Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

IANDS Iran

@IranNDE

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

3,023subscribers

-3 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001020879295
TypeChannel
Username@IranNDE
CreatedBetween 1 December 2015 and 31 July 2016— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live15 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 15 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/IranNDE

Growth

3,0223,0263,0245 August 2026 — 3,026 subscribers6 August 2026 — 3,026 subscribers11 August 2026 — 3,022 subscribers15 August 2026 — 3,023 subscribers3,0235 August 202615 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 9 days, net -3. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 3,021–3,027 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
15 Aug 2026, 00:473,023+1
11 Aug 2026, 20:013,022-4
6 Aug 2026, 05:013,026no change
5 Aug 2026, 20:043,026first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 3 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 3 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
15.0%
avg views ÷ 3,023 subscribers
Avg views / post
454
9 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.13%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
9
of 20 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 7 of 9 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 1 August 2026
Posts held20 (3 July 20261 August 2026)
Views total4,085
Reactions total35
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken8 Aug 2026, 00:11 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
31s
Average length
31s

Measured directly from 1 video with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no mark.

Reaction mix

116 reactions across 17 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 85.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
9985.3%
👍119.48%
🔥32.59%
🕊21.72%
🙏10.862%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 17 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 116reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 3 July 2026 to 1 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

1 Aug 2026, 19:27 UTC224 views8 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @Near_Death

«جیمز رندی»؛ شعبده‌بازی غیرقابل‌اعتماد ✍️ احمد بهزادی نه‌تنها دلیلی برای اعتماد به جیمز رندی و «جایزۀ یک‌میلیون‌دلاری» مؤسسه‌ش وجود نداره، بلکه شواهدی وجود داره که حتی صداقت رندی رو به‌شدت زیر سؤال می‌بره. ماجرایی که در ادامه می‌خونید، تنها یک نمونه از این شواهده و البته حتی همین یک مورد به‌تنهایی برای زیرسؤال‌بردن کارهای یک نفر کفایت می‌کنه. توانایی تله‌پاتیک سگ‌ها سال 1998، دکتر روپرت شلدریک، زیست‌شناس و محقق ف

7👍1

31 Jul 2026, 22:40 UTC434 views9 reactionsread 8 August 2026

مرور زندگی در آستانهٔ مرگ؛ وقتی مرز میان «من» و «دیگری» فرومی‌ریزد تحقیقات دکتر بروس گریسون (استاد روان‌پزشکی و علوم اعصاب رفتاری دانشگاه ویرجینیا آمریکا) و دکتر کنث رینگ-روان‌شناس برجسته- خصوصا در IANDS، از پدیده‌ای شگفت‌انگیز در تجربیات نزدیک به مرگ (NDE) پرده برمی‌دارند: «مرور زندگی» (Life Review). اما این مرور، تماشای یک فیلمِ معمولی از گذشته نیست! در این حالت، فرد زندگی خود را از چشمِ تمام کسانی که تحت تأثیر او

9

30 Jul 2026, 22:43 UTC391 views7 reactionsread 8 August 2026

#روان‌شناسی_کاربردی #موج_سواری_بر_هوس یک مراقبه‌ی بنیادین و مهم؛ موج سواری بر هوس تکنیک موج‌سواری بر هوس (Urge Surfing) که توسط دکتر آلن مارلات (پژوهشگر حوزه اعتیاد) توسعه یافته، اگرچه در روان‌شناسی چیزی به نام «مطلقاً قوی‌ترین» وجود ندارد، اما برای مدیریت هوس‌های قدرتمندی مانند هوس‌های جنسی، یکی از کارآمدترین و علمی‌ترین ابزارهاست. دلیل قدرت این تکنیک این است که به جای تکیه بر «اراده» و «سرکوب» که نتایج‌شان همواره

6🙏1

22 Jul 2026, 08:52 UTC500 viewsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @The_Science_and_Theology_CenterFile

مرکز علم و الهیات؛ پژوهشکدهٔ مطالعات بنیادین علم و فناوری دانشگاه شهید بهشتی 🆔 @The_Science_and_Theology_Center

22 Jul 2026, 08:52 UTC475 views2 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @The_Science_and_Theology_Center

🔺آیا آگاهی با مکانیسم‌های مغز قابل توضیح است؟ گفت‌وگو با دکتر عبدالرضا ناصر مقدسی🔺 👤 مجری: میزبان برنامه در کانال یوتیوب سرشت (Seresht) 👤 مصاحبه‌شونده: دکتر عبدالرضا ناصر مقدسی 📘 رزومه مصاحبه‌شونده: متخصص بیماری‌های مغز و اعصاب (نورولوژیست)، پزشک متخصص با تمرکز ویژه بر درمان بیماران مبتلا به ام‌اس (MS)، پژوهشگر حوزه فلسفه ذهن و آگاهی، و مبدع نظریه «اسطوره‌شناسی عصبی تکاملی». این گفت‌وگوی عمیق میان‌رشته‌ای بر نقد تقل

👍2

20 Jul 2026, 13:38 UTC488 viewsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @The_Science_and_Theology_CenterFile

پاسخ به ١٠ پرسش مشهور در فضای مجازی راجع به تحقیقات peer reviewed مشاهدات خارج بدن تاییدشده در تجربیات نزدیک به مرگ (به صورت رنگی همراه با اسکرین شات و هایلایت دقیق متون داخل منابع علمی) مرکز علم و الهیات؛ پژوهشکدهٔ مطالعات بنیادین علم و فناوری دانشگاه شهید بهشتی 🆔 @The_Science_and_Theology_Center

18 Jul 2026, 13:21 UTC554 views2 reactionsread 8 August 2026
File

#خلاصه_کتاب خلاصه‌ی کتاب در اسلایدهای رنگی و پاورپوینتی بالا به انگلیسی. گروه وابسته به انجمن بین المللی تحقیقات تجارب نزدیک به مرگ (IANDS) در ایران DNDSI.ir Join → @IranNDE

2

18 Jul 2026, 13:19 UTC543 views5 reactionsread 8 August 2026

کتاب (The Self Does Not Die: Verified Paranormal Phenomena from Near-Death Experiences) یا «خود نمی‌میرد: پدیده‌های فراهنجار تأییدشده در تجارب نزدیک‌به‌مرگ» یک اثر پژوهشی در حوزه تجارب نزدیک‌به‌مرگ (NDE) است که توسط انجمن بین‌المللی مطالعات نزدیک‌به‌مرگ (IANDS) منتشر شده است. ✍️ نویسندگان 👤 تیتوس ریواس (Titus Rivas) – روان‌شناس نظری، فیلسوف و محقق پاراسایکولوژی. 👤 آنی دیرون (Anny Dirven) – پژوهشگر هلندی در حوزه NDE.

4👍1

18 Jul 2026, 13:17 UTC476 views2 reactionsread 8 August 2026
File

گروه وابسته به انجمن بین المللی تحقیقات تجارب نزدیک به مرگ (IANDS) در ایران DNDSI.ir Join → @IranNDE

2

15 Jul 2026, 11:27 UTC677 views5 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Video

گروه وابسته به انجمن بین المللی تحقیقات تجارب نزدیک به مرگ (IANDS) در ایران DNDSI.ir Join → @IranNDE

5

14 Jul 2026, 02:16 UTC407 views9 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @Near_Death

💠 آیا با هیپنوتیزم می‌شه تجربۀ نزدیک به مرگ داشت؟ بیایم یه نگاه مختصر به سه تحقیق مرتبط با این موضوع بندازیم: ▪️ تحقیقی که دکتر بروس گریسون (پدر تحقیقات تجربۀ نزدیک به مرگ) و پروفسور ماسایوکی اوکادو (پارسایکولوژیست ژاپنی) در سال 2018 منتشر کردن توی این تحقیق، افرادی رو که تحت هیپنوتیزم بازگشت به زندگی گذشته، مرگ رو تجربه کرده بودن (تقریباً مشابه هیپنوتیزم دکتر مایکل نیوتن)، با افرادی که تجربۀ نزدیک به مرگ داشتن مق

8👍1

14 Jul 2026, 02:13 UTC381 views8 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @Near_Death

بررسی ادعا: «تجربه‌های نزدیک به مرگی که هنگام ”مرگ بالینی“ رخ نمی‌دهند، نمی‌توانند دلیلی بر هوشیاری مستقل از مغز باشند!» ▪️ این ادعا حتماً نادرسته! باید توجه کنیم تجربۀ نزدیک به مرگ شامل چندین عنصره که هرکدوم از اون‌ها مدرکی در تأیید هوشیاری مستقل از بدن هستن و لازم هم نیست هنگام مرگ بالینی یا یک وضعیت خاص مغزی اتفاق بیفتن. ▪️ مثلاً «مشاهدات تأییدشدۀ خارج از بدن» اگر حتی در عادی‌ترین وضعیت مغزی و جسمانی هم اتفاق بی

8

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @IranNDE. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 739,532 of 1,345,403entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Republished by

Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 15 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“IANDS Iran” (@IranNDE), 3,023 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/IranNDE.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.