reveal both atomic positions and energy levels simultaneouslyWhy Banerjee's team chose to benchmark quantum simulation against known experimental data first before tackling classically intractable problemsWhat the IBM Heron benchmarking paper actually showed — reproducing spinon excitations in KCuF3, a one-dimensional Heisenberg chain, with quantitative agreement to neutron dataHow different quantum computing modalities serve different materials science problems — IBM for fast, cheap operations on 2D lattices; trapped ions for all-to-all connectivity; D-Wave and QuEra for Ising-like HamiltoniansHow close we are to quantum advantage in materials simulation — Banerjee estimates 70-90 "good enough" qubits in 2D geometry could reach classically inaccessible regimesWhy Kitaev quantum spin liquids could provide a fundamentally different path to fault tolerance — topological protection from decoherence built into the material itself, not imposed through softwareResources & linksPapers & researchBenchmarking quantum simulation with neutron-scattering experiments (March 2026) — The news hook: IBM Heron processor reproduces real neutron scattering data from KCuF3. First direct validation of quantum simulation against experimental measurements of a real material. Proximate Kitaev quantum spin liquid behaviour in a honeycomb magnet (2016) — Banerjee et al., Nature Materials. The career-defining paper providing first experimental evidence for Kitaev spin liquid behavior in alpha-RuCl3. Discover Magazine Top 100 Stories (#18). Neutron scattering in the proximate quantum spin liquid alpha-RuCl3 (2017) — Banerjee et al., Science. Comprehensive neutron scattering study revealing fractional spinon excitations. Materials for quantum technologies roadmap (2025) — Applied Physics Reviews. Banerjee's roadmap paper on the pipeline from material discovery to quantum devices.Lessons from alpha-RuCl3 for atomically thin materials (Nov 2025) — What the decade-long study of alpha-RuCl3 teaches about 2D quantum materials.Guest & lab links Quantum Spins Laboratory, Purdue University — Banerjee's research groupORNL Profile: Traversing the Unknown, Befriending Uncertainty — Oak Ridge profile on Banerjee's research philosophy Purdue News: Keck Foundation Grant for Quantum Spin Liquids — $1.2M grant to probe Majorana bound states with optical techniquesCoverage of the IBM benchmarking work - IBM Newsroom: Quantum Computer Simulates Real Magnetic Materials — IBM's announcement of the benchmarking resultNature News: Quantum simulations verified by experiments for the first time — Nature's coverage of the milestoneOrganizations & facilities - DOE Quantum Science Center at Oak Ridge — $115M National Quantum Initiative center where Banerjee is a guest scientistSpallation Neutron Source, Oak Ridge — The neutron scattering facility central to Banerjee's experimental workISIS Neutron and Muon Source, Rutherford Appleton Lab — UK facility where part of the KCuF3 data was collectedKey quotes & insights"The entire electronic industry is built around trying to avoid quantum effects as much as possible. This is the time when we need to make quantum our friend instead of our enemy.""In a quantum spin liquid, the spin directions move collectively in dancing patterns that look extremely ordered — but if you take a snapshot, the individual spins feel completely random." — On why spin liquids are like vortices in water"A spin is a qubit is a spin." — On why quantum magnets and quantum processors are fundamentally the same physics"We need to know whether what we are doing really makes sense. That's what this experiment is about." — On why benchmarking against known results must come before tackling unsolved problems"I would like to simulate the entire standard model using a quantum computer." — When asked what problem he'd throw at an unlimited quantum computer Related episodesEp 6: Better Qubits Through Material Science with Nathalie DeLeon — The materials science perspective on improving qubit quality, from diamond color centers to surface physicsEp 13: The Mysterious Majorana with Leo Kouwenhoven — The topological quantum computing vision that Kitaev materials could enable through a different routeEp 74: Majorana Qubits with Chetan Nayak — Microsoft's engineered approach to topological protection — contrast with Banerjee's materials-first pathEp 25: Material Science with Houlong Zhuang at Q2B Paris — Using quan...

La meccanica quantistica ci ha convinti che il caso sia il fondo della realtà. Ma e se fosse solo un problema di strumenti? In questo episodio commento il quarto capitolo di Universo, Mente, Materia di David Bohm, dove il fisico smonta tre pilastri del dogma quantistico e ipotizza un livello subquantico nascosto, determinato, non locale, che governa tutto ciò che osserviamo. Esploro il dialogo tra Bohm e Faggin: percorsi opposti, stessa intuizione. Cosa si nasconde davvero sotto la materia?Punti chiave: il moto browniano come analogia, il principio di Heisenberg riletto, il paradosso EPR, il potenziale quantistico come guida invisibile.La mia riflessione: Bohm non è solo fisica, è una provocazione filosofica enorme su ciò che esiste davvero.Iscriviti, commenta e condividi.00:00:00 Introduzione e hook00:00:39 La pentola bollente e il caos apparente00:01:44 David Bohm e la meccanica quantistica00:02:29 Il capitolo dei parametri nascosti00:04:47 Bohm smonta Heisenberg00:07:23 Il teorema di von Neumann00:09:04 Il paradosso EPR e l'entanglement00:11:30 L'interpretazione a parametri nascosti00:14:20 Bohm contro Faggin: dialogo tra opposti00:17:45 Il lascito filosofico di Bohm00:20:10 Domanda aperta e conclusioneAscolta "La mia vita spaziale": Spotify, Apple Podcast, YouTube: www.andreabrugnoli.click/podcastGuarda il video completo: https://youtu.be/_G9lGRjweSYCommenta su Telegram: www.andreabrugnoli.click/telegramLascia una recensione Google: www.andreabrugnoli.click/stellineSupporta il podcast: www.andreabrugnoli.click/satispaySeguimi su: X | YouTube | TelegramHashtag: fisicaquantistica, davidbohm, filosofiadellanaturaDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/la-mia-vita-spaziale--2578955/support.© Andrea Brugnoli – Tutti i diritti riservati.

This week, Shawn Wilkie and Dr. Ivan Zak welcome Dr. Asaf Dagan, Chief Veterinary Scientist and Co-Founder of PetPace, to discuss how continuous monitoring is expanding clinical visibility outside the exam room. The conversation explores how real-time physiological data can help veterinarians detect changes earlier, better understand chronic conditions, and support more informed follow-ups between visits. From pain detection to seizure monitoring, continuous data is adding a new layer to how patients are assessed and managed. The episode offers a practical look at how these tools are already being used and what this shift could mean for everyday clinical workflows. Learn more about the PetPace. Dr. Dagan recommends "The Great Equations: Breakthroughs in Science from Pythagoras to Heisenberg" by Robert P. Crease, which explores the 10 most influential mathematical equations in history.

Does the universe need observers to exist? Neil deGrasse Tyson and co-hosts Chuck Nice and Gary O'Reilly explore questions about entropy, spontaneous symmetry breaking, spectroscopy and more with astrophysicist Charles Liu.  NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here:  https://startalkmedia.com/show/cosmic-queries-spontaneous-symmetry-breaking-with-charles-liu/ Thanks to our Patrons Avery Ellis, Markus Riegler, Linda Tullberg, Gami Lannin, Arief Aziz, Ron Lawhon, Corie Prater, Patrick McNaught, FracturedEquality, Spengler, Peter Harbeson, Oddron86, Hudson Lowe, Drew Romaniak, V2022, Kyle Ferchen, Branko Denčić, Patrick Borgquist, DJ Sipe, Andy Blair, Alan Keizer, SR, Nihat Cubukcu, Greg Lance, Diwas Pandit, Anik Kasumi, Alexander Albert, Kodai, Dyonne Peters Lewoc AKA DPTaterTot, Adrian, Ben Goff, Jose Barreiro, Saurabh Chaudhari, Wimberley Children's House, Jean Arthur Deda, Jerrel Thomas, Serkan Ergenc, Douglas Kennedy, Lee Browner, Manuel Palmer, Dans Jansons, Russell Harvey, BladiX, Lars-Ove Torstensson, Norman Weizer, Arian Farkhoy, S. Madge, Pavel Seraphimov, Amanda Wolfe, Heisenberg, Mattchew Phillips, Caleb Berumen, Sretooh, Gary Tabbert, Oscar Abreu Lamas, Kevin Attebury, Volker Haberlandt, SeaGolly, B. Shoemaker, Ruben Ferrer, Steven Adams, Daniel Hintz, Nathaniel Richardson, Nick Griffiths, Adam Schmidt, Scott Plummer, Northernlight, JoMama, Beth, Frank Cottone, Yinj, Betty Anderson, Paul Smith, John Little, Emad Uddin, Brian O'Brien, Jayden Moffatt, Kevin Mace, Zara DeBresoc, Rain Bresee, Mara (Farmstrong), Rose, Stiven, Demethius Jackson, Alejandro Rodriguez, J Davis, Chris Buhler, Nathan Davieau, Sourav Prakash Patra, Wayne Rasmussen, John from Bavaria, Stephanie Phillips, Yohojones, Josh Farrell, John, Oo-De-Lally, Millie Richter, Montague Films, Lawrey Goodrick, and John Giovannettone for supporting us this week. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of StarTalk Radio ad-free and a whole week early.Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that position and momentum cannot simultaneously be known. Click and Clack's uncertainty principle is that they may be able to figure out ‘Why' or ‘What' and sometimes ‘How' your car has broken down, but never all three at once(because that's too much work).  Lots of uncertainty on this episode of the Best of Car Talk.To manage podcast ad preferences, review the links below:See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

El programa analiza operaciones especiales de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. La Operación Gunnerside (1943) implicó el sabotaje aliado a la planta noruega de Vermork, productora de agua pesada. Comandos noruegos, entrenados por la inteligencia británica, destruyeron exitosamente la producción, retrasando el proyecto nuclear nazi que Heisenberg ya había priorizado secundariamente. La Operación Antropoide (mayo 1942) buscó eliminar a Reinhard Heydrich, "el carnicero de Praga". Comandos checos Joseph Gabčík y Jan Kubiš, apoyados por Londres, atacaron a Heydrich, quien murió días después. A pesar de la represalia nazi y la muerte de los comandos, la operación fue un éxito estratégico. La Operación Greif (1944), parte de la Batalla de las Ardenas, fue una misión nazi dirigida por Otto Skorzeny. Soldados alemanes infiltrados con uniformes y vehículos americanos sembraron confusión y psicosis aliada, ralentizando sus decisiones. Aunque causó caos, fracasó militarmente, pero distrajo ...

Portnox is an enterprise access control platform that eliminates passwords and enforces zero trust security. The company was bootstrapped for over a decade, plateauing at a few million in ARR before investors brought in Denny LeCompte as CEO four years ago. Since then, Portnox has grown 8x. But this episode isn't about that growth story. Denny, a former cognitive scientist and professor who taught psychometrics, uses his scientific background to systematically dismantle Net Promoter Score—explaining why it's methodologically flawed, how it misleads organizations, and which metrics actually correlate with business performance. This is a contrarian take grounded in measurement science, not marketing opinion. Topics Discussed: The fundamental psychometric flaws in NPS: why single-item questionnaires are unreliable and why throwing out 7s and 8s violates basic statistical principles How NPS scores fluctuate based on survey UI presentation independent of actual customer sentiment Why NPS creates incentive structures that encourage gaming rather than improving customer outcomes The case for gross revenue retention and net revenue retention as the only ungameable metrics that matter How measuring human behavior changes that behavior (the Heisenberg principle applied to business metrics) Why investors care about retention rates above 90% but don't ask about NPS scores GTM Lessons For B2B Founders: Single-item questionnaires violate measurement principles: Denny's background in psychometrics immediately flagged NPS as unreliable. One-item measures lack the redundancy needed for reliability, and the methodology of throwing out middle responses (7s and 8s) then subtracting detractors from promoters is statistically nonsensical. At a previous company with thousands of data points, he observed NPS scores drop and rise based solely on how the survey rendered on the page—no business changes, just UI differences. When presentation affects your metric independent of the underlying construct, your instrument is broken. Founders with technical backgrounds should trust their instincts when measurement methodology feels scientifically unsound. Compensation drives behavior more than metric accuracy: Portnox structures customer success compensation as 50% gross revenue retention and 50% net revenue retention. These are determined by finance and can't be manipulated. Denny had to rein in his CS team when they became overly focused on time-to-value because any number you give a team becomes their obsession. With NPS, teams game survey timing, cherry-pick recipients, and optimize for score rather than outcome. This is the Heisenberg principle applied to business: measuring changes the behavior. Choose metrics where gaming the number aligns with improving actual business outcomes. Investors evaluate retention rates, not satisfaction surveys: When Denny presents gross retention above 90%, investors don't ask about NPS. Renewal behavior reveals actual satisfaction—customers voting with budget rather than survey responses. The test for any metric: "What are we doing differently if this number is up versus down?" If it doesn't drive distinct actions or reveal information not already visible in financials, eliminate it. NPS often becomes a number that exists because "we've always measured it," inherited from previous leadership without questioning its utility. Question inherited practices ruthlessly: NPS gained adoption through Harvard Business Review credibility in 2003 and consulting firms building practices around it. The promise of "one number you need" appeals to executives wanting simple solutions. But herd behavior—"everyone else measures it"—perpetuates bad methodology. Denny's advice to founders stuck with NPS: give your team something else to focus on (gross retention is straightforward: don't let customers churn), then stop doing it. Sometimes you need to point to external validation to break internal momentum. The question isn't whether NPS correlates somewhat with growth—it's whether better alternatives exist that can't be gamed. // Sponsors: Front Lines — We help B2B tech companies launch, manage, and grow podcasts that drive demand, awareness, and thought leadership. www.FrontLines.io The Global Talent Co. — We help tech startups find, vet, hire, pay, and retain amazing marketing talent that costs 50-70% less than the US & Europe. www.GlobalTalent.co // Don't Miss: New Podcast Series — How I Hire Senior GTM leaders share the tactical hiring frameworks they use to build winning revenue teams. Hosted by Andy Mowat, who scaled 4 unicorns from $10M to $100M+ ARR and launched Whispered to help executives find their next role. Subscribe here: https://open.spotify.com/show/53yCHlPLSMFimtv0riPyM

SpaceTime with Stuart Gary Gary - Series 29 Episode 16In this episode of SpaceTime, we dive into groundbreaking revelations about Europa's ice shell, explore new evidence for the existence of a potential Planet Nine, and discuss a significant advancement in quantum physics that challenges the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.Europa's Ice Shell Thickness RevealedData from NASA's Juno mission has provided the first insights into the thickness of Europa's icy crust, estimating it to be around 29 kilometers. This measurement comes from Juno's 2022 flyby, where the spacecraft utilized its microwave radiometer to analyze the moon's surface temperature and characteristics. The findings suggest that beneath this thick ice lies a global ocean of liquid water, potentially harboring the ingredients necessary for life. Understanding the ice shell's structure is crucial for future missions, including NASA's Europa Clipper, set to arrive in 2030.The Case for Planet NineA new study published in Nature Astronomy presents fresh simulations suggesting that wide-orbit planets, like the hypothesized Planet Nine, could be a natural outcome of chaotic early planetary systems. Researchers found that during turbulent phases of stellar formation, planets can be flung into distant orbits rather than being ejected entirely. This work offers a 40% chance that a Planet Nine-like object exists, providing a promising avenue for future exploration as telescopes become more capable of surveying the distant solar system.Advancements in Quantum PhysicsIn a remarkable breakthrough, physicists have demonstrated a method to sidestep the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, allowing for simultaneous precise measurements of a particle's position and momentum. This innovative approach, detailed in Science Advances, could pave the way for ultra-precise sensor technologies across various fields, including navigation and astronomy. The study redefines the boundaries of quantum measurement, offering new possibilities for scientific exploration.www.spacetimewithstuartgary.com✍️ Episode ReferencesNature AstronomyScience AdvancesBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/spacetime-your-guide-to-space-astronomy--2458531/support.

On today's episode: How do marine darkwaves affect seafloor ecosystems? Electrons and wave-particle duality and uncertainty… it's time to get quantum. All that and more today on All Around Science...RESOURCEShttps://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-025-03023-4 Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle Explained | Veritasium - YouTubeThis Model Explains WHY Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle Happens | Astrum - YouTubeThe Uncertainty Principle is NOT About “Uncertainty” | The Science Asylum - YouTubeBrian Cox breaks down the most mysterious scale in the cosmos | Big Think - YouTubeCREDITS:Writing - Bobby Frankenberger & Maura ArmstrongBooking - September McCrady THEME MUSIC by Andrew Allenhttps://twitter.com/KEYSwithSOULhttp://andrewallenmusic.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Everyone has a story to tell, share yours with us at drama@preachgaming.com or at https://preachgaming.com/submit-story/00:00 - Intro01:40 - Fallout Heisenberg----------Gear: https://preachgaming.com/shop/Displate: https://displate.com/preachgaming?art=619e85e06e135Twitter: @PreachgamingLive Stream - twitch.tv/preachlfwWebsite: https://preachgaming.com/---------

Heisenberg @ Skylight Theatre - 7.4 out of 10! Average Show! Nov 20 – Dec 22, 2025. www.latheatrebites.com

Recorded live at London's Natural History Museum on November 24, 2025. Breaking Bad fanatics, have a fresh pair of trousers at the ready—Bryan Cranston delivers an unforgettable conversation packed with behind-the-scenes stories from his years playing Walter White. He shares how DEA agents taught him the fundamentals of meth production, what he learned shadowing a USC chemistry professor to prepare for the role, and the surprising science details the show actually got right. A Hollywood legend through and through, Cranston does not disappoint. Joining him is the eminent Alan Hart—mineralogist, science historian, and keeper of extraordinary knowledge about the material world. Hart breaks down the real science behind Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the intricate chemistry of organic and inorganic crystal structures, and the remarkable history of how the Periodic Table came to be. Together, Cranston and Hart illuminate the scientific heart of Breaking Bad in a way fans have never heard before.

By Matthew Nemeth Back with Becoming Heisenberg for Breaking Bad this, for Breaking Bad 413 ‘Face Off’ Click here for the ad-free podcast Click here for a list of our iTunes feeds. Information matthew@entertainmenttalk.org Please rate and review us on Read More

By Matthew Nemeth Back with Becoming Heisenberg for Breaking Bad this, for Breaking Bad 412 ‘End Times’ Click here for the ad-free podcast Click here for a list of our iTunes feeds. Information matthew@entertainmenttalk.org Please rate and review us on Read More

By Matthew Nemeth Back with Becoming Heisenberg for Breaking Bad this, for Breaking Bad 411 ‘Crawl Space’ Click here for the ad-free podcast Click here for a list of our iTunes feeds. Information matthew@entertainmenttalk.org Please rate and review us on Read More

In this episode of 'Cybersecurity Today,' hosted by Jim Love, the focus is on recent developments and tactics in cybersecurity. The episode discusses Meter's networking solutions, the innovative tactics of the ransomware group Killen using common Windows tools, and three new open-source offerings aimed at improving security: Heisenberg for software bills of materials, OpenAI's Aardvark for automated vulnerability detection, and Open PCC for securing AI data flows. The show emphasizes the importance of detecting unusual behaviors in legitimate tools and highlights the need for proactive security measures in development pipelines. Listeners are encouraged to explore these initiatives further through show notes and upcoming discussions. 00:00 Introduction and Sponsor Message 00:43 Ransomware Tactics: Using Everyday Tools 02:05 Heisenberg: Active Supply Chain Defense 03:38 Aardvark: Autonomous Security Researcher 04:56 Open PCC: Securing Enterprise AI Data 06:38 Final Thoughts and Resources 07:02 Closing and Upcoming Episodes

As a listener of TOE you can get a special 20% off discount to The Economist and all it has to offer! Visit https://www.economist.com/toe Physicist Yakir Aharonov argues that the standard story of quantum mechanics is wrong, proposing a time-symmetric “two-state vector” view in which reality is defined by wavefunctions from both past and future. He explains weak measurements (information without collapse), nonlocal dynamics behind interference, and phenomena like the “quantum Cheshire Cat.” Aharonov recounts the birth of the Aharonov–Bohm effect, why gauge potentials mislead about locality, and how pre and post-selection restore causal insight without determinism. He shares memories of Bohm, Heisenberg, and Feynman, touches on gravitational and non-Abelian AB analogs, and lays out why a clear narrative—not just math—is essential to understanding quantum theory. Join My New Substack (Personal Writings): https://curtjaimungal.substack.com Listen on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4e Links mentioned: - Yakir's Papers: https://inspirehep.net/authors/1023512 - Jenann Ismael [TOE]: https://youtu.be/7kvXihDAOi0 - Roger Penrose [TOE]: https://youtu.be/sGm505TFMbU - Shift Of An Electron Interference Pattern By Enclosed Magnetic Flux [Paper]: https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.5.3 SUPPORT: - Become a YouTube Member (Early Access Videos): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdWIQh9DGG6uhJk8eyIFl1w/join - Support me on Patreon: https://patreon.com/curtjaimungal - Support me on Crypto: https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/de803625-87d3-4300-ab6d-85d4258834a9 - Support me on PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=XUBHNMFXUX5S4 SOCIALS: - Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurt - Discord Invite: https://discord.com/invite/kBcnfNVwqs Guests do not pay to appear. Theories of Everything receives revenue solely from viewer donations, platform ads, and clearly labelled sponsors; no guest or associated entity has ever given compensation, directly or through intermediaries. #science Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A screencast from Chapter 3 in CH 221 entitled “de Broglie and Heisenberg”

Chemistry 221 L2 Video Lecture from October 9, 2025, Part 1 of 4. This video covers material from Chapter 3 including an overview the de Broglie equation, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, Schrödinger's equations, the four quantum numbers and more. CH 221 website: http://mhchem.org/221 Let me know if you have any questions! Peace!

“Science isn't about showing off. It's about attending to unusual data, unusual evidence”, says astrophysicist Avi Loeb.“We can only learn new things from anomalies, from what doesn't line up.”Paying attention to anomalies is precisely what he does as head of the Galileo Project at Harvard, whose purpose is to search for evidence of extraterrestrial technology.Loeb is frustrated. Almost all the research money that is allocated to the search for extraterrestrial life goes to projects for picking up radio signals and scanning for molecular fingerprints of microbes on exoplanets.“It's like lonely people waiting for a phone call. Nobody might call you”, says Loeb.“And personally, I think microbes are boring. I am more interested in intelligent life. Yes, there are more microbes, but it is arguably easier to detect evidence of technology.”Loeb became famous in 2017 when he suggested that the first detected interstellar object traversing our solar system, named 1I/Oumuamua, might be artificial because of its strange behavior.His suggestion was not well received in the scientific community. He was academically attacked by many colleagues.Now, the third interstellar object ever detected, 3I/Atlas, is hurling past the planets in our home system at breakneck speed. This visitor also features very odd properties. It doesn't look like a comet. It seems to be extremely large, it doesn't have the classic cometary tail, its glow is preceding it, the composition of its coma is unique, and its trajectory is in line with the plane of the planets.“If you were to construct a spacecraft that were to visit this solar system, you would make it go in the plane of the planets”, Loeb says.Yet mainstream astronomers call it a comet, or more specifically a “black“ comet.“It's like having only seen zebras and then suddenly see an elephant and go: ‘Look, a zebra without stripes, and with a trunk'.”Loeb has developed a scale for assessing whether a space object is natural or artificial, where 0 means decidedly natural and 10 means decidedly artificial. Loeb has given 3I/Atlas a 4, the same score he gave 1I/Oumuamua.It might drop on the scale – or climb – as more data is collected. By the end of October 2025 we probably know more, because that is when the object will be at its closest to the sun.Avi Loeb has always been an outlier in the scientific community, he says. He would “trade everything” he has of modern life to go back 95 years, to the time of quantum pioneers like Bohr and Heisenberg.“Because they were open-minded and willing to replace an old worldview with something completely new.”Science is more rigid today, he feels. Paradoxically, this may have to do with the fact that there are so many more scientists today. With a large enough population, ideas tend to regress to the mean.Avi Loeb isn't afraid of airing ideas that would appear outrageous in conventional quarters. Have there been advanced civilizations on earth millions of years ago? Could our species have been genetically manipulated by interstellar visitors a long, long time ago? Loeb is open to both propositions.“We tend to think we are first. But it's fully plausible that there was a technologically advanced civilization millions of years ago that was destroyed in a major catastrophe.”The Galileo ProjectPersonal page at HarvardEssays on MediumThe Book Interstellar (2024)The Book Extraterrestrial (2022)

Gary Glor sits down with Amy Hadam to discuss the role of the stage manager and the skills and techniques needed to do the job.Credits:Audio Engineer Gary GlorOne Heartbeat Away is provided to The Theater Project by Gail Lou References:Jekyll and Hyde, the Musicalhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jekyll_%26_Hyde_(musical)Surflight Theaterhttps://surflight.org/Molly Ivinshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hot_Patriot:_The_Kick-Ass_Wit_of_Molly_IvinsErma Bomback at Wits Endhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erma_BombeckAnn Richardshttps://theannrichardsplay.com/Buyer and Cellarhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buyer_%26_CellarOne Man show - A Christmas Carolhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Christmas_Carol_(1988_play)Five Lesbians Eating A Quichehttps://www.concordtheatricals.com/p/9940/5-lesbians-eating-a-quicheQLabhttps://qlab.appHedda Gablerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedda_GablerHeisenberghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenberg_(play)TopicWebsite (without actual link)

Pour écouter l'émission en entier, sans pub, abonnez-vous ! https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/S-tavkjvmo Mars 1945. Une explosion secoue la Thuringe. Pas un bombardement allié, mais un test… venu de l'intérieur du Reich. Prisonniers disparus, lumière blanche aveuglante, silence imposé par la SS. Et si l'Allemagne nazie avait expérimenté une arme nucléaire avant la fin de la guerre ? Dans cette émission tirée du livre Hitler's Bomb de l'historien Rainer Karlsch, nous explorons une thèse dérangeante : l'existence d'un programme nucléaire parallèle, mené dans l'ombre de Heisenberg, sous contrôle de la SS, qui aurait abouti à des essais secrets en 1945. Documents soviétiques "déclassifiés", témoignages oubliés, analyses scientifiques : tout converge vers une question taboue — les nazis ont-ils vraiment frôlé l'arme atomique ? Une enquête passionnante qui bouleverse le récit officiel et change à jamais notre regard sur la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Pour écouter l'émission en entier, sans pub, abonnez-vous ! https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/S-tavkjvmo Mars 1945. Une explosion secoue la Thuringe. Pas un bombardement allié, mais un test… venu de l'intérieur du Reich. Prisonniers disparus, lumière blanche aveuglante, silence imposé par la SS. Et si l'Allemagne nazie avait expérimenté une arme nucléaire avant la fin de la guerre ? Dans cette émission tirée du livre Hitler's Bomb de l'historien Rainer Karlsch, nous explorons une thèse dérangeante : l'existence d'un programme nucléaire parallèle, mené dans l'ombre de Heisenberg, sous contrôle de la SS, qui aurait abouti à des essais secrets en 1945. Documents soviétiques "déclassifiés", témoignages oubliés, analyses scientifiques : tout converge vers une question taboue — les nazis ont-ils vraiment frôlé l'arme atomique ? Une enquête passionnante qui bouleverse le récit officiel et change à jamais notre regard sur la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Pour écouter l'émission en entier, sans pub, abonnez-vous ! https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/S-tavkjvmo Mars 1945. Une explosion secoue la Thuringe. Pas un bombardement allié, mais un test… venu de l'intérieur du Reich. Prisonniers disparus, lumière blanche aveuglante, silence imposé par la SS. Et si l'Allemagne nazie avait expérimenté une arme nucléaire avant la fin de la guerre ? Dans cette émission tirée du livre Hitler's Bomb de l'historien Rainer Karlsch, nous explorons une thèse dérangeante : l'existence d'un programme nucléaire parallèle, mené dans l'ombre de Heisenberg, sous contrôle de la SS, qui aurait abouti à des essais secrets en 1945. Documents soviétiques "déclassifiés", témoignages oubliés, analyses scientifiques : tout converge vers une question taboue — les nazis ont-ils vraiment frôlé l'arme atomique ? Une enquête passionnante qui bouleverse le récit officiel et change à jamais notre regard sur la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Pour écouter l'émission en entier, sans pub, abonnez-vous ! https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/S-tavkjvmo Mars 1945. Une explosion secoue la Thuringe. Pas un bombardement allié, mais un test… venu de l'intérieur du Reich. Prisonniers disparus, lumière blanche aveuglante, silence imposé par la SS. Et si l'Allemagne nazie avait expérimenté une arme nucléaire avant la fin de la guerre ? Dans cette émission tirée du livre Hitler's Bomb de l'historien Rainer Karlsch, nous explorons une thèse dérangeante : l'existence d'un programme nucléaire parallèle, mené dans l'ombre de Heisenberg, sous contrôle de la SS, qui aurait abouti à des essais secrets en 1945. Documents soviétiques "déclassifiés", témoignages oubliés, analyses scientifiques : tout converge vers une question taboue — les nazis ont-ils vraiment frôlé l'arme atomique ? Une enquête passionnante qui bouleverse le récit officiel et change à jamais notre regard sur la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Pour écouter l'émission en entier, sans pub, abonnez-vous ! https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/S-tavkjvmo Mars 1945. Une explosion secoue la Thuringe. Pas un bombardement allié, mais un test… venu de l'intérieur du Reich. Prisonniers disparus, lumière blanche aveuglante, silence imposé par la SS. Et si l'Allemagne nazie avait expérimenté une arme nucléaire avant la fin de la guerre ? Dans cette émission tirée du livre Hitler's Bomb de l'historien Rainer Karlsch, nous explorons une thèse dérangeante : l'existence d'un programme nucléaire parallèle, mené dans l'ombre de Heisenberg, sous contrôle de la SS, qui aurait abouti à des essais secrets en 1945. Documents soviétiques "déclassifiés", témoignages oubliés, analyses scientifiques : tout converge vers une question taboue — les nazis ont-ils vraiment frôlé l'arme atomique ? Une enquête passionnante qui bouleverse le récit officiel et change à jamais notre regard sur la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Jess here. My guest this week is Jeff Selingo, an author and speaker I've admired for a long time. His work on college, college admissions and the transition to work and life in emerging adulthood are essential reads for anyone looking to understand what want and need in higher education and life. His books, There is Life After College, Who Gets In and Why: A Year Inside College Admissions and his forthcoming book, Dream School: Finding the College That's Right for You are all essential reads for teens and emerging adults as well as parents of teens and emerging adults. I adore all three, but I wanted to talk with Jeff about a few aspects of his writing: how he created a speaking career, finds his topics, and how on earth he gets people to talk about topics that tend to be shrouded in secrecy behind very high walls (such as college admissions). Check out Jeff's newsletter, Next, and Podcast, Future UKJ here, as you probably know, to tell you that if you're not listening to the Writing the Book episodes Jenny Nash and I have been doing, you should be. Jenny's working on her latest nonfiction, and I'm working on my next novel, and we're both trying to do something bigger and better than anything we've done before.We sit down weekly and dish about everything—from Jenny's proposal and the process of getting an agent to my extremely circular method of creating a story. We are brutally honest and open—even beyond what we are here. Truly, we probably say way too much. And for that reason, Writing the Book is subscriber-only.So I'm here saying: subscribe. That's a whole 'nother episode a week, and always a juicy one—plus all the other good subscriber stuff: the First Pages: BookLab, Jess's From Author to Authority series, and whatever else we come up with. (It varies enough that it's hard to list it all.) Plus, of course, access whenever we run The Blueprint—which, I don't know, might be soon.That's all I've got. So head to amwritingpodcast.com, get yourself signed up, and come listen to Writing the Book. Then talk to us. Tell us—tell us about your book writing and what's going on. We really want to hear from y'all.Thanks a lot. And Subscribe!Transcript below!EPISODE 465 - TRANSCRIPTKJ Dell'AntoniaHowdy, listeners—KJ here, as you probably know—to tell you that if you're not listening to the Writing the Book episodes Jennie Nash and I have been doing, you should be. Jennie is working on her latest nonfiction, and I'm working on my next novel, and we're both trying to do something bigger and better than anything we've done before. We sit down weekly and dish about everything from Jennie's proposal and the process of getting an agent to my extremely circular method of creating a story. We are brutally honest and open—even beyond what we are here. Truly, we probably say way too much, and for that reason, Writing the Books is subscriber-only. So I'm here saying: subscribe. That's a whole other episode a week, and always a juicy one—plus there's all the other good subscriber stuff: the First Page Booklab, Jess' From Author to Authority series, and whatever else we come up with, which kind of varies enough that it's hard to list out. Plus, of course, access to whenever we run the Blueprint, which—I don't know—it's going to be soon. That's all I got. So head to AmWritingpodcast.com, get yourself signed up and come listen to Writing the Book, and then talk to us. Tell us—tell us about your book writing and what's going on. We really want to—we want to hear from y'all. Thanks a lot, and please subscribe.Multiple SpeakersIs it recording? Now it's recording. Yay! Go ahead. This is the part where I stare blankly at the microphone. Try to remember what I'm supposed to be doing. All right, let's start over. Awkward pause. I'm going to rustle some papers. Okay. Now, one, two, three.Jess LaheyHey, it's Jess Lahey, and welcome to the Hashtag AmWriting Podcast. This is a podcast about writing all the things—short things, long things, poetry, proposals, queries, nonfiction, fiction—all the stuff. In the end, this is the podcast about getting the work done. And in the beginning of this podcast, our goal was to flatten the learning curve for other writers. So I am super excited about who I have today. Oh—quick intro. I'm Jess Lahey. I'm the author of The Gift of Failure and The Addiction Inoculation, and you can find my work at The New York Times, The Atlantic and The Washington Post, as you can find the work of my guest there too. So my guest today is someone that I have looked up to for a long time, and someone I use as sort of a—to bounce things off of and to think about how I do my work and how to do my work better. Jeff Selingo, thank you so much for coming to on the show. Jeff is the author of a couple of books that I'm a huge—In fact, I can look over at my bookshelf right now and see all of his books on getting into college, why college is not the end point. He has a new book coming out that we're going to be talking about—really; it's coming out real as soon as this podcast comes out. And I'm just—I'm a huge fan, Jeff. Thank you so, so much for coming on the pod.Jeff SelingoJust the same here—and I'm a huge fan of this podcast as well. It's on my regular rotation, so...Jess LaheyOh yay.Jeff SelingoI am thrilled, as always, to be here.Jess LaheyIt's—it's changed over the years, and now that we have four different, you know, co-hosts, there's sort of different takes on it. We've got, like, Sarina—the business side, and Jess—the nonfiction geek side, and KJ—the fiction side, and Jennie—the nuts-and-bolts editor side. So it's been really fun for us to sort of split off. But what I wanted to talk to you about today are a couple of different things. Your book Who Gets In and Why is—um , on the podcast, we talk about dissecting other people's work as a way... In fact, I was talking to my daughter about this yesterday. She's writing a thesis—what she hopes will be one chapter in a book. And I was saying, you know, one of the things you can do is go dissect other books you think are really well constructed—books that are reaching the same, similar audience. And your book, Who Gets In and Why, I think, is essential reading for anyone who's writing interview based, and specifically nonfiction around attempting to get their arms around a process. And a process that—for you—what I'm really interested about in this book is a process that's usually, you know, guarded and kind of secret. And no one wants to let you in for real on all the moving parts and how the decisions are made, because the college admissions process is—it's an inexact recipe. It depends on where you are, it depends on the school, but everyone wants the secret. Like, Jeff, just get me the secrets of how to get in. So how do you approach people who are, in a sense, some ways, secret-keepers and guardians of the secret sauce—to mix metaphors? How do you get those people to agree to be a part of a book—not just to be interviewed, but to actually put themselves out there and to put the sausage-making out there in a book, which can be a huge leap of faith for any organization or human being?Jeff SelingoYeah, and I think it's definitely harder now than it was when I did Who Gets In and Why. I think it's harder than when, you know, other people have been inside the process—whether it's, you know, Fast Food Nation, with the, you know, the fast food industry, which is a book that I looked up to when I was writing, Who Gets In and Why. I think it's—people just don't trust writers and journalists as much as they used to. So I think that's—a lot of this is really trust. First of all, you have to approach organizations that trust their own process. When people ask me, “Why these three schools?” You know, I approached 24 schools when I wrote, Who Gets In and Why, and three said yes. Twenty-one said no. And when I describe the people who said yes and why they said yes, they trusted their own process. And they also trusted me. But the first thing they did was trust their own process.. And so when I heard later on from people who had said no to me—and I would, you know, talk to them, you know, off the record about why they said no—there was always something about their process, their admissions process, that they didn't trust. They were getting a new, like, software system, or they had new employees that they didn't really quite know, or they were doing things—it's not that they were doing things wrong, but that, you know, it was at the time when the Supreme Court was making a decision about affirmative action, and they didn't quite know how that would play, and so they didn't quite trust it—and then how that, obviously, would be used by me. So the first thing you have to do is think about organizations that really believe in themselves, because they're going to be the ones that are going to talk about themselves externally. And then you just have to build trust between them and you. And that just takes—unfortunately, it takes time. And as a book author or a reporter, you don't always have that on your side.Jess LaheySo when—were some of these cold? Like of the 24, were all of these cold? Were some of these colder? Did you have an in with some of these?Jeff SelingoI had an in with most of them, because I had been covering—I mean, that's the other thing. You know, trust is built over time, and I had been covering higher ed for almost 25 years now. So it was just that they knew me, they knew of me, they knew of my work. I had other people vouch for me. So, you know, I had worked with other people in other admissions offices on other stories, and they knew people in some of these offices, so they would vouch for me. But at the end—so, you know, it ended up being Emory, Davidson and the University of Washington. It was really only Davidson where I knew somebody. Emory and University of Washington—I kind of knew people there that were the initial door opener. But beyond that, it was just spending time with them and helping them understand why I wanted to tell the story, how I thought the story would put play out, and getting them to just trust the process.Jess LaheyThere's also something to be said for people who have some enthusiasm for the greater story to be told—especially people who have an agenda, whether that's opening up admissions to the, quote, “whole student” as opposed to just their test scores, or someone who feels like they really have something to add to the story. Both of the people who I featured in The Addiction Inoculation and who insisted on having their real names used said, you know, there's just—there's a value for me in putting this story out there and finding worth in it, even though for these two people, there was some risk and there was embarrassment, and there's, you know, this shame around substance use disorder. But these two people said, you know, I just think there's a bigger story to be told, and I'm really proud to be a part of that bigger story. So there is a selling aspect also to, you know, how you position what it is you're doing.Jeff SelingoAnd there's—so there's a little bit of that, and that was certainly true here. The admissions deans at these places were longtime leaders who not only trusted their own process but understood that the industry was getting battered. You know, people were not trusting of admissions. They felt like it was a game to be played. And there was definitely a larger story that they wanted to tell there. Now truth be told—and they've told this in conferences that I've been at and on panels that I've moderated with them—there was also a little bit of they wanted to get their own story out, meaning the institutional story, right? Emory is competing against Vanderbilt, and Davidson is a liberal arts college in the South, when most liberal arts colleges are in the Northeast. So there was a little bit of, hey, if we participate in this, people are going to get to know us in a different way, and that is going to help us at the end—meaning the institution.Jess LaheyDo you have to? Did you? Was there a hurdle of, we really have, you know, this is some PR for us, too. So did that affect—I mean, there's a little bit of a Heisenberg thing going on here. Did the fact that you were observing them change, you think, anything about what they did and what they showed you?Jeff SelingoIt's an interesting thing, Jess. It's a great question, because I often get that. Because I was—you know, originally, I wanted to do one office. I wanted to be inside one institution. And when all three of them kind of came back and said, yes, we'll do this—instead of just choosing one of them—I thought, oh, this is interesting. We have a small liberal arts college. We have a big, private urban research university. We have a big public university in the University of Washington. So I wanted to show—kind of compare and contrast—their processes. But that also meant I couldn't be in one place all the time. There's only one of me, and there's three of them, and they're in different parts of the country. So clearly I was not there every day during the process. And somebody would say to me, oh, well, how do you know they're not going to do X, Y, and Z when you're not there? And I quickly realized that they had so much work to do in such a short amount of time that they couldn't really—they couldn't really game the system for me. After a while, I just became like a painting on the wall. I just was there. And in many cases, they didn't even notice I was there—which, by the way, is where you want to be—because they would say things, do things, without realizing sometimes that a reporter was present. And there's the opening scene of the book, which is just a fantastic—in my opinion, one of my favorite scenes in the book—right where they're talking about these students and so forth, and in a way that is so raw and so natural about how they did their work. If they knew I was in the room at that point—which of course they did—but if they really perceived my being there, that would have been really hard to pull off.Jess LaheyDid they have, did you guys have an agreement about off the record moments or anything like that? Or was there and speaking of which, actually, was there any kind of contract going into this, or any kind of agreement going into this?Jeff SelingoI basically told them that there would be no surprises. So everything was essentially on the record unless they explicitly said that, and that was usually during interviews, like one-on-one interviews. But while I was in the room with them, there was really nothing off the record. There couldn't be because it was hard to kind of stop what they were doing to do that. The only thing I promised was that there would be no surprises at the end. So when the book was done, during the fact-checking process, I would do what The New Yorker would do during fact-checking. I wouldn't read the passages back to them, but I would tell them basically what's in there, in terms of it as I fact-checked it. And so they really kind of knew, for the most part—not word for word—but they kind of knew what was in the book before it came out.Jess LaheyI like that term—no surprises. It's a real nice blanket statement for, look, I'm not looking to get—there's no gotcha thing here.Jeff SelingoThere's no gotcha, exactly...Jess LaheyRight. Exactly.Jeff SelingoThis was not an investigative piece. But there were things that, you know, I'm sure that they would have preferred not to be in there. But for the most part, during the fact-checking process, you know, I learned things that were helpful. You know, sometimes they would say, oh, that's an interesting way of—you know, I would redirect quotes, and they would want to change them. And I said, well, I don't really want to change direct quotes, because that's what was said in that moment. And then they would provide context for things, which was sometimes helpful. I would add that to the piece, or I would add that to the book. So at the end of the day—again—it goes back to trust. And they realized what I was trying to do with this book. It's also a book rather than an article. Books tend to have permanence. And I knew that this book would have, you know, shelf life. And as a result, I wanted to make sure that it would stand the test of time.Jess LaheyYeah, I've been thinking a lot about your new book—your book that's just coming out as this is getting out into the world—called Dream School. And by the way, such a great title, because one person's dream school is not another's. But like, my daughter happens to be at, I think, the perfect school for her, and my son went to the perfect school for him—which, by the way, wasn't even his first choice. And in retrospect, he said, I'm just so glad I didn't get into that other place—my, you know, early decision place—because this other place really was the perfect match. And I think that's why I love that title so much, because I spend a lot of time trying to help parents understand that their dream may not necessarily be their child's dream. And what makes something a dream school may, you know—in fact, in terms of time—my daughter was applying to colleges just coming out of COVID. Like, she had never been to a school dance. She'd never—you know—all that kind of stuff. So for me, the dream looked very different than maybe it would have four years prior, thinking I was going to have a kid that had the opportunity to sort of socially, you know, integrate into the world in a very different way. So I love that. And is that something that—how did—how do your ideas emerge? Did it emerge in the form of that idea of what is a dream school for someone? Or—anyway, I'll let you get back to...Jeff SelingoYeah. So, like many follow-up books, this book emerged from discussing Who Gets In and Why. So I was out on the road talking about Who Gets In and Why. And I would have a number of parents—like, you know when you give talks, people come up to you afterwards—and they say, okay, we love this book, but—there's always a but. And people would come up to me about Who Gets In and Why, and they would be like, love the book, but it focused more on selective colleges and universities. What if we don't get into one of those places? What if we can't afford one of those places? What if we don't really want to play that game, and we want permission? And this—this idea of a permission structure came up very early on in the reporting for this book. We need to be able to tell our friends, our family, that it's okay, right? You know how it is, right? A lot of this is about parents wanting to say that their kid goes to Harvard. It's less about going to Harvard, but they could tell their friends that their kid goes to Harvard. So they wanted me to help them create this permission structure to be able to look more widely at schools.Jess LaheyI like that.Jeff SelingoSo that's how this came about, and then the idea of Dream School—and I'm fascinated by your reaction to that title. Because the reaction I've been getting from some people is—you know—because the idea, too many people, the idea of a dream school, is a single entity.Jess LaheyOf course.Jeff SelingoIt's a single school; it's a single type of school. And what—really, it's a play on that term that we talk about, a dream school. In many ways, the dream school is your dream, and what you want, and the best fit for you. And I want to give you the tools in this book to try to figure out what is the best match for you that fulfills your dreams. It's kind of a little play on that—a little tweak on how we think about the dream and dream school. And that's really what I'm hoping to do for this book—is that, in some ways, it's a follow-up. So you read Who Gets In and Why, you decide, okay, maybe I do want to try for those highly selected places. But as I tell the story early on in in Dream School. A. It's almost impossible to get into most of those places today—even more so than five or six years ago. And second, many of the students that I met—young adults that I met in reporting Dream School—ended up at, you know, fill-in-the-blank: most popular school, brand-name school, highly selective school, elite school—whatever you want to put in that blank—and it wasn't quite what they expected. And so that's another story that I want to tell families in this book—is that, hey, there's a wider world out there, and there is success to be had at many of these places.Jess LaheyThere's something I say occasionally, that I have to take the temperature of the room, just because I—you know, you and I speak at some fairly similar places, like, you know, the hoity-toity private schools that—you know, everyone's just go, go, go, do, do, do, achieve, achieve, achieve. And every once in a while, I like to insert—I like to, number one, tell them that my college was, I think, perfect for me. I went to my safety school. I went to the University of Massachusetts and had an extraordinary experience. But I'm a very certain kind of person, and maybe for another—like, for example, my daughter, when we were looking at schools, our state school was just too big for her. It just—she was going to get lost. It wasn't going to work very well. But the thing I like to say when I can, when I feel like the audience is ready to hear it is: What if it's a massive relief if you don't have an Ivy kid? If you have a kid who's not going to get into an Ivy school, isn't it a relief to say that's not what we're aiming for here, and we can actually find a place that's a great fit for my kid? And that sometimes goes over really well. For a few people, they'll come up and thank me for that sort of reframing afterwards. But for some people, that is just not at all what they want to hear.Jeff SelingoAnd it's—you know, it's really hard. And I think you go back to audience, and—you know—most people make money on books kind of after the fact, right? The speaking, as you mentioned, and things like that. And it's interesting—this book, as I talk to counselors about it, high school counselors—oh, they're like, this is perfect. This is the message I've been trying to get through to parents. Then I talk to the parents—like, I'm not quite sure this message will work in our community, because this community is very focused on getting into the Ivy League and the Ivy Plus schools?Jess LaheyYes, but that's why your title is so brilliant. Because if you're getting—and I talk a lot about this, I don't know if you've heard, I've talked about this on the podcast—that with the substance use prevention stuff, it's hard for me to get people to come in. So I use The Gift of Failure to do that, right? So you've got this title that can get the people in the seats, and then you, in your persuasive and charismatic way, can explain to them why this is a term that may—could—use some expanding. I think that's an incredible opportunity.Jeff SelingoAnd it's important, too—early on, my editor told me, “Jeff, don't forget, we're an aspirational society.” And I said—I told, I said, “Rick,” I said, “I'm not telling people not to apply in the Ivy League. I'm not saying they're terrible schools. I'm not saying don't look at those places.” All I'm saying is, we want to expand our field a little bit to look more broadly, more widely. So we're not saying don't do this—we're saying, do “do” this. And that's what I'm hoping that this book does.Jess LaheyWell, and the reality is, people listen to the title. They don't read the subtitle, because subtitles are long, and they have a great use—but not when you're actually talking about a book with someone. And so what they're going to hear is Dream School, and I think that's a fantastic way to position the book. But since you opened up the topic, I also—I am right now mentoring someone who is attempting to sell a book while also planning for a speaking career, which, as you know, is something that I did concurrently. How did you—did you know you wanted to do speaking when you were first writing your books? Or is this something that sort of came out of the books themselves?Jeff SelingoIt just came out of the books. You know, the first book, which was College (Un)bound, which was 2012, sold better than I expected, but it was aimed at a consumer audience. But who ended up reading that were college leaders, presidents and people work at colleges. So I had a very busy schedule speaking to people inside the industry. Then I turned my—you know, the second book, There Is Life After College— really turned it to this parenting audience, which was a very new audience to me, and that really led to me to, you know, Who Gets In and Why, and now this book. The difference—and I'm always curious to talk to parenting authors like you—is that college, you know, people—even the most aspirational people in life, I understand, you know, people in certain cities think about preschool, what preschool their kid's going to get into to get into the right college—but in reality, they're going to read a college book when their kids are in high school. And that is the more challenging piece around, you know, I—unlike most parenting authors who have a wider audience, because a lot of the issues that face parents face parents when they have toddlers, when they have pre-teens, when they have teens. Obviously, some parenting authors just focus on teens, I get that.But this book really has kind of a short life in terms of the audience. And so what we're trying to do—so think about it: Who Gets In and Why— it's still in hardcover. Has never been published in paperback, largely because there's a new audience for it every year, which is fantastic...Jess LaheyYeah, I was going to mention that. That is the massive upside. And for me, it's usually a four-year sort of turnover in terms of speaking anyway.Jeff SelingoYeah, you're right. And so the nice thing on the speaking front is that I have almost a new audience every year, so I could continue to go back to the same schools...Jess LaheyRight.Jeff Selingo...every year, which has been really helpful—with a slightly different message, because the industry is also changing, and admissions is changing as a result. So, no, I—the speaking came afterwards, and now I realize that that's really kind of how you make this thing work. I couldn't really have a writing career without the speaking piece.Jess LaheySince figuring that out—and I guess assuming that you enjoy doing it, as I hope you do—is that something that you're continuing to market on your own?Jeff SelingoYes. So that's what we're doing. You know, one of the big changes from the last book is that we have developed a—you know, we built a customer relationship management system under our newsletter. So we use HubSpot, which is, you know, like Salesforce. It's something like that And so we've now built a community that is much stronger than the one that I had five years ago. That's a community of parents, of counselors, of independent counselors. So we just know so much more about who we serve, who our readers are, and who will ask me to come speak to their groups and things like that. So that, to me, has been the biggest change since the last book compared to this book. And it has enabled us—and it's something that I would highly encourage authors to do. I don't think they have to go out and buy one of these big, robust systems, but the more you know about your readers and build that community, the more that they're going to respond to you. They really want to be with you in some way. They want to read your books. They want to come to your webinars. They want to listen to your podcasts. They want to see you speak. They want to invite you to speak. And building that community is incredibly important to having that career, you know, after the book comes out.Jess LaheyIt's also for marketing purposes. So Sarina Bowen—again, brilliant at this. he way she does that is, she slices and dices her mailing list into all kinds of, like, where the reader came from—is this someone who's, you know, more interested in this, did I—did I meet them at this conference, you know, how did I acquire this name for my list? And she does a lot of marketing very specifically to those specific lists, and that information is amazing. And I think so many of us tend to think just—and I have to admit that this is where I spend most of my time—is just getting more emails in your newsletter. Owning, you know, the right—because it's an honor of being able to reach out to those people and have them be interested in what you have to say. But that's your—I may have to have you come back to talk specifically about that, because it's increasingly—as we're doing more of the marketing for our books—I think that's the future for people who want to keep things going.Jeff SelingoAnd that's—you know, that is the reality today. That's why proposals sell. Because people—you know, publishers really want people with platforms. And if you're not a superstar, there are very few of those out there, you need to figure out another way to build that platform. And so marketing yourself is critically important, and I've learned that from book one. You know, people would say, “Well, you're always just selling your book.” And I said, “Well, if I don't sell it, no one else,” right? So at some point, the publisher—you know, there's only so much the publisher is going to do. And they don't really have the tools that you do. And more than that, Jess, like, you understand your audience. Sarina understands her audience, right? Like, we understand our audiences in ways that publishers, who are doing, you know, dozens and dozens of books a year, just don't get.Jess LaheyRight. No, absolutely.Jeff SelingoLike, no offense against them. I think they're doing really good work. But it's just—it's hard for them, I think, to really understand, well, who's going to really read this book?Jess LaheyAnd I love the idea of using the questions you get. As you know, I tend to take the questions that I get and turn them into videos or—and I do answer all the emails—but I keep a spreadsheet of what those questions are so that I can slice and dice it in various ways. And they're fascinating. And that shapes like, oh wow, I had no idea so many people—like, I had no idea that so many kids were actually interested in knowing whether or not the caffeine—amounts of caffeine that they're drinking—are healthy, or how to get better sleep. Because if you ask their parents, they're like, “Oh no, they don't care about sleep,” or, “They just drink so much coffee and they don't care.” And yet what you hear from the kids is such a different story. And the thing that I also love is the idea of, you know, what that dream school concept means to the actual kid applying. You've probably heard this before, but I needed some symbolic way to let my kids know that this was not, in the end, my decision, and how important this decision was for them in terms of becoming adults. And so I said, the one thing I will never do is put a sticker for a school on the back of my car. Because your choice of where to become a young, emerging adult is not—I don't—that's not my currency to brag on as a parent. It's too important for that. And so people go nuts over that. They're like, “But that's what I really want—is that sticker on the back of the car!” And so I have to be careful when I talk about it, but for my kids, that was my one symbolic act to say, this is about your growth and development, and not my bragging rights. And I think that's a hard message.Jeff SelingoI think that's really important—especially, I have two teens at home. And I think this is a whole topic for another conversation around, you know, most parenting authors are also parents at the same time that they're doing this—advice out to everybody else. And I—I'm very aware of that. I'm also very aware of the privacy that they deserve. And so that's an—it's a fine line. It's a hard line to walk, I will say, for authors, because people—they want to know about you. And they ask you a lot of questions—like, especially around college—like, “Well, where are your kids applying? Where are they going to go?” Like, “Oh, I bet you—especially this book, where I'm encouraging parents to think more broadly—well, you're probably giving that advice to everybody else, but you're not going to follow that, surely, right?” So it's—you just have to—it's hard when you're in this world that you're also part of every day.Jess LaheyIt's really tough. And things have gotten a lot more complicated—as listeners know, I have a trans kid, and that means that everything that I've ever written about that kid is out there. Some of it changeable, a lot of it—most of it—not. And would I do it again? I don't—I don't think so. And that—you know, that's been a journey. But it's also been—you know, we can't know what we don't know. I don't know—it's a tough one. But I really admire your—that's why I throw my safety school thing out there all the time. I'm like, “Look, you know, I went to the place that saved my parents a boatload of money and allowed me to do stuff like traveling that I never would have had the ability to do if I hadn't gone to my state school. And my priorities were big, and adventures, and lots of options.” And I'm very, very clear that standing up for myself was something that I wanted to learn how to do more. On the other hand, that's not been the priority for both of my kids, so... Can I just—I want to ask one quick college question, just because it's—in reading all of your books, this comes up for me over and over again. How do you help parents see the difference between their dream and their kid's dream—or their goals and their kid's goals? And how do you dance that line, which I think is a very easy place to lose readers, lose listeners, because they just shut down and they say, “That's not something I want to mess with. This is too important to me.”Jeff SelingoIt's a fine line. It's a difficult line to walk. At some point I have to realize who's the you that you're speaking to. And I even say this in the introduction of the new book—it's largely parents. They're the readers. I know that—I hope their kids will read it. Maybe—maybe they will, maybe they won't, and maybe they'll read it as a family. But I'm really speaking to the families, and I want them to understand that college especially is an emotional good. It's something many of us—you're talking about your undergraduate experience. I'm not going to ask you how long ago that was, but my undergraduate experience...Jess LaheyI'm 55. So it's been a long time ago.Jeff SelingoAnd I'm 52, right? So same here. But we have this—you know, most people, because of the audiences I tend to speak to, they're not first-generation students, right? They're mostly parents. You know, most of the parents in the audience went to college themselves, and for many of them it was a transformative experience, like it was for me.People met their—they met their lifelong friends, they met their partners, they decided what they wanted to do in life. It was— it was this experience we all think it is. And as a result, I think a lot of parents put that then on their kids. “Well, this was a transforming experience for me, so it definitely has to be a transformative experience for you. Oh, and by the way, these are all the mistakes I made in doing that. I want to make sure you don't make any of those.”Jess LaheyAnd, by the way, no pressure, but this is going to be—this is where you're going to meet your best friends, your spouse. It's the best years of your life, so don't sacrifice even a second of it.Jeff SelingoYeah. And then I...Jess LaheyNo pressure.Jeff SelingoNo pressure. And not only that, but it is—it is something we bought a very long time ago. I'm always amazed when—sometimes we go to the Jersey Shore on vacation, and I'll be out on a walk on the beach in the morning, and I'll see people wearing, you know, college shirts, sweatshirts. And, you know, some of these people are old—much older than I am. And I say, “Oh”—you know, we'll start to have a conversation, and I'll say, “Oh, so does your grandkid, you know, go to X school?” Terrible assumption on my part, I know. But they say, “No, that's where I went.” And it's amazing to me—these are people in their 70s and 80s—because I'm the only other person out that early walking—and they love this thing so much that they're still kind of advertising it. But it was so different back then. And that's the thing that I—going back to your question—that's the thing I try to explain to parents. You can guide this. You can put guardrails up. You might have to put guardrails up about money and location and all that other stuff. But college has changed so much that—don't try to make this your search. You had your chance. You did your search. It worked out. It didn't work out. You would have done things differently. I think that's all great advice to give to your kids. But this is their life. This is their staging ground. They have to learn. And again, it's also different. Like, part of what I hope my books do is to try to explain to people—who, you know, kind of dip in and dip out of higher ed just when their kids are applying—that it's very different than when they applied and went to college.Jess LaheyThe thing I like to mention a lot is that people in admissions read so many applications that they can tell when something is sincere and something is personal and smacks of a kid, as opposed to when something smacks of a parent. That is a very different application. It's a very different essay—which is the thing that I guess I have the most experience with. But—so I am just so incredibly grateful to you for this book. I'm so grateful that there's evidence that people will actually agree to be interviewed, even in thorny situations like college admissions, which—I don't know. I'm still in awe of the fact that you got anyone to say yes. But—and I heavily—I heartily, heartily recommend Dream School to anyone who's listening. I just—I don't even have anyone applying to college, and I think it's just a fascinating topic, because the idea of where we become who we're going to be, and how we prime lots of other stuff that's going to happen later on in our life—I think that's a fascinating topic. So thank you so much for writing about it. Thank you for writing about it with such empathy and such interest. That's the other thing—is you can tell when someone really is interested in a topic when you read their book. And thank you for providing a book that I recommend all the time as a blueprint—as a dissection book—for people writing nonfiction, heavily interviewed nonfiction. So thank you, so, so much. Where can people find you if they want you to come speak, if they want you—if they want to find your books—where can people find you?Jeff SelingoPretty simple. Jeffselingo.com is my website, and you can also follow me on most social—handle is @jeffselingo, as in Jeff. And I just love hearing from readers. As you know, books change lives, and I love hearing the stories when readers tell me they read something in a book and they acted on it. It's just the most beautiful thing.Jess LaheyYeah, it's the best. I get videos occasionally; too, of like little kids doing things their parents didn't think they could do. And—“Look! Look! They did this thing!” It's just—it's an amazing and place of privilege. You have a newsletter also…Jeff SelingoI do. Called Next. It comes out twice a month.Jess LaheyIt's Fantastic!Jeff SelingoOh, well, thank you. And I have a podcast also called Future U— that's more around the kind of the insider-y nature of higher ed and how it works. But a lot—I know a lot of families listen to it to try to understand this black box that is college. So that's called Future U as in U for university.Jess LaheyThe reason I love the podcast so much is, a lot of what parents get exposed to when they're doing the college admissions process are those graphs—scatter graphs of like, where do your numbers intersect with the expectations of this school—and it's a real human version of that. It's a human version of how that black box operates.Jeff SelingoAnd at the end of the day, as I always remind parents, it's a business. You might have this emotional tie to college, but if you don't—if you don't—and you know a mutual friend of ours, Ron Lieber, who writes for The New York Times around...Jess LaheyHe's the best! The best!Jeff SelingoCollege finances, right? He always reminds people of this too. I don't remind them as often as he does, and I probably should. It's this—you're buying a consumer product. And you have to act as a consumer. Yes, you can have an emotional tie and a love for this place, but this is a big purchase, and you have to approach it like that.Jess LaheyDid you see his most recent piece about, yeah, taking some time and seeing—seeing what kind of offers you can get? I loved it. I love Ron's approach to—he's just a great guy. And his books are fantastic. Thank you again, so much. I'm going to let you get on with your day, but I'm always grateful for you. And good luck with the launch of Dream School.I will be out applauding on pub day for you.Jeff SelingoAppreciate it. Thank you, Jess.Jess LaheyAll right, everyone—until next week, keep your butt in the chair and your head in the game.NarratorThe Hashtag AmWriting Podcast is produced by Andrew Perella. Our intro music, aptly titled Unemployed Monday, was written and played by Max Cohen. Andrew and Max were paid for their time and their creative output—because everyone deserves to be paid for their work. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit amwriting.substack.com/subscribe

Pour écouter l'émission en entier, sans pub, abonnez-vous ! https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/S-tavkjvmo Mars 1945. Une explosion secoue la Thuringe. Pas un bombardement allié, mais un test… venu de l'intérieur du Reich. Prisonniers disparus, lumière blanche aveuglante, silence imposé par la SS. Et si l'Allemagne nazie avait expérimenté une arme nucléaire avant la fin de la guerre ? Dans cette émission tirée du livre Hitler's Bomb de l'historien Rainer Karlsch, nous explorons une thèse dérangeante : l'existence d'un programme nucléaire parallèle, mené dans l'ombre de Heisenberg, sous contrôle de la SS, qui aurait abouti à des essais secrets en 1945. Documents soviétiques "déclassifiés", témoignages oubliés, analyses scientifiques : tout converge vers une question taboue — les nazis ont-ils vraiment frôlé l'arme atomique ? Une enquête passionnante qui bouleverse le récit officiel et change à jamais notre regard sur la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

When it comes to business, measurement is everything—or at least, that's what we like to believe. In this episode of Now I Get It, I dive into the hidden traps of relying on metrics as tools for rewards or punishments and how doing so destroys their actual value. I also unpack how numbers get gamed, why this leaves businesses flying blind, and what the latest economic data reveals about our collective blind spots.But the conversation doesn't stop there. We explore the Heisenberg effect and how the very act of measurement changes the thing being measured—sometimes in subtle but important ways. And to ground this in real-world decision-making, I connect it all back to probability and betting, showing how the logic of a wager can help us sharpen our understanding of risk and make smarter, more informed choices in business and life.In this episode, you will learn:(00:22) Why using metrics as rewards or punishments destroys their value(01:10) How the jobs report reveals deeper problems in measurement(01:49) What the Heisenberg principle teaches us about observation and change(02:47) The difference between interaction that alters a system and interaction that doesn't(04:15) How probability reflects the information we already have, not the future(05:00) Why betting is the clearest metaphor for making decisions under uncertaintyLet's connect!linktr.ee/drprandy Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! ¡Abajo gafapastismos, esnobismos y lechuguinismos! Hoy por fin vamos a poner todas esas películas supuestamente insuperables, en teoría obras maestras del cine, pero que nadie soporta, en su sitio. ¿Cuántas veces has oído hablar maravillas de un film que nunca has logrado ver entero? Pues hoy, en La Órbita de Endor vamos a bajar del pedestal a Stanley Kubrick, Orson Welles, William Wyler, Francis Ford Coppola, Darren Aronofsky, Lars Von Trier, David Lynch o Clint Eastwood, entre otros muchos, por algunos peñazos que jamás hemos soportado, aunque los expertos de pacotilla nos vendan la cabra asegurando que su mierda es oro en paño. En LODE la caca es caca, y la caca es mala. Lo que hoy vas a escuchar aquí sobre estas películas, no lo vas a oír nunca en ningún sitio. Principalmente porque nadie se atreve a decirlo, incluso aunque lo piense. Con nosotros estará el Coronel Kurtz, Asier Huarte del programa amigo La Guarida del Sith y Abraham Hithorso del también programa amigo Podcinema. Además, conoceremos las películas más sobrevaloradas de la industria del cine según muchos de vosotros, oyentes activos, por vuestros propios comentarios en las redes sociales. Si bien es cierto que luego vendrán Vatman y Rovin a haceros perder vuestro tiempo escuchando sus memeces, pero para ser un simple espacio entre secciones, tampoco podéis quejaros mucho. Finalizaremos con nuestra sección Episodio Piloto, donde junto a Raúl Martin y un amigo de la web especializada en cómics Zona Negativa, David Fernández, analizaremos en profundidad la serie de culto Breaking Bad. ¿Cocinamos metanfetamina junto a Heisenberg? Pues venga. Esto es lo que os ofrecemos en un programa donde os hemos regalado una hora más de duración, porque vosotros lo valéis. La mejor manera de compensarnos por el detalle es escuchándolo. Por supuesto, conduce, edita, destruye y cocina: Antonio Runa. Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the German physicist who, at the age of 23 and while still a student, effectively created quantum mechanics for which he later won the Nobel Prize. Werner Heisenberg made this breakthrough in a paper in 1925 when, rather than starting with an idea of where atomic particles were at any one time, he worked backwards from what he observed of atoms and their particles and the light they emitted, doing away with the idea of their continuous orbit of the nucleus and replacing this with equations. This was momentous and from this flowed what's known as his Uncertainty Principle, the idea that, for example, you can accurately measure the position of an atomic particle or its momentum, but not both. With Fay Dowker Professor of Theoretical Physics at Imperial College London Harry Cliff Research Fellow in Particle Physics at the University of Cambridge And Frank Close Professor Emeritus of Theoretical Physics and Fellow Emeritus at Exeter College at the University of Oxford Producer: Simon Tillotson Reading list: Philip Ball, Beyond Weird: Why Everything You Thought You Knew about Quantum Physics Is Different (Vintage, 2018) John Bell, ‘Against 'measurement'' (Physics World, Vol 3, No 8, 1990) Mara Beller, Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution (University of Chicago Press, 2001) David C. Cassidy, Beyond Uncertainty: Heisenberg, Quantum Physics, And The Bomb (Bellevue Literary Press, 2010) Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy (first published 1958; Penguin Classics, 2000) Carlo Rovelli, Helgoland: The Strange and Beautiful Story of Quantum Physics (Penguin, 2022) Spanning history, religion, culture, science and philosophy, In Our Time from BBC Radio 4 is essential listening for the intellectually curious. In each episode, host Melvyn Bragg and expert guests explore the characters, events and discoveries that have shaped our world.