Independent Researcher in Physics
UK
Joined June 2008
- Tweets8.9K
- Following1.3K
- Followers1.8K
- Likes1.9K
Last week I presented my theory Relational Geometrics, applied to electron-electron scattering.
From a Relational Postulate, with no fields, background or virtual photons it reproduces the leading-order QED result & provides new insights. Paper forthcoming. A few slides...
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
2/ Ore builds iron-air batteries that can store power for up to 100 hours. The batteries are built from iron, water and air - materials that are abundant, inexpensive and don't require a single gram of lithium or cobalt.
Something must be rotten at the heart of UK. Why would the RAS write - "This news was cautiously welcomed by the RAS"? ras.ac.uk/news-and-press/new…
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
“If you want to understand what life is, you need to first build life.” — Job Boekhoven, systems chemist quantamagazine.org/for-the-f…
Having fun with a universe simulator.
You can run it your browser too, at universemakers.org/engine/
ALT Cosmos simulation in UniverseEngine
Writing, checking and refining physics research papers is exhausting. It's been too long since the last one. This was fun though, and is a whole new ball game: Møller Scattering from Relational Closure in Cl(1,3)
What they call "age verification" is actually mass surveillance
pluralistic.net/2026/06/23/d…
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
The hardest problems are rarely solved by adding more complexity to the solution -- they are solved by reframing the question until a simpler, clearer answer reveals itself.
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
🚨BREAKING: Keir Starmer announces social media ban for under-16s
“Politicians and tech companies have let children down for too long. But in a headlong rush to make up for lost time, the government is going down the wrong path.”
“The British people have always, rightly, rejected mandatory ID schemes. Now the government is imposing digital ID checkpoints for the internet. This is not like Challenge 25 for alcohol. We will all face a “papers, please” demand to get online.”
“Big Brother Watch would welcome evidence-led policies that offer real protection for young people. Instead, the government is mimicking much of Australia’s failed policy. A policy their own eSafety Commissioner admits has failed to keep children off social media.”
“Worse, these proposals will force the public to trust their IDs to companies with serious track records of leaks and hacks.”
“Targeted interventions that hold platforms to account, enforce existing laws, and give parents the tools they need are the answer. Evidence from Australia shows age bans don’t keep children off social media, they just remove the safety measures platforms put in place for them”
- Jack Coulson, Head of Advocacy
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
Spoke to @SkyNews this lunchtime about the latest @uk_biobank revelation - the #NHS #hospital data of their volunteers that they allowed researchers in China to download was listed for sale on a consumer website in China owned by @AlibabaGroup, FFS...
Foreign Financial Influence and Interference: UK Politics
Country mentions in the debate:
🇺🇸: 8
🇷🇺: 7
🇨🇳: 5
🇮🇷: 2
🇮🇱: 0
In the Rycroft review, where mentioned as a threat:
🇷🇺: 5
🇨🇳: 2
🇮🇷: 2
🇦🇿: 1
🇺🇸: 1
🤔
hansard.parliament.uk/Common…
Apple wasn’t legally required to do this. The UK Online Safety Act’s age verification obligations apply to platforms & adult content sites, not to device operating systems or app stores.
"For the children" is a false flag by both parties.
🚨NEWS: UK iPhone users must now prove their age or lose full internet access
"It is absolutely outrageous that, overnight, Apple has put a chokehold on Britons' freedom to search the internet, access information and use apps unless they provide sensitive ID documents.
This means 35 million Brits who have paid hundreds or even thousands of pounds for Apple tech suddenly now have a child's device unless they comply with invasive demands for personal information that go far beyond what UK law requires.
Apple has crossed the Rubicon with this software update which is more like ransomware, holding customers hostage to ID demands that are invasive, exclusionary and unnecessary.
Children's online safety is vital but requires better parental controls and thoughtful tech responsibility - not sweeping, draconian, shock demands by foreign companies for all of our IDs and credit cards."
- Silkie Carlo [@silkiecarlo]
Science advances through imagination that respects evidence. Speculation without constraint is not genuine progress.
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
Big Tech is BigTeching again.
Google has announced a new policy for Android devs, which would require them to seek Google’s permission if they want to distribute their apps outside of the Google Play Store (like on their own website or on alternative app stores). (1/3)
Colin Hayhurst retweeted
Altman made six arguments. All six have structural problems.
"We rushed to stabilize the situation." You rushed to capture a contract that opened up because your competitor was being punished. Supporting Anthropic publicly while closing the deal privately isn't stabilization — it's displacement.
"Elected governments should decide, not tech executives." The government's right to make defense policy doesn't create an obligation for any private company to provide its tools. Anthropic isn't overruling the Pentagon. It's declining to participate. That right is foundational to American law.
"Our redlines are flexible and can evolve." A redline that evolves is not a redline. OpenAI's prior red line was no military use at all. Then no warfare. Now three flexible guidelines. The trajectory is one-directional.
"Anthropic walked away because they wanted too much control." Operational control means the ability to verify your redlines are being honored and pull the technology if they aren't. Without it, redlines are aspirational. Anthropic wanted enforceable commitments. OpenAI accepted unenforceable ones and is framing that as maturity.
"You can't warn about AI dangers and then refuse to help." The warning and the refusal are the same position: this technology is too dangerous to deploy without adequate safeguards. Anthropic didn't abandon the building. It refused to hand the fire department a flamethrower.
"Cyber defense and biosecurity are crucial." Neither was at issue. Anthropic was already serving defense customers. The standoff was specifically about autonomous weapons and mass surveillance. Altman is blurring the line between defending the electrical grid and building population-scale targeting systems.
The silence that matters most: Altman's entire argument assumes the current government is acting in good faith. This is the same administration that called Anthropic "left-wing," applied Huawei-level trade instruments to an American company, and gave a classified contract to a $25M PAC donor within hours of banning its competitor. Deferring ethical judgment to a good-faith government is reasonable. Deferring it to this one, with classification authority preventing any public accountability, is a different proposition entirely. Altman never addresses this.