Channel
@nojom3
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
687subscribers
+30 since we began measuring on 28 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001942617433 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @nojom3 |
| Created | Between 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 28 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 14 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 8 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 14 October 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/nojom3 |
Science — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 20 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 14 Oct 2026, 22:36 | 687 | +10 |
| 7 Oct 2026, 16:16 | 677 | +3 |
| 27 Sept 2026, 10:35 | 674 | +10 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 01:18 | 664 | +3 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 09:57 | 661 | +1 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 03:34 | 660 | +3 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 13:15 | 657 | no change |
| 28 Aug 2026, 13:01 | 657 | first reading |
15 posts held, back to 13 February 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 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 15 posts for this entry, the most recent from 9 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Measured directly from 9 videos 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.
157 reactions across 15 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 59 | 37.6% | |
| 👍 | 45 | 28.7% | |
| 😁 | 22 | 14.0% | |
| 💯 | 18 | 11.5% | |
| 👎 | 9 | 5.73% | |
| 👌 | 2 | 1.27% | |
| 🆒 | 1 | 0.637% | |
| 🤯 | 1 | 0.637% |
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 15 of the 15 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 157 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 15 most recent posts we hold, published 13 February 2026 to 9 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.
شرودینگر کسی بود که علاوه بر پیچیده کردن فیزیک کوانتوم، به تبیینش هم کمک کرد.تنها کسی که از آزمایش گربه ی شرودینگر خبر نداره احتمالا مامان‌بزرگه منه.ولی بطور خلاصه این آزمایش ذهنی برای تبیین اصل عدم قطعیت کوانتومی است. طبق این اصل الکترون مسیر قابل پیش‌بینی نداره. پس ما فیزیکدان ها چطور میخوایم رفتار ذرات در حالت کوانتومی رو پیش‌بینی کنیم؟ فرض کن یک الکترون داخل یک «جعبه» گیر افتاده است؛ به این مدل ذره در چاه پتانسیل…
🔥11👍1
☀️شروع و پایان خورشید در مرکز خورشید، فرایند همجوشی هسته‌ای (Nuclear Fusion) رخ می‌دهد؛ فرایندی که منبع اصلی تولید نور، دما و انرژی در منظومه شمسی است. تحت فشار گرانشی عظیم و دمای بسیار بالای مرکز.در این چرخه، چهار هسته هیدروژن (پروتون) طی یک سری مراحل به یک هسته هلیوم-۴ تبدیل می‌شوند در ابتدای فرایند دوتریوم تشکیل میشود.به اینصورت که دو تا پروتون هیدروژن به هم جوش می‌خورند و یکی از این دو پروتون تبدیل به نوترون می…
🔥10
Carl Sagan
🔥9😁5💯2
گاهی وقت ها فقط باید به ندای طبیعت گوش بدیم. Can you hear it? 🆔@nojom3
🔥11
Photo, posted without a caption
😁17
در هفته‌ای که گذشت، شایان اویس‌قرن به پاس مشارکت گسترده‌اش در نظریه الگوریتم‌ها، مدال چرتکه (IMU Abacus Medal 2026)، معتبرترین جایزه در علوم کامپیوتر نظری، را دریافت کرد. مبارک او، خانواده عزیزش و همه ایرانی‌ها. مجله کوانتا در اینجا نوشته خوبی در توضیح کار شایان منتشر کرده. شایان استاد دانشگاه واشینگتن و متولد ۱۳۶۵ در اصفهان است. ---------------------------------------------- @sitpor | sitpor.org instagram.com/s…
🔥6
♾تراشه یا چیپ که به آن [ IC] هم می‌گن، در واقع مغز فیزیکی تمام دستگاه‌های الکترونیکی ماست؛ یک قطعه بسیار کوچک، معمولاً به اندازه یک ناخن، که از جنس سیلیکون (همون ماسه ی فرآوری شده ی خودمون)ساخته میشود. روی این قطعه کوچک، میلیاردها کلید مینیاتوری به نام ترانزیستور قرار داره که با قطع و وصل کردن جریان برق، محاسبات ریاضی را با سرعت نور انجام می‌دهند.و شما میتونید باهاش در امتحاناتتون موفق بشید. در وهله اول پردازنده مر…
👍11
I think that there is a moral to this story, namely that it is more important to have beauty in one's equations that to have them fit experiment. مهم تر است که یک معادله دارای زیبایی ریاضی باشد،تا اینکه با داده های آزمایشگاهی مطابقت داشته باشد. Paul Dirac Scientific American, May 1963.
💯8👍2👎2🔥1
🎥 سخنرانی ریچارد فاینمن در پاسخ به پرسش از امکان اینکه روزی ماشین‌ها بتوانند مانند انسان تفکر کرده و حتی از آنان باهوش‌تر باشند فاینمن در این جلسهٔ غیررسمی در قالب پرسش و پاسخ نظراتی در باب رایانه‌ها و امکان ذهن‌مندی کامپیوتر و ماشین ارائه می‌دهد که با مقایسهٔ آن با توانایی امروزهٔ مدل‌های زبانی می‌توان به نکات جالب توجهی نظر کرد. بخشی از پیش‌بینی‌ها و نظرات او در باب این مسئله هنوز هم قابل تأمل و بخشی دیگر شاید ف…
👍6👎1🤯1🆒1
From today, science is dead. Or maybe not! Some reflections on how AI is changing the very practice of research or any other creative endeavour. 🔗 Read more here. ---------------------------------------------- @sitpor | sitpor.org instagram.com/sitpor_media
👍9👎1
⚜اسپیس‌ایکس در تاریخ 22 می دوازدهمین پرواز آزمایشی یکپارچه استارشیپ (IFT-12) را با پیکربندی نسخه 3 از پایگاه استاربیس در تگزاس انجام داد. ⚜این پرتاب ساعت 5:30 بعدازظهر به وقت محلی صورت گرفت و نخستین استقرار محموله از یک استارشیپ در فضا را رقم زد. ⚜در این ماموریت، بوستر سوپر هوی (Booster 19) با 33 موتور رپتور 3 روشن شد، اما یک موتور در حین صعود خاموشی زودهنگام داشت. پس از جدایش داغ، بوستر نتوانست بوست‌بک کامل را اجر…
👍4👎1
⚜عذر خواهی بابت تاخیر در پوشش این رویداد مهم... 📃@Cataphract1
👍3👎1
Showing the 12 most recent of 15 posts we hold for @nojom3. 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.
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.
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.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 8 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 14 October 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“the Theory of Everything” (@nojom3), 687 subscribers as measured 14 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/nojom3.
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.