Podcasts about Newton

Wendy Newton and I discuss a description of the "play of life" that yoga describes. By cultivating the right attitude, through practice, we can have a deep appreciation for whatever happens, whether your mind wants to call it happy or painful. We base our discussion on a quote from Tantra Illuminated, by Christopher Wallis. This episode of Peter's Podcast is also available as a video on YouTube. Check it out!Please support Peter's Podcast on Patreon, and thank you to those who already do!Find Peter in person or streaming at ISHTA Yoga.Namaste

P. Federico (Guatemala)Dios no es la causa de los males naturales; tempestades de este mundo. Pedir un milagro en estos temas es pedir un milagro de milagro. En cambio, pedirle que nos libre de las tempestades interiores es un milagro más alcance de nuestras manos.[Ver Meditación Escrita] https://www.hablarconjesus.com/meditacion_escrita/tempestades/

In this episode, I'm breaking down Newton's three laws of motion. If you don't remember them or never learned them, that's fine I got you. I'll explain each law in simple terms and show you how they apply to real life, not just science. I like clear rules because they help us stay focused and not make excuses. These laws will help you look at your actions and results in a whole new way. Show Notes:  [02:01]#1 The law of inertia.  [10:16]#2 Force equals mass times acceleration. [15:54]#3 Action and reaction. [25:35]Recap Episodes Mentioned: 2466: The Law Of Inertia Next Steps: ---

“To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.”—Adam KucharskiMy conversation with Professor Kucharski on what constitutes certainty and proof in science (and other domains), with emphasis on many of the learnings from Covid. Given the politicization of science and A.I.'s deepfakes and power for blurring of truth, it's hard to think of a topic more important right now.Audio file (Ground Truths can also be downloaded on Apple Podcasts and Spotify)Eric Topol (00:06):Hello, it's Eric Topol from Ground Truths and I am really delighted to welcome Adam Kucharski, who is the author of a new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. He's a distinguished mathematician, by the way, the first mathematician we've had on Ground Truths and a person who I had the real privilege of getting to know a bit through the Covid pandemic. So welcome, Adam.Adam Kucharski (00:28):Thanks for having me.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, I think just to let everybody know, you're a Professor at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and also noteworthy you won the Adams Prize, which is one of the most impressive recognitions in the field of mathematics. This is the book, it's a winner, Proof and there's so much to talk about. So Adam, maybe what I'd start off is the quote in the book that captivates in the beginning, “life is full of situations that can reveal remarkably large gaps in our understanding of what is true and why it's true. This is a book about those gaps.” So what was the motivation when you undertook this very big endeavor?Adam Kucharski (01:17):I think a lot of it comes to the work I do at my day job where we have to deal with a lot of evidence under pressure, particularly if you work in outbreaks or emerging health concerns. And often it really pushes the limits, our methodology and how we converge on what's true subject to potential revision in the future. I think particularly having a background in math's, I think you kind of grow up with this idea that you can get to these concrete, almost immovable truths and then even just looking through the history, realizing that often isn't the case, that there's these kind of very human dynamics that play out around them. And it's something I think that everyone in science can reflect on that sometimes what convinces us doesn't convince other people, and particularly when you have that kind of urgency of time pressure, working out how to navigate that.Eric Topol (02:05):Yeah. Well, I mean I think these times of course have really gotten us to appreciate, particularly during Covid, the importance of understanding uncertainty. And I think one of the ways that we can dispel what people assume they know is the famous Monty Hall, which you get into a bit in the book. So I think everybody here is familiar with that show, Let's Make a Deal and maybe you can just take us through what happens with one of the doors are unveiled and how that changes the mathematics.Adam Kucharski (02:50):Yeah, sure. So I think it is a problem that's been around for a while and it's based on this game show. So you've got three doors that are closed. Behind two of the doors there is a goat and behind one of the doors is a luxury car. So obviously, you want to win the car. The host asks you to pick a door, so you point to one, maybe door number two, then the host who knows what's behind the doors opens another door to reveal a goat and then ask you, do you want to change your mind? Do you want to switch doors? And a lot of the, I think intuition people have, and certainly when I first came across this problem many years ago is well, you've got two doors left, right? You've picked one, there's another one, it's 50-50. And even some quite well-respected mathematicians.Adam Kucharski (03:27):People like Paul Erdős who was really published more papers than almost anyone else, that was their initial gut reaction. But if you work through all of the combinations, if you pick this door and then the host does this, and you switch or not switch and work through all of those options. You actually double your chances if you switch versus sticking with the door. So something that's counterintuitive, but I think one of the things that really struck me and even over the years trying to explain it is convincing myself of the answer, which was when I first came across it as a teenager, I did quite quickly is very different to convincing someone else. And even actually Paul Erdős, one of his colleagues showed him what I call proof by exhaustion. So go through every combination and that didn't really convince him. So then he started to simulate and said, well, let's do a computer simulation of the game a hundred thousand times. And again, switching was this optimal strategy, but Erdős wasn't really convinced because I accept that this is the case, but I'm not really satisfied with it. And I think that encapsulates for a lot of people, their experience of proof and evidence. It's a fact and you have to take it as given, but there's actually quite a big bridge often to really understanding why it's true and feeling convinced by it.Eric Topol (04:41):Yeah, I think it's a fabulous example because I think everyone would naturally assume it's 50-50 and it isn't. And I think that gets us to the topic at hand. What I love, there's many things I love about this book. One is that you don't just get into science and medicine, but you cut across all the domains, law, mathematics, AI. So it's a very comprehensive sweep of everything about proof and truth, and it couldn't come at a better time as we'll get into. Maybe just starting off with math, the term I love mathematical monsters. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Adam Kucharski (05:25):Yeah, this was a fascinating situation that emerged in the late 19th century where a lot of math's, certainly in Europe had been derived from geometry because a lot of the ancient Greek influence on how we shaped things and then Newton and his work on rates of change and calculus, it was really the natural world that provided a lot of inspiration, these kind of tangible objects, tangible movements. And as mathematicians started to build out the theory around rates of change and how we tackle these kinds of situations, they sometimes took that intuition a bit too seriously. And there was some theorems that they said were intuitively obvious, some of these French mathematicians. And so, one for example is this idea of you how things change smoothly over time and how you do those calculations. But what happened was some mathematicians came along and showed that when you have things that can be infinitely small, that intuition didn't necessarily hold in the same way.Adam Kucharski (06:26):And they came up with these examples that broke a lot of these theorems and a lot of the establishments at the time called these things monsters. They called them these aberrations against common sense and this idea that if Newton had known about them, he never would've done all of his discovery because they're just nuisances and we just need to get rid of them. And there's this real tension at the core of mathematics in the late 1800s where some people just wanted to disregard this and say, look, it works for most of the time, that's good enough. And then others really weren't happy with this quite vague logic. They wanted to put it on much sturdier ground. And what was remarkable actually is if you trace this then into the 20th century, a lot of these monsters and these particularly in some cases functions which could almost move constantly, this constant motion rather than our intuitive concept of movement as something that's smooth, if you drop an apple, it accelerates at a very smooth rate, would become foundational in our understanding of things like probability, Einstein's work on atomic theory. A lot of these concepts where geometry breaks down would be really important in relativity. So actually, these things that we thought were monsters actually were all around us all the time, and science couldn't advance without them. So I think it's just this remarkable example of this tension within a field that supposedly concrete and the things that were going to be shunned actually turn out to be quite important.Eric Topol (07:53):It's great how you convey how nature isn't so neat and tidy and things like Brownian motion, understanding that, I mean, just so many things that I think fit into that general category. In the legal, we won't get into too much because that's not so much the audience of Ground Truths, but the classic things about innocent and until proven guilty and proof beyond reasonable doubt, I mean these are obviously really important parts of that overall sense of proof and truth. We're going to get into one thing I'm fascinated about related to that subsequently and then in science. So before we get into the different types of proof, obviously the pandemic is still fresh in our minds and we're an endemic with Covid now, and there are so many things we got wrong along the way of uncertainty and didn't convey that science isn't always evolving search for what is the truth. There's plenty no shortage of uncertainty at any moment. So can you recap some of the, you did so much work during the pandemic and obviously some of it's in the book. What were some of the major things that you took out of proof and truth from the pandemic?Adam Kucharski (09:14):I think it was almost this story of two hearts because on the one hand, science was the thing that got us where we are today. The reason that so much normality could resume and so much risk was reduced was development of vaccines and the understanding of treatments and the understanding of variants as they came to their characteristics. So it was kind of this amazing opportunity to see this happen faster than it ever happened in history. And I think ever in science, it certainly shifted a lot of my thinking about what's possible and even how we should think about these kinds of problems. But also on the other hand, I think where people might have been more familiar with seeing science progress a bit more slowly and reach consensus around some of these health issues, having that emerge very rapidly can present challenges even we found with some of the work we did on Alpha and then the Delta variants, and it was the early quantification of these.Adam Kucharski (10:08):So really the big question is, is this thing more transmissible? Because at the time countries were thinking about control measures, thinking about relaxing things, and you've got this just enormous social economic health decision-making based around essentially is it a lot more spreadable or is it not? And you only had these fragments of evidence. So I think for me, that was really an illustration of the sharp end. And I think what we ended up doing with some of those was rather than arguing over a precise number, something like Delta, instead we kind of looked at, well, what's the range that matters? So in the sense of arguing over whether it's 40% or 50% or 30% more transmissible is perhaps less important than being, it's substantially more transmissible and it's going to start going up. Is it going to go up extremely fast or just very fast?Adam Kucharski (10:59):That's still a very useful conclusion. I think what often created some of the more challenges, I think the things that on reflection people looking back pick up on are where there was probably overstated certainty. We saw that around some of the airborne spread, for example, stated as a fact by in some cases some organizations, I think in some situations as well, governments had a constraint and presented it as scientific. So the UK, for example, would say testing isn't useful. And what was happening at the time was there wasn't enough tests. So it was more a case of they can't test at that volume. But I think blowing between what the science was saying and what the decision-making, and I think also one thing we found in the UK was we made a lot of the epidemiological evidence available. I think that was really, I think something that was important.Adam Kucharski (11:51):I found it a lot easier to communicate if talking to the media to be able to say, look, this is the paper that's out, this is what it means, this is the evidence. I always found it quite uncomfortable having to communicate things where you knew there were reports behind the scenes, but you couldn't actually articulate. But I think what that did is it created this impression that particularly epidemiology was driving the decision-making a lot more than it perhaps was in reality because so much of that was being made public and a lot more of the evidence around education or economics was being done behind the scenes. I think that created this kind of asymmetry in public perception about how that was feeding in. And so, I think there was always that, and it happens, it is really hard as well as a scientist when you've got journalists asking you how to run the country to work out those steps of am I describing the evidence behind what we're seeing? Am I describing the evidence about different interventions or am I proposing to some extent my value system on what we do? And I think all of that in very intense times can be very easy to get blurred together in public communication. I think we saw a few examples of that where things were being the follow the science on policy type angle where actually once you get into what you're prioritizing within a society, quite rightly, you've got other things beyond just the epidemiology driving that.Eric Topol (13:09):Yeah, I mean that term that you just use follow the science is such an important term because it tells us about the dynamic aspect. It isn't just a snapshot, it's constantly being revised. But during the pandemic we had things like the six-foot rule that was never supported by data, but yet still today, if I walk around my hospital and there's still the footprints of the six-foot rule and not paying attention to the fact that this was airborne and took years before some of these things were accepted. The flatten the curve stuff with lockdowns, which I never was supportive of that, but perhaps at the worst point, the idea that hospitals would get overrun was an issue, but it got carried away with school shutdowns for prolonged periods and in some parts of the world, especially very stringent lockdowns. But anyway, we learned a lot.Eric Topol (14:10):But perhaps one of the greatest lessons is that people's expectations about science is that it's absolute and somehow you have this truth that's not there. I mean, it's getting revised. It's kind of on the job training, it's on this case on the pandemic revision. But very interesting. And that gets us to, I think the next topic, which I think is a fundamental part of the book distributed throughout the book, which is the different types of proof in biomedicine and of course across all these domains. And so, you take us through things like randomized trials, p-values, 95 percent confidence intervals, counterfactuals, causation and correlation, peer review, the works, which is great because a lot of people have misconceptions of these things. So for example, randomized trials, which is the temple of the randomized trials, they're not as great as a lot of people think, yes, they can help us establish cause and effect, but they're skewed because of the people who come into the trial. So they may not at all be a representative sample. What are your thoughts about over deference to randomized trials?Adam Kucharski (15:31):Yeah, I think that the story of how we rank evidence in medicines a fascinating one. I mean even just how long it took for people to think about these elements of randomization. Fundamentally, what we're trying to do when we have evidence here in medicine or science is prevent ourselves from confusing randomness for a signal. I mean, that's fundamentally, we don't want to mistake something, we think it's going on and it's not. And the challenge, particularly with any intervention is you only get to see one version of reality. You can't give someone a drug, follow them, rewind history, not give them the drug and then follow them again. So one of the things that essentially randomization allows us to do is, if you have two groups, one that's been randomized, one that hasn't on average, the difference in outcomes between those groups is going to be down to the treatment effect.Adam Kucharski (16:20):So it doesn't necessarily mean in reality that'd be the case, but on average that's the expectation that you'd have. And it's kind of interesting actually that the first modern randomized control trial (RCT) in medicine in 1947, this is for TB and streptomycin. The randomization element actually, it wasn't so much statistical as behavioral, that if you have people coming to hospital, you could to some extent just say, we'll just alternate. We're not going to randomize. We're just going to first patient we'll say is a control, second patient a treatment. But what they found in a lot of previous studies was doctors have bias. Maybe that patient looks a little bit ill or that one maybe is on borderline for eligibility. And often you got these quite striking imbalances when you allowed it for human judgment. So it was really about shielding against those behavioral elements. But I think there's a few situations, it's a really powerful tool for a lot of these questions, but as you mentioned, one is this issue of you have the population you study on and then perhaps in reality how that translates elsewhere.Adam Kucharski (17:17):And we see, I mean things like flu vaccines are a good example, which are very dependent on immunity and evolution and what goes on in different populations. Sometimes you've had a result on a vaccine in one place and then the effectiveness doesn't translate in the same way to somewhere else. I think the other really important thing to bear in mind is, as I said, it's the averaging that you're getting an average effect between two different groups. And I think we see certainly a lot of development around things like personalized medicine where actually you're much more interested in the outcome for the individual. And so, what a trial can give you evidence is on average across a group, this is the effect that I can expect this intervention to have. But we've now seen more of the emergence things like N=1 studies where you can actually over the same individual, particularly for chronic conditions, look at those kind of interventions.Adam Kucharski (18:05):And also there's just these extreme examples where you're ethically not going to run a trial, there's never been a trial of whether it's a good idea to have intensive care units in hospitals or there's a lot of these kind of historical treatments which are just so overwhelmingly effective that we're not going to run trial. So almost this hierarchy over time, you can see it getting shifted because actually you do have these situations where other forms of evidence can get you either closer to what you need or just more feasibly an answer where it's just not ethical or practical to do an RCT.Eric Topol (18:37):And that brings us to the natural experiments I just wrote about recently, the one with shingles, which there's two big natural experiments to suggest that shingles vaccine might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, an added benefit beyond the shingles that was not anticipated. Your thoughts about natural experiments, because here you're getting a much different type of population assessment, again, not at the individual level, but not necessarily restricted by some potentially skewed enrollment criteria.Adam Kucharski (19:14):I think this is as emerged as a really valuable tool. It's kind of interesting, in the book you're talking to economists like Josh Angrist, that a lot of these ideas emerge in epidemiology, but I think were really then taken up by economists, particularly as they wanted to add more credibility to a lot of these policy questions. And ultimately, it comes down to this issue that for a lot of problems, we can't necessarily intervene and randomize, but there might be a situation that's done it to some extent for us, so the classic example is the Vietnam draft where it was kind of random birthdays with drawn out of lottery. And so, there's been a lot of studies subsequently about the effect of serving in the military on different subsequent lifetime outcomes because broadly those people have been randomized. It was for a different reason. But you've got that element of randomization driving that.Adam Kucharski (20:02):And so again, with some of the recent shingles data and other studies, you might have a situation for example, where there's been an intervention that's somewhat arbitrary in terms of time. It's a cutoff on a birth date, for example. And under certain assumptions you could think, well, actually there's no real reason for the person on this day and this day to be fundamentally different. I mean, perhaps there might be effects of cohorts if it's school years or this sort of thing. But generally, this isn't the same as having people who are very, very different ages and very different characteristics. It's just nature, or in this case, just a policy intervention for a different reason has given you that randomization, which allows you or pseudo randomization, which allows you to then look at something about the effect of an intervention that you wouldn't as reliably if you were just digging into the data of yes, no who's received a vaccine.Eric Topol (20:52):Yeah, no, I think it's really valuable. And now I think increasingly given priority, if you can find these natural experiments and they're not always so abundant to use to extrapolate from, but when they are, they're phenomenal. The causation correlation is so big. The issue there, I mean Judea Pearl's, the Book of Why, and you give so many great examples throughout the book in Proof. I wonder if you could comment that on that a bit more because this is where associations are confused somehow or other with a direct effect. And we unfortunately make these jumps all too frequently. Perhaps it's the most common problem that's occurring in the way we interpret medical research data.Adam Kucharski (21:52):Yeah, I think it's an issue that I think a lot of people get drilled into in their training just because a correlation between things doesn't mean that that thing causes this thing. But it really struck me as I talked to people, researching the book, in practice in research, there's actually a bit more to it in how it's played out. So first of all, if there's a correlation between things, it doesn't tell you much generally that's useful for intervention. If two things are correlated, it doesn't mean that changing that thing's going to have an effect on that thing. There might be something that's influencing both of them. If you have more ice cream sales, it will lead to more heat stroke cases. It doesn't mean that changing ice cream sales is going to have that effect, but it does allow you to make predictions potentially because if you can identify consistent patterns, you can say, okay, if this thing going up, I'm going to make a prediction that this thing's going up.Adam Kucharski (22:37):So one thing I found quite striking, actually talking to research in different fields is how many fields choose to focus on prediction because it kind of avoids having to deal with this cause and effect problem. And even in fields like psychology, it was kind of interesting that there's a lot of focus on predicting things like relationship outcomes, but actually for people, you don't want a prediction about your relationship. You want to know, well, how can I do something about it? You don't just want someone to sell you your relationship's going to go downhill. So there's almost part of the challenge is people just got stuck on prediction because it's an easier field of work, whereas actually some of those problems will involve intervention. I think the other thing that really stood out for me is in epidemiology and a lot of other fields, rightly, people are very cautious to not get that mixed up.Adam Kucharski (23:24):They don't want to mix up correlations or associations with causation, but you've kind of got this weird situation where a lot of papers go out of their way to not use causal language and say it's an association, it's just an association. It's just an association. You can't say anything about causality. And then the end of the paper, they'll say, well, we should think about introducing more of this thing or restricting this thing. So really the whole paper and its purpose is framed around a causal intervention, but it's extremely careful throughout the paper to not frame it as a causal claim. So I think we almost by skirting that too much, we actually avoid the problems that people sometimes care about. And I think a lot of the nice work that's been going on in causal inference is trying to get people to confront this more head on rather than say, okay, you can just stay in this prediction world and that's fine. And then just later maybe make a policy suggestion off the back of it.Eric Topol (24:20):Yeah, I think this is cause and effect is a very alluring concept to support proof as you so nicely go through in the book. But of course, one of the things that we use to help us is the biological mechanism. So here you have, let's say for example, you're trying to get a new drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the request is, well, we want two trials, randomized trials, independent. We want to have p-values that are significant, and we want to know the biological mechanism ideally with the dose response of the drug. But there are many drugs as you review that have no biological mechanism established. And even when the tobacco problems were mounting, the actual mechanism of how tobacco use caused cancer wasn't known. So how important is the biological mechanism, especially now that we're well into the AI world where explainability is demanded. And so, we don't know the mechanism, but we also don't know the mechanism and lots of things in medicine too, like anesthetics and even things as simple as aspirin, how it works and many others. So how do we deal with this quest for the biological mechanism?Adam Kucharski (25:42):I think that's a really good point. It shows almost a lot of the transition I think we're going through currently. I think particularly for things like smoking cancer where it's very hard to run a trial. You can't make people randomly take up smoking. Having those additional pieces of evidence, whether it's an analogy with a similar carcinogen, whether it's a biological mechanism, can help almost give you more supports for that argument that there's a cause and effect going on. But I think what I found quite striking, and I realized actually that it's something that had kind of bothered me a bit and I'd be interested to hear whether it bothers you, but with the emergence of AI, it's almost a bit of the loss of scientific satisfaction. I think you grow up with learning about how the world works and why this is doing what it's doing.Adam Kucharski (26:26):And I talked for example of some of the people involved with AlphaFold and some of the subsequent work in installing those predictions about structures. And they'd almost made peace with it, which I found interesting because I think they started off being a bit uncomfortable with like, yeah, you've got these remarkable AI models making these predictions, but we don't understand still biologically what's happening here. But I think they're just settled in saying, well, biology is really complex on some of these problems, and if we can have a tool that can give us this extremely valuable information, maybe that's okay. And it was just interesting that they'd really kind of gone through that kind process, which I think a lot of people are still grappling with and that almost that discomfort of using AI and what's going to convince you that that's a useful reliable prediction whether it's something like predicting protein folding or getting in a self-driving car. What's the evidence you need to convince you that's reliable?Eric Topol (27:26):Yeah, no, I'm so glad you brought that up because when Demis Hassabis and John Jumper won the Nobel Prize, the point I made was maybe there should be an asterisk with AI because they don't know how it works. I mean, they had all the rich data from the protein data bank, and they got the transformer model to do it for 200 million protein structure prediction, but they still to this day don't fully understand how the model really was working. So it reinforces what you're just saying. And of course, it cuts across so many types of AI. It's just that we tend to hold different standards in medicine not realizing that there's lots of lack of explainability for routine medical treatments today. Now one of the things that I found fascinating in your book, because there's different levels of proof, different types of proof, but solid logical systems.Eric Topol (28:26):And on page 60 of the book, especially pertinent to the US right now, there is a bit about Kurt Gödel and what he did there was he basically, there was a question about dictatorship in the US could it ever occur? And Gödel says, “oh, yes, I can prove it.” And he's using the constitution itself to prove it, which I found fascinating because of course we're seeing that emerge right now. Can you give us a little bit more about this, because this is fascinating about the Fifth Amendment, and I mean I never thought that the Constitution would allow for a dictatorship to emerge.Adam Kucharski (29:23):And this was a fascinating story, Kurt Gödel who is one of the greatest logical minds of the 20th century and did a lot of work, particularly in the early 20th century around system of rules, particularly things like mathematics and whether they can ever be really fully satisfying. So particularly in mathematics, he showed that there were this problem that is very hard to have a set of rules for something like arithmetic that was both complete and covered every situation, but also had no contradictions. And I think a lot of countries, if you go back, things like Napoleonic code and these attempts to almost write down every possible legal situation that could be imaginable, always just ascended into either they needed amendments or they had contradictions. I think Gödel's work really summed it up, and there's a story, this is in the late forties when he had his citizenship interview and Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern went along as witnesses for him.Adam Kucharski (30:17):And it's always told as kind of a lighthearted story as this logical mind, this academic just saying something silly in front of the judge. And actually, to my own admission, I've in the past given talks and mentioned it in this slightly kind of lighthearted way, but for the book I got talking to a few people who'd taken it more seriously. I realized actually he's this extremely logically focused mind at the time, and maybe there should have been something more to it. And people who have kind of dug more into possibilities was saying, well, what could he have spotted that bothered him? And a lot of his work that he did about consistency in mass was around particularly self-referential statements. So if I say this sentence is false, it's self-referential and if it is false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it's false and you get this kind of weird self-referential contradictions.Adam Kucharski (31:13):And so, one of the theories about Gödel was that in the Constitution, it wasn't that there was a kind of rule for someone can become a dictator, but rather people can use the mechanisms within the Constitution to make it easier to make further amendments. And he kind of downward cycle of amendment that he had seen happening in Europe and the run up to the war, and again, because this is never fully documented exactly what he thought, but it's one of the theories that it wouldn't just be outright that it would just be this cycle process of weakening and weakening and weakening and making it easier to add. And actually, when I wrote that, it was all the earlier bits of the book that I drafted, I did sort of debate whether including it I thought, is this actually just a bit in the weeds of American history? And here we are. Yeah, it's remarkable.Eric Topol (32:00):Yeah, yeah. No, I mean I found, it struck me when I was reading this because here back in 1947, there was somebody predicting that this could happen based on some, if you want to call it loopholes if you will, or the ability to change things, even though you would've thought otherwise that there wasn't any possible capability for that to happen. Now, one of the things I thought was a bit contradictory is two parts here. One is from Angus Deaton, he wrote, “Gold standard thinking is magical thinking.” And then the other is what you basically are concluding in many respects. “To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.” So here you have on the one hand your search for the truth, proof, which I think that little paragraph says it all. In many respects, it sums up somewhat to the work that you review here and on the other you have this Nobel laureate saying, you don't have to go to extremes here. The enemy of good is perfect, perhaps. I mean, how do you reconcile this sense that you shouldn't go so far? Don't search for absolute perfection of proof.Adam Kucharski (33:58):Yeah, I think that encapsulates a lot of what the book is about, is that search for certainty and how far do you have to go. I think one of the things, there's a lot of interesting discussion, some fascinating papers around at what point do you use these studies? What are their flaws? But I think one of the things that does stand out is across fields, across science, medicine, even if you going to cover law, AI, having these kind of cookie cutter, this is the definitive way of doing it. And if you just follow this simple rule, if you do your p-value, you'll get there and you'll be fine. And I think that's where a lot of the danger is. And I think that's what we've seen over time. Certain science people chasing certain targets and all the behaviors that come around that or in certain situations disregarding valuable evidence because you've got this kind of gold standard and nothing else will do.Adam Kucharski (34:56):And I think particularly in a crisis, it's very dangerous to have that because you might have a low level of evidence that demands a certain action and you almost bias yourself towards inaction if you have these kind of very simple thresholds. So I think for me, across all of these stories and across the whole book, I mean William Gosset who did a lot of pioneering work on statistical experiments at Guinness in the early 20th century, he had this nice question he sort of framed is, how much do we lose? And if we're thinking about the problems, there's always more studies we can do, there's always more confidence we can have, but whether it's a patient we want to treat or crisis we need to deal with, we need to work out actually getting that level of proof that's really appropriate for where we are currently.Eric Topol (35:49):I think exceptionally important that there's this kind of spectrum or continuum in following science and search for truth and that distinction, I think really nails it. Now, one of the things that's unique in the book is you don't just go through all the different types of how you would get to proof, but you also talk about how the evidence is acted on. And for example, you quote, “they spent a lot of time misinforming themselves.” This is the whole idea of taking data and torturing it or using it, dredging it however way you want to support either conspiracy theories or alternative facts. Basically, manipulating sometimes even emasculating what evidence and data we have. And one of the sentences, or I guess this is from Sir Francis Bacon, “truth is a daughter of time”, but the added part is not authority. So here we have our president here that repeats things that are wrong, fabricated or wrong, and he keeps repeating to the point that people believe it's true. But on the other hand, you could say truth is a daughter of time because you like to not accept any truth immediately. You like to see it get replicated and further supported, backed up. So in that one sentence, truth is a daughter of time not authority, there's the whole ball of wax here. Can you take us through that? Because I just think that people don't understand that truth being tested over time, but also manipulated by its repetition. This is a part of the big problem that we live in right now.Adam Kucharski (37:51):And I think it's something that writing the book and actually just reflecting on it subsequently has made me think about a lot in just how people approach these kinds of problems. I think that there's an idea that conspiracy theorists are just lazy and have maybe just fallen for a random thing, but talking to people, you really think about these things a lot more in the field. And actually, the more I've ended up engaging with people who believe things that are just outright unevidenced around vaccines, around health issues, they often have this mountain of papers and data to hand and a lot of it, often they will be peer reviewed papers. It won't necessarily be supporting the point that they think it's supports.Adam Kucharski (38:35):But it's not something that you can just say everything you're saying is false, that there's actually often a lot of things that have been put together and it's just that leap to that conclusion. I think you also see a lot of scientific language borrowed. So I gave a talker early this year and it got posted on YouTube. It had conspiracy theories it, and there was a lot of conspiracy theory supporters who piled in the comments and one of the points they made is skepticism is good. It's the kind of law society, take no one's word for it, you need this. We are the ones that are kind of doing science and people who just assume that science is settled are in the wrong. And again, you also mentioned that repetition. There's this phenomenon, it's the illusory truth problem that if you repeatedly tell someone someone's something's false, it'll increase their belief in it even if it's something quite outrageous.Adam Kucharski (39:27):And that mimics that scientific repetition because people kind of say, okay, well if I've heard it again and again, it's almost like if you tweak these as mini experiments, I'm just accumulating evidence that this thing is true. So it made me think a lot about how you've got essentially a lot of mimicry of the scientific method, amount of data and how you present it and this kind of skepticism being good, but I think a lot of it comes down to as well as just looking at theological flaws, but also ability to be wrong in not actually seeking out things that confirm. I think all of us, it's something that I've certainly tried to do a lot working on emergencies, and one of the scientific advisory groups that I worked on almost it became a catchphrase whenever someone presented something, they finished by saying, tell me why I'm wrong.Adam Kucharski (40:14):And if you've got a variant that's more transmissible, I don't want to be right about that really. And it is something that is quite hard to do and I found it is particularly for something that's quite high pressure, trying to get a policymaker or someone to write even just non-publicly by themselves, write down what you think's going to happen or write down what would convince you that you are wrong about something. I think particularly on contentious issues where someone's got perhaps a lot of public persona wrapped up in something that's really hard to do, but I think it's those kind of elements that distinguish between getting sucked into a conspiracy theory and really seeking out evidence that supports it and trying to just get your theory stronger and stronger and actually seeking out things that might overturn your belief about the world. And it's often those things that we don't want overturned. I think those are the views that we all have politically or in other ways, and that's often where the problems lie.Eric Topol (41:11):Yeah, I think this is perhaps one of, if not the most essential part here is that to try to deal with the different views. We have biases as you emphasized throughout, but if you can use these different types of proof to have a sound discussion, conversation, refutation whereby you don't summarily dismiss another view which may be skewed and maybe spurious or just absolutely wrong, maybe fabricated whatever, but did you can engage and say, here's why these are my proof points, or this is why there's some extent of certainty you can have regarding this view of the data. I think this is so fundamental because unfortunately as we saw during the pandemic, the strident minority, which were the anti-science, anti-vaxxers, they were summarily dismissed as being kooks and adopting conspiracy theories without the right engagement and the right debates. And I think this might've helped along the way, no less the fact that a lot of scientists didn't really want to engage in the first place and adopt this methodical proof that you've advocated in the book so many different ways to support a hypothesis or an assertion. Now, we've covered a lot here, Adam. Have I missed some central parts of the book and the effort because it's really quite extraordinary. I know it's your third book, but it's certainly a standout and it certainly it's a standout not just for your books, but books on this topic.Adam Kucharski (43:13):Thanks. And it's much appreciated. It was not an easy book to write. I think at times, I kind of wondered if I should have taken on the topic and I think a core thing, your last point speaks to that. I think a core thing is that gap often between what convinces us and what convinces someone else. I think it's often very tempting as a scientist to say the evidence is clear or the science has proved this. But even on something like the vaccines, you do get the loud minority who perhaps think they're putting microchips in people and outlandish views, but you actually get a lot more people who might just have some skepticism of pharmaceutical companies or they might have, my wife was pregnant actually at the time during Covid and we waited up because there wasn't much data on pregnancy and the vaccine. And I think it's just finding what is convincing. Is it having more studies from other countries? Is it understanding more about the biology? Is it understanding how you evaluate some of those safety signals? And I think that's just really important to not just think what convinces us and it's going to be obvious to other people, but actually think where are they coming from? Because ultimately having proof isn't that good unless it leads to the action that can make lives better.Eric Topol (44:24):Yeah. Well, look, you've inculcated my mind with this book, Adam, called Proof. Anytime I think of the word proof, I'm going to be thinking about you. So thank you. Thanks for taking the time to have a conversation about your book, your work, and I know we're going to count on you for the astute mathematics and analysis of outbreaks in the future, which we will see unfortunately. We are seeing now, in fact already in this country with measles and whatnot. So thank you and we'll continue to follow your great work.**************************************Thanks for listening, watching or reading this Ground Truths podcast/post.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.I'm also appreciative for your subscribing to Ground Truths. All content —its newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access. I'm fortunate to get help from my producer Jessica Nguyen and Sinjun Balabanoff for audio/video tech support to pull these podcasts together for Scripps Research.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years.A bit of an update on SUPER AGERSMy book has been selected as a Next Big Idea Club winner for Season 26 by Adam Grant, Malcolm Gladwell, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. This club has spotlighted the most groundbreaking nonfiction books for over a decade. As a winning title, my book will be shipped to thousands of thoughtful readers like you, featured alongside a reading guide, a "Book Bite," Next Big Idea Podcast episode as well as a live virtual Q&A with me in the club's vibrant online community. If you're interested in joining the club, here's a promo code SEASON26 for 20% off at the website. SUPER AGERS reached #3 for all books on Amazon this week. This was in part related to the segment on the book on the TODAY SHOW which you can see here. Also at Amazon there is a remarkable sale on the hardcover book for $10.l0 at the moment for up to 4 copies. Not sure how long it will last or what prompted it.The journalist Paul von Zielbauer has a Substack “Aging With Strength” and did an extensive interview with me on the biology of aging and how we can prevent the major age-related diseases. Here's the link. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

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 Professor John Norton has spent decades dismantling the hidden assumptions in physics from Newton's determinism to the myth of Landauer's Principle. In this episode, he explains why causation may not be real, how classical physics breaks down, and why even Einstein got some things wrong. If you're ready to rethink the foundations of science, this one's essential. Join My New Substack (Personal Writings): https://curtjaimungal.substack.com Listen on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4e Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 03:37 Norton's Dome Explained 06:30 The Misunderstanding of Determinism 09:31 Thermodynamics and Infinite Systems 14:39 Implications for Quantum Mechanics 16:20 Revisiting Causation 18:15 Critique of Causal Metaphysics 20:21 The Utility of Causal Language 24:58 Exploring Thought Experiments 33:05 Landauer's Principle Discussion 49:48 Critique of Experimental Validation 52:25 Consequences for Maxwell's Demon 1:13:34 Einstein's Critiques of Quantum Mechanics 1:28:16 The Nature of Scientific Discovery 1:42:56 Inductive Inferences in Science Links Mentioned: •⁠ ⁠A Primer on Determinism (book): https://amzn.to/45Jn3b4 •⁠ ⁠John Norton's papers: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=UDteMFoAAAAJ •⁠ ⁠Causation as Folk Science (paper): https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/003004.pdf •⁠ ⁠Lipschitz continuity (wiki): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipschitz_continuity •⁠ ⁠The Dome: An Unexpectedly Simple Failure of Determinism (paper): https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/2943/1/Norton.pdf •⁠ ⁠Norton's Dome (wiki): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton%27s_dome •⁠ ⁠Approximation and Idealization (paper): https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Ideal_Approx_final.pdf •⁠ ⁠On the Quantum Theory of Radiation (paper): https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/einstein/1917_Radiation.pdf •⁠ ⁠Making Things Happen (book): https://ccc.inaoep.mx/~esucar/Clases-mgc/Making-Things-Happen-A-Theory-of-Causal-Explanation.pdf •⁠ ⁠Causation in Physics (wiki): https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/causation-physics/ •⁠ ⁠Laboratory of the Mind (paper): https://www.academia.edu/2644953/REVIEW_James_R_Brown_Laboratory_of_the_Mind •⁠ ⁠Roger Penrose on TOE: https://youtu.be/sGm505TFMbU •⁠ ⁠Ted Jacobson on TOE: https://youtu.be/3mhctWlXyV8 •⁠ ⁠The Thermodynamics of Computation (paper): https://sites.cc.gatech.edu/computing/nano/documents/Bennett%20-%20The%20Thermodynamics%20Of%20Computation.pdf •⁠ ⁠What's Actually Possible? (article): https://curtjaimungal.substack.com/p/the-unexamined-in-principle •⁠ ⁠On a Decrease of Entropy in a Thermodynamic System (paper): https://fab.cba.mit.edu/classes/862.22/notes/computation/Szilard-1929.pdf •⁠ ⁠Landauer's principle and thermodynamics (article): https://www.nature.com/articles/nature10872 •⁠ ⁠The Logical Inconsistency of Old Quantum Theory of Black Body Radiation (paper): https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Inconsistency_OQT.pdf 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 #science Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alex Forsyth presents political discussion from Doveridge Village Hall.

In this conversation with Terry Pinkard, I discuss Hegel's famous Phenomenology of Spirit. Terry recently published a brilliant introductory guide to this famously difficult book [Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit: A Guide (2023)] which we use as our jumping off point. We discuss the origin of Hegel's book against the backdrop of its turbulent historical moment - the aftermath of the French Revolution and Napoleon's decisive victory at the Battle of Jena. At Jena Hegel too was writing alongside figures like Hölderlin, Schelling, Goethe, and Schiller. Terry clarifies common misreadings of Hegel, particularly the idea of Geist [spirit] as some kind of cosmic spirit or divine substance, emphasizing instead how Hegel understands his notion of Geist as something very concrete and social. Geist is the collective activity of reason unfolding in history. We also discuss Hegel's engagement with the scientific thought of his time, including the influence of Newton and Leibniz, and how their debates about force shaped his philosophy. The conversation traces key stages in the Phenomenology, from sense-certainty to understanding, and examines Hegel's distinctive view of freedom - not as mere individual choice, but as embedded in institutional and social practices. Finally, we consider what Terry might ask Hegel himself if given the chance. Prof. Terry Pinkard is a leading American philosopher and Hegel scholar, known for his influential work on German Idealism, phenomenology, and social philosophy. A professor at Georgetown University, he has written the definitive biography of Hegel (Hegel: A Biography 2000) and key interpretive works like Hegel's Phenomenology: The Sociality of Reason (1994) and Hegel's Naturalism (2011).  If you would like to study with me you can find more information about our online education MAs in Philosophy here at Staffordshire University. You can find out more information on our MA in Continental Philosophy via this link. Or, join our MA in Philosophy of Nature, Information and Technology via this link. Find out more about me here.  September intakes F/T or January intakes P/T. You can listen to more free back content from the Thales' Well podcast on TuneIn Radio, Player Fm, Stitcher and Pod Bean. You can also download their apps to your smart phone and listen via there. You can also subscribe for free on iTunes. Please leave a nice review.

Odvolací soud zrušil osvobozující verdikt nad Andrejem Babišem a Janou Nagyovou (oba ANO). „Hlavní problém je, že ta kauza znovu otřese důvěru českých občanů v soudní systém,“ myslí si v pořadu Pro a proti politolog Lukáš Valeš z Vysoké školy Newton. „Pro jeho voličské jádro je to impulz pozitivní. Semknou se za ním až sektářským způsobem,“ doplňuje pro Český rozhlas Plus politolog Ladislav Cabada, prorektor Metropolitní univerzity Praha.Všechny díly podcastu Pro a proti můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

With underground tanks and native vegetation, Cheesecake Brook is getting a climate-ready upgrade. Learn more at https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/ 

In this episode, Nick Zei breaks down what The Human Game really is-and why most people are trapped in loops without even knowing it.If you've ever felt like reality was off, like something deeper was going on beneath the surface... you're not crazy. You're waking up.We explore:Why your reality feels manipulated (and who benefits)Ancient cultures & the conscious field theoryThe illusion of “free will” in a distracted worldPsychological tactics used to keep Players asleepHow to break loops and shift your timelineThis episode connects the dots between Plato's Cave, the false light, and ancient truths hidden on purpose. It's the starter wake-up call for anyone ready to exit the matrix.

Newton, como casi todas las personas, tiene luces y sombras en su personalidad y en su forma de ser. En el caso de Newton, sin embargo, tenemos una luz brillantísima y unas sombras muy oscuras. Desde niño en el colegio despunta por su inteligencia y habilidades para el estudio. Siempre es más inteligente y hábil que el resto de sus compañeros en el colegio. El resto de los niños comienza a separarse de él y a considerarle bastante raro, tímido, extraño, reservado, etc. Tiene peleas con otros niños. Newton trata de hacer amigos, pero lo hace demostrando que sabe más que el resto de los niños. Lo cual provoca el efecto contrario. Newton es un niño solitario y taciturno, muy hábil haciendo experimentos. Todo esto forjará un carácter reservado y solitario que despuntará en su madurez con duros enfrentamientos con diferentes colegas. Nos lo contará Luis Enrique García Muñoz, vicerrector de Investigación y Transferencia de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Reality is shifting. Can we prove time is not linear? Visit https://rise.tv/video for free exclusive content! Visit https://metaphysicalcoffee.com for coffee that's out of this world! Traditionally, we always believe time is a straight progression from past to future, as noted by Newton's laws of physics. However, Einstein's theory of relativity shattered this narrative when he understood that time is relative to the observer's frame of reference, which is affected by speed and gravity. Nikola Tesla was also able to change his perception of time and maybe even took it to a whole new level. But what would happen if widespread acceptance of nonlinear time and reality shifts were accepted? Would it revolutionize how we perceive our existence, blending science, spirituality, and philosophy? Join Ben Chasteen and Rob Counts on this Edge of Wonder live show as they provide proof that time isn't as linear as we thought, and that there are connections to our dreams and alternate realities and timelines. At the end of the show, don't miss the live Q&A followed by a meditation/prayer only on Rise.TV. See you out on the edge! Download the Rise TV iPhone app – https://apple.co/3DYB7So or Android – https://bit.ly/risetvandroid Listen on Spotify — https://spoti.fi/3z679Xn or Apple Podcasts— https://apple.co/3w0xYdM Follow Edge of Wonder for more! Telegram – https://t.me/risetvofficial Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/risetvofficial Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/risetvofficial X – https://twitter.com/risetvofficial #reality #philosophy #timelines

Singapore is poised for a wave of transformation, with new neighbourhoods planned in areas like Dover, Newton, and Paterson—bringing a diverse mix of public and private housing options to various parts of the island. Beyond residential developments, the upcoming plans include expanded office spaces in Bishan, new parks in the north-west, and vibrant community hubs in Sengkang, Woodlands North, and Yio Chu Kang inspired by the successful model of Our Tampines Hub. These ambitious proposals were unveiled as part of the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s Draft Master Plan 2025, a strategic blueprint that will shape the nation's urban landscape for the next decade and beyond. What does this new phase of development mean for the way we live, work, and connect as a community? How will these plans address future challenges like sustainability, inclusivity, and population growth? And what role can residents play in shaping the neighbourhoods of tomorrow? On The Big Story, Hongbin Jeong speaks with Professor Sing Tien Foo, the Provost's Chair Professor at the Department of Real Estate, NUS Business School to find out more.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us a textDead body on the shoulder, oh what to do?

(00:00) The guys open the show by recapping their weekends, and Fred talks about his travelling with his son for his baseball games. (19:41) WHAT HAPPENED LAST NIGHT: Kevin Durant has been traded to the Houston Rockets, ending weeks of speculation, with the Suns receiving Jalen Green, Dillon Brooks, the No. 10 pick in 2025, and five second-rounders. The Thunder capped off a dominant season by winning their first NBA title, as MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led the way with 29 points and 12 assists in a 103-91 Game 7 win over the Pacers. Heliot Ramos drove in four runs, including a key two-run double in the seventh, to lead the Giants past the Red Sox 9-5. CONNECT WITH TOUCHER & HARDY: linktr.ee/ToucherandHardy For the latest updates, visit the show page on 985thesportshub.com. Follow 98.5 The Sports Hub on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. Watch the show every morning on YouTube, and subscribe to stay up-to-date with all the best moments from Boston’s home for sports!

INSTAGRAM:   https://www.instagram.com/squatchgouache/      WEBSITES:   https://mikehernandezart.com/ _______________________________________________________________________       THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS:       ROSEMARY BRUSHES  https://www.rosemaryandco.com         VASARI PAINTS https://www.vasaricolors.com       HEIN ATELIER  https://heinatelier.com/         ARTEFEX Try a panel free! artefex.biz/pod        WINSOR & NEWTON https://www.winsornewton.com/   Discount Code: UNDRAPEDARTISTPOD     _________________________________________________________________________       THANK YOU TO ALL OF MY GENEROUS PATRONS!   PLEASE CONSIDER HELPING TO KEEP THIS PODCAST GOING BY BECOMING A MONTHLY PATRON. JUST CLICK THE LINK BELOW.       https://patron.podbean.com/theundrape...    _________________________________________________________________________       FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON INSTAGRAM, FACEBOOK AND YOUTUBE:         / theundrapedartist           / 100083157287362            / @theundrapedartist     __________________________________________________________________________       FOLLOW THE HOST, JEFF HEIN:       Jeffhein.com          / jeffrey.hein.16           / jeff_hein_art           / jeff_hein_studio

INSTAGRAM:   https://www.instagram.com/squatchgouache/      WEBSITES:   https://mikehernandezart.com/ _______________________________________________________________________       THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS:       ROSEMARY BRUSHES  https://www.rosemaryandco.com         VASARI PAINTS https://www.vasaricolors.com       HEIN ATELIER  https://heinatelier.com/         ARTEFEX Try a panel free! artefex.biz/pod        WINSOR & NEWTON https://www.winsornewton.com/   Discount Code: UNDRAPEDARTISTPOD     _________________________________________________________________________       THANK YOU TO ALL OF MY GENEROUS PATRONS!   PLEASE CONSIDER HELPING TO KEEP THIS PODCAST GOING BY BECOMING A MONTHLY PATRON. JUST CLICK THE LINK BELOW.       https://patron.podbean.com/theundrape...    _________________________________________________________________________       FOLLOW THE PODCAST ON INSTAGRAM, FACEBOOK AND YOUTUBE:         / theundrapedartist           / 100083157287362            / @theundrapedartist     __________________________________________________________________________       FOLLOW THE HOST, JEFF HEIN:       Jeffhein.com          / jeffrey.hein.16           / jeff_hein_art           / jeff_hein_studio

NewsNation's national security contributor Lt. General Richard Newton joins John Williams to talk about the U.S. striking Iranian nuclear sites. Lt. General Newton explains what the strikes mean and what it means to the U.S. and stability in the Middle East.

NewsNation's national security contributor Lt. General Richard Newton joins John Williams to talk about the U.S. striking Iranian nuclear sites. Lt. General Newton explains what the strikes mean and what it means to the U.S. and stability in the Middle East.

NewsNation's national security contributor Lt. General Richard Newton joins John Williams to talk about the U.S. striking Iranian nuclear sites. Lt. General Newton explains what the strikes mean and what it means to the U.S. and stability in the Middle East.

Carl Gierstorfer sits down in Verona with Carlo Rovelli, one of the world's most renowned theoretical physicist, for a deeply personal and mind-expanding conversation. Together, they explore the radical heart of physics — not just as a science, but as a practice of *unlearning* and challenging our deepest assumptions about reality, from Newton to Einstein to quantum mechanics.

We are all aware how Newton's first law of motion, the law of inertia, applies to physical bodies... but does it also apply to mental motion?In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. We live in strange times, where mythology is actually history, where instead of teaching history, we obfuscate it, history is written by the victors as they say. If it can be destroyed by the truth, it deserves to be destroyed. Join me around the digital campfire as we explore the cosmos, and uncover hidden gnosis. LINKSJoin this channel to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoCGItGjnTXKeRk4PHcQ8AQ/joinPatreon:https://www.patreon.com/LibraryofgnosisPaypal:https://paypal.me/LibraryofGnosis?country.x=SE&locale.x=sv_SEYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/c/LibraryofGnosis/ Odyssey:https://odysee.com/@Library_of_Gnosis:eFacebook:https://www.facebook.com/Library-of-Gnosis-102241851413980/Bitchute:https://www.bitchute.com/channel/mvPf2ntAUShO/Rumble:https://rumble.com/c/c-1387156 Spotify:https://open.spotify.com/show/5Nr8DYq9PhhcIzEaMQcquB?si=FsNuxvo9TsqxXwu-Ge32fgApple Podcasts:https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/library-of-gnosis/id1608143632

1) MammAlps: l'IA au service de la protection de la faune sauvage en Suisse Le projet MammAlps utilise l'IA et des caméras infrarouges dans le Parc national suisse pour analyser 43 heures de vidéos. Il identifie et étudie les comportements de la faune, comme les chevreuils et les loups, en lien avec l'environnement. L'objectif est de mieux protéger la faune, malgré des questions éthiques. CQFD reçoit Devis Tuia, responsable du laboratoire de sciences computationnelles appliquées à lʹenvironnement, ECEO, EPFL. 2) SWOT, un satellite pour la gestion mondiale de l'eau Le satellite SWOT, lancé en décembre 2022 par le CNES et la NASA, révolutionne l'hydrologie spatiale en mesurant avec précision les niveaux d'eau des fleuves, lacs et océans de notre planète. Ses données publiques aident à gérer les ressources hydriques et à prévoir inondations et sécheresses. Un documentaire, "Un rêve en eau pour 2100", explore son impact. Sarah Dirren s'entretient avec lʹingénieur, Nicolas Picot, chef de projet au CNES et Thierry Gentet, ancien ingénieur au CNES et auteur-réalisateur du documentaire. 3) 2000 ans de découvertes de l'univers: l'évolution de la cosmologie L'astrophysicienne Françoise Combes retrace 2 000 ans de cosmologie dans son livre "Petite histoire de la cosmologie", publié aux éditions du CNRS. De la Terre plate des Mésopotamiens à l'expansion de l'univers, en passant par Ptolémée, Copernic, Newton et le Big Bang, elle explore les grandes étapes de notre compréhension de l'univers. Stéphane Délétroz interroge l'autrice et astrophysicienne Françoise Combes.

What happens when we teach science and math not just as technical subjects—but as opportunities for wonder, worship, and wisdom?In this summer flashback episode, Davies Owens is joined by renowned classical educator Ravi Jain, co-author of The Liberal Arts Tradition and a leading voice in the recovery of classical science education. Too often, classical schools are seen as focused on the humanities, while math and science remain untouched by the classical tradition. But Ravi makes a compelling case for why recovering natural philosophy—the pursuit of truth in the created world—is vital to forming whole human beings.From sketchbooks and pendulums to Pascal, Newton, and Galileo, this conversation explores how students can rediscover the beauty and order of God's creation—and how science class can become a place of discovery, not just memorization.

In this episode of the Crack House Chronicles Donnie and Dale discuss the disappearance of Ken Mohler. Kenneth “Ken” Earl Mohler was last seen on August 16th , 2012, at his place of employment, Gregory Wood Products located at 2801 Woodtech Dr. Newton, N.C.; where he worked as a third shift maintenance man. https://www.crackhousechronicles.com/ https://linktr.ee/crackhousechronicles https://www.tiktok.com/@crackhousechronicles https://www.facebook.com/crackhousechronicles Check out our MERCH! https://www.teepublic.com/user/crackhousechronicles Sources: https://abandonednc.org/the-disappearance-of-ken-mohler/ https://www.facebook.com/findkenmohler/ https://www.catawbacountync.gov/county-services/sheriffs-office/divisions/investigations/unsolved-cases-and-missing-persons/ https://namus.nij.ojp.gov/case/MP17916 https://charleyproject.org/case/kenneth-earl-mohler    

Today on Black Dragon Biker TV: Killed Outlaws Biker Named The biker community is reeling as new information emerges surrounding the fatal shooting at the Outlaws MC clubhouse in Newton, North Carolina. The victim has now been officially identified. Shortly after 2:00 a.m. on Sunday, June 8, Newton Police received a call from the Catawba County Communications Center about a shooting at the Outlaw Motorcycle Club House on North Main Avenue. Two individuals were shot. One man died from his injuries after being rushed to the hospital, while the second remains in critical condition after being airlifted to Atrium Health Medical Center in Charlotte.As the investigation unfolds, sources inside law enforcement via tactical two-way communications have voiced serious concerns that this may have been a targeted attack, possibly orchestrated by members of the Pagan's MC. Authorities are now actively investigating prior disputes involving the Pagan's that may have led to this deadly encounter. In this episode, we discuss:• The identity and background of the Outlaw MC member who was killed • The timeline of the shooting • What law enforcement is saying both publicly and privately • Rising tensions and the broader implications for the MC world Join Black Dragon, Lavish T. Williams, and Logic as we break down this developing story, ask tough questions, and bring the latest facts from the frontlines of biker news. Watch live on: Black Dragon Biker TV: /blackdragonbikertv Lavish T. Williams: /@lavishtwilliams Keep It Logical: /keepitlogicalBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-dragon-s-lair-motorcycle-chaos--3267493/support.

too insane https://erickimphotography.com/513-kg-1131-lb-rack-pull-new-world-record-6-84x-bodyweight/ Video https://videopress.com/v/gT3izZvn

Greg Rakestraw joins the action to talk about our two highschool softball state championships. He gives all the action on Newton vs. Clay City where Newton took the action 2-0 against a tough clay city. Greg mentions the amount of college prospects he got to see in this game and what that does for the girls around them. Greg then comments on what is to come tomorrow in an action packed Saturday of softball action. Jace comes in every 15 minutes for a much needed sport on such a big night for Indiana sports. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Bill Cunningham is joined by Richard Newton to discuss the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran.

Sponsor Details:This epiosode is broght to you by NordVPN...the official VPN service of SpaceTime. Get online security at a special SpaceTime price. Details at www.nordvpn.com/stuartgaryor use the code STUARTGARY at checkout.In this episode of SpaceTime, we explore groundbreaking discoveries and significant events unfolding in our universe.Galactic Collision Course: Two Massive Galaxy Clusters Set for Round TwoAstronomers have observed a rare cosmic event as two massive galaxy clusters, previously collided, are now on a trajectory for another encounter. Located 2.8 billion light-years away, the clusters—designated PSE2G 181.06.48.47—exhibit fascinating structures and shock fronts indicative of their impending collision. We delve into the implications of this rare event and what it reveals about the dynamics of galaxy clusters and dark matter.NASA's Psyche Mission Switches to Backup SystemsNASA has been compelled to switch to a backup fuel system on its Psyche spacecraft after a drop in fuel pressure was detected in the main propulsion system. We discuss the technical challenges faced by the mission team, the significance of the asteroid Psyche, and what this means for the spacecraft's journey to explore this intriguing metallic asteroid, scheduled for arrival in 2029.Discovery of a New Atomic NucleusFor the first time in over three decades, scientists have measured the heaviest nucleus decaying through proton emission. This discovery, involving the lightest known isotope of astatine-188, sheds light on the rare form of radioactive decay and the intricate properties of exotic nuclei. We explore the experimental techniques used and the theoretical implications of this groundbreaking finding.www.spacetimewithstuartgary.com✍️ Episode ReferencesAstrophysical Journalhttps://iopscience.iop.org/journal/0004-637XNASA Psyche Missionhttps://www.nasa.gov/psycheBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/spacetime-space-astronomy--2458531/support.00:00 This is Space Time Series 28, Episode 71 for broadcast on 13 June 202501:00 Galactic collision course: Two massive galaxy clusters set for round two12:15 NASA's Psyche mission switches to backup systems22:30 Discovery of a new atomic nucleus30:00 Science report: Unprecedented ocean warming in the South Pacific

Bill Cunningham is joined by Richard Newton to discuss the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran.

Bill Cunningham is joined by Richard Newton to discuss the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran.

Get Commanders tickets here! https://bit.ly/3Sos54U (05:00) Wild cards (13:00) S Will Harris (18:00) DT Johnny Newton (26:15) London Fletcher’s on the Money! (38:00) Voicemails Leave Jenks & Smoot a voicemail at 703-726-7419 or send us an email at washingtongetloud@gmail.com The views and opinions expressed by our podcast guests and/or hosts are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the Washington Commanders or any of their representatives.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Long before he was elected to the Senate, young Buck Newton from Wilson walked the halls of the Legislative Building as a House Page in the 1980s—an experience that not only sparked his interest in politics but also led to meeting his future wife. Sen. Newton reflects on his early exposure to public service, his return to Raleigh decades later as a successful candidate in 2010, and his role in helping Republicans flip the General Assembly for the first time in over a century. From page to senator to statewide candidate and back again, it's a candid conversation about lessons learned, battles fought, and what keeps him in the game. Plus, Skye and Brian update listeners on budget news and rumors, controversial legislation heading to Gov. Stein, #TOTW, bad breaker-uppers, and more.  The Do Politics Better podcast is sponsored by New Frame, the NC Travel Industry Association, the NC Beer & Wine Wholesalers Association, the NC Pork Council, and the NC Healthcare Association.

Tune in here to this Tuesday's edition of the Brett Winterble Show! Brett kicks off the program by discussing Governor Newton’s leadership and the consequences of his policies, particularly focusing on immigration and public safety. He argues that Newton’s tenure has led to increased strain on public resources, citing rising numbers of undocumented immigrants and associated social challenges. Brett then transitions to broader concerns about civil unrest in major cities, questioning whether the public has come to expect disorder as a norm in politically left-leaning areas. Brett emphasizes individual responsibility and personal agency. Drawing on the Stoic philosophy of Marcus Aurelius, he encourages listeners to reject passivity and take ownership of their lives and futures. He challenges the audience to avoid media-driven fear and distraction, and instead pursue meaningful goals with clarity and urgency. Using the metaphor of “burning the boats,” Brett calls for full commitment to personal and national renewal—insisting that change begins with decisive action and focused intention. Listen here for all of this and more on The Brett Winterble Show! For more from Brett Winterble check out his YouTube channel. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tune in here to this Tuesday's edition of the Brett Winterble Show! Brett kicks off the program by discussing Governor Newton’s leadership and the consequences of his policies, particularly focusing on immigration and public safety. He argues that Newton’s tenure has led to increased strain on public resources, citing rising numbers of undocumented immigrants and associated social challenges. Brett then transitions to broader concerns about civil unrest in major cities, questioning whether the public has come to expect disorder as a norm in politically left-leaning areas. Brett emphasizes individual responsibility and personal agency. Drawing on the Stoic philosophy of Marcus Aurelius, he encourages listeners to reject passivity and take ownership of their lives and futures. He challenges the audience to avoid media-driven fear and distraction, and instead pursue meaningful goals with clarity and urgency. Using the metaphor of “burning the boats,” Brett calls for full commitment to personal and national renewal—insisting that change begins with decisive action and focused intention. Later we’re joined by Beth Troutman to discuss the ongoing national unrest and its media portrayal, particularly in cities like Los Angeles. Beth shares insights from her background in television journalism, reflecting on how coverage often focuses on the most sensational or emotional aspects of protests to drive ratings. She emphasizes the importance of understanding the full human experience behind these events, noting that many peaceful protests and diverse perspectives go underreported. Beth expresses concern about the deepening emotional divide fueled by selective media narratives and social media algorithms. Drawing from her own experience covering the 2016 Charlotte protests, she advocates for more balanced, compassionate storytelling that includes voices from all sides—protesters, police, immigrants, and officials alike. Her call is for truth, empathy, and meaningful dialogue, not just headlines. Troutman’s heartfelt reflections underscore her desire for a more human-centered approach to journalism and public discourse. Listen here for all of this and more on The Brett Winterble Show! For more from Brett Winterble check out his YouTube channel. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Monday, a public hearing was held for the Massachusetts judge, Shelley Joseph, who is accused of helping a man sneak out the back of her Newton courthouse and evade Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Dan discussed the charges against Judge Joseph as the state's Commission on Judicial Conduct is moving forward with the power to recommend discipline but not removal.Now you can leave feedback as you listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW FREE iHeart Radio app! Just click on the microphone icon in the app, and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!

Sponsor Details:This episode is brought to you with the support of Insta360 - the leaders in 360-degree video technology. To explore their innovative range and claim your special SpaceTime bonus, visit store.insta360.com and use the coupon code SpaceTime at checkout.In this episode of SpaceTime, we uncover exciting new research challenging our understanding of dark matter, reveal hidden treasures beneath the Earth's surface, and explore the potential for life on Titan, Saturn's enigmatic moon.Modified Newtonian Dynamics: A Dark Matter AlternativeRecent studies suggest that modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND) may serve as a viable alternative to the elusive dark matter hypothesis. This theory, proposed by physicist Mordecai Milgrom, modifies Newton's laws to explain the gravitational behavior observed in galaxies without relying on dark matter. We delve into the latest findings that support MOND, including a novel method for measuring gravity in wide binary star systems, which indicates that gravity may actually be stronger than Newton's predictions under certain conditions.Earth's Hidden Gold ReservesA groundbreaking study reveals that Earth's core may contain vast reserves of gold and other precious metals, far beyond what is accessible on the surface. Researchers discovered traces of ruthenium in volcanic rocks from Hawaii, suggesting that these metals originated from the core and are leaking into the mantle. This research opens new avenues for understanding Earth's internal dynamics and the movement of materials from the core to the surface.Searching for Life's Chemistry on TitanNASA's upcoming Dragonfly mission aims to investigate the intriguing chemistry of life on Titan, Saturn's largest moon. With its organic-rich environment and unique geological features, Titan presents an opportunity to study prebiotic chemistry in a way that Earth cannot. We explore how Dragonfly will analyze the moon's surface and atmosphere to uncover clues about the processes that may have led to the emergence of life, potentially reshaping our understanding of habitability in the universe.www.spacetimewithstuartgary.com✍️ Episode ReferencesAstrophysical Journalhttps://iopscience.iop.org/journal/0004-637XNaturehttps://www.nature.com/nature/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/spacetime-space-astronomy--2458531/support.00:00 This is Space Time Series 28, Episode 68 for broadcast on 6 June 202501:00 Modified Newtonian dynamics as an alternative to dark matter12:15 Earth's hidden gold reserves22:30 Searching for life's chemistry on Titan30:00 Science report: Ancient tool-making from whale bones and quantum computing breakthroughs

Should the Commanders trade Johnny Newton and a 3rd for Trey Hendrickson

The BMitch & Finlay Show Hour 2 features: 1.Talking NFL Futures With Neil Greenberg 2.Potential Trades For Big Name NFL Players 3.Johnny Newton For Trey Hendrickson?

Desde el fuego secreto de los alquimistas hasta la explosión atómica. Desde los símbolos ocultos del Corpus Hermeticum hasta los experimentos de Newton y Boyle. En este nuevo capítulo de El Libro Rojo nos sumergimos en la historia de la alquimia como búsqueda de la fuerza contenida en la materia, pero también como viaje espiritual y psicológico hacia la transformación del alma. Nos acompaña Ángeles Ceregido, doctora en Química, en una conversación que une ciencia, mito y conciencia.

This week the American Landscape Painter Kim Casebeer whose career spans some 25 years and whose work is shown in private, corporate and museum collections throughout the United States. Kim is represented in galleries from Colorado to Wyoming, Montana, Arizona and her home state of Kansas. She is, she says, in a good place in her career now balancing her time between studio commissioned work, plein air painting and teaching workshops. Kim was born in Newton, KS in 1970 and grew up in the tiny town of Goessel, KS with her two younger sisters Trish and Jenny. Her father Lloyd is a retired farmer and mother Marlene, a retired nurse. Kim's family are fifth generation farmers so her childhood was spent learning to grow a variety of crops and compete in the local 4H club where her talent as a horticulturist was noteworthy. An early interest in all things artistic was encouraged by her parents from drawing tractors with her dad to learning a variety of mediums through high school. It was a natural progression for Kim to choose art school as she laid the foundation for her career by graduating with a Bachelor in Fine Arts from Kansas State University with an emphasis in Graphic Design in 1992. It was here that she met Shannon and the couple recently celebrated their 31st wedding anniversary. Upon graduating, Kim's first jobs were in graphic design with her art work pursued as a hobby. It was only when her paintings were generating more income than her employment that Kim decided it was time to quit her day job and focus on being a full-time artist in 2001. Kim is a Master Signature Member of the American Women Artists, and a Signature Member of the Oil Painters of America and the Pastel Society of America. She has received multiple awards and publicity for her work that focuses on the big skies and wide open spaces of the western United States. Kim lives in Manhattan, KS with her husband Shannon, sons Collin and Lucas, and Australian Shepherd, Matilda. Kim's links:https://www.kimcasebeer.com/https://www.instagram.com/kimcasebeerartist/ Some favorite female artists in visual arts:Kami MendlikChula BeauregardJane HuntCindy BaronShanna HernandezMelissa Scott MillerJan BeaneyChiharu ShiotaHost: Chris StaffordProduced by Hollowell StudiosFollow @theaartpodcast on InstagramThe AART Podcast on YouTubeEmail: theaartpodcast@gmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/wisp--4769409/support.

This week the American Landscape Painter Kim Casebeer whose career spans some 25 years and whose work is shown in private, corporate and museum collections throughout the United States. Kim is represented in galleries from Colorado to Wyoming, Montana, Arizona and her home state of Kansas. She is, she says, in a good place in her career now balancing her time between studio commissioned work, plein air painting and teaching workshops. Kim was born in Newton, KS in 1970 and grew up in the tiny town of Goessel, KS with her two younger sisters Trish and Jenny. Her father Lloyd is a retired farmer and mother Marlene, a retired nurse. Kim's family are fifth generation farmers so her childhood was spent learning to grow a variety of crops and compete in the local 4H club where her talent as a horticulturist was noteworthy. An early interest in all things artistic was encouraged by her parents from drawing tractors with her dad to learning a variety of mediums through high school. It was a natural progression for Kim to choose art school as she laid the foundation for her career by graduating with a Bachelor in Fine Arts from Kansas State University with an emphasis in Graphic Design in 1992. It was here that she met Shannon and the couple recently celebrated their 31st wedding anniversary. Upon graduating, Kim's first jobs were in graphic design with her art work pursued as a hobby. It was only when her paintings were generating more income than her employment that Kim decided it was time to quit her day job and focus on being a full-time artist in 2001. Kim is a Master Signature Member of the American Women Artists, and a Signature Member of the Oil Painters of America and the Pastel Society of America. She has received multiple awards and publicity for her work that focuses on the big skies and wide open spaces of the western United States. Kim lives in Manhattan, KS with her husband Shannon, sons Collin and Lucas, and Australian Shepherd, Matilda. Kim's links:https://www.kimcasebeer.com/https://www.instagram.com/kimcasebeerartist/ Some favorite female artists in visual arts:Kami MendlikChula BeauregardJane HuntCindy BaronShanna HernandezMelissa Scott Miller Jan Beaney Chiharu Shiota  Host: Chris StaffordProduced by Hollowell StudiosFollow @theaartpodcast on InstagramThe AART Podcast on YouTubeEmail: theaartpodcast@gmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/aart--5814675/support.

Generative AI is built on three key resources: people, compute and data. While companies invest heavily in the first two, they often use unlicensed creative work as training data without permission or payment — a practice that pits AI against the very creators it relies on. AI expert Ed Newton-Rex has a solution: licensing. He unpacks the dark side of today's AI models and outlines a plan to ensure that both AI companies and creators can thrive together. After the talk, Sherrell reflects on the issue of copyright and how to ensure creators are fairly compensated.Want to help shape TED's shows going forward? Fill out our survey!Become a TED Member today at ted.com/join Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this heartwarming episode of Reading with Your Kids, host Jed Doherty takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of children's storytelling, featuring three incredible creators who are redefining children's literature. First up, Scott Rothman and Zachariah Ohora share the magical backstory of their hilarious picture book, KittyBunkPort. Born from a playful moment with Rothman's son in Maine, the book transforms a simple mispronunciation into a whimsical tale about a town full of scaredy cats and a haunted lighthouse. Their conversation reveals the beautiful, often unexpected ways children's books come to life. Rothman, known for his childlike sense of humor, and Ohora, with his "Fuzzy Town" illustration style, demonstrate the incredible synergy between authors and illustrators. They candidly discuss their creative processes, from Rothman's trusty legal pad to Ohora's transition to digital illustration with Procreate. The episode then shifts to Helen Dunlap Newton, who introduces her middle-grade novel "Careful What You Hear" - a compelling story about Noah, a young protagonist with a cochlear implant who can unexpectedly hear thoughts. Newton, a veteran sixth-grade teacher, brings remarkable insight into adolescent experiences and the importance of diverse representation in children's literature. What makes this episode truly special is the genuine passion these creators have for storytelling. They're not just writing books; they're creating worlds that spark imagination, encourage empathy, and make children laugh. Whether it's Rothman's comedic cat adventures or Newton's innovative exploration of hearing technology, each story is crafted with love and understanding. For parents, educators, and book lovers, this episode is a delightful reminder of the magic that happens when creativity meets compassion. It's a must-listen for anyone who believes in the transformative power of children's literature. Click here to visit our website – www.ReadingWithYourKids.com Follow Us On Social Media Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/readingwithyourkids Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/readingwithyourkids/ X - https://x.com/jedliemagic LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/reading-with-your-kids-podcast/ Please consider leaving a review of this episode and the podcast on whatever app you are listening on, it really helps!

With AccessKit, Matt Campbell and Arnold Loubriat took on the ambitious task of abstracting over the accessibility APIs of several target OS' to offer toolkit providers one unified way to make their UIs accessible across platforms. This interview was recorded live at RustWeek 2025 with your host Luuk van der Duim. Contributing to Rustacean Station Rustacean Station is a community project; get in touch with us if you'd like to suggest an idea for an episode or offer your services as a host or audio editor! Twitter: @rustaceanfm Discord: Rustacean Station Github: @rustacean-station Email: hello@rustacean-station.org Timestamps & referenced resources [@1:11] - Introducing Matt and Arnold. [@1:45] - “What are you working on?” [@2:00] - “What does it offer?” [@2:28] - “Who would use AccessKit?” [@2:51] - AccessKit bindings in languages besides Rust. [@3:14] - Unifying accessibility protocols. [@4:47] - AccessKit's API. [@6:58] - AccessKit tree concepts. [@8:47] - When Arnold got involved. [@9:08] - 6000 lines of code to find Matt. [@12:56] - Matt's history with Windows and Microsoft. [@14:00] - How Quorum relates to AccessKit, Quorum [@15:52] - Challenges Quorum UI development faced. [@18:12] - Arnold and Matt on the necessity for back-end testing, Android, iOS - Linux. [@21:45] - On Newton and its Chromium relation. Newton [@27:55] - Newton on other compositers. [@29:20] - Wayland protocol purists versus Gnome D-Bus frictions. “Next-generation accessibility architecture” document [@31:03] - Where can people find Arnold? Arnold on GitHub as ‘DataTriny' Arnold Loubriat on LinkedIn DataTriny on Mastodon [@31:39] Where can people find Matt? Matt Campbell on GitHub AccessKit website. [@31:53] Your host can be found on GitHub. Luuk van der Duim Odilia screen reader atspi crate Credits Intro Theme: Aerocity Audio Editing: Luuk van der Duim Samples used in interruption: “Vinyl - 45RPM - Start 2” by: day-garwood License: Attribution 3.0 Record Scratch #3 by: musicvision31 License: Creative Commons 0 Hosting Infrastructure: Jon Gjengset Show Notes: Luuk van der Duim Hosts: Luuk van der Duim

This week Danielle and Kristine learn how to survive a roller coaster accident and Rylie Newton joins us to share her experiences in the competitive world of pickle ball!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

"There's this sense of all these people, they came out to watch you do this weird, crazy thing. And you're running toward the thing you've been working toward for many months, and all of these people are behind you, and people beside you trying to do the same thing. It's very special." First, Emily Oster started running. Then she started running fast. Then she ran a marathon: the California International Marathon in 2023, where she finished in a Boston Qualifying time of 3:17:39. Now, Emily is officially a Boston Marathoner, having completed this year's race in a personal best time of 3:14:53. In this episode, the economist and best-selling author breaks it all down, including what her training was like this time around, what the energy in the city felt like for a first-time Boston Marathoner, and why she briefly considered calling it quits at mile 23. SPONSOR:  UCAN's MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND SALE: Click here to get a FREE UCAN training sample pack (you'll just pay the cost of shipping), and use code ALI for 30% off your UCAN order from now until May 26! In this episode: Emily's snapshot moment from the 2025 Boston Marathon (3:30) How Emily has been feeling since Boston (5:00) Emily's road to the Boston Marathon, via CIM (6:00) Emily's impression of Boston (10:15) On hard work, genetics, and human limits (12:30) Emily's experience training through an icy New England winter, and how this training cycle was different from CIM 2023 (17:30) Emily's relationship with coach Kaitlin Goodman (20:20) The race plan (23:45) Emily's Boston Marathon weekend plans (24:25) How Emily was feeling on race morning, and the journey to the start line (35:20) The start line energy (38:35) Emily's “very specific chunking plan” (40:55) What it was like starting to run the Boston Marathon (44:00) Emily's take on the Newton hills (50:20) “That was the moment where I was like, I am not feeling good, I can't believe there are more miles” (53:00) Right on Hereford, left on Boylston (56:25) Now what? (1:00:45) What's dominating Emily's inbox these days? (1:04:55) Follow: Instagram @aliontherun1 Join the Facebook group Support on Patreon Subscribe to the newsletter SUPPORT: If you're enjoying the show, please subscribe and leave a rating and review on Apple Podcasts. And if you liked this episode, share it with your friends!