Readit NewsReminded me of Einstein:
> We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them
Since I assume you would be interested to know, this quote seems almost certainly misattributed to Einstein and seems to have been made up by Ram Dass [1]. Though I would be happy to be proved wrong if you have a source
[1] https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/7751/did-einstein-sa...
Full title: Top researchers consider leaving U.S. amid funding cuts: 'The science world is ending'
I’m glad this kind of work is getting highlighted on HN, but this is an extremely misleading title, to the point of being outright false.
As often happens, this appears to be due to PR titles being controlled by non-specialists, not the study authors.
While the work the authors do is important, in no sense does the tool they produced actually run a simulation.
A simulation implies a physical model and usually partial differential equations that are often solved on supercomputers, but here the neural network is rather interpolating some fixed simulation output in a purely data-driven way.
The simulations have not gotten faster due to neural networks, cosmologists have just gotten better at using them. Which is great!
Edit: see the sub-comment in the thread by crazygringo for the lead author’s take
When commenters say stuff like this I never know if they mean grants that went to funding utter taxpayer theft like this:
https://www.niemanlab.org/2025/04/national-science-foundatio...
Or real science.
So I just tune out.
Your link seems unrelated to the topic of this article? I gave the line items for the research conducted in the OP.
A good faith reading of your comment leads me to guess you might take issue with a small number of unrelated NSF CAREER awards going to research you don’t find worthwhile (such as those alluded to in your link). But the vast majority of CAREER awards fund what I would imagine you would consider “real science” [1], like the content of OP.
So please do not tune out!
[1] You can count them here in the list of all CAREER awards: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/advancedSearchResult?PIId=&P...
If you think this is cool/valuable, I just want to point out that this work is being paid for by the DOE Office of Science (BES division), uses the NSF National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, and is using money from an NSF CAREER award (“Acknowledgments” section under “Funding” in the actual paper [1]).
The former is facing a cut of 14% [2] (The Office of Science overall is seeing a similar cut), the second is facing a 40% cut [3], and the latter appears to be destroyed entirely (no money requested) [4] in documents released by these agencies for FY2026 (executive budget).
This research is also supported by Chinese funding agencies, who I imagine will not be engaging such senseless hamstringing of their national scientific organs…
[1] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adr6202
[2] See page 5 of https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-07/doe-fy-20...
[3] See page “Facilities - 5” of https://nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/files/00-NSF-FY26-CJ-Entir...
[4] See page “Summary Tables - 1” of the link in [3].
mosesbp commented on Early universe's 'little red dots' may be black hole stars science.org/content/artic... · Posted by u/rbanffy
Making progress on these key issues in galaxy evolution and black hole growth is exactly the kind of research that will not happen (or at minimum be extremely limited) under the current administration’s grant cancellations, funding cuts,
and staffing reductions at the NSF and NASA, the two of which account for almost all of US astronomy research funding.
Very well written title though.