Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

According to the College Board how many score an 800 on the SAT math each year?

AI Overview

The College Board does not publish the exact number of students who score an 800 on the SAT math section each year. However, an 800 is a top-tier score that falls in the 99+ percentile.

Assuming roughly 1.5 to 2 million students take the SAT annually, this translates to an estimated 15,000 to 20,000 students securing a perfect math score across the various testing administrations.

Did J. Robert Oppenheimer, Edward Teller, Leo Szilard, Enrico Fermi, Ernest Orlando Lawrence, Otto Frisch, Niels Bohr, Felix Bloch, James Franck, Emilio Segrè, Klaus Fuchs, Hans Bethe, or John Von Neumann ever work as direct employees (not consultants) for any technology company?

No, none of them.

When strictly excluding external advisory roles, board seats, patent licensing agreements, and independent consulting contracts, not a single scientist on this list was ever hired as a regular, direct employee for a private technology or engineering company.

Every individual on this list spent their formal payroll careers strictly within four institutional categories:

Universities and Academic Academies (e.g., Princeton, Chicago, Berkeley, Columbia, Copenhagen, Stanford).

Government Agencies and Public Commissions (e.g., the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, the National Defense Research Committee).

Publicly Funded or State-Run Laboratories (e.g., Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, Lawrence Berkeley, CERN, or the Central Institute for Nuclear Research in East Germany).

Foreign State Service (e.g., military service or national government research mandates).

Clarifications on Close Associations

While many of these men had deep ties to corporate entities, those relationships strictly disqualified them as "direct employees":

Leo Szilard: He famously partnered with Allgemeine Elektricitäts-Gesellschaft (AEG) to develop the Einstein-Szilard refrigerator. However, he was never on AEG's internal corporate staff or employment rolls; he was an independent inventor who sold patents and maintained a contract-based advisory relationship.

John von Neumann & Hans Bethe: Both men made fortunes in corporate tech. Von Neumann was a crucial architect of IBM's early computing strategy, and Bethe spent decades solving advanced solid-state problems for the General Electric Research Laboratory. However, both intentionally structured their corporate ties as elite, independent retainer-based consultants to protect their primary, full-time employment status as tenured academic professors (at the Institute for Advanced Study and Cornell University, respectively).

Edward Teller: He spent his entire career on the payroll of the University of California system (which managed the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos laboratories) and various defense advisory boards. His extensive corporate work with companies like Sandia Corporation, Ford, and aerospace manufacturers was entirely restricted to consulting panels and advisory boards.

Even as job seekers fret about artificial intelligence and tech behemoths announce massive layoffs, Matt Walsh is finding it surprisingly hard to help technology companies hire certain kinds of workers.

That’s what Walsh’s recruiting firm, Blue Signal, does. And in specialties including semiconductor production, “the unemployment rate is probably negative 20 percent,” the CEO of the Phoenix-based search company said. “It’s ridiculous. There just aren’t enough people.”

Higgenbotham wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 4:23 pm So let me spell it out step by step, very slowly.

1. America is the richest country in the world.
2. America has a very high wealth gap.
3. Due to factors 1. and 2., there are a lot of very, very rich people in America.
4. The very, very rich people in America, by and large, want to keep it that way.
5. Rich people generally spend almost all of their time working or thinking about money and that's one reason why they are rich.
6. When a person spends all of his time working or thinking about money, that experience influences his view of the world.
7. For such a person, when any given topic comes up, how to make some money automatically enters front and center into the thought process.
8. For any given topic, some of the ways money can be made are buying political influence and influencing public opinion.
9. To influence public opinion, you can, for example, play to the media or buy a newspaper (The Washington Post, for example).
10. If you are going to buy media influence it helps to get it cheap because it buys more influence.
11. Very rich people understand that the average person is not as interested in money as they are.
12. The rich use things that the average person does care about to influence their opinions.
13. There are many ways the rich influence opinions to make money on any given issue and they will figure out how to do that before others do.
14. The average person may not understand how and why the rich influence their opinions because the average person doesn't think that way.
15. Added in anticipation - no, this is not a conspiracy theory.

Hypothetical Letter to Property Tax Payers That Will Never be Seen


Dear Cutter County Property Tax Payer,

Hello, my name is Greg Cutter and for those of you who know me, this annual letter that comes with your property tax bill will once again this year report the good news from your county tax office. For those new residents to the county, welcome. I invite you to visit with me with your ideas as to how to increase efficiency in city and county government as well as the school system.

First, the bottom line. Property taxes in Cutter County will be reduced 6 percent this year, on top of the 7 percent reduction last year and the 5 percent reduction the year before that. With that, key services will be increased.

As far as property tax reductions go, we have 53 cost reduction and efficiency programs ongoing. This letter will discuss two of these programs that have resulted in significant cost savings once again this year.

The first is what we call the Hundred Year Highway program. This program makes use of advances in engineered materials with the goal that each road rebuilding or construction effort in the county results in a roadway that needs no ongoing maintenance due to wear and tear for 100 years. Since implementation of this program 26 years ago, our budget for road repairs continues to dwindle. Last year, our costs for road repairs and rebuilding really started falling off the cliff, having been reduced by another 7 percent over last year.

The second is what we call the Bottom Five Percent program. This is a program whereby we take a careful look at the Five Percent of the county population who use the majority of our police services. As reported in previous letters, we found several years ago that it was just five percent of our residents who were tying up over 50 percent of our police department time and expense. Since then, we have made concerted efforts to identify those residents and remove them from the county. We can once again report that this has resulted in substantial cost savings, as we have once again reduced our police force and crime rate, while still maintaining the high quality of life that Cutter County residents are used to enjoying.

There are similar ongoing efforts being implemented, particularly in the school system which will yield big results over the forthcoming years, and which should continue to result in the lower property taxes, improved quality of life, and increased efficiency which the residents of Cutter County have come to expect.

In the Spirit of Service to the Tax Payer,

Sincerely, Greg Cutter
Mayor of Cutter and Head of the County Tax Office

tim wrote: Sun Jul 12, 2026 5:17 pm Research the childhood vaccine schedule. Children are subjected to far more vaccinations today then the boomers were.

Next, research the percentage of diseases that today's kids have compared to the Amish population (or boomers as children).

The only question is, why isn't this research being conducted in an official capacity?

Wingspread Consensus Statement

In 1991, scientists gathered at a meeting at the Wingspread conference center in Racine, Wisconsin. There the term “endocrine disruptor” was coined. Here is the text of the consensus statement from this historic meeting.

CONSENSUS STATEMENT

The following consensus was reached by participants at the workshop.

1. We are certain of the following:

[*]A large number of man-made chemicals that have been released into the environment, as well as a few natural ones, have the potential to disrupt the endocrine system of animals, including humans. Among these are the persistent, bioaccumulative, organohalogen compounds that include some pesticides (fungicides, herbicides, and insecticides) and industrial chemicals, other synthetic products and some metals. [footnote 1]
[*]Many wildlife populations are already affected by these compounds. The impacts include thyroid dysfunction in birds and fish; decreased fertility in birds, fish, shellfish, and mammals; decreased hatching success in birds, fish, and turtles; gross birth deformities in birds, fish, and turtles; metabolic abnormalities in birds, fish, and mammals; behavioral abnormalities in birds; demasculinization and feminization of male fish, birds and mammals; defeminization and masculinization of female fish and birds; and compromised immune systems in birds and mammals.
[*]The patterns of effects vary among species and among compounds. Four general points can nonetheless be made: (1) the chemicals of concern may have entirely different effects on the embryo, fetus, or perinatal organism than on the adult; (2) the effects are most often manifested in offspring, not in the exposed parent; (3) the timing of exposure in the developing organism is crucial in determining its character and future potential; and (4) although critical exposure occurs during embryonic development, obvious manifestations may not occur until maturity.
[*]Laboratory studies corroborate the abnormal sexual development observed in the field and provide biological mechanisms to explain the observations in wildlife.
[*]Humans have been affected by compounds of this nature, too.

AI Overview

The standard measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine is highly effective. One dose provides roughly 93% protection, and a second dose increases immunity to 97% to 98%. A third dose is generally only recommended for specific high-risk groups in outbreak settings, as the two-dose series yields lasting immunity for most.

Vaccine Dosing Schedule and Effectiveness Breakdown

First Dose: Typically given between 12 and 15 months of age. It provides about 93% protection. The small percentage who do not respond usually require the second dose to build antibodies.

Second Dose: Recommended between 4 and 6 years old (at least 28 days after the first). This brings protection up to 97%-98% and serves to catch the small percentage of people whose first dose didn't "take".

Higgenbotham wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 4:21 pm

Higgenbotham wrote: Sat Jul 11, 2026 4:11 pm

WHEN ANDREW CHAN, MD, became a gastroenterologist two decades ago, he began noticing a gradual shift in the patients calling for appointments. These weren’t the usual people over 65. Instead, they were young adults who, at first glance, check the boxes for “healthy.” Yet each had been diagnosed with colorectal cancer.

Most weren’t obese. Some were marathoners. Some were vegetarians. Some didn’t even take a sip of alcohol. Since Dr. Chan specializes in high-risk cancer genetics, he also checked to see if there was a family history of disease. Negative.

Dr. Chan’s situation is not an outlier. In fact, it’s becoming more of the norm.

As to why young adults who check the boxes for having a healthy lifestyle can be getting sick, I've attempted to answer that question. Given the way I've tried to answer it, the problem will only continue to grow worse with time.

Higgenbotham wrote: Sun Mar 10, 2024 6:34 pm

Higgenbotham wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2024 9:54 pm In what might be called the mainstream American culture, which includes exposures to synthetic chemicals, childhood vaccines, standard American diet

First generation: (born around 1960 plus or minus a few years) Parents were not exposed to synthetic chemicals until they were adults. Anecdotally there seem to be a few more obese kids, geeky kids, gay kids, kids with allergies, kids needing orthodontics, etc., but nothing too alarming and kids seem to grow out of some of these problems. The birth rate for this generation falls a bit when adulthood is reached but nothing too dramatic. There may be a few years decrease in life expectancy becoming evident.

Second generation: (born around 1985 plus or minus a few years) First transgenerational effects may be seen, in other words, parents who were exposed to these things during their own fetal and childhood development start to have kids. In addition to what plagues the first generation born around 1960, hyperactivity, attention deficit disorder, autism, more severe allergies, diabetes, and other disorders become more common and less curable. Some are now common enough to have names and to be screened for. This generation sees a dramatic fall in their birthrate upon reaching adulthood.

Third generation: (born around 2015 plus or minus a few more years) Now going out on a limb. Transgenerational effects are now quite noticeable and influence the culture and economy to a great extent. There are lots more lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults compared to generations born before World War II, so many in fact that an acronym to describe this phenomenon is thought to be needed, LGBT. It is rare for a child not to have some kind of disorder. Disorders become even more severe; for example whereas many children born in 1960 may have been a bit geeky, now many are severely autistic. The birth rate for this generation takes a dramatic fall to less than half of the birthrate of the generation born before World War II.

Fourth generation: (born around 2045 plus or minus a few more years) Now really going out on a limb. Transgenerational effects in the mainstream American culture are now so severe that fertility and lifespan are affected to the point that it is evident mainstream culture is no longer viable. In most cases, disorders are so severe as to be irreversible and in many cases untreatable.

Reference that discusses transgenerational effects:

Fetal exposures cause disease in future generations. Remarkably, it appears that early life exposures can lead to health problems not only in adulthood, but also down through subsequent generations. For instance, adult diseases linked to newborns' low birth weight, enumerated above, cause adverse effects not only in those babies born small, but also in their children of any birth size, through heritable changes in gene expression that result in a phenomenon known as "epigenetic inheritance." Very different from genetic mutations, which are physical changes in gene structure, epigenetic inheritance is instead characterized by certain genes being turned on or off, but near permanently in ways that can be inherited.

If a genetic mutation is like changing a light fixture, the comparable epigenitic change would involve taping the light switch on or off. Since genes are responsible for making the chemicals that build and repair the body, this unnatural forcing to a permanent on or off position can have far-reaching consequences. In humans, both kinds of genetic changes, mutations as well as epigenetic changes in gene expression, can be passed down to a baby in the womb.

Scientists have recently found heritable epigenetic changes linked to the fungicide vinclozolin and pesticide methoxychlor, which impaired sperm counts and sperm motility not only among animals exposed in utero, but also in three subsequent generations (Anway et al. 2005). In other words, what each of us was exposed to in our mother's womb might affect the health of our great-grandchildren.

Notably, both of these pesticides were recently banned under a federal law that requires pesticides to be safe for newborns and children. The government gives children no explicit protection under the federal law meant to ensure the safety of other commercial chemicals (the Toxic Substances Control Act), even though risks from childhood exposures to industrial chemicals are no lower than those from pesticides.

https://www.ewg.org/research/body-burde ... n-newborns

The problem here seems to be that when the fetal exposures and exposures of previous generations lock epigenetic effects into place, a healthy lifestyle is not enough to overcome them in many cases. It may take stronger interventions than what are being practiced.

As I noted here:

"Fourth generation: (born around 2045 plus or minus a few more years) Now really going out on a limb. Transgenerational effects in the mainstream American culture are now so severe that fertility and lifespan are affected to the point that it is evident mainstream culture is no longer viable. In most cases, disorders are so severe as to be irreversible and in many cases untreatable."

We're nowhere near that yet but the first indications of it may be showing up in a few people. Without very strong interventions to reverse the transgenerational effects, these results may be mainstream in the second half of the century.

Higgenbotham wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2026 1:32 pm In a true Information Age, there would be enough information and decision making based on it to put people in positions of authority who wouldn't do stupid things like this. After all, those people do exist in substantial numbers. But we're nowhere near that yet. Before that, "The shit floats to the top," and then comes the new dark age.

I conducted many hundreds of focus groups with employees, managers, and senior managers over 2.5 decades as a management consultant. Many of these groups were done post-layoff. I cannot think of a single time when I didn’t run into focus group participants who were positively mystified because “that guy” or “that woman” was let go. Invariably, that guy and that woman were considered absolutely key to getting results and making their sub-organization run efficiently.

Bosses know a threat when they see one, and those threats are often very intelligent.