FlashFeed

Full text

A constellation of cubesats fitted with special detectors could sniff out nuclear weapons hidden on satellites launched by adversary nations, according to a new study.

In 2024, rumors began to swirl in military circles that Russia might be developing a space-borne nuclear weapon . At that time, two years into the war in Ukraine, Russia was well aware of how big a lifeline SpaceX's Starlink broadband constellation had been for the Ukrainians. Starlink has not only provided connectivity to ravaged cities and frontline troops but also helped Ukrainians counter-attack the Russian invaders more effectively.

Drones fitted with Starlink terminals could reach much more distant targets than those controlled via conventional radio links. As the Starlink signal is almost impossible to disrupt by jamming , the idea that Russia might consider wiping the megaconstellation out by brute force didn't seem impossible.

Researchers know that a nuclear detonation in orbit would flood the space around Earth with fast, energetic electrons. These particles would destroy most unhardened satellites within range, which would extend to orbits even hundreds of miles away from the explosion.

"It would make the low Earth orbit and very low Earth orbit — where the Starlink satellites are, where many reconnaissance and communications satellites are, and where the International Space Station is — uninhabitable for a long period of time," Areg Danagoulian, an associate professor of nuclear science and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the author of the new paper describing the proposed detection method, told Space.com.

"We would essentially not only lose the satellites in those orbits, we would lose those orbits for a few years," he added.

Humankind has already seen the effects of a nuclear explosion in space. In 1962, the U.S. detonated a 1.4-megaton hydrogen bomb at an altitude of 240 miles (400 kilometers) above the Pacific Ocean. Radiation from the explosion, known as the Starfish Prime test, destroyed one-third of all satellites in orbit at that time. Admittedly, there weren't that many up there — fewer than 100 — but the impact was far-reaching.

Today, a nuclear detonation in space would be a catastrophe. It would knock out internet-beaming constellations such as Starlink and Amazon Leo , as well as hundreds of Earth-observing satellites that keep an eye on the activity of adversary nations, the changing climate and areas struck by natural disasters.

Photograph of an aurora caused by the Starfish Prime high-altitude nuclear test explosion on July 9, 1962. (Image credit: Public Domain) No reliable way currently exists to detect and defuse a nuclear bomb in space. Danagoulian proposes a constellation of small "9U" cubesats , each one about the size of a large shoebox and each carrying a special detector capable of sensing radiation emitted by unexploded nulear bombs.

He explores a scenario in which Russia launches a suspected space nuke into an orbit with an altitude of 1,200 miles (2,000 km). That number is not random. In 2022, Russia's Kosmos 2553 satellite, orbiting at that exact altitude, triggered suspicions it might be testing components for a future orbital nuclear weapon.

Russia claims the satellite just observes Earth. At that altitude, the satellite passes through the Van Allen belt , a region of intense cosmic radiation trapped by Earth's magnetic field. Most of the belt stretches between altitudes of around 600 miles (1,000 km) to tens of thousands of miles, but in some areas the radiation can reach much closer to Earth's surface.

The interaction between the fissile material inside the nuke and the energetic particles from the radiation belt would create distinct signatures, Danagoulian said, which could help confirm whether a suspicious satellite carries a nuke or not.

"The thermonuclear weapon would contain a significant amount of uranium," Danagoulian said. "The high-energy protons [in the uranium] would break up when another proton is coming in and shred the nuclei. That would knock out a large number of neutrons. This interaction turns that device into a very intense neutron source that otherwise would not be there."

The process is known as proton-induced neutron spallation, which essentially means the ejection of fragments from material triggered by impacts of protons.

Two figures from the 2008 "Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack" illustrating the effects of a high-altitude nuclear explosion in Earth's atmosphere and how Earth's natural radiation belts can trap radiation released by nuclear detonations in or near space. (Image credit: U.S. Dept. of Defense) The detector satellite Danagoulian proposes would have to be able to get quite close to the suspect spacecraft — a few kilometers. The inspector spacecraft would carry a sensor combining two types of detectors. At the heart of the device is a neutron scintillator, which detects all incoming neutrons and protons. Around it is a "cage of diamond" detector that detects only neutrons — not protons. Such a set-up helps filter out the particles present in the environment naturally, said Danagoulian. In addition, by using two "planes of neutron detectors," the sensor can determine the direction from which the neutrons arrived.

"If the external diamond detector triggers and gives a signal, you can ignore the particle, because it's most likely a proton and not a neutron," said Danagoulian. "Once you identify those neutrons, by having those two detections, you can back project and find out where the neutron came from."

Danagoulian says such a nuke sniffer would have to be launched into an orbit aligned with that of the suspicious satellite and creep up as close as 2.5 miles (4 km) from it. It would then take about a week to gather enough measurements to confirm whether the object is hiding a nuke or not. A constellation of 10 such satellites could reduce the process to mere hours, Danagoulian said.

If a nuke were detected, the military could then try to jam the satellite's communications link from the ground, making it impossible for the adversary to remotely detonate the bomb. There is currently no technology available to safely defuse a nuclear weapon in space.

The United Nations Outer Space Treaty , which provides the legal foundation for humankind's use of outer space, bans the use of nuclear weapons in orbit. However, the treaty has no means to ensure compliance.

Other approaches to nuke detection in space have been explored, including maneuverable X-ray satellites, but those would be quite a bit more complex and expensive.

Danagoulian also suggests that high-grade radiation hardening could improve satellites' chances of surviving a nuclear winter in space.

The paper was published online in the journal Nature today (July 8).

Full text

Meta has filed a patent for a system that records your voice and surroundings all day, then uses an AI to analyse your mood. The patent’s stated, theoretical goal is for Meta, a company that makes billions of dollars targeting ads at its users based on their data, is to sell users a wearable that tailors workouts for them based on whether they’re happy or sad.

Patentlyze first noticed the patent which was published on July 2 after Meta filed it back in December of 2025. The filing described an “apparatus” that surveilled a user and their surroundings constantly to craft a better workout. “The audible communications may be associated with contextual factors such as time of day, location, user activity, or digital interaction,” the patent said. “The audible communications may be transcribed, and an emotional-state machine learning model may interpret verbal and nonverbal cues to determine emotional indicators.”

According to the filing, Meta needs to know when a user laughs or sighs, where they are physically, and what objects they’re surrounded by. It would even like to know when you’ve taken your meds. “The AI assistant may listen to a user(s) at predefined times to hear various types of communication, such as sighs, laughter, and/or the tone(s) of a voice(s),” the patent said. “The AI assistant may use these inputs to quantify the user's emotional state or generate other insights about the user [...] in another example, the AI assistant may take multiple inputs in in addition to audio inputs (e.g., of a user's voice) to provide a summary of emotional trends based on various inputs (e.g., a happier emotional state associated with a particular time of day or at a time when medication is taken, etc.).”

The more data it has, the patent explains, the better it could understand a user’s moods. “The system increases the precision and reliability of emotional inference by aligning multimodal sensor inputs on synchronized timelines, which creates a novel data structure that supports richer emotional analysis,” it said. “These combined features deliver a technical improvement in automated audio interpretation, enabling continuous emotional monitoring on everyday devices.”

Image via the US Patent Office. The emotional-analyzing AI would need far more than just a user’s words to determine moods over time. A longer description of the hypothetical training data for the AI included “attributes of thousands of objects” such as a user’s books, personal messages, and newspapers. “In some examples, audible communications may include speech (e.g., voice data), sighs, laughter, or other nonverbal sounds associated with an expression(s), an emotion(s), or ideas. In some examples, the audible communications may include the tone(s) of a voice of a user while making the communication(s),” it said.

All this data, Meta says, would be in service of tailoring better workouts. Humans, the patent explained, are simply not as good as a machine for this. “Personal trainers cannot provide the level of precision in guidance, such as correcting a pose and/or body movement,” it said. “These challenges create a need for a practical approach that uses a single device to observe movement, recommend routines, and provide corrective guidance.”

AI lives and dies by its training data. Many of the leading LLMs have already scanned the entire internet and are still hungry for more. Meta’s patented system would give it unprecedented access to the movements, moods, and interactions of its users. Giving the user workout suggestions in return seems a paltry compensation.

A wearable device that records every sound you make and transcribes it for an LLM while monitoring your exact location is a privacy nightmare. It’s also a fear that underpins many people’s concerns about big tech.

A wearable that records your every word and divines your emotions would also, necessarily, record your interactions with other people. Meta has pioneered non-consensual public recording with its smartglasses so it’s not shocking to see it file a patent that suggests it’ll move further into that space.

The last time Meta explicitly pursued user’s emotional data, it horrified people. In 2012, the company then called Facebook conducted a study into “emotional contagion” using Facebook’s newsfeed. Meta altered the feeds of 700,000 users to see if it could make them happy or sad just by tweaking what they saw online. Meta found that it could, in fact, alter people’s moods if it wanted. It did this without informing users they’d been part of an experiment.

Now it’s patented a device that will record your laughter and play it back to you. All in service of crafting the perfect workout routine. “An implementation may show that the user laughs more often on certain days, shows improved mood after life events, or expresses more positive emotion during morning routines. The device may also provide citations to specific audio moments that support the emotional interpretation,” it said.

Meta wants to tell you how you feel and it’ll use your own voice to do it.

Meta did not immediately respond to 404 Media’s request for comment.

Full text

The brain's memory center may come "prewired," rather than being built from scratch after birth, a new study in mice finds.

The research, published in April in the journal Nature Communications , offers a new perspective on a long-standing question in neuroscience: Does the brain begin as a blank slate and build memories by adding connections through experience, or does it come with built-in wiring? The new research focused on the hippocampus , a seahorse-shaped structure deep in the brain that's essential for forming memories.

Rather than supporting either theory directly, the research points to the latter idea but adds a significant twist.

The researchers focused on a region of the hippocampus called cornu ammonis 3 (CA3), which plays a central role in storing and recalling memories. A trait known as plasticity enables neurons within CA3 to continuously strengthen and weaken their connections and thus strengthen or weaken different memories.

The team examined mouse brain tissue collected shortly after birth, during adolescence or during adulthood. They found that early in life, hippocampal networks are densely wired, with many neurons hyperconnected in a seemingly random pattern. As the brain matures, these haphazard networks become sparser yet more structured as connections are pruned. This pruning begins soon after birth, with significant declines in connectivity by adolescence.

The finding discounts the idea that the hippocampus starts out as a blank slate, or "tabula rasa."

"We find, in a nutshell, that the system is not a tabula rasa, as we thought originally, where you can just write information and then at some point, this information fills the system," said study co-author Peter Jonas , a neuroscientist at the Institute of Science and Technology Austria. "Rather, it starts out as a tabula plena [full slate] and then becomes more sparser and specifically connected."​​

This pattern may help to explain why we remember so little from infancy .

Memories are thought to be stored within networks of neurons that fire together, representing specific experiences. In a young brain, however, these connections between neurons, called synapses, behave differently, the study suggests. In young brain tissue, a single input could cause a neuron to fire, the team found, while in mature networks, neurons typically require multiple inputs to fire.

In very young mice, neurons in a region of the hippocampus called CA3 form a dense, highly interconnected network (yellow), with connections that are largely random. (Image credit: Jake Watson / ISTA) Jonas said the team was surprised by not only the early pruning of connections but also how strong those early connections were. "You might think that early in development, you have poor synapses and weak synapses, but we found the opposite," he told Live Science.

This excitability comes at a cost, however: When neurons are activated too easily, different experiences can trigger overlapping patterns of activity. If that overlap is too great, the brain may struggle to distinguish one memory from another. Instead of forming distinct networks, it may generate broader, less-specific memories. In other words, the system is very active but not very precise.

This imprecision may affect behavior, too. For example, rodent studies show that young animals learn to fear an area of a cage where they received a mild shock, freezing when they return to it. But unlike adults, who freeze at that exact location, young animals also have this response in similar environments — so the memory is there, but it's not precise.

As mice mature, the network within CA3 becomes sparser but more organized (blue) with pruning refining the once-dense web of neural connections. (Image credit: Jake Watson / ISTA) As the brain matures, neurons become more selective and require multiple inputs to fire. The result is more distinct, separate networks that translate to specific and stable memories. So in regard to the inability to recall early childhood, it may be that our earliest memories are too poorly defined to be retained in the long term.

The findings are consistent with a growing body of research on how memory develops, said Hauður Freyja Ólafsdóttir, an assistant professor at the Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour at Radboud University in the Netherlands.

"It's exciting on multiple fronts," Ólafsdóttir, who was not involved in the study, told Live Science. "There is plenty of developmental psychology work that suggests that memory becomes more specific with age. And so it's kind of interesting that now, at the circuit level, we're also seeing that the connectivity patterns are becoming sparser."

So what drives brain wiring before birth? That dense, early connectivity may result from a genetically programmed developmental process. Then, after birth, experience refines the wiring, Jonas suggested.

The findings do not rule out the possibility that experiences before birth leave lasting traces in the brain. But Ólafsdóttir thinks those early forms of learning rely on different neural systems than mature hippocampal circuits.

"I'm not disputing that they're there and that they have influence," she said, referencing prenatal experiences. "They leave a trace, let's say, in our brain and probably in our psychology even." But those traces may not resemble the detailed memories formed later in life.

Related stories

Memories aren't static in the brain — they 'drift' over time

The brain stores at least 3 copies of every memory

'As if a shudder ran from its brain to its body': The neuroscientists that learned to control memories in rodents

When asked whether the connections that form before birth represent true memories or are just a byproduct of prenatal development, Jonas said, "The latter is more likely."

The "full slate" may give the brain a crucial head start by enabling neurons to quickly link different types of information, such as sights, sounds and smells. If the brain began as a blank slate, neurons might be too sparsely connected to find each other, making early communication difficult, the study authors think.

By starting with an overconnected network, the hippocampus may ensure that the necessary wiring is already in place, Jonas theorized.

This article was first published May 6, 2026.

See how much you know about the most complex organ in the human body with our brain quiz!

Full text

Credit: Jacob Itamar Cohen

Welcome to Wallpaper Wednesday! In this weekly roundup, we’ll give you a handful of Android wallpapers you can download and use on your phone, tablet, or even your laptop/PC. The images will come from folks here at Android Authority as well as our readers. All are free to use and come without watermarks. File formats are JPG and PNG, and we’ll provide images in both landscape and portrait modes, so they’ll be optimized for various screens.

For the newest walls, as well as all those from previous weeks, check out this Drive link . Want to submit your own? Head to the bottom of this article.