News Feeds

A disparate collection of young stellar objects bejewels a cosmic panorama in the star-forming region NGC 1333 in this new image from NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope. To the left, an actively forming star called a protostar casts its glow on the surrounding gas and dust, creating a reflection nebula. Two dark stripes on opposite sides […]

Betelgeuse is the star that everybody can't wait to see blow up, preferably sooner than later. That's because it's a red supergiant on the verge of becoming a supernova and there hasn't been one explode this close in recorded human history. It's been changing its brightness and showing strange surface behavior, which is why astronomers track its activity closely. Are these changes due to its aging process? Do they mean it's about to blow up? Probably not.

Mars Was Half Covered by an Ocean susannakohler33808 Mon, 01/12/2026 - 12:00 Mars Was Half Covered by an Ocean https://mediarelations.unibe.ch/media_releases/2026/media_releases_2026/mars_was_half_covered_by_an_ocean/index_eng.html

Clues from studies of ancient plants and animals have helped archaeologists pin down where the last Neanderthals found refuge, says columnist Michael Marshall

Anyone following recent events in Minneapolis has likely noticed something strange. People watching the same videos, reading the same headlines, and reacting to the same street-level events often seem to be describing entirely different realities. Conversations quickly break down, not because people disagree about what should be done, but because they cannot even agree on what is happening. It’s as if people are watching two completely different movies on one screen.

The “two-movies-one-screen” concept was first coined by Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert turned political commentator, to describe radically different interpretations of the same political events. People with access to the same set of facts come away with completely different understandings of what is happening. In some cases, each side seems genuinely unaware that the other interpretation even exists.

This is not merely disagreement, and it goes beyond ordinary bias. It is also not quite what psychologists usually mean by cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance, first described by Leon Festinger in the 1950s, occurs when people experience psychological discomfort from holding conflicting beliefs or encountering information that contradicts their existing views, and then attempt to reduce that discomfort through rationalization or reinterpretation of the facts. In cases like the Renee Good shooting in Minnesota, however, something else seems to be happening. So, what is going on?

From a psychological standpoint, this resembles dissociation more than cognitive dissonance. Dissociation refers to a class of mental processes in which certain thoughts, perceptions, or experiences are kept out of conscious awareness. As clinical psychologists have long noted, dissociation functions as a defensive mechanism, shielding the individual from information that is experienced as overwhelming or intolerable. The mind does not reject the data after evaluating it. It fails to perceive it in the first place.

The following is an attempt to provide a neutral description of the events, followed by two very different interpretations.

On January 7, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was fatally shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent during an operation targeting undocumented immigrants for deportation. Good was a U.S. citizen and mother of three from previous relationships, and present on the scene with her wife, Rebecca (Becca) Good.

Multiple videos from bystanders, body cameras, and agent phones capture the event, showing a chaotic scene lasting about three minutes.

0:00 /0:47 1×

ICE Agent’s Cellphone Video (Credit: Alpha News)

Renee Good was in her SUV, which was blocking or near the path of ICE vehicles during an arrest operation. Agents approached, giving conflicting commands: some ordered her to leave, while others demanded she exit the vehicle. One agent attempted to open her door and banged on the window.

Rebecca Good, Renee’s wife, was outside the vehicle filming and confronting agents.

At one point during the interaction, Renee’s wife urged her to “drive, baby, drive” as the situation escalated. Good maneuvered the vehicle forward and started to accelerate. The vehicle made contact with an ICE agent who was positioned in front; the agent fired through the windshield, striking her in the face and killing her.

0:00 /0:39 1×

Bystander Video (Credit: Nick Sortor)

According to official statements from ICE and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the shooting occurred after Good allegedly used her vehicle as a weapon, attempting to run over an agent who then fired in self-defense. Renee and Rebecca Good were part of “ICE Watch” groups monitoring, protesting, and interfering with ICE operations. The ICE agent who fatally shot Good was injured and hospitalized following a prior incident in June 2025, during which an undocumented immigrant with an open warrant for child sexual assault dragged him with his vehicle while attempting to flee arrest.

0:00 /4:26 1×

Bystander Video 2 (Credit: @Dana916 via X.com)

Progressive voices view Good’s killing as an example of ICE overreach, law enforcement brutality, and systemic abuse of power, especially against citizens exercising First Amendment rights. They emphasize Renee was a “legal observer” and had a constitutional right to protest. They further note that Good was an unarmed American citizen on a public road who was fatally shot in the face and head by a masked federal agent. They also interpret the footage as showing Good attempting to navigate away from the scene rather than intentionally trying to harm the agent. They further warn against normalizing state killings, such as in statements made by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D), who responded to Vice President JD Vance’s defense of the ICE agent by calling it a “regime willing to kill its own citizens.” This sentiment is tied to broader concerns about police/ICE militarization against undocumented immigrants, and observations such as that even if Good erred (e.g., by not complying with instructions of federal law enforcement officers), it wasn’t worth her life, and society needs a higher bar for lethal force.

Conservative commentators frame the shooting as justified self-defense against anti-ICE radicals who disrupted lawful operations. They emphasize Renee’s alleged aggression and Rebecca’s role in escalating the situation by shouting “You wanna come at us? Go get yourself lunch, big boy,” portraying the couple as part of a coordinated harassment campaign rather than passive observers or demonstrators. They also argue Good was an active participant and perpetrator obstructing enforcement of long-standing immigration law, and someone attempting to flee from the scene rather than simply a citizen attending a protest. They maintain that the shooting was tragic, nevertheless law enforcement (and citizens) can use lethal force if they reasonably believe they face imminent serious harm. Further, they make the following distinction: debating whether the officer should or should not have fired is rational, but refusing to acknowledge that being struck/pushed by a vehicle is basis for self-defense isn’t.

These conflicting media narratives matter because most people do not build their understanding of the world through direct experience. Our personal encounters are limited. The rest of our mental model is assembled from stories. Indeed, research in cognitive psychology and media studies consistently shows that humans rely heavily on narrative to organize information and assign meaning. In other words, we are not natural statisticians. As psychologists such as Jerome Bruner and Daniel Kahneman have shown, people reason intuitively through stories, examples, and emotionally salient cases, often treating mediated experience as a stand-in for reality itself. This is why propaganda is most effective when it does not look like propaganda.

Many people assume propaganda is something obvious that you notice and argue with. In reality, the most powerful propaganda works through repetition rather than persuasion. Social psychologists have documented what is known as the “illusory truth effect,” in which repeated statements are more likely to be judged as true, regardless of their accuracy. When a moral narrative is replayed often enough, it stops feeling like a claim and starts feeling like memory.

Consider the recurring portrayal of tech executives in films and television. A wealthy founder speaks in vague abstractions, dismisses ethical concerns, and pursues profit at the expense of ordinary people. The specifics vary, but the moral structure remains the same. Whether any individual depiction reflects the reality of modern technology firms is almost beside the point. After repeated exposure, viewers absorb not just a critique of corporate excess, but an intuitive framework for interpreting innovation, wealth, and motive. Repetition trains audiences to assign intent instantly and to stop questioning it.

This works because fiction bypasses our analytical defenses. Experimental research on narrative persuasion shows that people are less likely to counterargue when they are emotionally absorbed in a story. Psychologists refer to this as “transportation,” a state in which attention and emotion are captured by a narrative, making viewers more receptive to its implicit assumptions. We do not fact-check television dramas. We empathize with them. Their moral premises are absorbed quietly as background knowledge.

For most of us, the names Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, or Peter Thiel evoke an immediate moral impression. But how did that impression evolve? Have you, for example, ever heard them speak at length or know how they run their companies? Do you understand what motivates them? Do they have a good sense of humor?

There is also a structural problem with storytelling itself. Everyday reality, especially everyday crime, is usually chaotic, senseless, and narratively unsatisfying. Criminologists have long observed that much violent crime lacks coherent motives or moral meaning. Writers, understandably, select stories that feel legible, purposeful, and emotionally engaging. But those selections shape our expectations of reality and thus our perception, and make us see otherwise messy events as morally clearer than they actually are.

The result is a moral universe in which certain kinds of harm are treated as profound moral ruptures, while other kinds are treated as routine or unfortunate facts of life. Violence committed by some characters is framed as a social crisis demanding urgent moral response. Similar violence committed by others is portrayed as tragic but unremarkable, something to be managed rather than interrogated.

A clear example appears in the pilot of The Pitt. A dramatic subway assault is immediately interpreted through a moral lens before basic facts are known. The graphic depiction gives viewers the feeling that they are seeing something raw and unfiltered. At the same time, the narrative structure carefully guides inference and sympathy. In the same episode, a different shooting is treated as mundane and procedural. It carries little moral weight and prompts no larger reflection.

The show is not depicting reality. It is presenting a moral map.

This does not require a conspiracy, and it does not require malicious intent. Many writers openly acknowledge that fiction shapes social norms and expectations. Cultural theorists from Walter Lippmann to contemporary media scholars have noted that narratives function as “pictures in our heads,” guiding perception long before conscious judgment enters the picture. What is new is the growing cultural distance between those producing these narratives and the audiences consuming them, combined with a strong confidence that the moral direction of society is already settled.

When this kind of storytelling dominates, it does more than persuade. It trains perception itself. Viewers learn what to notice, what to ignore, and which conclusions should feel obvious. Over time, alternative interpretations stop feeling like interpretations at all. They begin to look irrational or delusional.

This is how “the other movie” disappears.

♦ ♦ ♦

A functioning society does not require agreement on every issue. It does require a shared reality. When large groups of people cannot even see what others are responding to, debate becomes impossible. You cannot resolve disagreements if one side experiences the other as hallucinating.

The answer is not counter-propaganda, and it is not simply more facts. Research on motivated reasoning shows that facts alone rarely change minds when perceptions themselves are structured by narrative. What is required instead is closer attention to how stories shape perception. What they highlight. What they omit. And how repetition turns fiction into intuition.

Was Renee Good heroically intervening in an unlawful abduction and a victim of reckless police violence? Or was she someone who interfered with a lawful enforcement action and nearly ran over an officer? Each interpretation feels obvious to those who hold it, and nearly invisible to those who do not. If you analyze both long enough, you might start to see the narratives and the chain of events that lead one to interpret this particular incident in a particular way after watching the exact same three minutes of video.

Skepticism, properly understood, is not just about questioning explicit claims. It is about examining why certain narratives feel natural, why others feel unthinkable, and why some movies seem to be playing on the screen while others are never seen at all.

I have put most of the news in the Hili dialogues, and, frankly, am afflicted with a bad case of Weltschmerz (I believe Dr. Cobb shares my ailment).  So today I’m proffering space for you to talk about anything you want, and it need not be limited to the news. I expect many people will want to give their opinions on the ICE killing in Minnesota, but remember that there are huge protests, and thousands of deaths, in Iran, with the possibility of regime change.  A government blackout is preventing us from hearing much about what’s happening, but video and messages have been smuggled out. That’s the news I’ll concentrate on in Hili Nooz until things are resolved one way or the other. The Iranian protestors, knowing that they could be shot, are still congregating en masse in the streets of many cities.

Finally, astronauts are coming back to Earth early because one of them has an undisclosed illness.

So talk about what you want, but please adhere to Da Roolz. For this one post I’ll relax the frequency restrictions, so you can make up to 15% of the total comments (about one comment in six).  Please try to avoid one-on-one arguments, and be civil, and, if I can add one more thing, don’t keep emphasizing the same point over and over again.

Okay, that’s it. Ready, set, go. . . .   and if I get fewer than 50 comments, I’ll be even more depressed.

Some of climate change's sharpest realities are being felt on small island nations, where extreme weather is claiming homes and triggering displacement. Those able to stay are spearheading inventive adaptation techniques in a bid to secure their future

The tech world is buzzing with the claims of a startup battery company out of Finland called Donut Lab. They claim to have created the world’s first production solid state battery. At first blush the claims are exciting but seem in line with the promises that we have been hearing about solid state batteries for years. So it may seem that a company has finally cracked the technical issues with the technology and gotten a product across the finish line. But let’s take a closer look.

First let’s review their claims. The CEO is claiming that their battery has a specific energy of 400 watt hours per kilogram. This is great, considering the current lithium ion batteries in production are in the 175-250 range. The Amprius silicon anode Li-ion battery has 370 Wh/kg, so 400 sounds plausibly incremental, but make no mistake, this would still be a huge breakthrough. Meanwhile the CEO also claims 100,000 charge-discharge cycles, and operation temperature from -30 to 100C. In addition he claims his battery is cheaper than standard Li-ion, does not use any geopolitically sensitive raw materials, and is already in production (for motorcycles). Further it can be fully recharged in 5 minutes, and is incredibly stable with no risk of catching fire.

As I have pointed out previously, battery technology is tricky because a useful EV battery needs a suite of features all at the same time, while reality often requires trade-offs. So you can get your high capacity, but with increased expense, for example (like the Amprius battery). So claiming to have every critical feature of an EV battery improve all at once is beyond a huge deal. That in itself starts to get into the implausibility range, but it’s not impossible. My reaction appears to be similar to most people in the tech world – show me the money. At the CES where Donut rolled out its battery claims, in short, they did not do that.

A battery company with these claims, if they wanted to be taken serious, would have presented their actual battery at CES demonstrating at least some of these features, like the energy density and cycle life. But all they had was an empty case – no actual battery. That we either a disastrous marketing decision, or they don’t have an actual battery. I’m beginning the smell the “fake it til you make it” syndrome that tanked Theranos.

As we go deeper the story gets more dodgy. The company, Donut Lab, is a small Finish company (registered in Estonia). Their employee roster boasts a single technical expert, the rest are in marketing and management. So now we are supposed to believe that this small company with a single engineer has outperformed the world’s battery tech giants with hundreds or even thousands of experts and who are pouring billions of dollars into R&D to be the first to market with a solid state battery. Um, no. I love a good Cinderella story, and it would be great if a viable solid state battery hit the market a few years (or maybe more) ahead of schedule, but this is just too much to believe.

Then there is the history of the CEO, Marko Lehtimäki. Last year this guy claimed to have created the first true artificial intelligence, Asinoid. He wrote: “Asinoids are today the world’s only AI with their own life, thoughts, continuous evolution and synthetic neuroplasticity with the ability to adopt to any kind of physical or digital ”body”, from humanoid robots to SaaS apps, drone swarms and CCTV cameras. Their intelligence is modeled carefully after the only true known intelligence — the human brain.”

This was just vaporware. Reading his posts I get the vibe that this guy wants to become the next Elon Musk, grabbing experts to create one moonshot breakthrough after another. He may be truly delusional, or really think that his companies are on the verge of these breakthroughs, so it’s just good marketing to get ahead of the curve. Or he may just be a scammer. Either way, he has no credibility.

We are therefore seeing a pattern that is extremely familiar and clear to experienced skeptics – an astounding claim with nothing real to back it up made by someone with a history of dubious claims. I would be shocked (although also happy) if this turns out to be legit.

Meanwhile, where does solid state battery tech actually sit? The technology is promising, and is expected to produce batteries with higher energy density, faster charging, and longer lifespans. But these will likely come at the expense of higher cost. The large companies working on this tech are also facing challenges to mass production and have not solved all the technical issues. Solid state batteries have been promised for a long time, and the technology is taking a lot longer than optimists expected. Realistically, this is a medium to long term technology. At best we will see them at the end of this decade but more likely in the early to mid 2030s. It may even take longer.

Meanwhile, Li-ion technology continues to advance. Over the next few years we will see silicon anode batteries in EVs at the high end. We are also starting to see sodium ion batteries at the low end, at about half the price of Li-ion batteries and still with acceptable energy density, although at the low end of current Li-ion batteries. This is proven technology, with continued incremental improvement in manufacturing and design. I suspect that these batteries will take us into the mid-2030s, until the industry shifts over to something like solid state batteries.

The post Is Donut Lab’s Solid State Battery Legit? first appeared on NeuroLogica Blog.

New Space is a term now commonly used around the rocketry and satellite industries to indicate a new, speed focused model of development that takes its cue from the Silicon Valley mindset of “move fast and (hopefully don’t) break things.” Given that several of the founders of rocketry and satellite companies have a Silicon Valley background, that probably shouldn’t be a surprise, but the mindset has resulted in an exponential growth in the number of satellites in orbit, and also an exponential decrease in the cost of getting them to orbit. A new paper, recently published in pre-print form in arXiv from researchers at Schmidt Space and a variety of research institutes, lays out plans for the Lazuli Space Observatory, which hopes to apply that same mindset to flagship-level space observatory missions.

A study of the hearts of Greenland sharks has found that the long-lived deep-sea predator has massive accumulations of ageing markers, such as severe scarring, but this doesn't appear to affect their health or longevity

Well, folks, this is it, the last batch of wildlife photos I have. As for more, there is nada, zip, zilch, and bupkes in the queue.  It is very sad, isn’t it.

But today we have photos of otters from reader Christopher Moss. Christopher’s captions and IDs are indented, and you can enlarge the photos by clicking on them. The first batch was sent on December 29:

Just after the sun went down this evening I spotted a pair of otters on the other side of the pond. I assume they are Lontra canadensis, the North American river otter. They are about 80m away, and the photos were taken through a window. But when you’re desperate for readers’ wildlife photos, maybe they will do. The otters played in a small area of open water for a while and then I lost sight of them in the gloom. This is the third or fourth time I have seen otters in our pond (which is in northwest Nova Scotia, near the border with New Brunswick).

Eventually one otter came back up, and was then joined by a second:

One of the otters came back for a trout:

We’re arguing over whether there are three or four pups. I do have a still of five otters at once:

Here’s a video showing all five at once:

A few minutes later my son called out that they were all standing up looking at something, and – guess what? – this fellow was a few feet from them:

A generative AI system can now analyze blood cells with greater accuracy and confidence than human experts, detecting subtle signs of diseases like leukemia. It not only spots rare abnormalities but also recognizes its own uncertainty, making it a powerful support tool for clinicians.

Mars Express has captured stunning images of wind sculpted terrain near the planet’s equator, revealing how Martian winds act as a sandblaster across geological timescales. The spacecraft’s high resolution camera spotted amazing ridges called yardangs, features carved by sand carrying winds that extend tens of kilometres across the surface. These dramatic erosional features share the landscape with impact craters and ancient lava flows, creating a fusion of three different geological forces that together tell the story of Mars’s violent and dynamic past.

Astronomers have revealed a surprising diversity in the evolutionary paths of the universe’s most massive galaxies. Using multi-wavelength observations combining Keck Observatory spectroscopy with far infrared and radio data, researchers found that less than two billion years after the Big Bang, some ultramassive galaxies had already shut down star formation and shed their dust, while others continued building stars behind thick dusty veils.

Scientists have pulled back the curtain on one of the most extreme solar regions seen in decades, tracking it almost nonstop for three months as it unleashed powerful space weather. By combining views from two spacecraft—one near Earth and one orbiting the Sun—researchers followed a massive active region as it grew, twisted, and ultimately triggered the strongest geomagnetic storms since 2003.

At extreme pressures and temperatures, water becomes superionic — a solid that behaves partly like a liquid and conducts electricity. This unusual form is believed to shape the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune and may be the most common type of water in the solar system. New high-precision experiments show its atomic structure is far messier than expected, combining multiple crystal patterns instead of one clean arrangement. The finding reshapes models of icy planets both near and far.

At extreme pressures and temperatures, water becomes superionic — a solid that behaves partly like a liquid and conducts electricity. This unusual form is believed to shape the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune and may be the most common type of water in the solar system. New high-precision experiments show its atomic structure is far messier than expected, combining multiple crystal patterns instead of one clean arrangement. The finding reshapes models of icy planets both near and far.

Astronomers have discovered a crucial missing link in understanding how the Galaxy’s most common planets form. By studying four young, extraordinarily puffy planets orbiting a 20 million year old star, researchers have captured a rare snapshot of worlds actively transforming into super Earths and sub Neptunes. This discovery reveals that the universe’s most successful planets start as bloated giants before shrinking dramatically over billions of years, fundamentally changing our understanding of how planetary systems evolve.

If ghosts don't exist, then how do we account for all the ghost experiences that people have every day?

Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Like I said at the beginning, I’m not really keen on the idea of the mathematical universe. My own personal biggest objection stems from the whole point of occam’s razor: make things as simple as possible.