SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " Century " 577 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
The EPA just erased a century of public health progress
Former Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health Dean Michelle A. Williams on the EPA’s incorrect and morally wrong decision.
Canon Fodder: Parasite’s Cake
Welcome back to ye ol’ Canon Fodder in 2026, a year of rather significant proportions as Halo will be celebrating its twenty-fifth anniversary. A whole quarter of a century—our very own and very first quadranscentennial! Indeed, it has already been over a month since Halo: Edge of Dawn released, and the latest novel from Kelly […]
Nearly 100-year-old candy company files for bankruptcy amid rising costs, heavy debt: report
Nearly century-old Chicago candy maker Primrose Candy Co. files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, seeking to restructure over $12 million in debt.
Puma's long slide: the rise and fall of a German sports icon
Germany's Puma and fierce rival Adidas have their roots in the very same house where brothers Rudolf and Adolf Dassler launched their shoe business a century ago, before a major fall-out between the siblings split the company in two.
A Century of Service: How Jackson County Public Health in Missouri is Leading a New Approach to a Healthy Community
Explore how Jackson County Public Health in Lee’s Summit, Missouri, marks 100 years by leading innovation for lasting public health change.
Bay science: Trying to unlock shrimp biology with baking soda
Burrowing shrimp are a well-documented native pest species in Willapa Bay that have been a nuisance to bottom-culture shellfish farmers for over a century. Methods for controlling shrimp populations have […]
A Grip on Sports: The Seahawks have a chance today to write another chapter in their legacy as well as the region's pro sports history books
A GRIP ON SPORTS • The calendar has flipped to 2026. But in the NFL sense, this is still 2025. The extension of the season that began just after Labor Day. And a chance for the Seattle Seahawks to continue the best professional sports year Washington has experienced this century.
Halley’s comet may need a new, medieval name
Astronomers suggest the honor should go to an 11th century monk known for a disastrous flying attempt.
York County plumbing company closes after a century in business
The company cited high costs and unsustainable income "during an economically challenging time" in a message to customers.
Alarm as US mulls prioritising citizens in research funding
A senior White House official said the Trump administration is considering ways to prioritise research funding to American citizens, triggering alarm in the research community that the country could destroy its century-long status as a magnet for overseas talent.Michael Kratsios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), said last week that it is “important for us to continue to emphasise the use of federal R&D dollars towards American scientists and technologists that are staffed by Americans in their labs.” Asked about support for Chinese students during a Congressional hearing, Kratsios went on to say that in future funding announcements, the OSTP would “emphasise” that “we're funding American students.”The precise meaning of his impromptu comments, and what they could mean in policy terms, isn’t yet clear. The OSTP did not respond to multiple requests for clarification from Science|Business.But given that US science and technology has relied on overseas talent for the past century, Kratsios’s words have alarmed former US science officials.Immigrants have made up around 30-40% of US Nobel Prize winners since the 1940s, for example. Except for some sensitive projects, countries typically grant research funding on a nationality-blind basis, lest they deter foreign scientists from immigrating. “If director Kratsios’s statements are taken literally and become official policy of the White House, [research-intensive] universities will likely have to close labs if not entire research divisions,” said David Biggs, a former science and technology official in the US State Department. In their most extreme interpretation, Kratsios’s comments would imply that foreign scientists established in the US would see access to funding curtailed. This would “result in many world-leading professors who work in the United States in fields that this administration considers a priority (like fusion energy, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing) leaving the country,” said Cole Donovan, a former US science diplomat, and now associate director at the Federation of American Scientists.CripplingHowever, given the context of the conversation, Kratsios may have been referring more narrowly to funding for doctoral or postdoctoral students. At the hearing, he said he wanted to see labs staffed by US citizens. But even this would have devastating consequences for the US science system, say former officials, because the country is so dependent on early-career foreign researchers. Recent statistics show that nearly half of those in the US with a PhD in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) are considered short-term visitors, or non-residents in the official terminology. If this included residents who are not yet citizens, the proportion would likely be even higher. “Foreign PhD students are really a significant and core part of the university STEM workforce, and postdocs is similarly large,” said Donovan. Preventing US-based academics from hiring them from overseas would be a serious blow, he said. “If it's the case that this administration intends to limit funding to labs staffed only with US citizens, the effect will be to cripple the American scientific enterprise,” said Chris Marcum, a former OSTP official. “To think that these researchers can simply be replaced is a pipe dream. The labs will close,” said Marcum. Go elsewhereAround half of US-trained postdocs are foreign-born, said Biggs. “If these top international students cannot get funding to do their research, or even if they hear that funding for foreign students has been greatly restricted and will be super competitive, they will no longer choose to study in the US and will go elsewhere.” It’s unclear for now if Kratsios’s comments will translate into a real policy shift. But they could add to turmoil in the US science system since Donald Trump took over as president one year ago. Related articlesNIH turmoil risks reciprocal EU-US access to health research fundingUS set to close office responsible for global science and technology dealsTrump halts new NIH grants to international health-research partnersSince then, nearly 8,000 grants at the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation have been frozen or terminated, Naturereports. Courts have overturned most of these cancellations, but the disruption caused remains significant. Both those agencies have also dished out around a quarter fewer grants this year than normal, the journal reported. International student enrolment is also down by 17%. The Trump administration also proposes to cut research budgets by around a third, although Congress may mollify the cuts.
Alarm over US plan to prioritise citizens in research funding
The US’s leading science official has said the country will focus its research spending on scientists with US citizenship, triggering alarm that the country could destroy its century-long status as a magnet for overseas talent.Michael Kratsios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), said last week that it is “important for us to continue to emphasise the use of federal R&D dollars towards American scientists and technologists that are staffed by Americans in their labs.” Asked about support for Chinese students during a Congressional hearing, Kratsios went on to say that in future funding announcements, the OSTP would “emphasise” that “we're funding American students.”Kratsios’s precise meaning, and what it could mean in policy terms, isn’t yet clear. The OSTP did not respond to multiple requests for clarification from Science|Business.But given that US science and technology has relied on overseas talent for the past century, Kratsios’s words have stunned former US science officials.Immigrants have made up around 30-40% of US Nobel Prize winners since the 1940s, for example. Except for some sensitive projects, countries typically grant research funding on a nationality-blind basis, lest they deter foreign scientists from immigrating. “If director Kratsios’s statements are taken literally and become official policy of the White House, [research-intensive] universities will likely have to close labs if not entire research divisions,” said David Biggs, a former science and technology official in the US State Department. In their most extreme interpretation, Kratsios’s comments would imply that foreign scientists established in the US would see access to funding curtailed. This would “result in many world-leading professors who work in the United States in fields that this administration considers a priority (like fusion energy, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing) leaving the country,” said Cole Donovan, a former US science diplomat, and now associate director at the Federation of American Scientists.CripplingHowever, given the context of the conversation, Kratsios may have been referring more narrowly to funding for doctoral or postdoctoral students. At the hearing, he said he wanted to see labs staffed by US citizens. But even this would have devastating consequences for the US science system, say former officials, because the country is so dependent on early-career foreign researchers. Recent statistics show that nearly half of those in the US with a PhD in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) are considered short-term visitors, or non-residents in the official terminology. If this included residents who are not yet citizens, the proportion would likely be even higher. “Foreign PhD students are really a significant and core part of the university STEM workforce, and postdocs is similarly large,” said Donovan. Preventing US-based academics from hiring them from overseas would be a serious blow, he said. “If it's the case that this administration intends to limit funding to labs staffed only with US citizens, the effect will be to cripple the American scientific enterprise,” said Chris Marcum, a former OSTP official. “To think that these researchers can simply be replaced is a pipe dream. The labs will close,” said Marcum. Go elsewhereAround half of US-trained postdocs are foreign-born, said Biggs. “If these top international students cannot get funding to do their research, or even if they hear that funding for foreign students has been greatly restricted and will be super competitive, they will no longer choose to study in the US and will go elsewhere.” It’s unclear for now if Kratsios’s comments will translate into a real policy shift. But they could add to turmoil in the US science system since Donald Trump took over as president one year ago. Since then, nearly 8,000 grants at the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation have been frozen or terminated, Naturereports. Courts have overturned most of these cancellations, but the disruption caused remains significant. Both those agencies have also dished out around a quarter fewer grants this year than normal, the journal reported. International student enrolment is also down by 17%. The Trump administration also proposes to cut research budgets by around a third, although Congress may mollify the cuts.
Fans know modern college football is a business, but they also feel the growing distance
NIL and the transfer portal have dramatically shifted how college football fandom works in the 21 century
Where Indiana ranks among college football's best teams of 21st century
Curt Cignetti, Fernando Mendoza and the Hoosiers made history as college football's first 16-0 champ
Marijuana's Restrictive Federal Classification Isn't Supported By Science, New Study Concludes
Marijuana and other drugs are not as dangerous as laws written half a century ago say they are, according to a new scientific review. Since the passage of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) in 1970, U.S. drug laws have been dictated by rigid categories that supposedly reflect the dangers posed by different substances—but the new […]
Video: Why 'basic science' is the foundation of innovation
At first glance, some scientific research can seem, well, impractical. When physicists began exploring the strange, subatomic world of quantum mechanics a century ago, they weren't trying to build better ...
Are refs behind the NBA's sudden scoring decline?
In today's edition: Harbaugh to the Giants, the NBA's sudden scoring decline, the 100th Grand Slam of the century, highest-paid athletes of 2025, Yahoo Fantasy Baseball is here, and more.
Sports for People and Planet
The $2.3 trillion global sports economy is experiencing robust growth, with annual revenues projected to reach $8.8 trillion by 2050. However, factors such as rising levels of physical inactivity and escalating environmental challenges could erode up to $1.6 trillion in annual revenue by mid-century. The World Economic Forum, in collaboration with Oliver Wyman, has developed this insight report to highlight the urgent social and economic imperative for coordinated public–private action to secure the sector’s long-term resilience, presenting transformative, multistakeholder pathways and innovative case studies.This approach ensures that the future of sport remains competitive and inspiring, while also being sustainable and inclusive for people and the planet alike.
How “tribology” became a new industrial science
The deep study of friction and surfaces — so crucial to industrial manufacture — emerged from a mid-century engineering conference.
A Quarter Century in Orbit: Science Shaping Life on Earth and Beyond
For more than 25 years, humans have lived and worked continuously aboard the International Space Station, conducting research that is transforming life on
Dittrich Furs announces closure after 132 years in business in Detroit
After more than a century serving Detroit, Dittrich Furs announced it is closing this spring as the family has made the decision to retire.
Bethell had cricket in his blood, says ex-teacher
Jacob Bethell, who went to Rugby School, scored his maiden Test century during the fifth Ashes Test.
Scientists tried to break Einstein’s speed of light rule
Einstein’s claim that the speed of light is constant has survived more than a century of scrutiny—but scientists are still daring to test it. Some theories of quantum gravity suggest light might behave slightly differently at extreme energies. By tracking ultra-powerful gamma rays from distant cosmic sources, researchers searched for tiny timing differences that could reveal new physics. They found none, but their results tighten the limits by a huge margin.
Steny Hoyer, Longest-Serving House Democrat, to Retire From Congress
The Maryland congressman, who served as one of his party’s top leaders, plans to depart after nearly half a century in Congress, as his party looks toward generational change.
Science seeks keys to human longevity in the genetic mixing of Brazilian supercentenarians
A study of 160 people over a century old includes some of the oldest humans on the planet
SF legacy business restaurant shuts down after more than 50 years on Embarcadero
SAN FRANCISCO (KRON) — A legacy San Francisco restaurant is no longer in business after more than half a century on the Embarcadero. The Waterfront Restaurant at Pier 7 officially closed on D…
Popular Science Experiments In Sound During The 19th-Century
Check one, two; check one, two; is this thing on? Over on The Public Domain Review [Lucas Thompson] takes us for a spin through sound, as it was in Britain around and through the 1800s. The article…
The year ahead in entertainment: What to look forward to in 2026
ABC News' Chris Connelly unpacks some of the exciting landmark events in entertainment on the docket for 2026.
Performative Cruelty and the Politics of Fear: From Vienna to the US Border
Performative cruelty is an ancient practice, even though the phrase itself is new. Gladiatorial fights (Ancient Rome, c. 264 BCE–5th century CE) in arenas like the Colosseum were intentionally staged...
Science in 2050: the future breakthroughs that will shape our world
Nature - Nuclear fusion. People on Mars. Artificial general intelligence. These are just some of the advances that could come by the mid-century mark.
A look at what 2026 has in store for Wales' political parties
Next May's election could be historic - with Labour’s century-long dominance in Wales under threat.
Looking into RI's future: 'Heart' of school sports won't change
As we embark on the second quarter of the 21st century, the RI Interscholastic League's director says 'the heart of what we do will remain the same'
Behold the Manifold, the Concept that Changed How Mathematicians View Space
In the mid-19th century, Bernhard Riemann conceived of a new way to think about mathematical spaces, providing the foundation for modern geometry and physics.
Deceiving US experts; proving Einstein wrong: 2025 China science breakthroughs
From the detonation of a hydrogen-based explosive to ending a century-old debate, here are some of the major science developments of the year.
From 9/11 to Trump 2.0: 25 years in politics
As the year comes to a close, we want to step back and take a longer view of the last quarter century.
Historic Ann Arbor store closes after more than a century in business
After nearly 120 years serving the Ann Arbor community, Downtown Home and Garden welcomed customers for the final time on Christmas Eve before closing its doors permanently.
Chinese team tackles a century-old physics puzzle: can we travel back in time?
Theoretical breakthrough shows that time’s arrow can emerge naturally from how quantum parts become interconnected.
The Business of Watches Podcast: Audemars Piguet CEO Ilaria Resta Drives Double-Digit Sales Increase For Brand's 150th Anniversary Year
How AP managed to grow sales amid an industry downturn and how its Chief Executive is positioning the brand for the next century.
Supreme Court’s National Guard decision could force new debate over how Trump could use Insurrection Act
The Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday blocking President Donald Trump from sending the National Guard into American cities is likely to raise a politically fraught debate about the president’s willingness to invoke a 19th century law to deploy the regular military on American soil instead.
The disunity of science is a feature, not a bug
Mathematical models wield miraculous power, but mistaking them for reality has trapped science in a destructive quest for a “Theory of Everything.” Physicist and philosopher Ragner Fjelland argues that this leads to bloated, Frankenstein theories kept alive by clumsy, ad-hoc amendments, which reduce rather than boost science’s power. Fjelland calls for a radical shift in our attitude: we must reorientate towards creating entirely new theories, celebrating rather than lamenting disunity and diversity in science. Science, from the scientific revolution in the seventeenth century to the present day, has more or less developed in a “reductionist” way. The fundamental assumption is that all sciences may be ordered in a hierarchy that can be represented as an upside-down pyramid. At the top we find the human sciences, and at the bottom physics. Strong (or “ontological”) reductionism maintains that all theories at one level can be completely reduced to the lower level, all the way down to theories of atoms and elementary particles, or whatever is “at the bottom.” In the end, all diversity in the world can be unified in one fundamental theory. Hence it is called a final theory, or a Theory of Everything.One of the central figures in developing the idea of a Theory of Everything is the Dutch theoretical physicist Gerard 't Hooft, who received a Nobel Prize in physics in 1999 for his work. He emphasizes the non-empirical status of the theory:There exists no closely resembling alternative theory. This means that any slight change brought about in the rules would make the theory unlikely or inelegant. The theory will be a "package deal": take it, or leave it. This should hold both for the local laws and for the boundary conditions.This endeavor is not new. On the contrary, it goes all the way back to the birth of Western philosophy 2,500 years ago. The Babylonians made regular astronomical observations during a period of 600 years, from 747 BCE until 150 ACE. They developed mathematical techniques to predict astronomical phenomena, but they made no attempts at explaining them. However, the Greeks developed models, both material and theoretical, to explain the observed phenomena.The best example is Plato’s late dialogue Timaeus. Here he introduces a divine craftsman, the Demiurge, who has constructed the universe according to an original plan. Plato seems to have thought that the original plan is what is actually real, while the material world is merely an imperfect realization of it. He therefore does not, in the Timaeus, reconstruct the material universe, but the original plan, which can then be used to explain the material universe.Plato’s aim in producing a theoretical model is to reconstruct the original plan. That is what he carries out in Timaeus—and some modern physicists have embarked on the same project. For example, Einstein’s basic attitude is reflected in the title of Abraham Pais’ biography: “Subtle is the Lord...,” echoing Einstein’s comment, “Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.” In an interview Einstein compared our situation to a child who enters a huge library. The child knows that someone has written the books, but he does not know the languages in which they are written. He suspects that there is a mysterious order, but he does not know what it is.___“We have all been working in what Husserl called the Galilean style; that is, we have all been making abstract mathematical models of the universe to which at least the physicists give a higher degree of reality than they accord the ordinary world of sensation.”Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize in Physics (1979)___This Platonist view is contrary to a widespread impression of science, symbolized by the picture of the “father” of modern science, Galileo Galilei, with his telescope. According to this impression, Galileo liberated himself from the dominating metaphysics of his day—basically Aristotelian philosophy—and constructed a telescope that he directed towards the sky, showing that Jupiter has four moons. He also performed experiments with bronze balls rolling down inclined planes and found the law of freely falling bodies.However, in other cases Galileo emphasized the unreliability of our senses. It is easy to see why. He defended Copernicus’ heliocentric hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, we are not at rest at the center of the universe, but moving at a tremendous speed through space. Why don’t we observe this motion? Galileo praises Copernicus because “with reason as his guide he resolutely continued to affirm what sensible experience seemed to contradict.” In other places he directly refers to Plato. SUGGESTED VIEWING The quest for a final theory With Michio Kaku Galileo’s Platonism goes back to his early writings. In The Assayer, published as early as 1623, Galileo compared the universe to a grand book that is written in the language of mathematics, and “its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it.” Therefore, things that cannot be described by mathematics—for example, colors, smells and odors—are not real. They are merely subjective.This division into subjective and objective, advocated by Galileo and his younger contemporary René Descartes, is normally associated with a mechanistic world view, which is regarded as the opposite of Platonism. When we reduce something to, for example, molecules and atoms, we move “downwards.” In contrast, the Platonist moves “upwards,” to abstract entities. However, it only shows that when we address fundamental questions, we should be careful in applying everyday spatial metaphors like “up” and “down.”___Nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world.___The endeavor of finding a Theory of Everything has been heavily criticized. In 2006, the theoretical physicist Lee Smolin published “The Crisis in Fundamental Physics.” He argued that one of the most fundamental principles of science is that we should only regard theories as scientific if we have the possibility to show that they are false by experiments. Although he did not refer to Karl Popper, other critics have referred to Popper and argued that a theory is not scientific if it cannot be falsified (see for example Ellis & Silk 2014).These were not the first physicists to be anti-reductionists. In 1972, the journal Science published an article by the physicist Philip Anderson with the title “More Is Different.” This is the kind of article a scientist would normally write only after he has won a Nobel Prize. However, Anderson won the Nobel Prize for physics five years later, in 1977. The article is amazing, not primarily because it argues in favor of anti-reductionism in general, but because it argues for anti-reductionism within physics itself. Anderson’s conclusion was:At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry.We may say that Plato started the “unity of science movement,” based on Euclidean geometry as the model of all knowledge. A distinguishing mark of geometry is that all possible constructions can be reduced to a few fundamental principles. We have to acknowledge that this approach has limitations. In general, we can easily model technological systems. In addition, we may construct simplified and idealized models that capture important aspects of systems, from various perspectives and for various purposes. But nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world. In a complex system, each level has its distinct, emergent, properties that are characteristic of this level. Therefore, a complex system should be investigated at different levels and from different perspectives. Instead of exclusively pursuing a scientific ideal based on the unity of science, we should acknowledge the diversity—or even the disunity—of science.
Science history: Anthropologist sees the face of the 'Taung Child' — and proves that Africa was the cradle of humanity
Over a century ago, anthropologist Raymond Dart chipped an ancient skull out of some rock from an ancient quarry — and revealed the face of an ancient human relative.
Best Of: What Beards Tell Us About Power, Politics And How We See Each Other : 1A
Abraham Lincoln was the first U.S. president to sport a beard. For the next 50 years, whiskers were commonplace in the White House. But then, they went out of style.Now, Vice President JD Vance is the first executive branch leader in more than a century with a furry face.And others are following suit. From the Senate to the campaign trail, more and more men in politics are letting their facial hair grow free. But what does that tell us about masculinity, power, and how we see each other?Why did our politicians remain bare faced for so long? And what does the reemergence of whiskers in the White House represent?Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.
As millions of Americans face a steep rise in health insurance costs, lawmakers continue a century-long battle over who should pay for health care
US health care policy will remain fractured until lawmakers address the core question of who is responsible for health care costs.
The Ashes: Travis Head century pushes England closer to defeat
England are pushed towards the precipice of the fastest Ashes series defeat in more than 100 years as a Travis Head century maintains Australia's grip on the third Test in Adelaide.
Gil Gerard, ‘Buck Rogers in the 25th Century’ star, dies at 82
Gil Gerard, the actor best known for playing sci-fi hero Buck Rogers, has died. He was 82.
Ramanujan’s 100-year-old pi formula is still revealing the Universe
Ramanujan’s elegant formulas for calculating pi, developed more than a century ago, have unexpectedly resurfaced at the heart of modern physics. Researchers at IISc discovered that the same mathematical structures behind these formulas also describe real-world phenomena like turbulence, percolation, and even black holes. What once seemed like pure mathematics now appears deeply intertwined with the physical laws governing the universe.
Science has always been marketed, from 18th-century coffeehouse demos of Newton's ideas to today's TikTok explainers
People often see science as a world apart: cool, rational and untouched by persuasion or performance. In this view, scientists simply discover truth, and truth speaks for itself.
Science has always been marketed, from 18th-century coffeehouse demos of Newton’s ideas to today’s TikTok explainers
Science has always been part of a marketplace of ideas, where claims vie for audiences, resources and belief, and where power, persuasion and status shape which ideas are heard, trusted or forgotten.
Science has always been marketed, from 18th-century coffeehouse demos of Newton’s ideas to today’s TikTok explainers
Science has always been part of a marketplace of ideas, where claims vie for audiences, resources and belief, and where power, persuasion and status shape which ideas are heard, trusted or forgotten.
Trumpism’s racial turn: From civilisation to whiteness
In its second phase, Trumpism has evolved into a racialised political project — a 21st century reinterpretation of Aryanism — redefining American identity not through ideological conflict, as in the Cold War, but through a rigid racial ordering, argues academic Ma Haiyun.
The biggest scientific breakthroughs of the last 25 years—and a few to watch
From decoding the human genome to exploring the universe, science has made huge strides in the 21st century.
Affable comedy acting legend Dick Van Dyke turns 100 years old
Comedy icon Dick Van Dyke is celebrating his 100th birthday. Van Dyke hit the century mark on Saturday, some six decades after he sang and danced with Julie Andrews in
Cows forgotten on an island survived alone for 130 years — their story fascinates scientists - Futura-Sciences
In the late 19th century, a small group of cattle was left behind on Amsterdam Island, a remote spot in the subantarctic region. Against the odds, the herd survived and adapted to the island’s harsh ... Read more
Einstein's right again! Scientists catch a feasting black hole dragging the very fabric of spacetime
"This is a real gift for physicists as we confirm predictions made more than a century ago."
December 12, 2025
Over the past century, most cancer research has focused on the tumor itself. Rakesh Jain focused on the tumor’s environment instead. Plus, a glacier’s edge can be a dangerous place to do research. One team is using robots and sound samples to monitor the melting ice. And, when cases of plague pop up in the US, it can feel straight up medieval. It’s treatable, but how and why does it persist?
New restaurants, jobs and entertainment venues transform Century Farms
With hundreds of jobs on the way, Century Farms is transforming Antioch.
Influence 125: Arthur Blank, AMB Sports & Entertainment
Falcons owner Arthur Blank was honored in SBJ's Influence 125, which named the most influential sports business figures of the past quarter-century.
Influence 125: Mark Lazarus, Turner Entertainment Group/NBCUniversal/Versant
Mark Lazarus of Turner Entertainment Group, NBCUniversal and now Versant, was honored in SBJ's Influence 125, which named the most influential sports business figures of the past quarter-century.
Indiana's turnaround of the century isn't ending any time soon
Long the armpit of college football, Indiana is the big, bad bully on the block now.
Neon Liberalism #55: Politics As Culture
Has culture stagnated in the 21st century? Do the last twenty-five years feel like a blur? What can politics learn from the inherent dynamics of cultural change? And is Donald Trump the greatest kitsch artist of our time? Join Samantha Hancox-Li and guest W. David Marx, author of the just-released
Country Music Has Long Been Political
The controversy about Zach Bryan's latest song taps into a half century of political realignment and country's evolution.
Platform Dalí art and science programme - Announcements - e-flux
The Gala-Salvador Dalí Foundation presents Platform Dalí, a new international program inspired by the Empordà-born artist whose work was profoundly shaped by the scientific advances of the 20th century.
Will Venezuela buckle under Trump? Maduro wouldn't be the first to fall
U.S. presidents have successfully moved to remove Latin American leaders for over a century. What to know about U.S. involvement in coups in the region.
Supreme Court agrees to decide if Trump may end birthright citizenship
The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide if President Donald Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship with an executive order is constitutional, offering the justices an opportunity to revisit what has widely been considered settled law since the 19th Century.
For the first time this century, child deaths under age 5 will rise. Why?
A dramatic drop in mortality for youngsters under age 5 has been one of the great accomplishments in global health. But estimates suggest that in 2025 child deaths will go up.
Boston 25 News
"This acquisition brings together two pioneering entertainment businesses, combining Netflix’s innovation, global reach and best-in-class streaming service with Warner Bros.’ century-long legacy of...
Column | The World Cup has always been about politics
The tournament played a role in early 20th century nation building, Jonathan Wilson says in a new book, and it is still political today.
Volcanic eruption may have sparked Europe's Black Death plague, scientists find
The plague killed between a third and half of the European population in the mid-14th Century. But it's unknown what triggered the pandemic.
THEN AND NOW: Photos show where America's wealthiest lived a century ago versus today
A hundred years ago, America's wealth concentrated in New York's Fifth Avenue. Today, the richest Americans reside in places like Miami and Hawaii.
Accel Entertainment subsidiary acquires route operation assets of Dynasty Games
Accel Entertainment announced Tuesday that its subsidiary, Century Gaming Technologies Nevada, has acquired the route-operation assets of Dynasty Games. Financial details of the transaction weren’t disclosed, but they're expected to be accretive to Accel’s 2026 financial results.Accel, a loc
Science history: Computer scientist lays out 'Moore's law,' guiding chip design for a half century
At a small local chapter meeting of a professional society, Gordon Moore's talk laid out the rudiments of what would become "Moore's law, which would govern the electronics industry for a half century.
Are university policies holding science back? Study shows how patenting boosts pure research
When UC Berkeley biochemist Jennifer Doudna first began studying how bacteria fight virus infections, she had no idea it would result in one of the most important scientific breakthroughs of the century. ...
In 19th century Tombstone, the Bird Cage Theater had entertainment for everyone
Tombstone’s Bird Cage opened in 1881 in what was then a young, remote boomtown. Today, the historic variety theater is revered among locals and tourists alike.
Once-in-a-century floods set to become annual events in northeastern US in the next 75 years, study finds
Rising sea levels and storm surges from hurricanes will bring more frequent extreme floods to northeastern U.S. states, including Connecticut, New York and New Jersey.
Science Power-up: Where Biomanufacturing Can Take Us This Century
Explore how fundamental science is shaping the future of everyday items we all rely on, from food to plastics – and how artificial intelligence and data will power the technologies of tomorrow in biomanufacturing.
Science must move from materialism to mystery
Theoretical physicist and neuroscientist Àlex Gómez-Marín argues that modern science has become trapped in a framework that mistakes matter for the whole of reality. In this wide-ranging interview, Gómez-Marín challenges the foundations of materialism, defends the scientific study of near-death experiences, and calls for a new type of science grounded in mystery and a renewed sense of the sacred. He suggests that abandoning materialism could open the door to a deeper understanding of consciousness, death, and the purpose of human existence. Simon Custer: You are both a theoretical physicist and a neuroscientist, and you have also been fiercely critical of materialist theories of mind and consciousness. What do you think the ultimate nature of reality is?Àlex Gómez-Marín: I don't know what the ultimate nature of reality is, but what I try to first assess is whether the stories that they [mainstream science] have told us about it are right, or maybe whether there are other alternatives. That's why I've been a fierce critic of materialism. As a scientist, I realized that they had sold us this idea that to be a good scientist you also had to subscribe to many other -isms, like materialism, reductionism, and even secularism. And so first I think one needs to unmount these -isms, and then, as is happening today in consciousness studies, we have a huge landscape where there isn't only one game in town, the idea that matter is the only thing that really exists. But because we are studying the hard problem of consciousness, it may be the case that other views of reality, like idealism, or even dualism, or other theories like dual aspect monism... these are philosophical ideas that now, I think, have room in science to be taken seriously. How does something like materialism relate to dualism or idealism? What is materialism in the first place?Well, materialism is the philosophical position that matter is the only really ‘real’ thing in the universe. And I think that worked kind of well because science started 400 years ago and Galileo made that split, I call it the foundational wound. It was a great business move.He said, let's start doing science on that portion of reality that lends itself more easily to mathematization and measurement. So, for some reason, the solidity of this table or the movement of planets lend themselves very well to this foundational idea of science. But as time went on, 400 years later, we realized that we had forgotten the other side, which is what really matters.What really matters is pain, is love, is feelings, sensation, consciousness, which is very hard to define, but very intimate. We all know what it is. It's that thing that disappears when we go into deep sleep and comes back in the morning. SUGGESTED VIEWING On the edges of knowledge With Michael Shermer, Rupert Sheldrake, Güneş Taylor It's what it is like to be, as Nagel said. It's the feeling of being alive. So, materialism is good to study certain things, but then when it ossifies into this ideology and then is dressed like science, now it's preventing us from understanding these key questions that are really that everybody wants to know.Why are we here? Why do we feel reality? Where do we go when we die? And so we need other ways. We need pluralism. I'm only asking for having more options on the table and taking them seriously. Why does materialism fail to explain consciousness? For example, if you were to lobotomize me, I would not be a functional human being. What do you say to someone who might think that materialism adequately explains the mind?Well, here we could speak about different things. We could talk about physics or about neuroscience. I happen to have training with both.For instance, for neuroscientists, 99% of them, I'm not included in that portion, believe that the brain can only be a productive organ. It's an organ that somehow, somewhere, consciousness emerges. It's like a lamp. And then something happens, magic happens, and then consciousness emerges.That's the position you need to be if you're a materialist because if the only really ‘real’ thing is matter, then you need to say, just give us some more time and money and we'll figure out how mind emerges or is produced from matter. There are many philosophically sophisticated ways of criticizing this.Now there's another option, which is the brain as a permissive organ. This was said by William James more than 100 years ago.Now then the brain wouldn't be like this machine, like for instance, a heat engine whose smoke is consciousness, which is what we would have in the first big model, the productive model. But in the permissive model, the brain would be a kind of a filter. And so the brain would still have a very important role in consciousness, but it wouldn't be a productive role.It would be permissive, much like a filter or much like a prism which would receive light. And - I'm speaking metaphorically - it would receive the light of the mind and then it could reflect it and refract it.Now, with these two big options on the table, I think we can make progress into what I call the edges of consciousness, which are all these experiences, weird experiences that many people have, but we don't talk about enough, like near-death experiences, precognitive dreams, synchronicities. These experiences are very important for humans and they have a place in the permissive hypothesis and they are literally impossible in the productive hypothesis. So that's yet one more reason to explore alternatives to materialism. There may be anecdotal evidence for near-death experiences, but is there robust evidence that would be accepted by the majority of scientists who subscribe to the scientific method?Sure. And the plural of anecdotes, someone said, is data.And there's a lot of data. Actually, this year is the 50th anniversary, half a century, since Dr. Raymond Moody realized that we have two ears and one mouth and started listening to what his patients had to say about their experiences while they were clinically dead.The heart had stopped, breathing had stopped in these patients. These patients would come back and tell him these amazing stories that some people may say are hallucinations, but for the patients were hyper-real, like seeing light at the end of the tunnels, seeing deceased family members waiting for them, feeling bliss.___I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain.___And so he and others started taking them seriously and writing their accounts down. And then you can do a science based on that material of experience that people have. Now, on the more objective side, more recently people have started to measure what's going on in the brain when people are clinically dead and brought back. This has opened a proper field of study, which is near-death studies.Evidence is a difficult word, because sometimes people think that when you say evidence, this is just the final proof. Evidence is like in a jury. You bring testimony, you bring pieces of data that point in one direction or another.I would say the evidence suggests that the mind can survive the death of activity of the brain. When brains are broken or shut off, there can still be mind going on. And that's revolutionary.That would entail that when we die, it's not game over, which, by the way, is the thesis of materialism. If consciousness survives, materialism dies. It's game over for materialism if something of us continues after we die. Do you think that there is mental continuity after death?Well, I think so, and I believe so, and I could also say I may have experienced it myself, because four years ago I had a near-death experience. I was in the hospital, I lost a lot of blood, and I saw those beings at the end of the tunnel, three beings, and there was yellow light. I was in a well, I was looking upwards, and I hadn't read about NDEs by then, but when I came back from this experience, I decided I would try to integrate this also in my professional life. Not just my personal life, of course, but my professional life as a physicist and as a neuroscientist. So I may have had the experience of glimpses of what an afterlife would be, and I'm not ashamed to say it in this way, and then one can do science of it, and then one can do philosophy of it.One can think about what -isms we were discussing, what views on reality would allow those experiences to be really ‘real,’ as opposed to, well, poor guy, the brain was kind of broken, it must have been a hallucination. Do you have a view about whether individuality or “the ego” persists after death, or whether we sort of merge into some sort of cosmic consciousness instead?I don't know, but my view would be along those lines you're suggesting. I think we could speak about a kind of universal mind, and then the problem is not how we emerge from matter, but how we fragment from a more holistic consciousness into these individual eddies and then when we die, this kind of dissipates.But I'm not sure. For instance, idealism would promote that view, but then what would survive of us after these eddies just vanish and become again the big Consciousness, I'm not sure what that would be. I don't know for sure, but I would tell you I believe something of us survives.And there are other lines of research, not just near-death experience, that can address this really hard question of survival. For instance, there are children who remember previous lives. This was studied by Ian Stevenson at the University of Virginia for more than 50 years.___Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.___It's amazing research. He went all over the world, especially in the East, and collected all these case studies, all these stories. In plural, these were data of kids, very young age, who would describe up to 40 items that then he could go and verify.There was no internet. There was really no way the kid could know. Why would the kid say that when I was living in this other body and I was a woman and that's how my house would look like or that's how I would die, right? Again, there is evidence, not proof, but there's evidence not only that something weird and interesting is happening as we cross the threshold, but also when we come back to this life.Scientists should not be afraid of studying this, but they are because there's stigma. There's usually stigma upon the enigma, and this is so unfortunate. And one of the reasons is because of the ideology of materialism, because those things cannot be possible. What is wrong with the politics of science such that they have generated this stigma?So many things. Science is a human activity to begin with.So it falls prey to all our passions and ego and greed. That's one thing. Science is a job for the good and for the bad.You need to get a salary. You need to get grants. Research takes place within a selection mechanism that also sometimes reinforces things that are not very scientific.And then, we didn't have time to unpack this, but science for many years become entangled, as I was suggesting before, to other -isms, materialism, secularism. So anything that smells like the afterlife, people may think has to do with God, and then they freak out.Anything that suggests that there's something about the mind that may not need a physical material substrate to exist, it smells like non-materialism. So, all these -isms are ideologically blocking that kind of research, and then there are all these sociopolitical constraints as to what should be studied and what shouldn't be studied.I call it the backstage of science. Sometimes we scientists or science communicators seem to speak as if the data is the only thing that matters. We say, well, data and theory.But then there's a third leg of this stool, which is all the politics that goes behind the scenes. And we often don't speak about this, and it's quite vicious and petty, and it's very real. Why is materialism so attractive to most scientists?Well, an easy answer is because we've grown up with it.It's what the educational system promotes, and that's what you hear when you go to university. So it's like growing in a culture. It feels like the air in which you breathe.So it's very hard to begin with to detect, well, maybe there's another alternative. Maybe there are other ways of doing science, other environments in which one could do science. That's one reason.And other reasons maybe are more profound, and I'm not qualified to explain them, but I could say, looking at this 400-year history of science, since it started around 1623 with Galileo's book The Assayer, that science went and coupled with all what's going on in the West.And so the fall of religion, you could say, and science presented us this new alternative that then could be coupled very well with other -isms, and this idea of growth, and then science losing its good twin brother, which was philosophy. There's a whole natural history of science starting as philosophy, kind of emancipating or breaking out from philosophy, and then marrying technology, and then marrying other social systems.From that point of view, materialism is a very convenient idea to propose. There were attempts, like the German idealists tried to do a more romantic science. But no, the idea prevailed, like Francis Bacon said: You should pursue nature through all her corners, he said, and make her spill her secrets.Our attitude towards nature in the science that dominates is very much reflecting how we treat nature in our society, in our culture, like a resource to extract secrets by force and then dominate it. How is materialism related to the notions of growth and progress? What's wrong with having a productive citizenry?This is another very interesting and very difficult question to answer.But there's this recent book coming out by Paul Kingsnorth. In it, he explains this idea of the machine and this idea of progress. And this, again, this conflation of more is better, of we need to go forward always, and convincing us that the way to do that is to continually extract more from nature. But because we don't have the religious context anymore, because God is dead, then what do we have? We have what we can do as humans with our own gadgets.It's kind of the story of the Promethean fire. We will just build anything to make ourselves God.A good example today is transhumanism. Transhumanism is this pseudo-religion dressed in technoscientific language whose goal is very religious. They promise immortality, they promise redemption, they promise transformation of the entire natural world, but it's done by human means through technology. Are you suggesting that we can't have ethics without religion?Well, we should have ethics with or without religion. That's another pruning that has happened in science. We say, forget about aesthetics, although some physicists still think that beautiful means probably true, and forget about politics. We pretend there's no backstage of science, and even let's forget about ethics.___Science needs to be in the service of mankind.___Scientists, when they become more like engineers, they're just thinking how to make things work so that they can go to the moon, go to Mars, make machines that think, but they don't think whether that's a good idea.And also consider metaphysics. Many scientists for a long time pretended, and maybe that comes from the stream of positivisms, that really one doesn't need metaphysics at all, except that materialism is always the metaphysics running the system.You see, it's not just ethics. It's the pruning of all of these, you could say, five main legs of philosophy that just makes a kind of unconscious science, a science that doesn't really know what it's doing. It's doing it very well locally, but it just doesn't know what it's doing globally. Do you think science has to have an ultimate vision and purpose behind it for it to be effective or for it to be meaningful and transformative?Yes, a way I would say that is that science needs to be in the service of mankind. And it hasn't been that. And we can see it through, you know, when we discovered the secrets of the atom, and all of a sudden, the Manhattan Project, and then we create nuclear weapons.And now we're trying to crack how machines may think, and now we're creating this mess, right? So science needs to be in service of mankind, not in service of a few ideas that maybe want to make more money or just dominate upon nature. What about planes, trains, automobiles, and modern medicine? Hasn't science served mankind by helping us develop those technologies?Yes and no. I see where you're going, and it's fair.I came here by plane, and it's a blessing. When I almost died, the surgeons did their job, and they saved my life. But these two forced choices between Luddites and Silicon Valley types, I think, of course, it's a false dichotomy.Progress, in a way, it's good, but we often don't speak about the dark side of the moon. We say the great things that progress has brought, and we don't speak about the disasters, the side effects that it has come with, and the same when we promise new technologies. We tend to think that any technology is great, that email is going to save us so much time because we don't need to write letters and send them anymore.Is that true? I spend so many hours a week writing emails. Let's just say there are great things about it and bad things about it. People like Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, for example, argue that we've made moral progress over time because of the Enlightenment. Do you think that's totally wrong-headed?I think he's emphasizing a side of the moon, and he does that very well, and you can find tons of plots where there's a slope going up and say it's great. But I think he should also tell the not-so-friendly story.But if your ideology is just to resist and continue to explain that the Enlightenment is the best thing ever and reason is the best thing ever… this feels to me like you're worshipping these abstractions.I'm very critical of it and also of these, again, science communicators and scientists that say, Oh, science says, in the name of science, experts say. It's like, come on, let's be careful because we can shoot ourselves in the foot by putting forth to the people an image of science that we know is not really true. Recently there's been a resurgence of spirituality and of people who say that they're spiritual but not religious, especially in the United States. If materialism is going away, what is going to fill that gap? Are we going to return to traditional religion? Do you see that being connected with the rise of the political right?I'm not a fortune teller, so I don't know what's going to happen. But, yeah, we could say we're in this post-materialist age and even post-secular age. One cannot come back to the past, but maybe just to contact with the roots is a good idea.What do I mean by that? I think we need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method. We need to do so in a culture where we realize humans cannot thrive in a vacuum where there's this idea that the sacred has to be removed.Now, how do we do that without bringing in back all the vices of religion? I don't know. I'm from a Catholic country.Here we are in England, so there are differences and interreligious dialogue has always been a challenge. But I think maybe a way of putting it is: after all these conflicts and branchings I was quickly alluding to, science from philosophy and then also from religion, now there's a time of reconciliation perhaps and maybe debates in the proper sense, like exchange of ideas in service of learning and getting into something higher than both poles. We need science to talk to religious people and it's interesting when people say they're spiritual and not religious.I think this is just a way of saying, no, I don't want to go back, I want to go forward. But at the end of the day, religions have offered us practices and grounding that we now desperately need. Everybody can and should just meditate or pray or do whatever they want, but we're in a crisis and it's time for reconciliation. What do you say to critics that say you are merely projecting our need for meaning onto a fundamentally indifferent universe?Yeah, I know that the typical science communicator says something like this. But we're not projecting. Human beings feed on meaning.It's the other way around. If you're a materialist, because the only thing that there is is matter, all that comes next, free will, consciousness, meaning, this is a kind of illusion that we need to explain.They're just craving for meaning, but there isn't really for them. I would also like to remind my materialist friends that for decades, if not centuries, they've said in the name of science, we know that this and this and this doesn't really exist. I think now they sense they're forced to say, well, actually, we don't know. We've been saying, for instance, that there's nothing after you die, and now probably they need to admit that they don't know the answer.___We need to do a science 2.0, a science that says thank you to Galileo and thank you to materialism, but we need to reinvent even a new kind of scientific method.___So it's a moment to open up possibilities and also to gently but fiercely critique these claims that I think harm society. If you say in the name of science, get on with it, when your father dies, you'll never see him again. Well, what the F do you know about it? You haven't studied the literature, you haven't had any of those experiences, and basically what you're doing is you're just doing marketing on ideology. This needs to stop. Do you think that it's scarier for some people to entertain the thought that there might be life after death, compared to a materialist worldview where you just die, given that there might be consequences for unsavory behaviour?Well, death and dying is scary. It's maybe the ultimate ending. It's a limit on life, and when we're in this conquest mode, we don't like limits.And it also has, there's a shockwave backwards, so I think if you change your notion of what death is or may be, you live differently. It also has consequences, as you're saying, for the future because this is not our only goal here and we come back in whatever form. And again, different religions would say different things. I the East, they are more happy with the idea of reincarnation, and here in the West, there are other preferences. But in any case, it changes how we live, and that's really what matters.It's not about just projecting or imagining what we'll be after, but how we live now and also how we treat those who are dying. So it goes from the individual to the families, to the hospitals.Now in the near-death research I do, this has ramifications at all these levels, all the way to society.But our society is thanatophobic. It has a phobia of death. We don't want to hear about death, and this is another thing we need to put on the table and be willing to talk about it. Do you think that we might get closer to answering ultimate questions like why is there anything at all if we jettison materialism?That’s an excellent question, Simon. Two things: we should stop treating reality, I believe, as a great sudoku, as an enigma, as something that with intelligence, money, and time that we will crack and instead treat reality more like a mystery. And what you do for in front of a mystery is not to be the clever guy in a class and say “I’ll solve you” but more like “I will bow and you will transform me.”I know this sounds a bit like a scientist speaking like a mystic. But I think this reorientation is needed. In the end, we won’t crack the big questions, but they will transform us. If we free ourselves from this prison of materialism, the way we will explore these questions will be freer, more creative, and in service of mankind. Do you think exploring mystery is the reason why we are here?I think we are here because, and this pseudo-theological argument I’m making off the cuff, But the One, the Absolute, if there is such a thing, had everything except limitation. We are that absolute experiencing that contingency. It’s like an act of divine proprioception. It’s a wonderful adventure, it’s just incredible to be alive. Perhaps we have forgotten why we are here and the whole point is to experience the flesh.Let me end by saying this. I criticize materialism harshly. I bang on this dead horse, because I think it’s dead. But matter is a great mystery. So maybe my invitation is as follows: hey materialist friends, come here, let’s work on materialism 2.0! Consciousness is a mystery, but matter is also a mystery. The fact that we can have an intersubjective experience consensus, the fact that we can apply mathematics, that we can measure things... the physical world we take for granted, but it is a great mystery too.Maybe that’s related to your last question: why are we here? Why did spirit decide to incarnate? Being in the flesh may be a great thing if spirit decided to do so.Àlex Gómez-Marín, thank you very much.My pleasure.
AI and science: Pioneering the 21st century
A new paradigm of AI-directed science is emerging to solve existential challenges, creating inelastic demand for mission-critical, high-performance computing, writes Tibor Schwartz, senior adviser at QIC.
Antarctica's Southern Ocean might be gearing up for a thermal 'burp' that could last a century
When humans manage to cut enough emissions and eventually reduce global temperatures, new research shows the Southern Ocean could kick warming back into gear.