⭐️ به زودی این پست حذف خواهد شد لطفاً زودتر وارد شوید . 〰❤️ 🧤 [از این فرصت استفاده کنید .] 👨💻

Channel
Science Magazine
@science_magazine
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
22,218subscribers
+878 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001064896577 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @science_magazine |
| Description | 🌲 مجله علم. جایی برای فهمیدن، نه فقط شنیدن. علم راست آزموده ، با احترام به خرد ایرانی و دقت پژوهشی. ✉️ @Persian_Scientist |
| Created | Between 1 May 2016 and 28 February 2017 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 29 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 36 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 29 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/science_magazine |
Topic
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 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 93% 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.
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 29 Sept 2026, 19:16 | 22,218 | +96 |
| 17 Sept 2026, 21:39 | 22,122 | +203 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 19:55 | 21,919 | -14 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 02:58 | 21,933 | +4 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 06:55 | 21,929 | -35 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 04:00 | 21,964 | +180 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 21:01 | 21,784 | -34 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 10:00 | 21,818 | -23 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 19:28 | 21,841 | +178 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 18:26 | 21,663 | -8 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 18:16 | 21,671 | +2 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 17:45 | 21,669 | -4 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 18:54 | 21,673 | -4 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 20:33 | 21,677 | -3 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 23:02 | 21,680 | -13 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 23:49 | 21,693 | +73 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 00:42 | 21,620 | +79 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 01:43 | 21,541 | +5 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 16:22 | 21,536 | -6 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 05:07 | 21,542 | first reading |
Engagement
268 posts held, back to 3 August 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 68 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 5.47%
- avg views ÷ 22,218 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 1,220
- 54 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 1.30%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 54
- of 268 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 53 of 54 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 29 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 268 (3 August 2026 – 29 September 2026) |
| Views total | 65,627 |
| Reactions total | 848 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 30 Sept 2026, 05:33 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
- Photos
- ≈5,090
- Videos
- ≈2,330
- Links
- ≈4,090
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 30 September 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
- Video runtime
- 1h 24m
- Average length
- 4m 40s
Measured directly from 18 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.
Reaction mix
6,751 reactions across 247 posts, in 29 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 43.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 2,917 | 43.2% | |
| 👍 | 2,095 | 31.0% | |
| 👏 | 366 | 5.42% | |
| 🔥 | 207 | 3.07% | |
| 😍 | 180 | 2.67% | |
| 😁 | 145 | 2.15% | |
| 💔 | 117 | 1.73% | |
| 👌 | 112 | 1.66% | |
| 🤣 | 104 | 1.54% | |
| 😢 | 80 | 1.19% | |
| 👎 | 57 | 0.844% | |
| 😭 | 54 | 0.8% | |
| 😨 | 47 | 0.696% | |
| 😱 | 44 | 0.652% | |
| 🤔 | 36 | 0.533% | |
| ⚡ | 35 | 0.518% | |
| 🤯 | 29 | 0.43% | |
| 😐 | 22 | 0.326% | |
| 🤓 | 19 | 0.281% | |
| 🥰 | 18 | 0.267% | |
| 9 further kinds | 67 | 0.992% |
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 266 of the 268 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 7,309 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 268 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 29 September 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.
Telegram Stars
- Stars received
- 2
- across the posts below
- Posts paid on
- 2
- of 267 we hold a reading for · 0.7%
- Most on one post
- 1
- single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @science_magazine. 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 268 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 3 August 2026 to 29 September 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.
Recent posts
« ۳ سال طول کشید تا این کانال هارو پیدا کردم » ⬅️ در حوزه های: 🔹 سینما 🥢 😐 فلسفه 👠 موسیقی🥢 🌟 ادبیات 🌌 نقاشی 🥢 🧠 علمی 🌻این پست تبلیغاتی نیست... "پیوستن به مجموعه"
❤1
ویدئویی شگفت انگیز از جدا شدن ماهواره های استارلینک از سفینه مادر. 🆔 @science_magazine
❤17😍2
🧠 مغز قبل از یک تصمیم سخت، واقعاً بین «ریسک کن» و «احتیاط کن» کشمکش دارد! وقتی بین دو انتخاب گیر میکنیم؛ مثلاً یک فرصت جذاب اما پرریسک را قبول کنیم یا سراغ گزینه امنتر برویم، چه اتفاقی در مغز میافتد؟ پژوهشگران این فرایند را این بار مستقیماً در مغز انسان بررسی کردند. آنها فعالیت الکتریکی مغز ۶ نفر را که به دلیل درمان صرع یا برخی شرایط روانپزشکی الکترودهایی در مغزشان داشتند، ثبت کردند. شرکتکنندگان در یک بازی کا…
👍7❤5
🔬 دوربین آینده شاید اصلاً «دوربین» نباشد! تصور کنید یک تصویر رنگی و دقیق را به جای یک دوربین بزرگ، فقط با یک فیبر نوری بسیار باریک ثبت کنیم! پژوهشگران در یک مطالعه تازه در مجله Nature Communications روشی ساختهاند که میتواند اطلاعات پیچیده مربوط به رنگ و جهت نور را از طریق تنها یک فیبر نوری دریافت و سپس با محاسبات بازسازی کند. این سیستم به جای استفاده از میلیونها پیکسل مثل دوربینهای معمولی، در انتهای فیبر از یک…
❤10👏2
📢 تصویر روز ناسا 🗓 سهشنبه ۷ مهر ۱۴۰۵ 🔭 Sh2-۱۸۸: سحابی میگو چه چیزی باعث پیچوتاب سحابی میگو شده است؟ احتمالاً سرعت زیاد آن. چیزی که میدانیم این است که Sh2-۱۸۸ از نظر اندازهٔ ظاهری یکی از بزرگترین سحابیهای سیارهای در آسمان شب است و پهنایی حدود نصف قطر ماه دارد. همچنین هستهٔ کوتولهٔ سفید آن ــ بازماندهٔ ستارهای شبیه خورشید که جو بیرونیاش را از دست داده ــ با سرعتی غیرعادی در فضای میانستارهای حرکت میکند و م…
❤12😍6⚡1🔥1
یک تزریق برای پایین نگهداشتن کلسترول! در یک مطالعه فاز ۱ روی ۳۵ نفر، درمان ژنی VERVE-102 با یک تزریق، ژن PCSK9 را در سلولهای کبد هدف گرفت. در بالاترین دوز، میانگین PCSK9 حدود ۸۸٪ و LDL یا کلسترول بد حدود ۶۲٪ کاهش پیدا کرد. در افرادی که حداقل یک سال پیگیری شدند، اثر کاهش LDL همچنان پایدار به نظر میرسید. 💉 ایده اینه که با یکبار ویرایش ژن، بهجای مصرف مداوم دارو، کاهش طولانیمدت LDL ایجاد بشه. ⚠️ اما هنوز خیلی ز…
👏5❤4👍3
🌦️ آیا پیشبینی هوا برای همه جای دنیا به یک اندازه دقیق است؟ وقتی هواشناسی میگوید فردا باران میبارد، معمولاً تصور میکنیم این پیشبینی در هر نقطه از جهان تقریباً به یک اندازه قابل اعتماد است. اما یک پژوهش تازه نشان میدهد چنین نیست. پژوهشگران در مطالعهای که ۱۴ سپتامبر در مجله Nature Communications منتشر شد، دقت پیشبینی دما را در سراسر جهان بررسی کردند و به یک تفاوت عجیب رسیدند: 🌍 پیشبینی ۷ روز آینده در کشورها…
❤7👍7
🧬 بدن ما پروتئینهایی میسازد که DNA اصلاً آنها را کُد نکرده! ما معمولاً فکر میکنیم DNA مثل یک دستورالعمل دقیق است: ژنها اطلاعات را ذخیره میکنند و سلول طبق همان دستور، پروتئین میسازد. اما یک پژوهش تازه در Nature نشان داده ماجرا کمی عجیبتر است! دانشمندان با بررسی پروتئینهای ۲۹ بافت سالم انسانی، بیش از ۱۳ هزار گونه پروتئینی متفاوت پیدا کردند که در مجموع شامل ۷۲۱۵ تغییر تکاسیدآمینهای بودند. بخشی از این تفاوت…
🔥9❤3👍1
هر وقت کسی گفت که سرم شلوغ بوده و وقت نکردم به یادت باشم اینو براش بفرست... مکالمه یک فضانورد با همسرش از فضا 🆔 @science_magazine
🔥11❤9👏3😭1
🌐 یه سایت کاربردی برای کسایی که دوست دارن بدن انسان رو واقعاً ببینن و بشناسن! #معرفی_سایت سایت BioDigital Human یک مدل سهبعدی و تعاملی از بدن انسان در اختیارتون میذاره؛ میتونید بدن رو بچرخونید، زوم کنید، لایهها رو جدا کنید و ساختارهایی مثل مغز، قلب، استخوانها، عضلات، عصبها و اندامهای داخلی رو از نزدیک ببینید. 🫀 علاوه بر آناتومی، مدلهایی از بیماریها و بعضی فرایندهای بدن هم در دسترسه؛ برای دانشجوهای پزشکی، …
❤12🔥5👍4👌3👎1
📢 تصویر روز ناسا 🗓 دوشنبه ۶ مهر ۱۴۰۵ عنوان: لاته کیهانی: رنگ میانگین جهان رنگ جهان چه رنگیه؟ یعنی اگه کل آسمون رو با هم قاطی کنیم، آخرش چه رنگی درمیاد؟ این سؤال جالب زمانی پیش اومد که ستارهشناسها میخواستن بدونن چه نوع ستارههایی تو کهکشانهای نزدیک بیشتر پیدا میشن. جوابش همون رنگی هست که اینجا نشون داده شده؛ یه جور بژ خیلی ملایم. توی کامپیوتر این رنگ رو با کد #FFF8E7 میشناسن. برای اینکه بفهمن این رنگ دقیقاً …
⚡8❤4
Showing the 12 most recent of 268 posts we hold for @science_magazine. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@science_magazine edited 4 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
- First edit seen
- 26 August 2026
- Most recent edit
- 27 September 2026
Polls
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.
در هر ۲۴ ساعت چند پست داخل کانال بفرستم بهتره؟ نظر دیگه ای داشتید کامنت کنید
- 234%
- 435%
- 616%
- 814%
Shares as published, totalling 99%. 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 268 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 29 September 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.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
@jenasmedia · 9,4812 postsکانال نسخه نویسی اجتماعی
@socialprescription · 4662 postsکتابسار
@ketaabsaar · 10,4901 postژنتیک پزشکی
@med_gene · 1961 postمدیران ایران | آموزش مدیریت کسب وکار |modiriran 🕊
@modiriran · 34,6211 postشیوه های نوین یاددهی و یادگیری
@nazeriict · 1,4351 postیادگار عمر
@yadegareomr · 1861 post
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.
Mentions
Named by 18 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.
@jenasmedia · 9,48113 postsکتابسار
@ketaabsaar · 10,4906 posts🕊 فرازتد⚡️(روشنگری)
@FarazTed · 20,5463 postsندای عقل و دل
@nedayeaglodel · 1,9793 postsدر آغاز واژه بود، و واژه خدا بود
@chontonazanini · 152 postsپیام شاپرک (مغز و شناخت)
@Shaparakpsychcenter · 3342 postsکانال نسخه نویسی اجتماعی
@socialprescription · 4662 postsدر حاشیهی زندگی
@cornerofzendegii · 1431 postCyctour
@cyctour · 9761 postکانال خبر رسانی کانون بازنشستگان آ.پ همدان
@kaphamedan · 1,2791 postپارادایم
@khademzade · 4261 postکانال محمد امین مروتی
@manfekrmikonan · 1,8301 postژنتیک پزشکی
@med_gene · 1961 postمدیران ایران | آموزش مدیریت کسب وکار |modiriran 🕊
@modiriran · 34,6211 postفردای بهتر (مصطفی تاجزاده)
@MostafaTajzadeh · 42,8861 postشیوه های نوین یاددهی و یادگیری
@nazeriict · 1,4351 postطبناTEBNA
@tebnaa · 1,9341 postیادگار عمر
@yadegareomr · 1861 post
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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
@daily_science_magazine · 4,489#1
@ScientificDialectics · 24,277#2
@scientific_resources · 16,124#3
@TechTube · 80,960#4
@razcom · 1,232,708#5
@cyru55_ch04 · 4,115#6
@FarazTed · 20,546#7
@jadivarlog · 103,484#8
@Digiato · 113,726#9
@thezoomit · 131,342#10
@ofoghclip · 6,049#11
@CognitionWorld · 8,606#12
@daneshagahi · 28,319#13
@sut_tw · 90,529#14
@AI_DeepMind · 15,686#15
@harmoniclib · 11,884#16
@ofoghroydad · 16,451#17
@vpn_proxy400 · 22,498#18
@scibookss · 508#19
@brainstormingchannel · 2,332#20
@ahplogs · 1,633#21
@GalileAstronomy · 3,726#22
@techube · 12,258#23
@neurocognitionandlearning · 4,893#24
@endishea · 4,201#25
@scitubee · 1,474#26
@tajrobenegaran · 8,104#27
@ai_person · 3,616#28
@Recomendersystem2023 · 4,615#29
@digiunicos · 10,678#30
@CognitionTimes · 4,993#31
@modern_cogitation · 14,012#32
@Taghi_kimyai · 7,863#33
@usedata · 3,048#34
@seyed_bax · 12,448#35
@spaceastron · 1,513#36
@Sciences_Meme · 1,019#37
@ofoghroydadd · 13,349#38
@evolution_iran · 6,621#39
@dirinenegar · 2,689#40
@aysoosdiaries · 9,736#41
@Documentary20 · 23,094#42
@Function_of_the_world · 4,472#43
@SpacePassengers · 4,300#44
@CogSci_Neuron · 3,677#45
@meteorjournal · 2,659#46
@nasa_farsi_twitter · 7,582#47
@persiancosmology · 17,520#48
@CogniPlus · 2,906#49
@schoolofai · 11,240#50
@lifeAsAService · 3,906#51
@heavenevents · 1,683#52
@PsycheSci · 4,227#53
@neurolation · 1,267#54
@Dynamic_M1nd · 3,259#55
@ReasonableMind · 5,923#56
@NeuroLab_Official · 3,719#57
@Sciencebeyondthebelief1 · 2,205#58
@RegaPlus · 1,482,987#59
@CottageOrg · 786,514#60
@wbnet · 228,556#61
@Linuxor · 31,557#62
@mathematics_learn · 11,503#63
@vahidonline · 1,399,039#64
@mamlekate · 566,935#65
@devtwitter · 32,186#66
@CleverDevs · 10,836#67
@geekalerts · 19,016#68
@Y45ha · 4,111#69
@anarconomy · 46,502#70
@nadiamusicalword · 190 (as read 21 September 2026)#71
@NurdRage · 2,289#72
@miladnourichannel · 27,338#73
@aqvalanam · 40,125#74
@physic678 · 6,138#75
@volandarkside · 2,911#76
@blackbooxx · 1,401#77
@linuxtnt · 6,943#78
@PinkOrca · 3,212#79
@PyBackEndHub · 8,329#80
@nojom3 · 674#81
@Hafezbajoghli · 14,943#82
@paintingco · 12,884#83
@pyHints · 10,115#84
@caulfild · 33,192#85
@ofoghmostanad · 2,021#86
@emicalll · 15,053#87
@lnxpylnxpy · 4,144#88
@ketaabsaar · 10,490#89
@makedeveloper · 2,825#90
@math_olympiad_problem_solving_ch · 7,061#91
@gopher_academy · 3,846#92
@hafezeye_tarikhi · 142,125#93
@riazi_cafe_tg · 3,469#94
@sohrabcontents · 3,711#95
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 21 September 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
@FarazTed · 20,546
Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 26 September 2026
@ScientificDialectics · 24,277
Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 16 September 2026
@Documentary20 · 23,094
Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 19 September 2026
@big_bangpage · 39,158
Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 31 August 2026
@daneshagahi · 28,319
Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 10 September 2026
@homosapiensfa · 43,950
Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 28 August 2026
@ketabnayyab · 89,465
Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 17 August 2026
@KetabTOpdf · 62,745
Telegram ranks this channel #24 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 22 August 2026
@rokhpodcast · 112,400
Telegram ranks this channel #24 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 14 August 2026
@tehranpodcast · 232,087
Telegram ranks this channel #41 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 11 August 2026
@vkends · 24,706
Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 15 September 2026
@Avaye_Choopan · 36,434
Telegram ranks this channel #50 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 1 September 2026
@psychology_personaa · 19,910
Telegram ranks this channel #67 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 29 September 2026
@UIBiologists · 29,874
Telegram ranks this channel #67 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 8 September 2026
@Yojana_Kurukshetra_Magazine · 50,373
Telegram ranks this channel #70 of 70 here — alongside 69 others — read 25 August 2026
@PsyEngAcademy · 21,724
Telegram ranks this channel #86 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 24 September 2026
This channel appears in 16 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 29 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Science Magazine” (@science_magazine), 22,218 subscribers as measured 29 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/science_magazine.
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.