The Portal Wiki

Isadore Singer: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Isadore Singer (edit)

Revision as of 06:33, 10 January 2026

21,362 bytes added ,  10 January
ā†’ā€Ž2021
No edit summary
Ā 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[File:Isadore-singer.jpg|thumb]]
[[File:Isadore-singer.jpg|thumb]]
{{stub}}
Ā 
== On X ==
=== 2009 ===
Ā 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2930667078
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=To @orzelc: in your life you'll see Paris and the Taj Mahal. Make sure you meet all the great minds. Go see [[Ed Witten|Ed]]. He's part human.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2928337597
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=[[Ed Witten|Ed Witten]] has no Nobel Prize.
Ā 
Now tell me again how this era's physics just feels different because we are too close to it.
|timestamp=11:06 AM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2929192939
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So @orzelc asks me to unpack the No-Nobel/[[Ed Witten|Witten]] tweet.Ā  It presupposes at least minor direct contact w/ [[Ed Witten|Ed]] so you don't doubt [[Ed Witten|Ed's]] gift.
|timestamp=12:31 PM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2929274636
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=So @orzelc the Quetion is: "Is thisĀ  likely the first era of fundamental physics that could produce a 55+ [[Ed Witten|Witten]] nonlaureate?"
|timestamp=12:38 PM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2930347717
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=My friend @orzelc asks: "do you consider Wheeler to be in [[Ed Witten|Witten's]] class?" Short answer is no. But I never went 1-1 with a young Wheeler.
|timestamp=1:57 PM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2930448229
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=In my whole life @orzelc, I have only had the pleasure to know one other person well who I regard as "in [[Ed Witten|Witten's]] class". [[Isadore Singer|Is Singer]].
|timestamp=2:03 PM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/2930581754
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=The nonphysicist disagrees w/ @orzelc. Wheeler lived through the whole build up of the [[Standard Model]]. [[Ed Witten|Ed]] would have pounced repeatedly.
|timestamp=2:12 PM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
|timestamp=2:17 PM Ā· Jul 30, 2009
}}
Ā 
Ā 
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/4118990218
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=In Econ. Krugman is the master chef who can start with deadly pufferfish and dependably prepare elegant fugu thats safe to eat.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/4118385737
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=There are three careers in modern physics of which I am envious. The other two are Yang and Dirac. In math: [[Isadore Singer|Singer]], [[Ed Witten|Witten]], Attiyah, [[Raoul Bott|Bott]]...
|timestamp=5:05 AM Ā· Sep 20, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/4118560452
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=And what about Jim Simons? Other than Chern Simons he did amazing stuff. Wu-Yang ...and that holonomy theorem of Berger was first rate.
|timestamp=5:18 AM Ā· Sep 20, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/4118623731
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Anyone else appreciate that Jim Simons redoing Berger's list of holonomy groups to prove intrinsic sphere transitivity? An artist's theorem.
|timestamp=5:23 AM Ā· Sep 20, 2009
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/4118705638
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Someone else I admire: [[Dan Freed]] at Austin. Dan never gets all the credit he deserves. Every paper nails some loose end for the community.
|timestamp=5:29 AM Ā· Sep 20, 2009
}}
|timestamp=5:51 AM Ā· Sep 20, 2009
}}
Ā 


{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 14: Line 132:
}}
}}


=== 2020 ===


{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 137: Line 256:
}}
}}


=== 2021 ===


{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 273: Line 393:
}}
}}
|timestamp=10:16 PM Ā· Feb 19, 2021
|timestamp=10:16 PM Ā· Feb 19, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131507686363138
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Discontinuous innovation is always unlikely. But never impossible.
We are both skeptics. But this UFO story is weird beyond belief Michael. I canā€™t think of a single story to fit to these reports Iā€™m hearing about.
I welcome your thoughts. As always.
Warm regards,
Eric
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131487692115972
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Dear @michaelshermer,
Thanks for this. Very sober. I myself also donā€™t find the authenticated videos so far released compelling. But I do find your challenge of ā€œno isolated discontinuous innovationā€ quite interesting!
Might I propose a friendly debate among friendly skeptics?
{{Tweet
|image=michaelshermer-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/michaelshermer/status/1403837966305300481
|name=Michael Shermer
|usernameurl=https://x.com/michaelshermer
|username=michaelshermer
|content=Dear @EricRWeinstein Please see my argument for why [[UAP|UAPs]] cannot be foreign assets capable of physics & aerodynamics attributed to [[UAP|UAPs]] that if true would be decades or centuries ahead of us. History shows no nations/companies of comp development so lag.
https://quillette.com/2021/06/03/understanding-the-unidentified/
|timestamp=10:13 PM Ā· Jun 12, 2021
}}
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131494289760259
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=First of all, I am concerned that the paradigm of being scientifically or technologically ā€œcenturies aheadā€ is all wrong. This came up in a phone call with our buddy @SamHarrisOrg.
Q: How many centuries ahead is 1952-3 from 1900? Iā€™d have guessed ā€œmanyā€ (not .5) and been wrong.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
|media1=ERW-X-post-1404131494289760259-1.jpg
|media2=ERW-X-post-1404131494289760259-2.jpg
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131496059805698
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Next challenge: doesnā€™t your line of reasoning prove that ā€œRenaissance Technologiesā€ is either a fraud or a front? Their Medallion Fund is otherwise a long term unbreached secret, discontinuous from any other know investment fund seemingly thousands of years ahead of competitors.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131496844165120
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Now Iā€™ve had the odd question about Renaissance (front not fraud) for just this reason. But either way, itā€™s either a counter example to your claims on discontinuous innovation if it is merely a fund or a counter-example to your secrecy claims if it is our secret physics program.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131497641082880
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Next: there are really two metrics on innovations.
Metric I: How big the incremental jump in difficulty.
Metric II: How big the jump in what is unlocked.
The great fear is that a small jump measured by 1 leading to an ENORMOUS jump in as measured by II.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131498391871490
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=You are, to me, arguing powerfully that certain people canā€™t exist: Rodney Mullen, Edward Van Halen, Bob Beamon, Dick Fosbury, Hiroji Satoh, Satoshi Nakamoto, etc.
They all exhibited the ā€œa little unlocks a lotā€ paradigm with Zero-Day exploits that were each decisive.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131499197157376
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=And that brings us to theoretical physics. Beginning around 1982 , the son of the worldā€™s top employed anti-gravity researcher(?!) of the 1950s turned in what may be the most impressive 15yr output in the history of the subject by my estimation. How can I begin to explain this?
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131499977318403
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Itā€™s not physics exactly. But Edward Witten w support from a small number of folks rewrote [[Quantum Field Theory]] as geometry. If Einstein geometrized gravity, then [[Ed Witten|Witten]] geometrized Quantum Field theory (everything else).
Now, all that change has so far unlocked exactly nothing.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131500753182720
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=But itā€™s not that nothing happened in physics. While we were pretending that string theory was working, [[Ed Witten|Witten]] & Co revolutionized our mathematical framework. Think of it as an enormous amount of unrealized gains. Pent up genius & power looking for its 1st application to the šŸŒŽ.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131501512433665
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If you gave us [[Ed Witten|E Witten]], [[Jim Simons|J Simons]], [[Isadore Singer|I Singer]], [[CN Yang]], M Atiyah, D Quillen & G Segal, in a quiet program in 1975, I could argue that they didnā€™t need much more. In fact you donā€™t need all 7 but for the sake of argument I can make the case using this. But Witten is the main engine.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131502275776512
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Now let me show you how I could get discontinuous innovation if I were China or Russia. I donā€™t know those systems as well so Iā€™ll use the US example.
We know most of the top minds. We pretend that there is a lot of subjectivity about this for social reasons but China wouldnā€™t.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131503064289281
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If I thought like CCP, Iā€™d create a lavish secret theoretical physics program modeled on the Russian Sharashka system. The key would be to get it to look like something else. A boring Tech company or some weird Chinese fund to disguise the reason for the secretive lavish campus.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131503827685378
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=[Digression: If the US were smarter, weā€™d do it by setting up a mythic secret $B hedge fund that employs top differential geometers, theoretical physicists & ML experts by a national lab & an off brand university w/ inexplicably strong geometry & physics. But enough crazy talk..]
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131504586838016
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=If CCP could today repeat what Witten (& friends) did building off Geometric Quantum Field Thy, the US would have Zero clue what it unlocks. Even by your own incrementalist theory. It might unlock absolutely nothing. Or passage to the stars via additional degrees of freedom. šŸ¤·ā€ā™‚ļø
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131505350201345
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=One last point. I released such a theory. Could well be wrong.
But I can tell you I should have received a call from DOE. Because calls are cheap and relevant trained PhDs are *very* finite. The US should track every geometer, General Relativist, and Particle Theorist working.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131506121961473
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=You donā€™t have to take a position on me or GU. You can ask Wolfram or Lisi or Barbour or Deutsche or anyone outside the system whether such calls are placed. They are not. No one *in* the system believes in wild discontinuous change from *outside* the system. As per your article.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1404131506876928003
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Which is to say weā€™re not monitoring. Maybe we think thatā€™s a waste of taxpayer dollars. Maybe we think that a Grisha Perelman of physics is impossible.
How much does a phone call cost if a researcher is wrong vs not bothering if theyā€™re right? Price the [[Type I & Type II Error|Type I & II error]]. Nuts.
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
|timestamp=5:40 PM Ā· Jun 13, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1474262756308119555
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Said differently Iā€™ve been bullish on positive externalities of mathematical physics. But a lot of great math that got done isnā€™t [[String Theory|string theory]]. Itā€™s claimed to be stringy but it is really mostly mathematical physics or geometric field theory that is claimed by string theorists.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1473817405809778689
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Things got hard. They didnā€™t get hopeless.
Yes we spent almost 40 years lying about [[String Theory|string theory]]. But we could stop today. We could have the leaders in the field admit they made a *colossal* bad bet & ask ā€œWhat did we dispose of while we were wildly over-hyping [[String Theory|string theory]]?ā€
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=TradeTexasBig-profile-7puYx-nQ.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/TradeTexasBig/status/1473809988535697408
|name=šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡²TradeTexasBigšŸ‡®šŸ‡³
|usernameurl=https://x.com/TradeTexasBig
|username=TradeTexasBig
|content=Its increasingly apparent to me that the next physics breakthrough is gonna be from #ai . Its humanly not possible anymore for theoretical physicists ..i was feeling it even around 2010
|timestamp=12:17 AM Ā· Dec 23, 2021
}}
|timestamp=12:47 AM Ā· Dec 23, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=skdh-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/skdh/status/1473872481735827459
|name=Sabine Hossenfelder
|usernameurl=https://x.com/skdh
|username=skdh
|content=They can't stop, Eric. They're making a living from writing papers about things no one will ever see. It's a systemic problem that requires a systemic response. And the first step would be to admit they have a problem (which they don't).
|timestamp=4:25 AM Ā· Dec 23, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=WeLivetoServe-profile-wfx-Iowe.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/WeLivetoServe/status/1473873663166451714
|name=WeLivetoServe
|usernameurl=https://x.com/WeLivetoServe
|username=WeLivetoServe
|content=Seems likely a lot of the math they developed will wind up handy, but it's a long time to wait for dessert.
|timestamp=4:30 AM Ā· Dec 23, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=skdh-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/skdh/status/1473874437523005443
|name=Sabine Hossenfelder
|usernameurl=https://x.com/skdh
|username=skdh
|content=Most of what physicists call math is totally uninteresting even for mathematicians. It's just advanced calculus. Look here is my qft and when I crunch it cross-sections fall out.
|timestamp=4:33 AM Ā· Dec 23, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1474213317568651264
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We may disagree intellectually more than I thought. This is Jackiwā€™s point: the era of physics thinking of mathematics as advanced calculus (analysis) wasnā€™t fruitful.
That changed around 1975 when the quantum began to discover geometry.
Iā€™m honestly confused. What do you mean?
|timestamp=3:00 AM Ā· Dec 24, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=skdh-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/skdh/status/1474247291687088134
|name=Sabine Hossenfelder
|usernameurl=https://x.com/skdh
|username=skdh
|content=We are talking past each other. I am referring to particle physicists/astrophysicists/cosmologists who crunch out shallow and useless papers in the thousands. There's no interesting math in those. You're talking about something else entirely.
|timestamp=5:15 AM Ā· Dec 23, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1474261469462073344
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=[[Quantum Field Theory|QFT]] & cross-sections sound more like particle theory than Astrophysics, Cosmology or even [[General Relativity|GR]].
Would we agree that the collision of [[Ed Witten|Witten]]/[[Isadore Singer|Singer]]/Quillen/[[Nathan ā€œNatiā€ Seiberg|Seiberg]]/Freed/Bismut/Maldacena/Penrose/[[Michael Atiyah|Atiyah]]/
Hitchin/Dijgraff/[[Cumrun Vafa|Vafa]]/Segal/Jackiw/Kontseivich/Alvarez-Gaume/etc has been magic?
|timestamp=6:11 AM Ā· Dec 24, 2021
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1474261875328098308
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=There are a lot of string theorists who have done things that really matter to geometry, topology, analysis on manifolds, representation theory. And I donā€™t want to misunderstand your point.
|timestamp=6:13 AM Ā· Dec 24, 2021
}}
|timestamp=6:16 AM Ā· Dec 24, 2021
}}
=== 2025 ===
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1989612740046905377
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Itā€™s as if we, the U.S., hate being the worlds premier homegrown scientific community. All it takes is reversing self inflicted damage. Thatā€™s it. Thatā€™s all.
We seem to hate our own scientists.
It makes no sense. At least to me.
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1989608579163460068
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Yes. Iā€™m saying that the [[Jim Simons]], [[Richard Feynman]], [[Jim Watson]], [[Steven Weinberg]], [[Sidney Coleman]], [[Ken Arrow]], [[Linus Pauling]], [[Isadore Singer]], [[Joshua Lederberg]], [[Steve Smale]], [[Paul Samuelson]], [[Mark Ptashne]], [[John Milnor]], model of homegrown American scientific genius is being destroyed.
|timestamp=8:17 AM Ā· Nov 15, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1989608581470327007
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=Is anyone concerned about this? It sure doesnā€™t seem it.
Science needs [[Academic Freedom|academic freedom]]. It needs resources. It needs independence.
Fauci and Collins would have been impossible if we were healthy.
It is not safe to make scientists into mere employees.
Itā€™s way too dangerous.
|timestamp=8:17 AM Ā· Nov 15, 2025
}}
|timestamp=8:33 AM Ā· Nov 15, 2025
}}
}}


Line 278: Line 751:


* [[Atiyah-Singer Theorem]]
* [[Atiyah-Singer Theorem]]
{{stub}}


[[Category:Mathematics]]
[[Category:Mathematics]]
Retrieved from "https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/24143...25395"