The text is clear that both theories make both testable and untestable predictions.

It helps if you read what I write 😉

That's right, we made it clear in the acknowledgements that this isn't coming from Tononi et al.

Re: "one chance to come back with a reasonable reply", a completely separate reply (which we have nothing to do with) is being published soon in Nature Neuroscience. So, stay tuned.

Thanks, that's exactly our point.

In case you're not convinced that the original letter's arguments can be easily redirected to general relativity somethingitslike.substack.com/p/is-general...

Thanks Johannes. Indeed, we had a whole paragraph citing reasonable criticisms of IIT, including original criticisms which we wrote ourselves.

Did you read the paper?

Did you read the paper?

congrats!

This is totally something I would have done when I was that age 😄

Makes sense, yeah, it would need a whole page entirely to itself!

Nice! But where's Ceres? It didn't lose its asteroid status even when it got promoted to dwarf planet ;)

In that case, I really hope another Kuiper belt dwarf planet gets visited in my lifetime ...

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shensuo

You're crushing my dreams 😭 And this wouldn't work for a closer dwarf planet like Makemake either?

Thanks, is there any hope of collecting enough Eris data with JWST to eventually generate some surface maps like the Hubble ones of Pluto?

Pictures?