Michelle Collins

@runningastronomer.bsky.social

✨Astronomer searching for and studying the faintest galaxies in the Universe ✨co-host of the @starxiv.bsky.social podcast ✨ Enthusiastic-but-mediocre runner 🏃🏻‍♀️ vegan 🌱 She/her

Think of all the awesome science-ing we could do with an extra £20M......🧪

Kirsty Grainger @kirstygrainger.bsky.social · last wk.

Earlier this year UKRI launched a funding call to invest £40M in ONE AI lab. www.ukri.org/opportunity/... For some unknown reason they decided to fund TWO AI labs at the cost of £60M. An extra £20M. Just found. That's the equivalent of 7 more years of Jodrell Bank. www.ukri.org/news/ukri-la...

At today's UKRI board meeting, the fate of UK particle physics and astronomy will likely be decided. Have we done enough to convince the powers-that-be to halt the proposed funding cuts? 🤞 Read Prof. Hiranya Peiris in Nature today eloquently explaining why these cuts are wrong.🧪🔭⚛️ 📖: rdcu.be/friwM

Restructuring research funding as a choice between discovery and application gets the economics wrong, the evidence wrong and the people wrong.

A premise is gaining traction in science policy on both sides of the Atlantic: that fundamental and applied research are competing claims on the same budget, and that the balance must shift towards application. In the USA, the current administration has proposed cuts of billions of dollars to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. In the UK, the national funding agency UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is restructuring its portfolio around government growth priorities, with curiosity-driven research nominally protected but the grant lines that actually fund investigators under severe pressure. The language varies — ‘doing fewer things better’, ‘aligning research with industrial strategy’ — but the underlying logic is the same. Fundamental science, the argument goes, is a luxury that becomes dispensable when budgets are tight. This premise is wrong, and the consequences of acting on it are already visible.
Royal Astronomical Society@royalastrosoc.bsky.social · 2mo ago

Stars of physics are in Westminster right now to call on the Government to halt funding cuts to astronomy and particle physics research. Professor Brian Cox called them "inexplicable", urging the Government to instead "trust, inspire and continue to invest in the next generation of scientists".

Stars of physics outside the Houses of Parliament.

Interested in working on stellar streams in the UK? I’ll be posting a 3 year postdoc position to work with me and Eugene Vasiliev on measuring dark matter subhalo properties with streams in a few days. Interviews will be in early August with a start date of October 1st. 🧪☄️

Many pro astrophysicists receive unsolicited letters from amateurs with new but subtly wrong physics theories, often about relativity and from retired engineers. This cute new paper is a perfect reply & I love how it uses cyclotrons & transponders & radar 🧪🔭 arxiv.org/abs/2605.21660

Relativity for Retired Engineers

We provide some guidance and examples to clear up common misconceptions about special relativity. These misconceptions often come from trying to express the truths of special relativity in Newtonian t...

arxiv.org