SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " engineer " 1,457 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Here's how a KPMG FDE uses AI to work with clients
Justin Johnsen, now a forward deployed engineer at KPMG, has been at the firm for six years. He says a lot has changed in the past year.
SEED STEM Festival brings science to life for local children
From building robots to exploring neuroscience, local children got hands-on experience with science, technology, engineering and math Saturday at Aiken’s 41st annual SEED STEM Festival.
Stanford scientists transplanted human brain tissue into mice missing most of their cortex; within months, it grew to occupy more than 90% of the space
Stanford scientists have created a new model for studying human brain development by transplanting lab-grown human brain tissue into mice that were engineered to lack most of their cerebral cortex. Within months, the human tissue not only survived but expanded to occupy more than 90 percent of the cortical space, forming working connections with the mouse brain and spinal cord.
Scientists transport antiprotons by road, store them in mobile vessel
Ninety-two trapped antiprotons have been transported outside the Antimatter Factory along a 4.66-mile route without particle loss or measurable degradation of the trap vacuum.
SEED STEM Festival brings science to life for local children
From building robots to exploring neuroscience, local children got hands-on experience with science, technology, engineering and math Saturday at Aiken’s 41st annual SEED STEM Festival.
Apple Top Executive Doesn't Want You To Use Screen Protector On iPhone: 'It Makes My Skin Crawl'
Apple's new Vice President of Hardware Engineering, Tom Marieb, dislikes iPhone screen protectors, saying it makes his 'skin crawl'.
Science Vs on the 49ers Substation: Anatomy of a Hatchet Job
In August, Pablo Torre Finds Out and Science Vs released an episode about my theory that electromagnetic fields from the electrical substation beside the 49ers facility may be contributing to the team’s run of soft-tissue injuries. As the originator of the theory, I was also a subject of the episode. I sat was interviewed by Wendy Zukerman and Rose Rimler of Sciene Vs. I sent them research, connected them with scientists, and spent hours digging through the City of Santa Clara’s and Silicon Valley Power’s records to help clarify critical details. Both Wendy and Rose came off as affable and professional, showing curiosity during the interviews, with Wendy going out of her way to question the “conspiracy theory” framing itself. Then they titled the episode We Solve the 49ers Viral Conspiracy Theory. I was familiar enough with their catalog that I never expected them to agree with my theory, but I did expect them to give it a fair hearing and to deliver their findings honestly. On both counts they came up short. They were not directly dishonest in anything they said, but rather in what they left out, in how what remained was cut, and in the picture painted by those two things in combination. They asked me to recorded the interview on my phone for better audio quality, and I held on to my copy for reference later. That turned out to be a fortuitous decision. Here is the raw audio of my first interview, unedited*. Only my side was recorded, so their questions aren’t on it, but you can generally infer them from the answers, and every claim I make below about what I said can be checked against my statements in this clip. (Note: Wendy had connection trouble at the beginning of the interview and was cutting in and out, which accounts for the false starts.) 0:00 -1:19:13 Audio playback is not supported on your browser. Please upgrade. Science Vs is a fun show. It is pitched at roughly a high-school understanding of science, for an audience that is skeptical, Snopes-oriented, and worried about misinformation. Take a claim circulating online, interview a supporter of the claim, interview consensus scientists, and then tell people which side of the line it lands on. I have listened to their episodes on raw milk, seed oils, 5G and other contested issues in the wellness space. I have problems with all of them, but each at least made an honest attempt to represent the actual range of scientific opinion by talking to credentialed scientists with differing perspectives. Dissenting researchers were heard from, answered, and often given a chance to respond. This episode did not do that. This article is not a relitigation of the science. I have written extensively about that already. This post is for the record. It is simply an accounting of what was wrong with their episode. Contents Is there a power plant next to the 49ers practice facility? — the clearest single example of getting something objectively wrong For the record — a high-level overview of all of the problems with their investigation Draw your own conclusions — why they had to make this episode at all What they left out about childhood leukemia — the exposure threshold, and playing games with statistics to minimize sick children What they left out about the mechanism — the body of literature they refused to cover, and evidence for the mechanism used against it The scientists Science Vs interviewed and did not air — four credential scientists who support myhe theory, recorded and cut, or not even called How they misrepresented me and my case — an answer severed from its question, and three telling edits How you would actually study the injuries — it doesn’t actually matter which team is the most injured, overall The theory: magnetic fields, oxidative stress, and collagen Since the episode never states my theory, here it is below. Those who are familiar with my work can skip this section. Electrical equipment produces magnetic fields, and those fields induce faint electrical currents in anything that passes through them, including people. My argument goes further than induced current. Mitochondria — the structures that generate a cell’s energy — run on continuous flows of electrons and protons, and those flows carry faint electromagnetic fields of their own. Maxwell’s principle of superposition shows that when two fields share the same space, they add together. An external field does not need to be strong to alter an internal field, it only needs to be present. The electron transport chain inside the mitochondria leaks a small fraction of its electrons by design, and those become reactive oxygen species — free radicals, which healthy cells use as signals. External magnetic fields cause the rate of leakage to change, increasing free radicals. When free radicals accumulate faster than the cell’s antioxidant systems can clear them, the result is oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is a recognized driver of chronic illness, including cardiovascular disease, neurodegeneration, diabetes and cancer, and it is in every medical school curriculum. One of its ordinary effects in connective tissue is that it switches on matrix metalloproteinases — MMPs, the enzymes that break collagen apart — while suppressing new collagen synthesis. Tendons are made of collagen. An athlete loading his soft tissue heavily six days a week is already creating oxidative stress in the tendons, so the addition of magnetic field exposure compounds the damage and inhibits repair, making him more susceptible to injury when enormous force lands on a tendon in a fraction of a second. That is the theory. We know that EMF causes oxidative stress, and we know that oxidative stress degrades collagen. The only thing missing is a study showing that direct connection. I have never claimed certainty that the substation is contributing to the elevated injury rate. I do believe it is likely, and I believe it warrants caution, and that a revenue machine like a major NFL team can easily afford to remove the exposure out of precaution. Is there a power plant next to the 49ers practice facility? Here is the clearest single instance of the problem with this episode. It requires no knowledge of electromagnetic fields at all. This story first came to me through Jon Feliciano, a former 49er, in an interview on Willard & Dibs on 95.7 The Game. Asked about why the 49ers are always injured, he said players used to joke that it was the power plant behind the practice fields. Wendy Zukerman corrects him on air. “It’s important to say that it’s not a power plant near the 49ers site.” Torre then asks her to explain the difference between a substation and a power plant. Her answer: a power plant generates electricity and transmits it to a substation, which converts the voltage into something your house can use and sends it on to your home or your business. There are two problems with that. The first is that there is a power plant on that site. The Gianera Generating Station is a natural-gas-fired peaker plant owned by Silicon Valley Power, and it has been there since 1986. I have published aerial photographs of the location from 1987 in which the gas plant is the only thing standing, before the practice facility was even there. I even mentioned the gas plant in my first interview. (Feliciano has since gone on record about this issue, and it is clear he had the substation in mind rather than the gas plant.) The second is that her definition describes a distribution substation, and the facility beside the 49ers is not that. It is the Northern Receiving Station, which takes in bulk power from outside the city’s grid and delivers it to distribution substations. Silicon Valley Power’s own map distinguishes receiving stations from substations, and Rose Rimler even reads the label out loud in the episode when she walks through that map on air. A few minutes before the map segment, Zukerman tells Torre: “like I said, we fact check everything.” Well, maybe not everything. I made a mistake On the morning of July 6th, at 10:20, I sent Rose and Wendy two studies. During the interview I had been asked which human studies show oxidative stress from electromagnetic fields, and I had not been able to name one on the spot. Rose emailed asking for the studies, I quickly searched for a couple, and I wrote that I thought these were the most relevant from that search. Unfortunately, I was busy and did not read either one closely at first. I picked them because they were topically relevant — one on substation workers, one on power plant workers. Neither were great studies, and their problems go past the ones raised in the episode. That was careless on my part. There is context that did not make the episode, though. Before that email I had been on a Zoom call with Rose talking about EMF and oxidative stress, and I pointed her to Dr. Henry Lai at the University of Washington, who has spent years aggregating the literature on this question. His tallies show that roughly 90% of studies since the late 1990s find oxidative effects from electromagnetic field exposure — hundreds of studies, systematically counted. Rose told me she was already aware of his work. So when she asked for studies, I understood her to have the aggregate view already and that she would report anything within that context. Not reading those two carefully was still a mistake, but the larger mistake was assuming the episode would be based on a thorough review of the actual body of literature, rather than on whatever I happened to send that morning. The second email At 1:49 that same afternoon — three hours and twenty-nine minutes after the first — I sent them a second email that I had been preparing for a while. It was a structured document in six numbered sections, written in response to a request they had made two weeks earlier, laying out my entire argument with citations attached to every link in the chain. The episode aired on August 13th, five weeks later, and not a single item from the second email is in it. Here is how it opens: The full email is included at the bottom of this post in Appendix B. Nearly 1,500 words in total. It contains two named mechanisms with the physics behind them. Occupational studies in humans. The literature on oxidative stress and collagen. A section addressing the strongest counter-evidence against my own theory, which I raised myself. And a closing section stating plainly what the theory cannot yet show. My entire argument, in writing, with detailed citations for every claim, provided to them five weeks before broadcast, and none of it made it into the episode. That is the single largest omission, but it is not an isolated one. The whole episode is riddled with similar problems, and the conclusion they came to is not merely a difference of opinion about the scientific evidence. Through omission and through strategic editing, Science Vs misinformed its audience — about what the evidence shows, about what I argued, and about who they spoke to. That is a notable outcome for a show whose stated purpose is correcting misinformation. For the record I am not going to tell you that Science Vs set out to discredit me, or that they had come to their conclusion before they reported the story, or that they used misleading editing to make me look like a man retreating from his own theory. I cannot know what was in anyone’s head, and I am not going to pretend otherwise, either. What I can tell you is what is on the record. They asked me for evidence and aired the weakest thing I sent. They interviewed three scientists who supported my theory and aired none of them. They discussed childhood leukemia without ever saying the exposure level at which it appears. And they took an answer I gave weeks before Ken Karipidis, the one EMF scientist who was put on air, was interviewed, and placed it directly after his critique, where it comes off as a major concession. A friend of mine who has worked as a journalist for thirty years read that last one and called it sleazy. I agree with her. Those are just the four issues that are impossible to defend as pure editorial decision, but they are not the only issues. The most glaring issues stem from what they left out: The exposure level at which the childhood leukemia association actually appears — three to four milligauss, a number the episode never states despite it being much lower than what I measured. The mechanism itself: The episode gets as far as “oxidative stress could weaken collagen,” which leaves it sounding like speculation, rather than a known pathway. The second email, and all the studies in it. Dr. Paul Héroux at McGill, whose work my proposed mechanism rests on, whose contact details I supplied, and who was never called. Dr. Beatrice Golomb at UC San Diego, who runs a research group on oxidative stress and mitochondrial function and has specific expdertice in collagen, interviewed and not aired. Dr. David Carpenter at Albany, the most prominent academic voice on the harm from magnetic field exposure, interviewed and not aired. Dr. Joel Moskowitz at Berkeley, interviewed and not even credited. The specific, testable condition I put in writing that would make me abandon the theory. My own unprompted statement of the theory’s evidentiary gap. My caveats about my own measurements. My ranking of EMF as one factor among several rather than the only one. The new equipment installed at those facilities between 2010 and 2014, and the sharp rise in system load from 2013 onward. But that is not all. What they kept, they selectively edited to serve a narrative that was not served by the raw transcripts of the interviews. A description of thousands of commercial routers in a workplace, reduced to the Wi-Fi in your house. My own acknowledgment, multiple times, that "I'm not a scientist" clipped in an episode that spends considerable energy pointing out that I am not a scientist. And a qualification I volunteered about my own measurements, cut from my answer and delivered later by their EMF expert as a correction. Together their edit produce a portrait of a wellness guy with Wi-Fi phobia and two bad studies, backing away from his theory the moment a “real” scientist looked at it. A practice facility where nothing changed because no new substation was built. Injuries written off as random because the 49ers were not quite the single most injured team in the league over the period in question. That portrait is false even though almost no individual statement made in the episode is. Draw your own conclusions At the top of the episode, Pablo Torre says his show had been flooded with requests to investigate the substation — that it was the thing they were asked to look into over and over again. Neither show went hunting for this story. It arrived from their own audience, in volume, and it could not be waved off. A thread I posted on X reached twenty-two million people. A guy with a gaussmeter and a brand-new Substack obligated a Pultizer prize winning program to spend an hour on a question about player health, that is considered fringe enough that most media operations won’t touch it. Pablo Torre Finds Out could not ignore it. So Science Vs came in and ran a “debunking” operation instead of an investigation. Everything below is what had to be left on the cutting room floor to deliver the “debunking”. They could not ignore it. So they tried debunked it instead. The demand was strong enough to force an episode, and since the episodes release the 49ers have sustained more injuries, including season ending ones, and interest has only grown. Demand from fans and playets is strong enough to force a better investigation from someone else. An omission is not a lie until you find out what was omitted. What follows is the detailed record so you can see the full picture. Draw your own conclusions. I have drawn mine. I am going to keep publishing. A note about Pablo Torre Finds Out After the episode aired I posted publicly, calling out Pablo Torre Finds Out for concerns I had about the integrity of their investigation, and about an interview directly with Pablo Torre which had been offered but never happened. I have since spoken with a producer at PTFO. The offer had rested on a misunderstanding about where things stood between us, and it fell away as the Science Vs part of the production widened past the science. He apologized for the miscommunication and I accepted. The producer also confirmed to me that they did essentially hand off the entire investigation to Science Vs for narrative purposes — so Pablo would be genuinely curious or potentially surprised by their findings — while still taking responsibility for what went out under their name. I appreciated the candor and the accountability, and I am comfortable with where we left things. So this post is not about PTFO. My disagreement is with Science Vs. What they left out about childhood leukemia Childhood leukemia appears at three milligauss. They gave no number at all. 1. They built an EMF ruler, then discussed childhood cancer without it. The sequence on air went like this: First I measured almost 9 mG, then I measured up to 50 milligauss. Torre reacts with concern — “that sounds high.” Cut to Karipidis: the public limit is 2,000 milligauss. Torre reacts again — “What happens at 2,000?” Karipidis explains that nothing happens at 2,000, that safety factors are built in. Then: at more than 50,000 milligauss you get flickers of light in the retina, and higher still, nerve stimulation. The listener now has a ruler (their ruler) to measure these numbers with. Fifty is nothing by their ruler. Then the episode turns to childhood leukemia and states, accurately, that there is a real association — but tellingly, they never give the exposure level at which that association appears. Childhood leukemia appears at three milligauss. They conveniently left that out. The pooled analyses that produced the World Health Organization’s carcinogen classification found roughly a doubling of childhood leukemia risk above three to four milligauss. That is the number that belongs in that segment, and it is more than ten times below the reading that had just been dismissed as trivial. I gave them that number myself, on tape, in the interview. Describing my own threshold, I said my comfort level for long-term chronic exposure is three to four milligauss, but preferably one. 2. Six children in thirteen million. The episode reports that these fields might explain one to four percent of childhood leukemias, then reframes it as a German estimate of perhaps six cases among thirteen million children. Torre, to his credit, is uncomfortable. What never gets explained is why that number is small. Almost no children lives above three milligauss in Europe. Fewer than two children in a hundred, in the Italian data. So even if the risk to those children doubles, the number of additional cases across an entire country stays small — not because the hazard is small, but because hardly anyone is exposed to it. Count the whole population and the few who are exposed disappear. And the reason hardly anyone is exposed is that siting rules keep housing away from transmission lines. In Europe, at least. The Dutch government has a standing precautionary policy against building new homes in any zone where the annual average magnetic field exceeds 4 milligauss — the same number the episode never mentioned. Denmark and Norway treat 4 milligauss as the level that triggers a look at mitigation. That is five hundred times below the ICNIRP figure quoted on air. The United States has no federal equivalent. That is evidence of infrastructure siting policy working. It is not evidence that there is no hazard. It is evidence that we already act as though there is one. If you listen to the raw audio you will hear that my proposed solution is EMF exposure is to build better infrastructure. What they left out about the mechanism 3. They accused me of cherry-picking, and then cherry-picked themselves. On air, Zukerman tells Torre that people who worry about electromagnetic fields dismiss the studies showing null results and collect the ones showing harm, and that this is why you have to be careful not to cherry-pick. They had two papers I had rattled off in a hurry, and a second email containing a carefully chosen set. They ran the two weakest, graded them on air, and presented the result as the state of the evidence for not only my theory, but the whole question of oxidative stress from magnetic fields. That is cherry-picking from my emails. The bigger picture is what they did with the literature as a whole. Zukerman acknowledges it exists, dismisses it, and disposes of it in a single stroke. You can go online right now, she tells Torre, and find scores of studies showing these fields increase oxidative stress. The issue, she says, is that they are not studies in people. Many of them are in people. The occupational studies in my second email are in people. That email had been in her inbox for five weeks. She waved off the literature on a factual claim that the documents in her possession contradict. (I have written separately about the evidentiary standard at work here). The effect was that they essentially baited me: ask the subject to supply the evidence, take the weakest thing he sends, and let that stand as a proxy for the whole argument. Wendy has been doing this show for ten years and clearly knows how to extract what she needs for her desired narrative. 4. They presented the collagen-improvement research as a gotcha, but I had already addressed it. The episode treats the existence of studies showing that EMF can improve collagen as a surprise that undercuts me, but I had pre-emptively addressed that five weeks earlier in the email they ignored. Those studies use measured, high-intensity pulsed dosing. The mechanism by which they work is oxidative signalling. The cell reads a controlled rise in reactive oxygen species as a warning, upregulates its antioxidant defenses, mounts a repair response, and the therapy stops before the system is overwhelmed. The key point is that it induces an oxidative response, which means those studies are actually evidence for my proposed mechanism, not against it. A field that produces a therapeutic effect cannot be biologically inert (which is the implication when they say “Nothing happens at 2,000 milligauss). Chronic ambient exposure is the same pathway with no off switch, and it is most consequential during the evening and while sleeping, when the body is in repair mode and the exposure does not stop. Section 5 of my email is titled What about the study showing improved collagen synthesis. I raised the counter-evidence myself, explained why I did not think it refuted the theory, and wrote that I was disappointed the question had not come up in the interview. That is worth holding against the cherry-picking charge in the item above: the studies they presented as inconvenient for me were studies I had gone out of my way to put in front of them. 5. Section 1 of my email stated a critical argument that was never put to the expert directly responsible for it. My email says the exposure limits exist to prevent acute effects and do not address chronic exposure at all, and that my dispute is with the entire framework. Zukerman gestures at this once. After Karipidis gives the 2,000 milligauss figure, she tells Torre that I would object because those levels do not capture “more subtle effects.” That is not my argument, and “subtle” is doing a lot of work here. My argument is that the limits are built to prevent acute effects — nerves firing, muscles twitching, etc — and were not designed to address chronic exposure at all. In fact, ICNIRP’s own documents state as much themselves. Mine is a structural objection to what the standard measures, reduced as a concern about subtlety, it becomes a matter of degree, rather than a categorical difference. They interviewed Ken Karipidis, vice chair of ICNIRP — the body that writes those limits. He was asked what the limit is, but he was never asked how it applies to chronic exposure. The scientists Science Vs interviewed and did not air 6. They interviewed four officials of the standards body. The episode credits roughly a dozen researchers. Four of them are associated with ICNIRP. Ken Karipidis is the vice chair. Rodney Croft chaired ICNIRP from 2020 to 2024 and led the development of its current guidelines. Dan Baaken is ICNIRP’s scientific secretary. Frank de Vocht sits on the Main Commission. One of them speaks in the episode. Their institution’s position is more than adequately represented — the 2,000 milligauss figure, the safety factors, the assurance that nothing happens below the line. 7. The four who were left out. Dr. Beatrice Golomb is Professor of Medicine at UC San Diego — a physics undergraduate degree, a PhD in biology, an MD. She directs a research group whose stated focus is the relationship between oxidative stress, mitochondrial function and health. That is the mechanism the episode spent its first half dismissing. Her published work includes the fluoroquinolone case series behind the FDA’s black box warning on an antibiotic class that ruptures tendons, where the accepted mechanism is oxidative stress and mitochondrial toxicity — the back half of my chain, already on a drug label. She is in the credits. She is not in the episode. She has told me she finds my theory biologically plausible, and that she has a recording of her interview. Dr. David Carpenter directed the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany for decades and is the most prominent academic voice arguing these fields cause harm. Childhood leukemia is the reason these fields carry a WHO classification at all, and Carpenter is the person you call if you want that case made by someone who has spent a career on it. He is in the credits. He is not in the episode. He has told me that when he was interviewed they could not have been less interested in what he had to say. Dr. Joel Moskowitz directs the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health. He told me directly that they interviewed him and that he thought it went well. He does not appear in the episode, and unlike Golomb and Carpenter, he does not even appear in the credits. Dr. Paul Héroux at McGill is the researcher whose work provides the foundation for the oxidative stress mechanism my theory rests on. I gave Rose his email address and phone number. He was never interviewed. They never even called him. 8. “He’s not a scientist.” The episode leans hard on the fact that I am not a credentialed scientist. Zukerman says it. Torre repeats it. “At all.” Having built a segment on that, they then left out the physicist-biologist-physician, the professor of public health, the director of a university environmental health institute, and the McGill researcher whose work the primary mechanism comes from. They spent the episode telling their audience I am not a scientist, and then kept four actual scientists who support the theory off because their argument does not survive otherwise. How they misrepresented me and my case 9. They played my words as a response to an interview I had never heard. Near the end of the hour, Zukerman says she went to me and told me the evidence was lacking. Then she plays me saying I am not wedded to it being an EMF, that I have staked my reputation on it needing more study, and that I am not certain of anything. That segment was placed immediately after Karipidis had finished taking the cherry-picked papers apart. It plays as a man folding under expert scrutiny. Commenters have used it against me since, but it is incorrect. Here is the sequence as it happened. I was interviewed. Karipidis was interviewed weeks later. I was never told what he said, or even who he was. I was never asked to respond to it. I did not know his name until the episode aired. That is not a simple editing decision. That is a quote from one interview, moved to follow a critique from a different interview it was not a response to, so that it would land as a concession. A friend of mine who has spent thirty years as a journalist read that sequence and called it sleazy. She is right. The full passage is reproduced in Appendix A, and it is worth reading. What airs is the preamble. Four paragraphs later I say “to directly answer your question” — and that answer, about what would change my mind if the team relocated, is not in the episode. Neither is the sentence two paragraphs on, where I say the EMF might turn out to be ten percent of the problem. I will say the underlying point again, though, because I meant it and I still do. I am not wedded to my theory that magnetic fields from the substation are contributing to the 49ers injuries. I could be wrong. What I am wedded to is the process of scientific inquiry, and the fact that we should be cautious around these exposures and we need more independently funded studies. 10. Three telling edits. They cut “I’m not a scientist” mid-sentence. What I said: “...and I am not certain of anything. I’m not a scientist. To me, I find the mechanisms compelling. I will go back to the fact that I got into this not because of the 49ers, but because of clients I was working with who suffer from EDS...” What aired: “...and that I am not certain of anything. I’m not.” The clip ends on the first two words of the sentence in which I say I am not a scientist, in an episode that spends considerable energy establishing that I am not a scientist. The full sequence is in Appendix A. They cut my own description of my work. Asked what I do, I said I run a wellness business, that I am focused on writing software to help people navigate environmental stressors, that environmental health is my focus, and that I also do independent journalism and research. What aired is the wellness business and the environmental health, with the software and the journalism removed from my own answer. The software engineering does come up later — narrated by them, as a hacker who grew up to write firmware — but my current work, in my own words, arrives as “wellness guy.” Thousands of commercial routers became home Wi-Fi. What I described: working at a wireless networking company surrounded by thousands of Wi-Fi routers, and a stress-induced health collapse afterward that working in that environment contributed to. What aired: Wi-Fi, the kind you have at home — reinforced by a clip of Christian McCaffrey talking about turning his router off at night. Three cuts, and every one of them makes me seem less credible. That is not a coincidence. 11. I gave them my own caveats and the test that would disprove me. In the first email I wrote that a well-designed chronic, ambient-level exposure study in tendon showing no collagen degradation, run over many months, would undercut my confidence in the theory. That is a specific, testable condition, stated in advance and in writing. There was a second interview, weeks later, which was not used in the episode, but in that I asked again for the falsification criterion to be included. What the episode presents instead is a man saying “we need more study,” which reads as a hedge, an open-ended request for the benefit of the doubt. It is the opposite of a hedge. Section 6 of my second email says, unprompted, that as far as I am aware there is not a single study showing EMF-driven oxidative stress degrading collagen in a human in vivo or in human tendon in a lab. I wrote that because it is true and because it is the first thing anyone should check. Under their standard it becomes the hinge of the entire first half, framed as something they had to surface without my cooperation. I had handed it to them five weeks earlier. And in the interview I said that my 25 to 50 milligauss readings were taken at knee level, and that these fields attenuate quickly, so by the time it reaches your head it is not that high anymore. That did not air either. The qualification arrives later, from Karipidis, as a correction. How you would actually study the injuries 12. They measured the wrong thing. The episode spends its final act on whether the 49ers are the most injured team in the NFL, finds no clean ranking, and lands on “injuries are random”. That is the wrong test. You would define the exposure — measured field levels at the facility — and the outcome narrowly: soft-tissue injuries, not a single MSK injury count that a broken finger and a ruptured Achilles both land in. Then you would compare the 49ers to themselves before and after the exposure changed, and compare that change against every other team over the same window. That controls for league-wide shifts in rules, turf and training load. It is a difference-in-differences design, and it is standard. I sent them that argument on July 28th, in writing, along with the fact that in eleven of the past twelve seasons the 49ers had finished top ten in Adjusted Games Lost. And by the episode’s own reporting, the 49ers are second in games lost to injury over the past decade, with FTN’s Aaron Schatz confirming that once you adjust for starters they come out second worst in the league — after having been one of the healthiest teams for years before that. A finding like that is where an investigation starts, not where it stops. 13. I did a lot of substation research for the episode that was never aired. I had reported that the substation next to the facility was expanded in 2014. That was wrong, and Rose Rimler and I sorted it out together. They gave me credit on air, which I appreciated, but framed it as a concession on my part to something they had found. In fact I had been investigating it myself, was uncertain before they asked, but was waiting for clarification from Silicon Valley Power. The uncertainty centered around a substation named “Esparanca” that was proposed right behind the facilities as part of the stadium construction, but now appears to never have been built. I spent days in Silicon Valley Power’s records, and did eventually reach Silicon Valley Power for confirmation and indentified the mistake myself. I also gave them highly detailed documents on what we do know about those facilities: new equipment installed between 2010 and 2014, and load growth across the system with an inflection around 2013–2014, with the Northern Receiving Station carrying the highest capacity in the system and sitting closest to the data center corridor. None of that is in the episode. I have a separate piece about it coming out soon. *I cut 2 seconds from the raw audio to remove personal information that had no connection to anything in the episode. Appendix A: the passage the clip was taken from This is the sequence from my first interview, in full. The episode uses one fragment of it. It’s tricky because my understanding is that there’s something like a 15-year half-life on collagen remodeling issues. They’re going to get a new crop of players. What I really need, though, is for the injuries to be broken down so we can see the soft tissue injuries. Right now, they’re categorized as MSK injuries, but let’s say we can actually identify them more specifically. Is that right? He was able to do that? Oh, cool. I wasn’t able to find that information. Interesting — I didn’t know that data existed. I tried so hard to get it, and I didn’t know it was available. Maybe you could connect me with that person. That would be amazing. I’m not wedded to it being an EMF, honestly. I’m not. I would say that, to a certain extent, I’ve staked my reputation on the fact that it needs more study. It’s important to look into it, and I am not certain of anything. I’m not a scientist. To me, I find the mechanisms compelling. I will go back to the fact that I got into this not because of the 49ers, but because of clients I was working with who suffer from EDS, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, a tendon hypermobility issue. This condition is documented to be partially caused by oxidative stress. I’ve worked with them to mitigate their EMF exposure and have seen people improve. I think it’s a bigger story. In a way, the 49ers represent an occupational cluster with specific exposure risks. If someone would conduct a study on this, I believe we could learn a lot. Perhaps we would discover that it’s like, okay, maybe it’s 10% of the problem. I don’t know the exact number, but I think either way, conducting the study would provide valuable insights. To directly answer your question, it’s challenging for me because it’s part of a bigger story. If the 49ers move and stop having injuries, I might conclude that it was related to the substation. However, if they move and still experience injuries, I would want to analyze the nature of those injuries. Are they primarily soft tissue injuries? I don’t think it’s necessarily a case closed, but the story might lose traction at that point regardless. Three things are worth noting. The aired fragment stops immediately before the sentence in which I say I am not a scientist — the cut described in item 10. It also stops four paragraphs before the words “to directly answer your question.” What the episode plays is the throat-clearing. The actual answer, about what would change my mind, never airs. And two paragraphs in, I say the EMF might turn out to be ten percent of the problem. That is the ranking the episode says I never gave. Appendix B: the full email, July 6th, 1:39 PM Hi Rose, You asked me to send you some studies a couple of weeks ago. I apologize for the delay. I have been incredibly busy. I also wanted to give you a chance to dig in yourself, and get your own perspective before I influenced you too much with mine. That said, I do want to make sure that the actual argument is abundantly clear, so here it is! One note before I begin, there are really two separate questions here: Does the substation cause the soft-tissue injuries? That was my specific claim, and what the podcast is about. Is the theory biologically sound? Can 50/60 Hz fields at these levels do anything biological below the safety limits? Question two is why people have been calling me a conspiracy theorist. The regulatory and advisory bodies (ICNIRP, etc) maintain that anything below their exposure limits is biologically inert, and that position is broadly accepted within the mainstream, but the actual science paints a different picture. To defend my theory I’ve had to defend a much larger claim: that the advisory bodies have the biology wrong. I can’t honestly answer question 1 without first addressing that. Here’s is a simplified outline of my theory, with links to studies: 1. Advisory body thresholds for biological effects The ELF magnetic-field limits (ICNIRP’s ~2,000 mG public / 10,000 mG occupational) exist to prevent acute effects from exposure. If a magnetic field is strong enough, it makes nerves fire and muscles contract. Muscles twitch. You can see faint flashes of light in your vision. People can even feel tingling or even a shock. That happens due to Faraday’s law, which states that a time-varying magnetic field induces an electric field inside the body via the creation of Eddy currents.The standards assume that those currents do nothing below the twitch threshold. They do not consider chronic effects at all. My argument is that they are biologically active and do have chronic effects. 2. There are multipe ELF-EMF mechanisms for inducing oxidative stress. This is basic biophysics. Below are the two primary mechanisms. Simplest first. Dr. Paul Héroux of McGill has the most intuitive explanation, which rests on Maxwell’s principle of superposition: because Maxwell’s equations are linear, two sets of electromagnetic waves sharing the same space simply add together. In the interview I pictured a pebble dropped into a pond, sending out clean ripples. Then a boat motors past at distance, sending larger waves, and where they meet the ripples, the two add together and the original pattern gets distorted. In our cells, the mitochondria run on continuous currents of electrons and protons that carry their own faint electromagnetic fields. An external field from a substation, by the principle of superposition, adds to those internal currents and shifts the pattern. The electron transport chain in the mitochondria leaks a fraction of its electrons by design as reactive oxygen species (ROS), which act as signalling molecules in a healthy cell. Distorting that field increases that electron leakage, creating oxidative stress. A tiny electromagnetic interference results in a large downstream effect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844025006474 The more complex pathway is Dimitris Panagopoulos’s Ion Forced-Oscillation / Voltage-Gated Ion Channel (IFO-VGIC) mechanism. Weak, polarized, low-frequency fields force the ions (calcium, potassium, sodium) next to an ion channel’s voltage sensor to oscillate; because that force scales with the inverse cube of the distance involved, fields far below the stimulation threshold can still force the channel open, disrupting the cell’s ion balance and driving ROS overproduction (Nitric oxide and superoxide interact and produce peroxynitrite, a highly unstable cytotoxin that breaks down into free radicals). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366088934 https://www.spandidos-publications.com/ijo/59/5/92 https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/18/10041 https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1585441/full https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3772193/ 3. Evidence of oxidative stress, in vivo, in humans from ELF-EMF There are many studies, and the strongest are occupational, which applies to the 49ers situation. 115 power-plant workers vs. 145 office controls. Serum malondialdehyde (MDA, the standard lipid-peroxidation marker), superoxide dismutase, and catalase were all significantly higher in the exposed group, and the markers rose with increasing field exposure. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3233/WOR-203244 A follow-up where they reversed the oxidative stress in power plant workers. A double-blind randomized controlled trial: 91 power-plant workers given vitamin E, vitamin C, both, or placebo for 90 days. The antioxidant groups showed reduced lipid peroxidation and raised antioxidant capacity versus controls. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32191586/ A spot-welder study: 46 welders occupationally exposed at 50 Hz, showed significantly altered red-blood-cell antioxidant enzyme activity and concluded ELF-MF “might act as an oxidative stressor… even at the recommended levels of exposure.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18504600/ A substation-specific study found oxidative stress and DNA damage https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24460415/ 4. Oxidative stress degrades collagen This half isn’t controversial at all. Oxidative stress activates the matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) that break collagen down and suppresses its synthesis. Here are three example studies: Siwik et al. 2001: Oxidative stress raises MMPs and lowers collagen synthesis in cardiac fibroblasts. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11121376/ Fisher et al. 2009: Collagen fragmentation drives oxidative stress and elevates MMP-1 in aged human skin. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2631323/ Varani et al. 2006: Decreased collagen production in oxidatively aged skin. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16723701/ 5. What about the study showing improved collagen synthesis I’m glad you asked this question, and I’m bummed we didn’t get to it in the interview because it is a great question, and very important to understand. Superficially it may appear to be a refutation of my theory, but I would argue that it actually supports the underlying argument. That study used a short, high-intensity pulsed dose: therapeutic-PEMF, the same type of field used clinically to stimulate bone and tissue healing. The reason this works is because it triggers the very same biological pathways that can lead to oxidative stress. The exposure still stimulates ROS production, but done at a controlled dosage, for a limited duration it has a different effect. The cell reads the ROS as a warning signal and it upregulates its antioxidant defenses, and mounts a repair/proliferation response. The therapy is then stopped before the cell gets overwhelmed. That is essentially a hormetic response: a small dose of a stressor producing a beneficial adaptation. Two things follow: At the very least, this means the field is biologically active, which by itself undercuts the regulatory claim that these fields are inert below their thresholds. There is a wealth of literature on PEMF (pulsed EMF) bone regeneration and calcium channel signalling (which is the second mechanims in section one). Here is one. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep13856 At best, it leads us straight to my actual concern, which is that under chronic, chaotic and unregulated exposure, the cell’s antioxidant capacity gets overwhelmed, resulting in oxidative stress. There are plentiful examples of things that are beneficial at controlled doses, but harmful at uncontrolled doses. Excecise is one obvious, uncontroversial example. Botox is perhaps a more interesting example. 6. What about a study that shows EMF causing collagen degradation in humans? As far as I am aware there is not a single study showing EMF-driven oxidative stress degrading collagen in a human, in vivo, or in human tendon in a lab. There are studies involving isolated fibroblasts though, which secrete collagen. The most relevant one showed that human fetal scleral fibroblasts exposed to 50 Hz ELF-EMF showed a significant decrease in collagen synthesis and that MMP-2 expression was upregulated, which is the exact mechanism I described in section 2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3626379/ That’s it! Thanks again for the interview. Best, Peter Anthony Cowan Environmental Health · Wellness Tech · Researcher & Journalist Publisher & Editor, Living Energy Bio: petercowan.comSocial: X · Instagram · TikTokApp: sunlightis.lifePhone: [redacted]
Apple Exec Says 'Hold Us Accountable' on iPhone Duo Crease
Apple hardware engineering VP Tom Marieb spoke with TechRadar and shared some candid thoughts about Apple's upcoming iPhone Duo. The iPhone Duo uses a matte nano-texture display, which is meant to cut down on glare and minimize the visibility of the crease. When asked if the iPhone Duo's crease would be more visible over time, as that's what tends to happen on other foldables, Marieb said the nano-texture display would help.
$1 Million Fellowship in Coffee Science Established at UC Davis
The Specialty Coffee Association, or SCA, and the University of California, Davis, announced the establishment of the Specialty Coffee Association Endowed Fellowship in Coffee Science, made possible by a $1 million gift from the SCA to support graduate coffee research at the UC Davis Coffee Center, a center of excellence in the College of Engineering.
Hamilton County Commissioners approve infrastructure, health measures
The Hamilton County Commissioners approved several infrastructure and public safety measures at their Sept. 14 meeting. The next commissioners meeting is at 1 p.m. Sept. 28 at the Hamilton County Judicial Center. What happened: Approved an emergency engineering agreement with
Apple VP of hardware talks iPhone Duo durability, crease, hinge, and more
Here’s what Apple’s VP of Hardware Engineering said about iPhone Duo’s durability, the hinge, and display crease in a new interview.
$1 Million Fellowship in Coffee Science Established at UC Davis
A $1 million endowment from the Specialty Coffee Association will provide lasting support for graduate researchers at the UC Davis Coffee Center and help prepare future leaders in coffee science.
New PEs Promoted at PND Engineers
Wade Kamkoff and Ben VanderHart, who’ve both been with PND Engineers since 2022, earned their licenses and promotions to Senior Engineer.
Scientists Create Stronger Concrete That Absorbs CO2 From the Air
Concrete usually adds to the world’s carbon burden, but a new formula absorbed CO2 while becoming stronger than a conventional mix. Researchers at Mepco Schlenk Engineering College in India developed the concrete by combining two naturally derived materials: porous zeolite and bamboo biochar. Tests described in Carbon Research suggest the blend could give infrastructure a
AI pioneer Andrew Ng calls extinction fears ‘science fiction’
He also said there are "practical engineering problems" the industry can focus on to continue to improve and safeguard the technology.
Faculty Considering Revisions to Bachelor of Science Requirements and Engineering Double Majors
Faculty gathered for their first monthly meeting of the year on Sept. 9. Discussion primarily featured proposed changes to the Bachelor of Science Requirements and Engineering Double Majors. The Academic Affairs Council proposed changes to the requirements to complete the Bachelor of Science (BS). Currently, any student at Bates can elect to get a BS ...
MIT School of Engineering faculty and staff receive awards in spring 2026
Faculty and researchers across the MIT School of Engineering were recognized in spring 2026 with prestigious awards for their contributions to research, technology, society, and education.
Science Corporation Names Darius Shahida President as PRIMA Enters Commercial Market
Science Corporation has appointed Chief Strategy Officer Darius Shahida as president, expanding his responsibilities as the neural engineering and brain-computer... Read More
Microsoft’s AI playbook shows businesses how to turn experiments into results
Microsoft’s new Frontier Playbook outlines how businesses can move beyond AI experimentation and turn artificial intelligence deployments into measurable business results, including greater productivity and time savings, Inc. reports. The guide draws on more than 100 of Microsoft’s internal AI projects across its corporate functions, commercial organization and engineering teams. It comes as enterprise AI […]
Understanding the world, from the Cold War to the age of AI
For 75 years, the MIT Center for International Studies has brought together social scientists, engineers, and practitioners to understand global change, shape public debate, and address generational challenges.
Nexus Engineering set to double its footprint and increase local hiring
Nexus is the latest firm to say it needs more space and people to keep up with strong demand.
Booming Business: Atlanta Firm Creates Cleaner Way to Sop Up Oil Spills
After the Deepwater Horizon spill, o-founder and CEO Sudhir Sharma, a Georgia Tech Ph.D. and chemical engineer, started wrestling with how to actually clean up spilled oil instead of just moving the problem from the ocean to the landfill.
Virtual launch: New report on ethics oversight of AI-related health research
WHO will host a virtual launch of its new report, Artificial Intelligence-related Health Research: Ethics Review and Oversight, which provides practical recommendations for researchers, ethics committees, regulators, funders and policy-makers on the responsible conduct of AI-enabled health research.
Virtual launch: New report on ethics oversight of AI-related health research
WHO will host a virtual launch of its new report, Artificial Intelligence-related Health Research: Ethics Review and Oversight, which provides practical recommendations for researchers, ethics committees, regulators, funders and policy-makers on the responsible conduct of AI-enabled health research.
Engineers Gate Manager LP Has $1.71 Million Stock Position in PENN Entertainment, Inc. $PENN
Engineers Gate Manager LP lowered its stake in PENN Entertainment, Inc. (NASDAQ:PENN - Free Report) by 89.2% during the second quarter, according to its most recent Form 13F filing with the SEC. The firm owned 80,231 shares of the company's stock after selling 661,024 shares during the period. Engi
The Science of Reading Has an Implementation Problem. Could Engineering Help?
Researchers suggest that an "engineering of reading" could better translate evidence into practice.
Crafton Tull promotes Daniel Ellis to chief operating officer
For the first time since 2009, Crafton Tull has a chief operating officer. The Rogers-based engineering and design firm said Wednesday (Sept. 16) that it has promoted Daniel Ellis from...
Thirty Inspiring Middle School Scientists and Engineers Named Finalists in the 2026 Thermo Fisher Scientific Junior Innovators Challenge
Representing 17 U.S. states and Puerto Rico, finalists will compete in Washington, D.C. for more than $100,000 in awards Congratulations to the Thermo Fisher JIC Finalists Celebrating the top 30 finalists in the 2026 Thermo Fisher Scientific Junior Innovators Challenge Key Takeaways: Society for Science named the 30 finalists in the 2026 Thermo Fisher Scientific Junior Innovators Challenge (Thermo Fisher JIC), the nation’s premier middle school STEM research competition.The finalists were select
Ukrainian defence tech seeks new ways to scale up
Since Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine's defence sector has expanded several-fold, becoming a significant source of military innovation, especially in unmanned systems, counter-drone technologies, electronic warfare and AI-driven combat systems. But finding the funds and personnel to scale up and to reach international markets remains a challenge.Spurred on by the demands of the front-line, Ukrainian defence companies say they can develop a minor component in a couple of weeks, or major hardware or software solutions within a year. This is several times faster than the usual development cycles in the sector. Tencore, founded in 2024, is now one of Ukraine’s largest providers of unmanned ground vehicles, well exceeding the production of NATO members in this category. Odd Systems, a Ukrainian combat cameras developer founded in 2023, launched its first thermal camera in 2024. Less than two years later, it is developing the fourth generation of the product, one that has evolved into a full vision system.According to Michael Singer, managing partner at Verne Capital, a venture capital fund supporting defence companies in Europe, this speed is down to the short feedback loop between the developer and the end user. “Ukrainian companies develop technologies in close interaction with soldiers and military units, test them under real combat conditions and rapidly incorporate feedback into the next generation of the product,” he says. “Sometimes we need to react to feedback and deploy an upgrade within hours,” says Polina Tymchenko, the spokesperson for Himera, which develops electronic warfare-resistant walkie-talkies. “It means that, as a company, you have to have a higher tolerance for risk, and also design your products in a way that fosters those quick changes.”Getting a product deployed by a combat command involves no paperwork other than a purchase order, says Perry Boyle, co-founder and chief executive of Mits Capital, a Ukrainian-US investment group focused on attracting capital for Ukraine's defence tech sector. “New weapons can be developed and deployed based largely on handshakes.”Nevertheless, the speed of development is largely subject to the level of funding, says Iryna Sukhomlyn, head of business development at RMachine, a developer of unmanned ground systems. “Financial support needs to start much earlier, particularly at technology readiness level 3-5, not only when most of the technological risk has already been removed,” she says.In 2025, Ukrainian defence tech companies attracted about $129 million in investment, with the true figure likely higher given the share of undisclosed security-sensitive deals, according to a report published by the Kyiv School of Economics. These investments were primarily concentrated in the AI and software segment, as they are considered a lower financial risk.Scaling production is a major barrierAccording to Iryna Supruniuk, business development director at Odd Systems, proving a defence product in Ukraine is not the end of the development process, but the beginning of a continuous evolution, since operational requirements change rapidly. “Continuous iteration remains our highest priority,” she says.It's also when production must scale up, which represents a major hurdle. “Scaling production requires capital, manufacturing capacity, components, certification, procurement access and reliable supply chains,” Singer says. Scale-up is also hampered by demographic pressures, especially a shortage of young specialists needed to expand engineering teams. Companies have reported struggling to replace specialists lost due to Russian attacks, mobilisation and emigration. In order to meet this scale-up challenge and finance arms production, begun allowing defence technologies to be exported, assuming it has an excess capacity. It has also announced the creation of ten defence and weapons export centres across Europe by the end of 2026.According to Singer, a technology that has demonstrated its value under real combat conditions has a fundamentally different credibility than a product that has only been tested in a laboratory or training environment. But combat validation alone doesn’t automatically create an international business. “Companies still need access to foreign defence ministries and procurement organisations, international certification, financing for production scale-up and, in many cases, local industrial partners,” he says.Already in 2026, the EU has signed several agreements with Ukraine that aim at joint defence technology development and production. These include allowing Ukraine to join the European Defence Fund, signing a financing agreement under the European Defence Industry Programme, and setting up the EU-Ukraine Drone Alliance.For Singer, it is important that European defence companies don’t just see their Ukrainian partners as technology suppliers, but rather as potential innovation partners. “Ukrainian companies bring speed, operational experience and an exceptional ability to iterate. European partners can provide industrial capacity, capital, established supply chains and access to European procurement markets.”Procurement possibilitiesWhen it comes to exports, the procurement and compliance processes involved require time, taking months or even years, and money. In other words, resources that small defence tech companies need if they are to improve and scale up their technologies. According to Sukhomlyn of RMachine, if the priority is to rapidly increase available defence capabilities, then the processes need to reflect that urgency. “If Europe wants defence innovation at wartime speed, its administrative processes also need to operate much closer to wartime speed,” she says, highlighting a need for support with certification, market access and mutual recognition of relevant testing. “Otherwise, we risk having excellent technology available but spending years making it administratively eligible to be purchased.”Related articlesRussia widens targeting of European research centresEU must support research managers in central and eastern Europe, says Visegrad fund headThis is a lesson Europe’s defence sector would do well to learn, Singer says. “Defence innovation needs to be organised around the speed and requirements of the end user, not around the speed of the bureaucracy.”Supruniuk says the European defence sector should rethink the balance between quality and quantity. “In many cases, a good-enough system available in thousands of units creates greater operational value than a perfect system available in dozens.”“For decades, everyone has been looking for that all-powerful, exquisite system that can protect everyone,” adds Tymchenko. “We see in crime that only scalable, dedicated, affordable solutions can actually defend democracies.”
Simplilearn and Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science Executive Education Launch Program to Advance LLM and Multi-Agent Systems Skills
Simplilearn, the global digital upskilling platform, along with Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science Executive Education, has launched Build With LLMs: From Context Engineering to Multi-Agent Systems, an 8-week live online program designed to help technical professionals develop the skills to build modern LLM-powered applications and multi-agent systems.
Dinosaurs May Have Engineered Their Own Egg Incubators to Survive Cold Regions
Craftier than you might think.
Watercolor artist shares how she does and doesn't use AI in her work
Artist Sara Wilczynska, who previously was a software engineer at Google, reflects on the strict boundaries she has for AI usage in her work.
Study: Why Colder Temps Can Be Better for Removing Ice
By Kim Horner | Mechanical engineering research associate Yao Ren exposes an ice-covered metal surface to dry ice to cool it further. Researchers found that a material’s thermal properties play a critical role in determining whether ice remains attached to a surface — a discovery that may lead to the design of future deicing systems for […]
The Missing Science Of Robotic Systems
More capable robots require systems that realize capabilities through appropriate paradigms, compose them across time, distribute them across heterogeneous compute, and govern them under explicit constraints.
Shizuoka City Uses Model Race Cars to Bring Science and Engineering to Life
High schoolers will fit sensors to Mini 4WD cars to learn data science, as Shizuoka bets model kits can revive local industry too.
Engineers solve puzzle of Arctic sea ice movement
UC Riverside researchers discover a way to explain the previously confusing movement of Arctic sea ice, offering a way to potentially predict where the ice will travel as the ocean gets warmer.
Technologies, Math Research Get Lift from CAREER Awards
By Office of Media Relations | Dr. Waseem Abbas, assistant professor of systems engineering in the Erik Jonsson School of Engineering and Computer Science, uses lightweight modular small quadcopters, a type of drone, for indoor aerial robotics research. Abbas received a Faculty Early Career Development Program award from the National Science Foundation to support his work […]
RIX Industries Partners with Build Health International to Bring Medical Oxygen Compressor Training to Africa
New program at Kigali College of Rwanda Polytechnic puts RIX factory-level compressor training within reach of hospital biomedical technicians across the continentBENICIA, Calif., Sept. 15, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- RIX Industries, a recognized leader in advanced gas compression, gas generation, and precision-engineered technologies, today announced a formal training partnership with Build Health International (BHI), a nonprofit organization specializing in designing and building healthcare infra
A-State Exercise Science Programs receive STEM Designation
JONESBORO — Arkansas State University’s undergraduate and graduate exercise science programs have officially received a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics designation, further recognizing the scientific rigor and workforce relevance of
Plans to artificially dim the sun have divided scientists—here's what they're actually arguing about
No, President Joe Biden did not engineer Hurricane Milton. No, the ice crystal contrails left behind by high-altitude aircraft are not "chemtrails" sprayed by governments to control the weather or manipulate ...
Should Scientists Decide Policies About Wealth Inequality?
Reframing policy issues as questions of objective “science” makes it easier to justify relying on “experts”, thereby enfeebling democratic institutions in favor of bureaucratic systems.
Princeton Engineering - Beyond air pollution: Study reveals India’s hidden urban health risks
Extreme heat, noise pollution and low physical activity pose underrecognized health threats in India’s cities, according to a new study by Princeton
NASA rushed engineers out of their labs. They say it risks future space missions
NASA employees say they've lost vital equipment and staff needed to make sophisticated spacecraft amid the agency's abrupt relocations over the past several months.
Genenta Science’s Sòphia HT Supplies Spring Assembly for VEGA-C VV30 Launch Mission
Sòphia HT's Spring Assembly supports VEGA-C's stage separation, showcasing precision engineering for reliable aerospace components.Quiver AI SummaryGenenta Science S.p.A., soon to be renamed Saentra Forge, has announced that its strategic investment in Sòphia High Tech S.r.l. has led to the production of the Spring Assembly, a crucial component for the VEGA-C launch vehicle's second and third stage separation system. Since 2018, Sòphia HT has bee
DeepSeek engineer's viral post offers glimpse inside China's AI race
In a post published on his public WeChat account, DeepSeek engineer Liu Shengyu said he expects AI to soon surpass him at the work he loves.
How Far Can Applied Digital Stock Fall If The Business Keeps Growing?
Applied Digital (APLD) trades near $26, about 47% below its high of the past twelve months, after returning -36.3% over three months. Over twelve months, though, it is still up 55.6%. Nothing in the operation broke: it beat the quarter it reported in July 2026, and management says every project is on time and on budget.
Google finally lets all engineers use Anthropic's Claude
Google engineers can finally use one of Anthropic's strongest coding models for internal work.
Some AI leaders want more safeguards. Is there political will to make that happen?
In recent days, warnings and risks surrounding AI have taken an existential turn. A former Anthropic employee stated that "the people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade." And Anthropic's CEO urged AI companies to "pace the frontier" in developing new technologies.But is there political will to make that happen?This episode was produced by Sophia Paliza-Carre and Karen Zamora, with audio engineering by Tiffany Vera Castro. Our director is Jonas Adams.It was edited by Kara Platoni, Brett Neely, Rebekah Metzler, Sarah Handel and Tinbete Ermyas.Our interim executive producer is Courtney Dorning.Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. This show’s perks include bonus episodes and sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org.
OpenAI buys smartphone camera maker Glass Imaging for $300 million, report says
Glass Imaging was founded by a pair of former Apple engineers who previously led the team that developed Apple's Portrait Mode.
OpenAI acquires Israeli-founded camera startup Glass Imaging for over $300 million
Founded by Israeli former Apple engineer Ziv Attar and his former colleague Tom Bishop, Glass Imaging uses AI to overcome limitations in compact cameras and has developed technology for smartphones, drones and wearables.
USF College Of Marine Science Lands NOAA Deal To Advance Seafloor Mapping
NOAA's Office of Coast Survey has renewed its partnership with USF's Center for Ocean Mapping and Innovative Technologies through a five-year cooperative agreement, funding AI-driven seafloor mapping research that spans autonomous vehicles, crowdsourced bathymetry, and cross-college engineering collaboration.
Materials science professor receives international research honor
Tarasankar DebRoy, professor of materials science and engineering in the Penn State College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, received the 2026 Joining and Welding Science Award from the Joining and Welding Research Institute of the University of Osaka.
Blue Turf Thinkers: College of Engineering builds Idaho's energy workforce
At each Boise State home football game, the “Blue Turf Thinkers” series honors outstanding groups...
A-State Exercise Science Programs Receive STEM Designation
Undergraduate and graduate exercise science programs at A-State have received a science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) designation, further recognizing the scientific rigor and workfo
Porting Half-Life: Alyx to Steam Frame: How Valve's Engineers Went from "There's No Way" to Shipping Standalone
Foveated rendering, lots of driver work and 16GB of RAM.
Get to know Beckman: Ngoc Nguyen, research engineer
Research engineer Ngoc Nguyen reflects on his career path, his new role at the Beckman Institute and the joys of life in central Illinois.
Dr. Mae Jemison, first woman of color to go into space, to deliver Sept. 22 URI Honors Colloquium lecture
KINGSTON, R.I. – Sept. 14, 2026 – Dr. Mae Jemison has spent her entire aerospace career integrating the physical and social sciences with art and culture to spark innovation and build meaningful solutions to critical problems facing the world. Jemison is an American engineer, physician, and former NASA astronaut whose work on improving science literacy, […]
Crane Company Announces Agreement to Acquire U.S. Water Pump Business from First Reserve-Backed Trillium Flow Technologies
STAMFORD, Conn., September 14, 2026--Crane Company (NYSE:CR) ("Crane" or the "Company"), a premier industrial manufacturing and technology company, today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire the U.S. pump business from First Reserve-Backed Trillium Flow Technologies, a leading provider of highly engineered pump technologies primarily serving the U.S. municipal water and wastewater markets for approximately $240 million, representing a multiple of approximately 14.
What supplement formulators can borrow from pharmaceutical delivery science
Poor absorption is a problem the pharmaceutical industry solved decades before most supplement formulators had to think about it. Compounds that show real biological activity in a lab often perform far worse once they're inside the body, because getting a molecule to dissolve, cross the gut wall and reach circulation is a separate engineering problem from proving the molecule does something useful
Engineering from Above S2 among science, history, wildlife shows from Blue Ant
Canada’s Blue Ant Media has revealed seven new and returning factual originals spanning science, history and wildlife, including a second season of Engineering from Above.
Bryan Johnson and Kate Tolo's very public experiment in love
Bryan Johnson and Kate Tolo are lovers, cofounders, and human experiments trying to engineer a future where people and AI evolve together.
Decorated researcher combines neuroscience and engineering at Yale
Dani Bassett, who arrived at Yale’s Wu Tsai Institute this summer, brings network science to the University’s study of human cognition. Bassett’s lab embraces interdisciplinary methods that span neuroscience, psychology and engineering.
AI and the end of humanity? OK, ‘doomer’ says one Trump official
The latest warning from a former AI engineer was supposed to boggle minds and shock everyone into action.
NASA-backed scientists turn plastic waste into edible cookies
Scientists have engineered yeast to turn PET plastic and agricultural waste into ingredients for protein-rich, 3D-printed cookies called µBites. Developed partly for NASA’s Deep Space Food Challenge, the system can produce proteins, fats, vitamins, and even vanilla flavoring from waste materials. Researchers hope the unusual technology could eventually help address both plastic pollution and food insecurity, while also supplying food in extreme environments such as deep-space missions.
In 1903, a mining engineer staked a claim on Arizona's Meteor Crater, convinced a fortune in iron lay beneath the floor, and spent 26 years drilling for a meteorite that had mostly vaporized on impact — his family still owns the crater today, and science later proved him right about everything except the treasure
A wealthy engineer bet his fortune on a hole in the ground that science said was worthless, and spent three decades proving the experts catastrophically wrong.
Science festival brings hands-on learning to Indianola
INDIANOLA, Miss. — Science, technology, engineering, art and math (STEAM) were on display Saturday at the B.B. King Museum and Delta Interpretive Center, but the lessons didn't come from a
New Fellowship Aims to Fuse Research and Extension for Future Animal Scientists
The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture has unveiled an ambitious new fellowship designed to reshape how the next generation of animal science professionals is trained. Known as F.U.S.E. Animal Science, short for the Fellowship for Undergraduate Scientific Exchange
Litavis: World's first spad sensor with on-chip processing
Singular Photonics has launched Litavis, a SPAD image sensor that combines photon counting, timing and histogramming with on-chip processing.
New 7S Framework Aims to Unify How Science Judges Data Credibility
Every number that enters a scientific argument arrives by one of three routes. It is either measured directly with an instrument, inferred statistically from other data, or predicted using a model built from prior knowledge. For decades, each route has carried its own separate
Engineers Gate Manager LP Purchases 358,588 Shares of Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. $PLAY
Engineers Gate Manager LP increased its holdings in shares of Dave & Buster's Entertainment, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLAY - Free Report) by 200.7% during the 2nd quarter, according to its most recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The firm owned 537,254 shares of the restaurant operator's
The politics and possibilities of ‘AI could kill us all’
I found myself fielding a lot of questions from folks who don’t usually talk much about AI this week. They were mostly along the lines of “do you think AI is going to kill us all?” or “how worried should I be about this human extinction stuff?” Motivating this wave of existential anxiety was the highly dramatic resignation of now-former Anthropic employee Jacob Coxon, who quit his job while publicly sharing his concerns about safety practices at the leading AI companies. More specifically, he declared that almost everyone at OpenAI and Anthropic, the leading AI labs, believes that there’s a decent chance the AI systems they’re producing could “kill us all” by the end of the decade, and the companies aren’t “acting responsibly.” Other AI safety researchers, including those still employed at Anthropic and OpenAI, all confirmed that yes, Coxon is correct, they’re all worried that their company’s products might prove fatal for the entire human race as well. Two more AI employees quit and joined the chorus. Now, the warning shot has been covered everywhere from the Wall Street Journal to Fox News to WIRED to the Guardian. I understand why all this sounds scary, but my response to those who have asked, has generally been: No, you don’t need to worry that AI will kill go rogue and kill us all. But that does not mean we shouldn’t worry, period. Far from it. The companies building AI products are now among the wealthiest and most powerful entities in the world. And they very much are building enormous engines of mass surveillance, extraction, and automation. They can and have allowed their AI systems to carry out felony hacks of other companies, provided the government with autonomously generated kill lists, and sold enterprise technology to firms around the world that is explicitly intended to replace jobs. But “AI” has done these things not because they have all-powerful minds of their own but, ultimately, because people have programmed, calibrated, and directed them to. In other words, it’s not AI we need to worry the most about. It’s the people and corporations working to profit from and gain power by deploying it. The technology is sophisticated, sure, and, especially in cybersecurity contexts, potentially disruptive to plenty of existing systems. But if we want to stop this predatory, profiteering, and extractive form of AI—and it’s worth noting that at this point, most people do—we absolutely can. A quick note/plea: I can only do all of this with the support of readers like you, so if you find value in independent, critical tech journalism and analysis, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. I want to keep as much of this un-paywalled as absolutely possible, and I need your support to do so. Many thanks to all who continue to chip in, it’s very much appreciated. Onward. Subscribe First, some context: AI industry folks like Coxon have been discussing the prospect that AI will destroy humanity for years. Even before the beginning of the AI boom, many working in the industry, from the executive staff to the rank and file researchers, have obsessed over ‘x-risk’, or the possibility that AI will become sentient or semi-sentient and move one way or another to exterminate humanity. This is ostensibly why Elon Musk bankrolled OpenAI in the first place, and is the grounds for his lawsuit alleging OpenAI betrayed its charter by abandoning its nonprofit status to become a commercial enterprise. Many AI engineers and startup founders have calculated their own personal p(doom), or the probability that the tech product they are working on will initiate an actual humanity-extinguishing apocalypse. 10-25% p(doom)s are pretty common. (I wrote about a long weekend I spent among these folks at one of their top conferences here, to give you an idea of their ideas and belief systems.) Sam Altman himself drove the narrative of the imminent rise of a super-powerful AI, or artificial general intelligence, to prominence by declaring that the technology he was building posed an existential risk to humanity. This idea is in other words baked into the DNA of modern AI companies and into the products they engineer. It’s also why the industry is routinely accused, by myself and others, of “doom marketing,” ie, using such proclamations and framings to impart the sheer power of the technology behind your product onto investors, partners, consumers, and the state. Some ambient understanding of this tendency may have helped prevent the press from repeating the claim every time one of the x-risk folks made it over the years, including when they quit their jobs at AI companies while doing so. Yet Coxon’s AI x-risk alarm has broken containment, as they say, and has exposed the idea to the mainstream media once again. This has happened, I think, for a number of reasons. First, when AI CEOs were going around saying AI might kill everyone in 2023, their companies were well-capitalized, but not nearly to the extent they are today. They were more easily dismissed as eccentric geeks of the sort that Silicon Valley is supposed to produce. Now, not only do their products have much greater market saturation, but people are more aware of a) the often unethical ways the executives and companies comport themselves b) the other adverse impacts of AI that have already arrived, and c) the physical cost of building these systems, particularly when it comes to data centers. Finally, toss in the constant stream of headlines in 2026 about AI models going rogue or potentially upending the world’s infrastructure. [ ](https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/with-the-backlash-to-data-centers) [ With the backlash to data centers, Flock and AI glasses, a mass opposition to big tech is underway. Silicon Valley is in denial. ](https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/with-the-backlash-to-data-centers) Brian Merchant · Aug 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.bloodinthemachine.com/p/with-the-backlash-to-data-centers) As a result, general sentiment was already overwhelmingly skeptical of AI and its overlords, so the table was pretty well set for someone to come along and say ‘just a reminder, the companies that are building the product that promises to take your job and leave a data center in your neighborhood also think that it might exterminate the human race’ and get a strong reaction from the media and the public. The question is: Should we understand this stuff as hype, strategically fanned to feed already swelling valuations? Is it doom marketing? Genuine cause for alarm that the infrastructure that undergirds modern life is facing a novel threat vector? Or reason to be sincerely worried that AI companies are amassing too much power, and that their products are genuinely dangerous? The answer, I’m afraid, is “yes.” Let me try to untangle all of this a bit, because arguments over how to navigate this moment are extremely heated right now, as they are essentially arguments over how to approach the politics of AI at a moment where there may be a unique opening for action. Those sympathetic to AI alignment concerns and x risk arguments—which increasingly includes a faction on the left who want to shut down AI over safety concerns—argue that people who dismiss AI as all hype have their heads in the sand. Meanwhile, critics of the x-risk narrative—which I might note includes a cadre of investors and tech folks on the right, too—argue that it is hype and can be used to further inflate valuations or for pursuing regulatory capture. The challenge is that many feel that dismissing AI as just hype or purely marketing also diminishes the urgency of taking on the AI industry as the novel and threat to labor, civil society, and the public sphere it is; others that by accepting the industry’s own terms, we imbue it with undue power and enable it. But let’s be clear: Declarations that AI is so powerful it might end the world are a kind of marketing, and anyone who says otherwise is just as off base as those who say that’s all that it is. If you don’t think that these sub-trillion dollar companies have higher-ups who noticed that when their founders talked about super-powerful dangerous AI they got spikes in media interest and phone calls from investors, or that those founders didn’t notice that themselves, and lean into certain narratives to advantage their products, then I don’t know what to tell you. Not all marketing is a Pepsi ad campaign with a celebrity spokesperson. Yet confronting the AI industry should certainly be considered an urgent project. Do I share the x-riskers’ fear that out-of-control, super-intelligent AI agents might end the world? I do not. I’ve read a good deal of AI extinction literature over the last couple of years and I have not come across a credible, step-by-step documentation of how exactly AI might move from self-recursively improving AI to killing every single human on the planet. Most of what I’ve read seems predicated on a sort of reverse Ian Malcolmian logic: Eventually, it becomes smart enough and AI, uh, finds a way (to exterminate humanity). Are the AI companies also overstating and dramatizing what their products can do? Yes, pretty much all the time. They’re in a knife fight for market share and are trying to win customers and government contracts before their investors come knocking. And yet. They have concentrated enormous amounts of compute, have extensive data collection and surveillance capacities, have inserted themselves into the state in numerous capacities, including military kill chains, and they are being run by egomaniacal billionaires who are rushing to monopolize an entire new market. The way I think about their most recent frightening-seeming exploits is not as a “swarm of rogue AI agents building a new civilization” or whatever, but as corporations with a hitherto-unimaginable amount of compute at their disposal recklessly experimenting with automation programs, completely unafraid of any repercussions because we have been unwilling or unable to impose any on them. So I think we should welcome any newfound imperative to hold them accountable. I also think that ultimately, the AI critics, Pause AI folks, leftists, doomers, effective altruists, and, honestly, most of the public, want a lot of the same things: legitimate checks and limits on AI companies’ power, actual transparency into what the companies are doing, and for more of AI to be under public control. (Ultimately, a lot of what animates the x-risk fears are rooted in just that: a fear of losing control.) How we move towards all this, exactly, is the question of the day, and while there’s much to be argued over in terms of building a viable political platform to challenge the AI industry’s power, I do want to cast a vote against one particular approach. Not to pick on Chris here, as there are a lot of folks out there proposing stuff like this, and the policy ideas actually stem from AI safety groups. But not only would this be challenging to land politically (I can already hear the ‘China will beat us to AGI’ calls) and all but unworkable in practice, this approach is a) far too limiting, b) fails to address the current harms caused by AI and c) would likely only wind up serving Anthropic and OpenAI; it’s what regulatory capture looks like in action. Full model transparency is the floor for what should be on offer here. If these companies believe their products will kill us, the very least we deserve is to know how. It’s in the public interest. I would also argue we might get a lot of the way to stopping any currently envisioned robot apocalypse simply by forcing AI companies to assume liability, and to submit to the full brunt of the law. If Sam Altman were liable to be charged with a felony for approving the hack on Hugging Face1, if Google was forced to pay defamation fines each time it published a false and injurious AI Overviews, these companies might suddenly find cause to restrain their models’ output, and we might hear less about rogue AI. We would need to introduce new frameworks and available tools for tracking automated lawbreaking, to be sure, but I’d wager that little would frighten the AI companies more than actually being held accountable for what their products enable. To that end, Illinois has passed an AI liability law, which the industry fought tooth and nail, and Florida is considering one. The next steps would be towards moving AI under public control; again, it’s only reasonable, since everyone, not just AI insiders, should get a say over how a technology whose developers say might kill us is developed and deployed. Dismantling the whole industrial project as currently structured should be on the table, too, pending democratic input. But that’s for another post. For now, suffice to say that while I won’t be losing any sleep about an AI-enabled extinction event, Mr. Coxon and co. have given us an opportunity to underscore the urgency of the clear and present damage AI companies are doing, the extreme power they wield and the extent to which they hold themselves unaccountable, and the abundance of political capital there is out there for taking them on. Subscribe 1 Purely speculative! I do not know if he did or not.
Meet ARMI's Christy Johnson
Christy Johnson, director of education and workforce development for ARMI, says there’s no upper limit for educating people in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics).
National Science Foundation grant programs at Bemidji State University have exceeded expectations
BEMIDJI — For the last several years, Bemidji State University has been leading several projects to increase participation in science, engineering, technology and mathematics-related fields funded by federal grants, and
Passkey-themed phishing attacks lead to Microsoft 365 data theft
Microsoft says threat actors linked to ShinyHunters, Helix, and other extortion gangs are using passkey and single sign-on-themed social engineering attacks to compromise corporate Microsoft accounts and steal data from Microsoft 365 services.
50 Years of Engineering Better Health - USC Viterbi
BME 50 -The Alfred E. Mann Department of Biomedical Engineering at USC Viterbi and Keck celebrated 50 years of excellence and innovation with a two-day gathering
Sanctuary Boxing Club to move after New Kensington zoning board denies business use at current location
Sanctuary Boxing Club in New Kensington has less than three months to find a new location after the city’s zoning hearing board denied its special exception request for business use. City Engineer Tony Males said the Strawn Avenue location is zoned residential and, when the gym opened in 2020 in
URI’s Graduate School of Oceanography to host Science Saturday
KINGSTON, R.I. – Sept. 11, 2026 – The public is invited to a family-friendly day on Saturday, Sept. 26 at the University of Rhode Island’s Narragansett Bay Campus, home of the Graduate School of Oceanography, Department of Ocean Engineering, and numerous other organizations, which together create a world-renowned community of coastal and ocean scientists, engineers, […]
Trump keeps telling voters he doesn’t care much about affordability
The president is engineering a pre-midterms price spike.
CWRU Receives $15 Million to Support New Science and Engineering Building
As a result of the donation, a new ISEB terrace named after the Kelvin & Eleanor Smith Foundation will be added.
2026 Rising Stars: Kristopher Pockell
Kristopher Pockell is a software engineering manager at Liberty Lake-based OpenEye by day and the co-founder of Spokane Valley-based Elixir Sauce Co. by night.
Chandigarh University's Computer Science Engineering Students Develop AI-Powered Platform to Detect Fraudulent Apps
Chandigarh University's Computer Science Engineering (CSE) students have once again proven their brilliance on the national stage by securing second position in the national-level CyberShield Hackathon, organized by Bank of India in collaboration with IIT Hyderabad to solve AI, cybersecurity and banking-fraud challenges, winning a prize of Rs 3 lakh by providing innovative solution for harnessing Generative AI for automated reverse engineering, static and dynamic analysis and risk scoring of fra
Trinity Health Michigan lays off 557 in IT and engineering
The health system sent notices that numerous roles will be impacted between October and November due to outsourcing and a need to keep pace with healthcare sector innovation.
CWRU gets large gift to support new science, engineering building
The Kelvin & Eleanor Smith Foundation has committed $15 million to support Case Western Reserve University’s (CWRU) Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering Building (ISEB), 10900 Euclid Ave., a new research facility designed to advance collaboration and discovery across disciplines. Read More
Senphonix Receives National Science Foundation Grant to Advance SleeveSense, a Continuous, Long-Term Vitals Monitoring Platform
Senphonix, Inc., a medical-technology startup developing SleeveSense™, a wearable that will continuously monitor patients' vital signs over days, weeks, or months, today announced it has received a Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Phase I award from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) through America's Seed Fund. The award supports engineering to strengthen the patent-pending device's wireless and radio-frequency systems and to move it from prototype toward a manufacturable produ
UNM expands academic commitment to quantum information science, engineering and technology
As New Mexico makes significant investments to establish itself as a leader in quantum technology, The University of New Mexico is expanding its academic efforts to prepare students for the opportunities emerging alongside this growing industry and new...
Museum of Science's new Science Stadium exhibit connects science, sports
The Buffalo Museum of Science will capitalize on the region’s love of our local professional sports teams, and will also use the opportunity to teach about science and engineering through
Inaugural $10M DoW Grant to Enhance University, Defense Research Capacity
A&T is an inaugural recipient of a five-year, $10 million U.S. Department of War grant to establish Accelerate-DAQ.
Is Accenture’s Business Falling As Fast As Its Stock?
Accenture (ACN) trades at $179.03, about 53% below its two-year high, the price of a business the market thinks is ending. Over the last twelve months, it generated $12.58 billion of free cash flow, a yield of 11.5% on its market value against a 4.4% median for the S&P 500. Both facts are true.
Science, Technology, Engineering, Math … STEM in action at next Placer County Navy League meeting
The Placer County Council of the Navy League is meeting Monday, Sept. 21.
ATSC 3.0 Wins Engineering, Science & Technology Emmy Award
The National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences will honor ATSC on October 14 with a 2026 Engineering, Science & Technology Emmy Award.
Racing legend Jack Roush to auction off iconic cars, personal hot rods
Legendary engineering innovator and motorsports icon Jack Roush is putting cars from his museum collection up for auction for the first time.
USC Dornsife professor Moh El-Naggar named director at Carnegie
Biophysicist and microbiologist will lead Carnegie’s Biosphere Sciences and Engineering, maintains appointment and research at USC Dornsife
Recent Stanton graduate wins Humane Science Award from National Anti-Vivisection Society
Alan Alwakeel, a recent graduate of Stanton College Preparatory School in Jacksonville, Florida, was one of just five recipients of the prestigious Humane Science Award at the 2026 Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair (ISEF). The award is presented by the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS), a nonprofit devoted to the advancement of science without harming animals and the only animal advocacy group invited to award a prize at the ISEF. Each recipient received a $3,000 prize
Slime mould has no brain, no neurons and no central control, yet when scientists placed food at 36 locations matching cities around Tokyo, it grew a network strikingly similar to the rail system — with comparable efficiency, cost and resilience
A single-celled organism with no brain solved a transportation puzzle that took human engineers decades to perfect.
Hawaiian Telcom Unveils Future-Ready Business Fiber Platform Engineered for 10 Gig Connectivity
Hawaiian Telcom announced enhancements to its business fiber internet portfolio, including expanded symmetrical upload and download speeds across Fioptics Business Internet plans and the introduction of Fioptics Advanced WiFi for business customers. Together, these enhancements provide Hawaiʻi businesses with faster, more scalable connectivity backed by a fiber network engineered to support connectivity solutions up to 10 Gig.
Mack Cleveland: Using computational materials science to engineer higher burnup fuels
Propelled by a love of mathematics and materials science, the MIT doctoral student models granular chemical reactions in uranium dioxide, work that might lead to less fissile nuclear waste and improved plant performance.
Scientists engineer ready-to-use cancer-fighting T cells for solid tumors
T-cell receptor, or TCR, therapy is a cancer treatment that genetically reprograms immune cells, called T cells, to hunt down cancer with precision. It's similar to another treatment, CAR T-cell therapy, ...
The Galaxy Z Fold 8 is outselling Samsung's record-breaking Fold 7 by a wide margin
Samsung finally explained the engineering behind the gap.
Accenture and Google Cloud are creating a joint unit to embed AI engineers in enterprises
The Accenture Gemini Enterprise Business Group will train and deploy forward-deployed engineers to help enterprises build and scale agentic AI applications
What Formula One Engineering Can Teach Us About AI Infrastructure
Michael Fuller, Executive Chairman of Conflux Technology, examines why thermal performance alone is no longer enough in modern data centers, and how balancing heat transfer with hydraulic efficiency can unlock significant operational gains. The AI era is forcing data center operators to rethink some long-held assumptions about infrastructure design. As processor power densities continue to […]