Channel
@science
On this record: Topic · Previous handles · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
120,796subscribers
+283 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 100,000–316,228.
| Telegram ID | -1001091087098 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @science |
| Created | 25 November 2016 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 10 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/science |
Science — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 9 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% 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.
Recorded in 2019 as “Science” — the title held for this same channel (matched by Telegram id, not by handle) in the Pushshift Telegram Dataset, a third-party archive captured in 2019-2020, years before this register made its own first observation. CC BY 4.0, Baumgartner, Zannettou, Squire & Blackburn (2020), Zenodo. A third party’s dated snapshot, not a measurement this register made itself.
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 22:05 | 120,796 | -29 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 20:24 | 120,825 | -26 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 18:27 | 120,851 | +120 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 21:53 | 120,731 | -1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 23:18 | 120,732 | +146 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 00:26 | 120,586 | +12 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 03:18 | 120,574 | +63 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 06:35 | 120,511 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 01:32 | 120,513 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 00:59 | 120,513 | first reading |
23 posts held, back to 12 July 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 17 pagesof 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 12 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 23 (12 July 2026 – 12 August 2026) |
| Views total | 151,650 |
| Reactions total | 1,138 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Aug 2026, 18:21 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.
Measured directly from 2 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.
1,375 reactions across 23 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 412 | 30.0% | |
| 🔥 | 321 | 23.3% | |
| 😁 | 242 | 17.6% | |
| 👀 | 214 | 15.6% | |
| ⚡ | 135 | 9.82% | |
| 🕊 | 51 | 3.71% |
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 23 of the 23 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 1,375reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 2026 to 12 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @science. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 23 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 12 July 2026 to 12 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
👁️ Scientists Have Mapped the Wiring Behind Human High-Resolution Vision Researchers have created the first complete cell-by-cell and synapse-level wiring map of the human fovea — the pinhead-sized region of the retina that lets us read, recognize faces and see fine detail in color. The team reconstructed roughly 3,000 neurons and more than 300,000 connections, tracing how signals move through this tiny patch of ne…
🔥11👍5
🔴 A Rock From Mars Just Filled a 2-Billion-Year Hole in the Planet’s History Scientists have dated an unusual Martian meteorite to 1.273 billion years old — placing it almost exactly inside a huge missing chapter in our geological record of Mars. The meteorite, called NWA 13441, was discovered in Algeria in 2019. Most Martian volcanic meteorites of its type are either younger than about 600 million years or around …
🔥15👍7⚡1
🛰 We May Be Building Satellite Constellations Too Large for Earth’s Orbit A new analysis suggests that some satellite megaconstellations could cross a dangerous threshold where collisions create debris faster than Earth’s atmosphere can remove it — potentially triggering a runaway increase in space junk. The study introduces the idea of a “critical size” for a satellite constellation. Above that point, even if indi…
👍18🔥6👀3
📡 6G May Be Able to Detect People Through Walls — And Privacy Experts Are Alarmed The next generation of mobile networks won’t just transmit data. Under development for the 2030s, 6G is expected to integrate Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) — a technology that combines wireless communications with radar-like sensing. According to Germany’s Data Protection Conference (Datenschutzkonferenz), ISAC could all…
👀33🔥27👍8🕊6😁5
🔭 NASA Discovers a “Wandering” Supermassive Black Hole Devouring a Star Far from Any Galactic Center Astronomers have observed something never before seen in optical light: a supermassive black hole tearing apart a star more than 30,000 light-years from the center of its host galaxy — far from where such giants are normally found. The event, designated TDE 2025abcr, was first detected in November 2025 by the Zwicky…
🔥24👍7👀5😁4🕊3
🔭 The Largest Eye on Earth Is Rising Above the Atacama At an altitude of 3,046 metres on Cerro Armazones in Chile’s Atacama Desert, engineers are building the most powerful optical telescope ever attempted: ESO’s Extremely Large Telescope, or ELT. Its primary mirror will span an astonishing 39 metres — far too large to manufacture as a single piece. Instead, it will function as one perfectly synchronised surface ma…
🔥41👍15⚡9👀7😁7
👀 “You’ve been spotted.” NASA’s Curiosity rover was captured from orbit by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) as it continued its journey across the Martian surface.
👍27👀19😁8🔥6
🧠 An Ordinary Laptop Just Solved a Quantum Problem That Challenged a Quantum Computer Last year, researchers using D-Wave’s quantum annealer argued that a particularly difficult quantum simulation was beyond the reach of classical computers. Now physicists at the Flatiron Institute have shown otherwise. Using tensor networks together with belief propagation—an algorithm first developed in the 1980s—they reproduced…
😁18👍15
👁️ Your Eyes May Have Evolved From an Ancient “Cyclops” Organ Every vertebrate eye — including yours — may trace its origins to a single light-sensitive organ that sat in the middle of the head of a distant ancestor nearly 600 million years ago. In a new Current Biology study, researchers from Lund University and the University of Sussex propose that an early worm-like ancestor lost its paired eyes after adopting a…
⚡18🔥11😁11👍8👀2
📊 The U-Curve of Happiness: Why Life Often Gets Better After 50 For decades, the “midlife crisis” was dismissed as little more than a cultural stereotype. But large-scale research suggests it reflects a real statistical pattern. Economist David Blanchflower (Dartmouth College) analyzed well-being data from 145 countries, controlling for income, education, employment, and marital status. Published in the Journal of Po…
👍30😁10👀6🕊6
🧬 AI Discovers a Natural Peptide That Could Rival Ozempic Researchers at Stanford Medicine have used artificial intelligence to identify a naturally occurring human peptide that suppresses appetite and promotes weight loss in mice—while avoiding the major side effects commonly associated with GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic. The newly discovered molecule, called BRP, is only 12 amino acids long. Yet in early laboratory ex…
👍26🔥9😁9⚡4
🦷 Scientists May Have Found a Way to Regrow Tooth Enamel For decades, dentists have faced a frustrating reality: once tooth enamel is lost, it never naturally grows back. Researchers at the University of Nottingham may have found a way to change that. In a study published in Nature Communications, the team developed a protein-based biomaterial that mimics the way enamel forms during early childhood—the only time ou…
👍38🔥13⚡9
Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @science. 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 — 38,526 of 1,151,006entries 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.
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.
Named by 11 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.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Science in telegram” (@science), 120,796 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/science.
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.