Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

از نورون تا هوش ◇---<

@Physics_Daily

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

4,406subscribers

-8 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001136071431
TypeChannel
Username@Physics_Daily
CreatedBetween 1 June 2017 and 31 August 2020— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held5
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/Physics_Daily

Growth

4,4064,4144,4106 August 2026 — 4,414 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,414 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,413 subscribers9 August 2026 — 4,409 subscribers12 August 2026 — 4,406 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
5 measurements spanning 6 days, net -8. 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 4,405–4,415 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 13:374,406-3
9 Aug 2026, 10:314,409-4
6 Aug 2026, 20:204,413-1
6 Aug 2026, 04:044,414no change
6 Aug 2026, 03:534,414first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 22 June 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 6 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
35.4%
avg views ÷ 4,406 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,560
6 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.92%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
7
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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 28 July 2026
Posts held20 (22 June 202628 July 2026)
Views total9,347
Reactions total366
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken8 Aug 2026, 18:16 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
14s
Average length
14s

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

756 reactions across 18 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
38050.3%
🔥12516.5%
👍9512.6%
❤‍🔥8411.1%
😍537.01%
💯131.72%
🎉60.794%

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 18 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 756reactions 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 22 June 2026 to 28 July 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

28 Jul 2026, 19:46 UTC797 views144 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

تا حالا دوستی داشتید که زودگیرتر باشه؟ زودتر یاد بگیره؟ آره: ❤️ نه: 👍 اپیزود اول پادکست عجب چیزی بشه.

120👍19💯5

27 Jul 2026, 04:24 UTC≈1,010 views96 reactionsread 8 August 2026

خبر خبر 🔥 بازنشرهاتون انگیزه زیادی به من داد. برای همین تصمیم گرفتم کار رو به پادکست تبدیل کنم. 🥹 اسم پادکست: از نورون تا هوش مرتبط‌تر با زندگی روزمره خواهد بود، لحنش صمیمی‌تر و کمتر رسمی خواهد بود، اپیزودها کوتاه‌تر خواهد بود، اما به هیچ‌وجه از عمق ماجرا کم نمی‌کنیم. همچنان قوی‌ترین مقالات و یافته‌های علوم اعصاب نظری و هوش مصنوعی رو بررسی خواهیم کرد. یادتون نره که این پادکست رو برای شما می‌سازم. نمونه خارجی هم

65🔥12😍12🎉5👍2

26 Jul 2026, 18:07 UTCviews —

از نورون تا هوش ◇---< pinned «🥹 مبحث بعدی رو شما انتخاب کنید.»

24 Jul 2026, 23:04 UTC≈1,310 views21 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Poll

🥹 مبحث بعدی رو شما انتخاب کنید.

  1. مغز چرا نمی‌تونه بهترین الگوریتم ریاضیاتیِ یادگیری رو استفاده کنه؟ و چطور با این محدودیت کنار میاد؟44%
  2. فرایادگیری چیه؟ می‌شه یاد گرفت که کدوم شبکه عصبی بهتر از همه یاد می‌گیره و اون رو استفاده کرد؟64%

The shares total 108%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.

15💯3🔥3

20 Jul 2026, 19:47 UTC≈2,570 views56 reactionsread 8 August 2026
File

🧠 فردیت و یگانگی در شبکه‌های عصبی ذهنِ هوشِ مصنوعی می‌تواند شبیه ذهنِ ما باشد؟ بررسی کامل مقاله بالا به صورت صوتی و نوشتاری (لینک نوشتاری) تقدیم‌تون شد. 🙏 این پست رو برای علاقمندان مغز، هوش مصنوعی، فیزیک و ریاضیات بفرستید. @physics_daily | از نورون تا هوش

❤‍🔥3014👍10🔥2

20 Jul 2026, 02:32 UTC≈2,120 views32 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

🧠 فردیت و یگانگی در شبکه‌های عصبی— ذهنِ هوش مصنوعی می‌تواند شبیه ذهنِ ما باشد؟ مثل قبل، اینجا خلاصه رو می‌گم و در پست بعدی بررسی مقاله رو به صورت فایل صوتی و نوشتاری تقدیم می‌کنم. آیا فعالیت نورونی مغز من و شما، پس از یادگیری کاری یکسان، مثلا شنای قورباغه، به هم شبیه می‌شود؟ آیا شبکه‌های عصبی زیستی و مصنوعی راه‌های مشابهی برای حل مساله یکسان پیدا می‌کنند؟ پژوهشگران حدود سه هزار شبکه عصبی مصنوعی را زیر ذره‌بین مطا

🔥189👍3😍2

7 Jul 2026, 18:57 UTC≈2,300 viewsread 8 August 2026
Poll

حدس شما چیه؟ درباره سوال بالا

  1. فعالیت مشابه5%
  2. فعالیت متفاوت16%
  3. شباهت سطحی و تفاوت عمقی48%
  4. شباهت عمقی و تفاوت سطحی32%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

7 Jul 2026, 18:55 UTC≈2,280 views13 reactionsread 8 August 2026

❓ حدس شما چیه؟ من و شما در کلاس مشترکی شرکت می‌کنیم و یاد می‌گیریم شنای قورباغه کنیم، یا فلان انتگرال رو بگیریم. سوال: اگر به اون بخش از مغزهامون نگاه کنیم که یادگیری مورد نظر درش انجام شده، آیا فعالیت عصبی مشابهی می‌بینیم؟ یا مثلا می‌بینیم شبکه‌های نورونی ما دو راه کاملا متفاوت برای حل مساله واحد پیدا کرده‌اند؟ همین سوال رو می‌شه درباره هوش مصنوعی هم پرسید. فعلا نظرسنجی کنیم تا بعد خلاصه مقاله رو تقدیم کنم. @ph

9😍3💯1

7 Jul 2026, 02:30 UTC≈1,970 views33 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

🔥 مقاله بعدی که به زودی بررسی می‌کنیم. @physics_daily | از نورون تا هوش

🔥18👍6😍54

5 Jul 2026, 05:46 UTC≈3,750 views57 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Voice message

🧠 مغز چطور پیش‌زمینه را در تصمیم‌گیری لحاظ می‌کند؟ بررسی کامل‌تر مقاله بالا به صورت صوتی و نوشتاری (لینک نوشتاری) تقدیم‌تون شد. 🙏 این کانال رو به علاقمندان مغز، هوش مصنوعی، فیزیک و ریاضیات معرفی کنید. @physics_daily | از نورون تا هوش

36👍10❤‍🔥4🔥4😍2💯1

5 Jul 2026, 04:52 UTC≈2,130 views43 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

🧠 مغز چطور پیش‌زمینه را در تصمیم‌گیری لحاظ می‌کند؟ صدای انفجار می‌شنوید! اگر چهارشنبه‌سوری باشد، ممکن است لبخند بزنید. اگر نباشد، شاید حدس بزنید جنگ شروع شده و استرس بگیرید یا به شعف بیایید. مغز شما به پیش‌زمینه (کانتکست) اهمیت می‌دهد. اما دقیقا چطور این کار را می‌کند؟ قبلا تصور می‌شد که مغز اطلاعاتِ نامربوط به پیش‌زمینه را (مثل حضور دسته کلاغ‌ها در آسمان حین رانندگی) در نواحی حسی اولیه فیلتر و حذف می‌کند. درعوض

❤‍🔥218👍8🔥3😍3

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @Physics_Daily. 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.

Polls

The 2 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

24 Jul 2026, 23:04 UTCAnonymous Poll273 voters

🥹 مبحث بعدی رو شما انتخاب کنید.

  1. مغز چرا نمی‌تونه بهترین الگوریتم ریاضیاتیِ یادگیری رو استفاده کنه؟ و چطور با این محدودیت کنار میاد؟44%
  2. فرایادگیری چیه؟ می‌شه یاد گرفت که کدوم شبکه عصبی بهتر از همه یاد می‌گیره و اون رو استفاده کرد؟64%

The shares total 108%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.

7 Jul 2026, 18:57 UTCAnonymous Poll296 voters

حدس شما چیه؟ درباره سوال بالا

  1. فعالیت مشابه5%
  2. فعالیت متفاوت16%
  3. شباهت سطحی و تفاوت عمقی48%
  4. شباهت عمقی و تفاوت سطحی32%

Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 22 June 2026 to 28 July 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 184,507 of 1,169,250entries 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

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 1 registered channel — 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.

Named by

Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.

Names

Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.

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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“از نورون تا هوش ◇---<” (@Physics_Daily), 4,406 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Physics_Daily.

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.