Latest news with #Newtonian
Asia Times
02-06-2025
- Politics
- Asia Times
MAGA's overreaching anti-economists get it all wrong
Oren Cass, the founder of the think tank American Compass, is probably the leading intellectual voice of MAGA economics. In a recent blog post, he discusses the question of whether economic forces are like gravity. He writes: [Y]es, the physical world is governed by the laws of gravity. But it is not governed only by the laws of gravity. Indeed, anyone who thought he could reliably predict the motion of bodies with knowledge only of gravity would be something of a moron. Oh, really? Would such a man be a moron? Then please explain to me how Edmond Halley, using only his knowledge of gravity, and having no understanding of any of the other forces of nature, was able to predict a solar eclipse in 1715 to an accuracy of four minutes: In 1715…a total solar eclipse was visible across a broad band of England. It was the first to be predicted on the basis of the Newtonian theory of universal gravitation, its path mapped clearly and advertised widely in advance. Visible in locations such as London and Cambridge, both astronomical experts and the public were able to see the phenomena and be impressed by the predictive power of the new astronomy… Wikipedia will tell you that this is known as Halley's Eclipse, after Edmond Halley, who produced accurate predictions of its timing and an easily-read map of the eclipse's path. Halley did not live to see the confirmation of his predictions of a returning comet – a 1759 triumph for the Newtonian system – but he was able to enjoy his 1715 calculations, which were within 4 minutes[.] Cass — who holds a Bachelor's in political economy from Williams College and a law degree from Harvard, but has no apparent training in physics — confidently assures us that anyone who attempted what Edmond Halley did would be 'something of a moron.' This is the kind of insult that says less about the target than about the person doing the insulting. Before you make confident assertions about a field of study, you owe it to your readers to attempt to understand that field at least a little bit. A botched physics analogy is harmless enough. But Cass' main argument isn't about gravity at all — it's about economics. And it's here where his willingness to make grand pronouncements about whole fields of study gets him into real trouble. Cass' post is a response to a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Matthew Hennessey. Hennessey, in turn, is responding to J.D. Vance's declaration that markets are a 'tool.' Hennessey argues that markets are more like a force of nature than a tool.1 Cass is trying to rebut Hennessey, criticizing market fundamentalism while also taking a swipe at the entire discipline of economics. Now, I am no fan of market fundamentalism, and I spent my early years as a blogger bashing the field of (macro)economics — often with even more scorn than Oren Cass employs in this post. But I like to think that when I did this, I generally stuck to making specific criticisms about actual economic models and methods. A lot of econ critics don't do this. Back when I was at Bloomberg, I used to have fun poking at the grandiose broadsides against economics that periodically appear in British publications like The Guardian or The Telegraph. These critiques tend to repeat the same old nostrums over and over — economics isn't a science, it doesn't do controlled experiments, its assumptions are bad, its theories don't work, people can't be predicted like particles, etc. etc. There are grains of truth to these boilerplate critiques, but the people who write them generally haven't bothered to pay much attention to what modern economists actually do . Here's what I wrote in a Bloomberg post back in 2017: [E]conomists have developed some theories that really work. A good scientific theory makes testable predictions that apply to situations other than those that motivated the creation of the theory. Slowly, econ is building up a repertoire of these gems. One of them is auction theory, which predicts how buyers will bid for things like online ads or spectrum rights — Google's profits are powered by econ theory as much as by search algorithms. Another example is matching theory, which has made it a lot easier to get an organ transplant. A third is random-utility discrete choice theory, which is used in everything from marketing to transportation planning to disaster preparedness. Nor are econ's successful theories limited to microeconomics. Gravity models of trade, though fairly simple in nature, have proven very successful at predicting the flow of international trade. These and other successful economics theories can be used confidently in a wide-variety of real-world situations, by policy makers, engineers and businesses. They prove that anyone who claims that econ theories will never be reliable, because they deal with human beings instead of atoms, is simply incorrect. Yes, studying mass human behavior is different than studying the motions of the planets, in a number of important ways. But the intellectuals who loftily declare that economics 'isn't a science' don't seem like they've bothered to think very hard about what those differences are , or when and why they matter. For example, what do the people who write that 'economics isn't a science' think about natural experiments — the empirical technique that has taken over much of econ research in the last three decades? Do they think that these are always less informative than lab experiments in the natural sciences? And if so, why? What do they think are the strengths and weaknesses of natural experiments relative to lab experiments, and how much can they help us test theories and derive general principles about how economies work? I suspect that very few of the econ critics have thought seriously about these questions, and that far too few have even heard of natural experiments. Certainly, if they have, they must have some good reason for never mentioning them. And certainly they must have good reasons for never talking about auction theory, matching theory, discrete choice models, gravity models, or any of the other economics theories that prove themselves in the real world day in and day out. Right? But the screeds in The Guardian or The Telegraph are downright erudite compared to what Oren Cass serves up in his own criticism of econ. Here's what he writes: Economics is nothing like physics. Its principles are not generated from repeatable experiments, nor do they hold consistently across space and time. Trusting otherwise is a quite literal example of the blind faith and fundamentalism at issue. That's it. That's literally Cass' entire criticism of the field of economics in this post. He spends the rest of the post pulling quotes from conservative political thinkers — G.K. Chesterton, Robert Nisbet, Yuval Levin, Roger Scruton, etc. — who urge us to value things like community, tradition, etc., or who assert that markets can't work without a robust social fabric. Those are interesting things to think about, to be sure, but they don't bear on the question of what, exactly, Cass thinks is so inadequate about economics. Cass does not name or criticize any specific economic theories in this post. He cites zero papers and names zero researchers. I looked through a bunch of his other posts about economics, and I almost never found him naming or criticizing any specific theories in those posts, either. In one post, I did find him criticizing the theory of comparative advantage, and he did make one useful, substantive point about it — that comparative advantage can't explain trade deficits and surpluses. He's right about that. That's by far the most substantive, knowledgeable criticism of economics that I could find on his blog. If Cass is aware of any economic models other than comparative advantage and the basic Econ 101 supply-and-demand model, he plays his cards close to his chest. He doesn't mention gravity models of trade, which some economists use to try to predict the effects of tariffs (with some success). Nor does he mention Paul Krugman's New Trade Theory, which implies that countries can sometimes benefit from targeted tariffs against other countries' national champions (but which wouldn't recommend the kind of broad, sweeping tariffs Trump has tried to implement). Neither of those theories is outside the mainstream; both were invented by economists who went on to win the Nobel. Why doesn't Oren Cass mention them, or grapple with their implications, or use their existence to inform his criticisms of the field of economics? My guess — and this is only a guess — is that Cass is completely unaware that these theories exist, that he has no interest in discovering whether such theories exist, that if he did discover them he would have no idea how to evaluate them, and that even if he did know how to evaluate them he would have no interest in doing so. A sophisticated understanding of what mainstream economics actually says and does is not useful to Oren Cass' project, which is to denounce intellectual rivals within the conservative movement. If you want to actually figure out how trade works and what tariffs do, it would help to look at the research literature. If you didn't get the training needed to understand that literature, it would help to ask some people who did get that training, or at least read a little Wikipedia and ask ChatGPT a few questions.2 That won't give you all the answers — the world's best economists don't even have all the answers — but it would leave you a lot more knowledgeable than you started out, and it would give you a much better idea of where economists are on solid ground and where there are gaps in their understanding. On the other hand, if all you want is to dunk on Wall Street Journal writers, perhaps all you need is some hand-waving rhetoric about 'market fundamentalism' and a vague half-knowledge of one simple trade theory developed 200 years ago. The real problem with these econ critics — both the lefty writers in The Guardian and the new crop of MAGA defenders — is that their project is fundamentally political. The lefty writers think that if everyone accepts that econ isn't a science, and that the econ Nobel isn't a real Nobel, and people aren't like particles, and so on and so forth, then some sort of lefty ideology — Marxism, or degrowth, or whatever — will flow in to fill the hole left when economics vanishes. The MAGA writers think that it will be Trump's economic ideas that fill that void instead. But Matthew Hennessey, the Wall Street Journal writer, got one big thing right: Simply replacing academic theories with your own ideology can win you power, but there are important things it can't do. It can't change the nature of what tariffs actually do to the economy. Even if you and your friends and your political allies all shout very loudly that tariffs will restore American manufacturing, and act very scornful toward nerdy academics who tell you it doesn't work like that, the economic headwinds that tariffs actually create for American manufacturers won't change one iota. However limited mainstream academic economics is as a tool for understanding the consequences of your policies, ideology is even worse. NOTES: 1 Who's right, Vance or Hennesey? Both are right. Market forces are , quite literally, forces of nature. And markets themselves are, quite literally, a tool. Tools work by harnessing forces of nature. A pendulum clock works by harnessing the force of gravity. A market works by harnessing the forces that drive people to buy and sell things. Vance is right that markets should be shaped to serve our desired ends, rather than being an end in and of themselves. Hennesey is right that market forces can't be denied, ignored, or wished away. 2 Just to see how AI is doing, I asked ChatGPT o3 about the papers on gravity models. Its characterization of the papers' results was oversimplified and omitted crucial nuance about the ex ante predictive accuracy of Fejgelbaum et al. (2020). But overall, its explanations weren't too bad! This article was first published on Noah Smith's Noahpinion Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become a Noahopinion subscriber here.
Associated Press
25-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
IBN Coverage: Newton Golf (NASDAQ: NWTG) Gains Momentum on Champions Tour with Golf.com Spotlight
This article was published by IBN, a multifaceted communications organization engaged in connecting public companies to the investment community. LOS ANGELES, CA - April 25, 2025 ( NEWMEDIAWIRE ) - Newton Golf Company Inc. (NASDAQ: NWTG), a technology-forward golf equipment manufacturer committed to enhancing player performance through innovative design, has seen its Newton Motion shafts rapidly gain popularity on the Champions Tour, recently earning a feature on for their innovative performance benefits tailored to senior players. The shafts utilize a unique variable stiffness profile - more flexible in the midsection and stiffer at the tip and butt ends - resulting in improved energy transfer, higher launch angles, and increased distance. These design advantages have made them a go-to choice for many veteran professionals seeking more consistency and power in their drives. To read the full feature, visit About Newton Golf Company Inc. Newton Golf harnesses the power of physics to revolutionize golf equipment design. Formerly known as Sacks Parente, the company's rebranding reflects its commitment to innovation inspired by Sir Isaac Newton, the father of physics. By applying Newtonian principles to every aspect of its design process, Newton Golf creates precision-engineered golf clubs that deliver unmatched stability, control, and performance. The company's mission is to empower golfers with scientifically advanced equipment that maximizes consistency and accuracy, ensuring every swing is backed by the laws of physics. For more information, visit the company's website at NOTE TO INVESTORS: IBN is a multifaceted financial news, content creation and publishing company utilized by both public and private companies to optimize investor awareness and recognition. For more information, please visit Please see full terms of use and disclaimers on the InvestorBrandNetwork website applicable to all content provided by IBN, wherever published or re-published: The latest news and updates relating to NWTG are available in the company's newsroom at Forward Looking Statements Certain statements in this article are forward-looking, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements and may not be indicative of future results. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including, among others, various factors beyond management's control, including the risks set forth under the heading 'Risk Factors' discussed under the caption 'Item 1A. Risk Factors' in Part I of the Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K or any updates discussed under the caption 'Item 1A. Risk Factors' in Part II of the Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and in the Company's other filings with the SEC. Undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking statements in this article in making an investment decision, which are based on information available to us on the date hereof. All parties undertake no duty to update this information unless required by law. About IBN IBN is a cutting-edge communications and digital engagement platform providing tailored Platform Solutions for select private and public companies. Over the course of 19+ years, IBN has introduced over 70 investor facing brands to the investment public and amassed a collective audience of millions of social media followers. These distinctive investor brands amplify recognition and reach as well as help fulfill the unique needs of our rapidly growing and diverse base of client-partners. IBN will continue to expand our branded network of influential properties as well as leverage the energy and experience of our team of professionals to best serve our clients. IBN's Platform Solutions provide access to: (1) our Dynamic Brand Portfolio (DBP) through 70+ investor facing brands; (2) article and editorial syndication to 5,000+ news outlets; (3) full-scale distribution to a growing Social Media Network (SMN) ; (4) a network of wire solutions via InvestorWire to effectively reach target markets and demographics; (5) Press Release Enhancement to ensure accuracy and impact; (6) a full array of corporate communications solutions; and (7) total news coverage solutions. For more information, please visit Please see full terms of use and disclaimers on the InvestorBrandNetwork website applicable to all content provided by IBN, wherever published or re-published: Media Contact IBN Los Angeles, California 310.299.1717 Office [email protected] View the original release on
Yahoo
19-04-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
Universe may revolve once every 500 billion years — and that could solve a problem that threatened to break cosmology
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. In 1929, astronomer Edwin Hubble published a paper demonstrating that the universe is expanding. It gave rise to the Hubble constant, the number that describes how fast the universe is expanding. But it eventually created a puzzle, called the Hubble tension, because this cosmic expansion differs depending on what cosmic objects are used to measure it. A new mathematical model could resolve the Hubble tension by assuming the universe rotates. Related: After 2 years in space, the James Webb telescope has broken cosmology. Can it be fixed? The new research, published in March in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, suggests that our universe completes one revolution every 500 billion years. This ultraslow rotation could resolve the discrepancy between different measurements of the Hubble constant. "The standard concordance cosmological model has some wrinkles," study co-author István Szapudi, an astronomer at the Institute for Astronomy at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa, told Live Science in an email. "A slow rotation of the universe could solve the Hubble puzzle." Astronomers measure the universe's rate of expansion in a few ways. One involves looking at supernovas — the explosive deaths of giant stars — and measuring how quickly these supernovas recede. The other method utilizes the cosmic microwave background, the radiation present 380,000 years following the Big Bang. However, these two measurements differ by about 10%. The idea of a rotating universe isn't new; mathematician Kurt Gödel introduced the idea in a 1949 paper published in the journal Reviews of Modern Physics. Other researchers, like Stephen Hawking, have also explored this theory. In the new study, the team applied the rotation to the Hubble tension. Because all celestial objects — including planets, stars, galaxies and black holes — rotate, this behavior naturally extends to the universe as a whole, the study authors proposed. "Much to our surprise, we found that our model with rotation resolves the paradox without contradicting current astronomical measurements," Szapudi said. RELATED STORIES —Scientists may have finally found where the 'missing half' of the universe's matter is hiding —Rare quadruple supernova on our 'cosmic doorstep' will shine brighter than the moon when it blows up in 23 billion years —Scientists discover smallest galaxy ever seen: 'It's like having a perfectly functional human being that's the size of a grain of rice' The proposed glacial speed at which the universe may rotate is too slow to detect, but it would still affect the universe's expansion rate and does not require new physics. However, the model only incorporated some of the physics thought to be at play. "We use Newtonian physics with some input from General Relativity," Szapudi said. "A complete [General Relativity] treatment would be desirable." He also explained that their work assumes the universe is uniform and did not vary in density as it evolved. In future investigations, the team will contrast the rotating-universe model against other cosmological models.
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Newton Golf Company to Host Fourth Quarter and Full-Year 2024 Earnings Call on March 31, 2025
CAMARILLO, Calif., March 31, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- via IBN – Newton Golf Company (Nasdaq: NWTG), a developer of performance-focused golf equipment, today announced it will host an earnings call to discuss its fourth quarter and full-year 2024 financial results on Monday, March 31, 2025 at 4:30PM ET. Earnings Call Details• Date: March 31, 2025• Time: 4:30 PM ET• Participant Listening Options: Participant Listening: 1-877-407-0779 or 1 201-389-0914Callme™: Participants can use Guest dial-in #s above and be answered by an operator OR click the Call me™ link for instant telephone access to the event.- Call me™ link will be made active 15 minutes prior to scheduled start time. The call will feature remarks from Greg Campbell, Chairman and CEO, providing an overview of the Company's financial performance and strategic outlook. A recording of the call will be available following the event via the Investor Relations section of the Company's website at Investor Alerts Stay updated with the latest from Newton Golf! Investors and stakeholders can sign up for email alerts at to receive company news, updates, and strategic developments directly in their inbox. For more information, visit About Newton Golf At Newton Golf, we harness the power of physics to revolutionize golf equipment design. Formerly known as Sacks Parente, our rebranding reflects our commitment to innovation inspired by Sir Isaac Newton, the father of physics. By applying Newtonian principles to every aspect of our design process, we create precision-engineered golf clubs that deliver unmatched stability, control, and performance. Our mission is to empower golfers with scientifically advanced equipment that maximizes consistency and accuracy, ensuring every swing is backed by the laws of physics. Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements relate to future events or the future financial performance of Newton Golf Company (the 'Company') and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terms such as "may," "will," "should," "expects," "plans," "anticipates," "intends," "believes," "estimates," "projects," "potential," "continues," or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the expected benefits of the reverse stock split, the Company's ability to maintain compliance with Nasdaq listing requirements, the potential for increased institutional investor interest, the Company's future growth strategy, expansion of its product portfolio, anticipated financial performance, and future business prospects. These forward-looking statements reflect the Company's current expectations and projections based on information available as of the date of this release and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, general economic, financial, and business conditions; changes in consumer demand and industry trends; the Company's ability to successfully implement its strategic initiatives; competition in the golf equipment market; supply chain disruptions; regulatory compliance and legal proceedings; and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. The Company cautions investors that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results may differ materially from those projected. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as required by law. Company Contact:Newton Golf Company551 Calle San PabloCamarillo, CA 93012https:// Investor Contact:Scott McGowanInvestorBrandNetwork (IBN)Phone: 310.299.1717ir@ in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
World's largest digital camera to help new Vera Rubin Observatory make a 'time-lapse record of the universe' (video)
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. A major milestone with the Vera C. Rubin Observatory has been reached with the installation of the telescope's enormous LSST Camera — the last optical component required before the last phase of testing can begin. The car-sized Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) Camera that was recently installed on the Vera C. Rubin Observatory is the largest digital camera ever built and will be used to capture detailed images of the southern hemisphere sky over a decade. "The installation of the LSST Camera on the telescope is a triumph of science and engineering," said Harriet Kung, Acting Director of the Department of Energy's Office of Science in a statement. "We look forward to seeing the unprecedented images this camera will produce." The telescope is funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science and is named after Dr. Vera C. Rubin, an American astronomer whose work provided strong evidence for the existence of dark matter. Along with her colleague Kent Ford, Rubin observed that in the numerous galaxies they studied, stars at the outer edges were moving just as fast as those near the center. This was unusual because, according to Newtonian physics and Kepler's laws of planetary motion, objects farther from the center of a gravitational system should orbit more slowly due to the weaker gravitational pull. After accounting for all visible matter, the gravitational force from the observed mass wasn't enough to keep these fast-moving stars bound to the galaxy. Without additional mass providing extra gravitational pull, the galaxies should have been flying apart. This discrepancy led to the conclusion that an unseen form of mass, now known as dark matter, was holding them together. Following its namesake, the Rubin telescope will investigate the mysteries of dark energy and dark matter with cutting-edge technology. Its state-of-the-art mirror design, highly sensitive camera, rapid survey speed and advanced computing infrastructure each represent breakthroughs in their respective fields. Every few nights, it will survey the entire sky, creating an "ultra-wide, ultra-high-definition time-lapse record of the universe," the statement adds. Each image will be so massive that displaying it would require 400 ultra-high-definition TV screens. "This unique movie will bring the night sky to life, yielding a treasure trove of discoveries: asteroids and comets, pulsating stars, and supernova explosions," states the observatory's website. While the LSST Camera is an engineering marvel, its installation was equally challenging. In March 2025, after months of testing in Rubin Observatory's clean room, the summit team used a vertical platform lift to move the camera to the telescope floor. A custom lifting device then carefully positioned and secured it on the telescope for the first time. RELATED STORIES: — How Earth's new Rubin Observatory will usher in the next era of asteroid space missions — Rubin Observatory aces 1st image tests, gets ready to use world's largest digital camera — Scientists alarmed as Rubin Observatory changes biography of astronomer Vera Rubin amid Trump's push to end DEI efforts "Mounting the LSST Camera onto the Simonyi Telescope was an effort requiring intense planning, teamwork across the entire observatory and millimeter-precision execution," said Freddy Muñoz, Rubin Observatory Mechanical Group Lead. "Watching the LSST Camera take its place on the telescope is a proud moment for us all." Over the coming weeks, the LSST Camera's utilities and systems will be connected and tested. Soon, it will be ready to capture detailed images of the night sky. The Rubin telescope, under construction in Cerro Pachón, Chile, is expected to see first light in 2025.
