خدایا یا من پولدار شم یا آذرخش مکری از این میم معروف استفاده کنه. خدا: @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
🎃6❤5💯1🔥1😈1

Channel
@Psycho_dive
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
629subscribers
+1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002632971622 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @Psycho_dive |
| Description | اینستاگرام : https://www.instagram.com/psycho.dive?igsh=MTl3M2VlYjF6YjEzZg== کست باکس : https://castbox.fm/va/5312283 |
| Created | Between 1 March 2025 and 31 July 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 8 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| On Telegram | t.me/Psycho_dive |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 02:50 | 629 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:47 | 629 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:14 | 628 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 2 January 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 29 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (2 January 2026 – 29 July 2026) |
| Views total | 1,766 |
| Reactions total | 30 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 02:50 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 8 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
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.
142 reactions across 18 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 60.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 86 | 60.6% | |
| 👍 | 18 | 12.7% | |
| 🔥 | 11 | 7.75% | |
| 🎃 | 8 | 5.63% | |
| 😢 | 6 | 4.23% | |
| 🤷♂ | 4 | 2.82% | |
| 💯 | 3 | 2.11% | |
| 🌚 | 2 | 1.41% | |
| 😈 | 2 | 1.41% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.704% | |
| 🤨 | 1 | 0.704% |
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 142reactions 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 2 January 2026 to 29 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.
خدایا یا من پولدار شم یا آذرخش مکری از این میم معروف استفاده کنه. خدا: @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
🎃6❤5💯1🔥1😈1
من خودمم اولین بار تو کتاب شادمانی درونی از مارتین سلیگمن (پدر روانشناسی مثبت نگر) همچین چیزی را خواندم و یه مدت هم عمل کردم و فکر میکنم واقعا اثر داشت، نیازم نیست فقط به خدا اعتقاد داشته باشید بلکه تشکر از یک موجود برتر و حتی اگر مثلا چیزی و به عنوان موجود برتر یا به قول بعضیها طبیعت و امثالهم را قبول ندارید، این شکر گذاری میتواند به عنوان قدردانی باشد، من خودم معمولا گزینههایی و مینوشتم که اگر آنرا نداشتم چقد…
❤6
این پژوهش با بررسی ۱۹۲ شرکت کننده در طول ۱۰ هفته نشان داد نوشتن روزانه یا هفتگی شکرگذاری نعمتها (در مقایسه با گرفتاریها) باعث افزایش عواطف مثبت، خوشبینی، کمک به دیگران و بهبود خواب میشود؛ تأثیر آن حتی توسط همسران نیز تأیید شد. تحلیل آماری نشان داد که خودِ حسِ شکرگزاری، واسطهی اصلی افزایش شادی است، نه مثبت اندیشی عمومی. @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
❤10
در این کارآزمایی، محرومیت ۳۰ دقیقهای استفاده از موبایل پیش از خواب بهمدت ۴ هفته، موجب بهبود چشمگیر کیفیت خواب، کاهش زمان بهخوابرفتن و برانگیختگی پیشخواب، افزایش عاطفهی مثبت و تقویت حافظهی کاری در دانشجویان دارای اختلال خواب شد. @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
❤5
سلام! ⚜ما در حال یک پژوهش درباره شکلگیری اعتماد در نوجوانی و اوایل بزرگسالی هستیم هستیم و میخوایم نقش تجربیات کودکی رو در این زمینه بررسی کنیم. ⚠️این تحقیق برای رده سنی ۱۸ تا ۲۴ سال طراحی شده. 💠تکمیل پرسشنامه فقط چند دقیقه از وقتت رو میگیره و جوابهات کاملاً محرمانه میمونه. خیلی ممنون میشیم اگه با تکمیلش، ما رو در این پژوهش همراهی کنی! 🙏 لینک پرسشنامه : https://survey.porsline.ir/s/dG8AWP9Y
❤1
سلام این یک پژوهش برای پایان نامه یکی از دوستانم، ممنون میشم زحمت بکشید و پر کنید.
❤5
تحقیق روی ۴۰۶ بزرگسال سالم نشان داد که احساس حمایت شدن از سوی دیگران و بغل کردن، خطر ابتلا به ویروس سرماخوردگی را کم میکنند و حتی در صورت ابتلا نیز شدت علائم بیماری را کاهش میدهند. منبع @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
❤6🔥6
امروزه دانشمندان حتی بر این باورند که ناسزاهاو فحشها در بخش متفاوتی از مغز ذخیره میشوند. بیشتر تواناییهای گفتاری از کارکردهای مغز عالی به شمار میآیند؛ یعنی ناحیهی قشر مخ (cerebral cortex) که علاوه بر گفتار، اعمال ارادی و تفکر منطقی را نیز کنترل میکند. اما ناسزاها و فحشها در مغز پایینی، یعنی دستگاه لیمبیک (limbic system) ذخیره میشوند؛ بخشی که بهطور کلی مسئول هیجانها، واکنش «جنگ یا گریز» و عملکرد دستگاه عصبی …
❤7👍2
ناسزاها و فحشها به انسان کمک میکنند تا درد جسمانی را بهتر تحمل کند. در یک آزمایش اخیر، افرادی که هنگام فرو بردن دست خود در آب بسیار سرد، ناسزایی مانند "shit" را تکرار میکردند، توانستند مدت بیشتری دست خود را در آب نگه دارند؛ در مقایسه با کسانی که واژهای خنثی مانند "shoot" را تکرار میکردند. 📚HOLY SHIT A Brief History of Swearing 🖋Melissa Mohr @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
❤7🤷♂3🎃2⚡1🌚1
در پس تمامی رویکردهای مدرن به خوشبختی و موفقیت، فلسفه ساده ای وجود دارد، و آن تمرکز بر خوب پیش رفتن امور است. اما از زمان نخستین فیلسوفان یونان و روم رویکرد مخالفی مطرح شده است: اینکه تلاش بی وقفه ما برای خوشحالی یا دستیابی به اهدافی معین دقیقاً همان چیزی است که ما را درمانده و از اهدافمان دور میکند و این تلاش مدام ما برای حذف یا نادیده گرفتن امور منفی - مانند عدم اعتماد به نفس، تردید ناکامی ناراحتی، خود، موجب می شود…
❤5
زیگموند فروید این گونه نظر داده است: اگر کسب دانش در مورد ناخودآگاه به خودی خود مهم بود کافی بود بیماران کتاب بخوانند یا در سخنرانی ها شرکت کنند. او علاوه بر این خاطرنشان کرد که توصیف ناخودآگاه همان قدر بر نشانههای روان نژندی تاثیر دارد که پخش کردن کارتهای صورت غذا در زمان قحطی، بر گرسنگی اثر میکند. 📚اصول رواندرمانی 🖋واینر، بورناشتاین @Psycho_dive|سایکو دایو
👍6❤2🔥1
دوست دارید راجب اهمالکاری(انجام ندادن یا تعویق کارهایی که باید انجام بدهیم) با هم صحبت کنیم ؟
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @Psycho_dive. 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.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
دوست دارید راجب اهمالکاری(انجام ندادن یا تعویق کارهایی که باید انجام بدهیم) با هم صحبت کنیم ؟
Shares as published. 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 2 January 2026 to 29 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 — 1,114,847 of 1,336,469entries 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.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
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.
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 8 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Psycho dive” (@Psycho_dive), 629 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Psycho_dive.
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.