As someone who is currently figuring out wether or not to stay in academia, this was a very good read. It reminded me of the things I really like and value about doing science. Thank you.

”The results, in a strict practical sense, don't matter. What matters is the process of getting them […] If you hand that process to a machine, you haven't accelerated science. You've removed the only part of it that anyone actually needed.”

The machines are fine. I'm worried about us. On AI agents, grunt work, and the part of science that isn't replaceable.

Hey, I wrote a thing about AI in astrophysics
ergosphere.blog/posts/the-ma...

A digital pinboard showing six options. Ranging from 1. Nothing. 2. A vague outline with no/barely any colour. To 5. A vivid red star and 6. Something more elaborate. 35 people respond as “imagers” (Options 4-6). 6 people show aphantasia (Options 1-2), with one person selecting ‘nothing’. In the comments section for “nothing”, someone has asked “hello one friend. How do you imagine things?” The reply says “I think of concepts (weepy-face) can’t see things in my mind”

Once a year I ask my students to imagine a red star.

It’s cognitive psychology and we are about to talk about whether “imagery” is the same or different from “perception”, but first, I like to check in on what our class experience when we imagine something.

Friends, the results NEVER disappoint!