Sabine Hossenfelder (@skdh) X analytics
@skdh
German Physicist. Author of "Lost in Math" & "Existential Physics". There is no strength in numbers, have no such misconception. rt's are not endorsements
@skdh has 236.6K followers, a median of 31.6K views per post and a 2.12% engagement rate.
Based on 28 recent original posts (high confidence). Updated October 23, 2026.
At a glance
Key stats
- Followers
- 236.6K236,584 followers on October 23, 2026
- Median views per post
- 31.6K
- Average views per post
- 52.7K
- Engagement rate (by views)
- 2.12%
- Original posts per week
- 12.0
- Average engagements per post
- 1,118
Engagement grade
Strong
This is above the baseline for accounts with 100K-1M followers.
Profile score
85/100
- Profile completeness100
- Audience shape100
- Engagement25
- Consistency100
- Positioning clarity100
Monetization
Estimated X creator earnings
$12–$30 in the last 30 days
From views on @skdh's original posts over the last 18 days, scaled to 30 days (about 2.5M views).
Rewards eligibility: likely
Rough estimate. X publishes no payout rate, so this assumes about $5–12 per 1M original-post impressions from reported creator payouts. Only Premium viewers’ impressions count, so real payouts can be much lower.
Free report
How does your account compare with @skdh?
Get the same report for your own account by email: engagement grade, median views, best times to post and estimated earnings.
Growth
Follower growth
Tracked by Xholic since August 2, 2026.
| Date | Followers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 2026 | 236,584 | +1,823 |
| Oct 4, 2026 | 234,761 | +9,215 |
| Aug 2, 2026 | 225,546 | – |
Timing
Best times to post
When @skdh's recent posts performed best (UTC).
- #1 slot
8:12 PM
Monday · UTC
- #2 slot
7:18 PM
Tuesday · UTC
- #3 slot
8:23 PM
Wednesday · UTC
What worked
Top recent posts
- 01
@skdh ·
If we want to continue progress in science, we must be prepared to acknowledge that the correct description of nature will eventually simply be too complicated for humans to understand. I do not think it is wise to make human understanding a requirement. AI is the way forward.
- 1.2KReplies
- 564Reposts
- 5.8KLikes
- 461.3KViews
6.7x average engagementText onlyLong post (over 200 characters)Posted Mon 04:00 UTC - 02
@skdh ·
Physicists have created an entirely new form of matter, a crystal that we didn't previously know existed. It's the sort of research that might one day win a Nobel Prize.
Watch video- 113Replies
- 366Reposts
- 2.7KLikes
- 81KViews
3.5x average engagementHas a videoMedium length (100-200 characters)Posted Thu 15:00 UTC - 03
@skdh ·
Quantum mechanics makes sense, a physicists shows mathematically, if the universe has two dimensions of time, rather than just one. Does this make sense? I've had a look at the paper.
Watch video- 134Replies
- 179Reposts
- 1.5KLikes
- 65.1KViews
2.4x average engagementHas a videoMedium length (100-200 characters)Posted Tue 14:00 UTC - 04
@skdh ·
I thought it'd be a good idea to do a quick summary of the points I have made about the problems in the foundations of physics, just to make it more difficult for the offended physicists on X to pretend misunderstanding me: (A) The problem with the foundations of physics is that physicists continue to use methods that demonstrably do not work. They have made tens of thousands of so-called "predictions" for new particles, forces, extra dimensions etc etc, that were simply wrong. You can check this yourself. The literature is full of this nonsense. It has come to the point where a "prediction" in this field no longer means anything. It's embarrassing. And they're not doing anything about it. I have NOT said that the problem is that it takes them a long time to make progress. It is true of course, that that theory development in the field has basically stalled since the completion of the standard model. But who is to say whether this is just because the questions are difficult. If you think I have said that it is taking too long, you are confusing me with someone else. I have said instead that the problem is that they are using methods that evidently do not work. And that they do not update these methods is hugely worrisome because it demonstrates a failure of science to self-correct. It shows that the self-correction in this community is broken. (B) I have been very clear with saying that the problem is theory development in the foundations of physics. Not the foundations of physics per se (clearly experiment has made progress), not physics per se (clearly there is more to physics than the foundations), but theory development in the foundations of physics. (C) In my book Lost in Math, I explain that historically the method that has worked best (for theory development in the foundations) has been requiring mathematical consistency. This is why I argue physicists in these areas should prioritize solving problems of mathematical consistency and/or inconsistency with experiments. Examples: quantum gravity, measurement problem in quantum physics, dark matter. This is not an exhaustive list. (D) I did not say that mathematical consistency is either sufficient or necessary for a successful new theory. I made a much weaker point, which is that historically it has worked well. Evidence speaks for it. Obviously just because a theory is mathematically consistent doesn't mean it also correctly describes nature. Meaning: Physicists must also make sure their theory can, and will be tested. If they work on a theory without thinking about how to experimentally test it, that is not scientific. (E) People who haven't read my book sometimes think I say physicists use too much maths. This could not be farther from the truth. I argue they need to take maths more seriously. (F) Because of the above, I have repeatedly said that string theory has a good motivation. If you think I am a big critic of string theory, again, you are confusing me with someone else. (G) I have said that while these issues seem specific to the foundations of physics, they are symptoms of a bigger underlying problem that affects all of academia, which is that scientists get rewarded for producing papers that they themselves call progress. Progress in academia has no tangible external measure, hence they are optimizing irrelevant goals. It's a systemic problem that has been much discussed by sociologists and economists and many, if not most, academics are to some extent aware of it. In the foundations in particular, physicists have hit on the rather obvious simple fix of producing theories that simply have no relation to the real world and then discussing them forever, claiming that paper production counts as progress in some sense. I'm not having it and neither should you. This nonsense needs to stop. (H) I have been writing and speaking about this for about 20 years. Indeed it's how I got to know @ericweinstein , because I organized a conference about this a long time ago. The idea that either of us is going on about this because it is somehow "popular" contradicts facts. Rather what has happened is that at last at least the more informed public is paying attention to what we have been pointing out for a long time is a huge problem.
- 171Replies
- 215Reposts
- 1.7KLikes
- 70.8KViews
2.2x average engagementText onlyLong post (over 200 characters)Posted Fri 05:00 UTC - 05
@skdh ·
The butterfly effect is much stranger than we thought.
Watch video- 80Replies
- 179Reposts
- 1.3KLikes
- 53.2KViews
1.8x average engagementHas a videoShort post (under 100 characters)Posted Fri 12:00 UTC - 06
@skdh ·
A nuclear fusion start up in New Zealand is the only one working on the "levitating dipole" approach.
Watch video- 71Replies
- 150Reposts
- 1.2KLikes
- 36.2KViews
1.4x average engagementHas a videoMedium length (100-200 characters)Posted Wed 11:00 UTC
Latest
Recent posts by Sabine Hossenfelder
The latest 28 original posts from @skdh, newest first, as of October 23, 2026. Replies and reposts aren't included.
@skdh ·
Unfortunately, it's not going well for small modular reactors https://t.co/8igMVwhaHt
- 37Replies
- 18Reposts
- 187Likes
- 20.2KViews
@skdh ·
Personally, I think it is totally fine if you use AI for writing purposes. I don't like reading AI prose. But in many cases (especially formal) writing is merely a way to convey information, it isn't necessary that people enjoy reading it. If it will even be read by people... https://t.co/nWZ0WEAFLj
- 104Replies
- 15Reposts
- 469Likes
- 24.7KViews
@skdh ·
A 14 year old has put forward a new theory for the universe. I've had a look and it's interesting, though not because of the theory itself. https://t.co/zaa4EnEGUi
- 40Replies
- 22Reposts
- 192Likes
- 26.2KViews
@skdh ·
I got my teeth 3d scanned at the dentist and asked the assistant how the device works (laser? visual range? ultrasound? why does it vibrate?). She told me it's "not radiation" and "not dangerous" and that was the only thing I could get out of her. https://t.co/gQXpCYeE4S
- 133Replies
- 34Reposts
- 1.1KLikes
- 84.4KViews
@skdh ·
Quantum mechanics makes sense, a physicists shows mathematically, if the universe has two dimensions of time, rather than just one. Does this make sense? I've had a look at the paper.
Watch video- 134Replies
- 179Reposts
- 1.5KLikes
- 65.1KViews
@skdh ·
(a) GR does not say faster than light travel is impossible. (b) Even if it did, GR almost certainly is not fundamentally correct. But thanks for asking. https://t.co/viZXjERb8J
- 95Replies
- 28Reposts
- 921Likes
- 45.7KViews
@skdh ·
my favorite X account is the UK @metoffice because nothing is as relaxing as listening to British people discussing the weather 11/10. I am sure you all wanted to know this
- 65Replies
- 12Reposts
- 366Likes
- 19.2KViews
@skdh ·
Astronomers have found a green star. And a pink one and a purple one. This was supposed to be impossible. In today's video I explain how they arrived at this stunning conclusion https://t.co/It76eun2Lk
- 45Replies
- 38Reposts
- 304Likes
- 18KViews
@skdh ·
If we want to continue progress in science, we must be prepared to acknowledge that the correct description of nature will eventually simply be too complicated for humans to understand. I do not think it is wise to make human understanding a requirement. AI is the way forward.
- 1.2KReplies
- 564Reposts
- 5.8KLikes
- 461.3KViews
@skdh ·
A group of astrophysicists claims they have solved the problem of the Hubble tension https://t.co/GHwSPSgQuk
- 40Replies
- 27Reposts
- 205Likes
- 20.3KViews
Show all 28Show fewer
@skdh ·
The butterfly effect is much stranger than we thought.
Watch video- 80Replies
- 179Reposts
- 1.3KLikes
- 53.2KViews
@skdh ·
so instead of thinking about what I said, this physicist continues to invent things I did not say and accuses me of being "trumpian".
- 101Replies
- 23Reposts
- 621Likes
- 18.6KViews
@skdh ·
I thought it'd be a good idea to do a quick summary of the points I have made about the problems in the foundations of physics, just to make it more difficult for the offended physicists on X to pretend misunderstanding me: (A) The problem with the foundations of physics is that physicists continue to use methods that demonstrably do not work. They have made tens of thousands of so-called "predictions" for new particles, forces, extra dimensions etc etc, that were simply wrong. You can check this yourself. The literature is full of this nonsense. It has come to the point where a "prediction" in this field no longer means anything. It's embarrassing. And they're not doing anything about it. I have NOT said that the problem is that it takes them a long time to make progress. It is true of course, that that theory development in the field has basically stalled since the completion of the standard model. But who is to say whether this is just because the questions are difficult. If…
- 171Replies
- 215Reposts
- 1.7KLikes
- 70.8KViews
@skdh ·
this might be the dumbest post these so-called scientists have yet come up with. not only does he obviously not know I have written an entire book arguing that physicists need to pay more attention to mathematical consistency (10 years ago), he also pretends he doesn't understand a trivially correct point about the broken incentives in academia. to top it off he accuses me of writing X-comments to make money rather than actually thinking about why their field is stuck. the unwillingness -- or maybe just inability -- of these people to think about the obvious problems in their field blows my mind. is anyone really surprised the foundations of physics have degenerated into a bullshit paper production machine?
- 82Replies
- 63Reposts
- 946Likes
- 34.5KViews
@skdh ·
Consistency is useful but insufficient. There are many different ways to make mathematical axioms consistent, eg by simply removing some of them. This is basically what physicists are doing with the black hole information loss problem or quantum mechanics. https://t.co/5cnmMup9fP
- 22Replies
- 6Reposts
- 177Likes
- 12.5KViews
@skdh ·
Global warming means fewer hurricanes, scientists confirm https://t.co/IcjeFM1VeE
- 57Replies
- 16Reposts
- 153Likes
- 14.2KViews
@skdh ·
the problem is to measure "impactful" and optimize for it. academia has defined "impactful" as "other academics like it". Academics like string theory because it is mathematically "rich" in the sense that you can write lots of papers about it. https://t.co/JXsI6qdyb2
- 72Replies
- 49Reposts
- 612Likes
- 31.9KViews
@skdh ·
Big Oil's plans to survive climate change policies is working beautifully https://t.co/vXkE2LGFih
- 21Replies
- 10Reposts
- 86Likes
- 12KViews
@skdh ·
A nuclear fusion start up in New Zealand is the only one working on the "levitating dipole" approach.
Watch video- 71Replies
- 150Reposts
- 1.2KLikes
- 36.2KViews
@skdh ·
kudos to everyone who has just been plastering their videos with Getty photos leaving the watermark on https://t.co/oyb9hwxKgy
- 16Replies
- 18Reposts
- 355Likes
- 31.3KViews
@skdh ·
Biologists Give 3 Reasons Why AI Isn’t Conscious (Yet) https://t.co/qooUHD9Wgp
- 62Replies
- 23Reposts
- 155Likes
- 16.6KViews
@skdh ·
A group of astronomers claim they have evidence for UFOs on the moon. Their evidence is so bad I suspect they are just trolling.
Watch video- 77Replies
- 83Reposts
- 813Likes
- 30KViews
@skdh ·
New data about the Milky Way is incompatible with both dark matter AND modified gravity https://t.co/a9SbJx5OgK
- 86Replies
- 51Reposts
- 335Likes
- 32.6KViews
@skdh ·
Physicists have created an entirely new form of matter, a crystal that we didn't previously know existed. It's the sort of research that might one day win a Nobel Prize.
Watch video- 113Replies
- 366Reposts
- 2.7KLikes
- 81KViews
@skdh ·
The only thing I do on linkedin is post links to my YouTube videos. I don't know why I'm bothering.
- 177Replies
- 36Reposts
- 909Likes
- 26.4KViews
@skdh ·
Expert predictions about AI progress have been stunningly inaccurate https://t.co/QYinVEdz2l
- 54Replies
- 48Reposts
- 416Likes
- 83.1KViews
@skdh ·
Life did not have one origin, but two, the authors of a new study say.
Watch video- 81Replies
- 109Reposts
- 1.1KLikes
- 45.7KViews
@skdh ·
A few words on this year's Nobel Prize in physics. It's okay if you hate me for saying this. https://t.co/2QmZd6FS0y
- 71Replies
- 38Reposts
- 289Likes
- 58.9KViews
Formats
Content mix
- Text only
- 11%
- With media
- 32%
- With links
- 16 posts
- With hashtags
- 0 posts
Creator style: High-reach broadcaster
See the full app
This creator report is one small part of Xholic
Click through a sample creator's account in the real app. No sign-up, nothing to install.
- Posts written in your voice and scheduled for your best hours
- Buyers found on 𝕏, with a reply drafted for each one
- Analytics that show which posts grow you
No sign-up or login needed · Takes about 2 minutes
Grow your own account
Want numbers like @skdh's?
Xholic writes posts in your voice, schedules them for the hours your audience is active, and tracks what's working every day.
$0 today · Card required · Cancel anytime
Live demo: no sign-up or login needed · takes about 2 minutes
Keep browsing
More in Health & science
See all of Health & science
Keep exploring
Free tools
- Compare Twitter AccountsPut two public accounts head to head and see who leads on views, engagement, grade and posting pace.
- Twitter Engagement Rate CalculatorCalculate engagement rate from your numbers or a public profile and grade it against your tier.
- X Monetization CalculatorChange the assumptions behind six X revenue models and compare gross revenue with direct contribution.
Guides
- How to Analyze Any X Profile and Read the ReportAnalyze any public X profile and read the report properly: how each metric is calculated, what is measured vs estimated, and three worked readings.
- How to Check Twitter (X) Analytics: Every Metric ExplainedHow to check your own X analytics on desktop and mobile, what's free per post and what needs Premium, what every metric means, and how to check any public account.
From the blog
- How to Track a Competitor's X/Twitter AnalyticsTrack a competitor's public X analytics: follower growth, top posts, engagement proxies, cadence, content patterns, and a repeatable reporting workflow.
- Twitter Analytics Metrics That Actually Drive GrowthLearn which twitter analytics metrics predict growth on X, how to read them together, and the workflow that turns data into better posts and replies.
Best tweets on this topic
- Best tweets about Self ImprovementA curated collection of the sharpest, most-shared X posts about self improvement—saved so you do not have to dig through the timeline yourself. Updated every two weeks.
- Best tweets about ProductivityA curated collection of the sharpest, most-shared X posts about productivity—saved so you do not have to dig through the timeline yourself. Updated every two weeks.
- Best tweets about Burnout and Mental Health for FoundersRead 50 of the best tweets about founder burnout and mental health, with honest lessons on startup stress, resilience, and sustainable work.
About this data
- Analytics are inferred from public profile and recent post data. They do not include private impressions, profile visits, link clicks, or follower-source data.
- Deleted, protected, unavailable, or rate-limited posts may be missing from the sample.
- Stats come from public posts Xholic has stored, not private X Analytics. Xholic is not affiliated with X Corp or @skdh.
- Own this account and want it hidden? Email support@xholic.ai — we verify ownership and handle requests within 2 working days.