• Architectural Showdown for On-Device AI: A Comparative Analysis of the NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX and Apple M4

    This report provides an exhaustive comparative analysis of two leading-edge System-on-Chip (SoC) platforms, the NVIDIA® Jetson Orin™ NX and the Apple M4, with a specific focus on their capabilities for on-device Artificial Intelligence (AI) computation. While both represent formidable engineering achievements, they are the products of divergent design philosophies, targeting fundamentally different markets. The NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX is a specialized, highly configurable module engineered for the demanding world of embedded systems, robotics, and autonomous machines. It prioritizes I/O flexibility, deterministic performance within strict power envelopes, and deep programmability through its industry-standard CUDA® software ecosystem. In contrast, the Apple M4, as implemented in the Mac mini, is a highly integrated SoC designed to power a seamless consumer and prosumer desktop experience. It leverages a state-of-the-art manufacturing process and a Unified Memory Architecture to achieve exceptional performance-per-watt, with its AI capabilities delivered through a high-level, abstracted software framework.

    The central thesis of this analysis is that a direct comparison of headline specifications, particularly the AI performance metric of Trillion Operations Per Second (TOPS), is insufficient and often misleading. The Jetson Orin NX, with its heterogeneous array of programmable CUDA® cores, specialized Tensor Cores, and fixed-function Deep Learning Accelerators (DLAs), offers a powerful and flexible toolkit for expert developers building custom AI systems. The Apple M4, centered on its highly efficient Neural Engine, functions more like a finely tuned appliance, delivering potent AI acceleration for a curated set of tasks within a tightly integrated software and hardware ecosystem. Key differentiators—including a two-generation gap in semiconductor manufacturing technology, fundamentally different memory architectures, and opposing software philosophies—dictate the true capabilities and ideal applications for each platform. This report deconstructs these differences to provide a nuanced understanding for developers, researchers, and technology strategists evaluating these platforms for their specific on-device AI needs.

    (more…)
  • Project Babylon: An Intelligence Assessment of the Iraqi Supergun Program

    Project Babylon was a confirmed, state-sponsored weapons development program initiated by the government of Iraq and active between 1988 and 1990. The program’s objective was the design, clandestine procurement, and construction of the largest conventional artillery pieces ever conceived. Contrary to some popular misconceptions, the technology was based entirely on established ballistic principles and chemical propellants, not on theoretical electromagnetic or railgun systems. The program was the brainchild and life’s work of the brilliant but controversial Canadian artillery engineer, Dr. Gerald Bull, who found in Iraqi President Saddam Hussein a patron with the ambition and resources to fund his vision.   

    The program’s stated purpose was dual-use: to provide Iraq with a cost-effective, independent capability to launch satellites into low Earth orbit, while also possessing an inherent, undeniable potential for strategic long-range bombardment. This dual nature was a source of significant international concern, as the weapon’s theoretical range placed key regional adversaries, including Israel and Iran, within its reach.   

    Project Babylon successfully produced and test-fired one functional, sub-scale prototype known as “Baby Babylon”. However, the full-scale weapon, “Big Babylon,” was never completed. The program was abruptly and decisively neutralized in the spring of 1990 through a sophisticated, multi-pronged counter-proliferation effort. This effort culminated in two key events: the assassination of Dr. Gerald Bull in Brussels in March 1990, which decapitated the project’s technical leadership, and the subsequent coordinated seizure of critical gun components by customs authorities across Europe in April 1990.   

    Following the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the government of Iraq admitted to the existence of the program. All remaining hardware, including the completed prototype and the unassembled components of the full-scale gun, were located, documented, and systematically destroyed under the supervision of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM). The existence, technical specifications, and ultimate fate of Project Babylon are not matters of speculation or conspiracy theory; they are a thoroughly documented chapter in the history of unconventional weapons proliferation. This report provides a comprehensive assessment of the program, from its conceptual origins to its final dismantlement.  

    (more…)
  • The Sonim Saga: A Wall Street Cautionary Tale

    How does a publicly-traded technology company lose over 99% of its value, leaving even seasoned investors bewildered? The story of Sonim Technologies, ticker SONM, is a classic Wall Street cautionary tale—a dramatic chronicle of a promising IPO that devolved into a multi-year “penny stock death spiral.” This is not just a stock chart; it’s an autopsy. Join us as we dissect the complete timeline, from the initial hype to the desperate reverse stock splits, the failed turnaround attempts, and the final buyout. We’ll uncover the fundamental financial failures and strategic blunders that sealed Sonim’s fate, providing a crucial lesson in risk, value, and the brutal realities of the market.

    Doomscroll Dispatch
    Doomscroll Dispatch
    The Sonim Saga: A Wall Street Cautionary Tale
    Loading
    /
  • An Autopsy of a Penny Stock: The Complete Timeline and Analysis of Sonim Technologies (SONM)

    The Anatomy of a 99% Decline

    For any trader, even one with a decade of experience, the trajectory of Sonim Technologies (NASDAQ: SONM) can appear baffling. The stock’s history is a maelstrom of extreme volatility, deep value destruction, and seemingly contradictory news. The central explanation for Sonim’s stock performance, however, is not found in complex market manipulation or a hidden, misunderstood value proposition. Rather, SONM’s chart is a direct and brutal reflection of a company that, despite possessing a well-defined product for a niche market, has been fundamentally unable to achieve sustained operational profitability since its public debut.

    This failure has locked the company in a classic “penny stock death spiral.” The narrative begins with a promising Initial Public Offering (IPO) in May 2019 at $11.00 per share. It quickly devolves into a story of chronic cash burn, which forced the company into a series of highly dilutive capital raises at progressively lower valuations. To maintain its Nasdaq listing in the face of a collapsing share price, the company was compelled to execute two separate 1-for-10 reverse stock splits, which only temporarily masked the relentless destruction of shareholder value. A 2022 takeover by a strategic investor, AJP Holding Company, brought a new management team and a strategic pivot, leading to a brief, illusory financial recovery in 2023 built on an unsustainable business line. This was followed by a disastrous 2024, characterized by a strategic reset that led to massive financial losses and a second reverse split.   

    This multi-year saga has culminated in the current endgame: a 2025 definitive agreement to sell the company’s core assets to Social Mobile for approximately $20 million. The stock’s recent volatility is not a sign of a potential turnaround but the speculative spasms of a distressed entity where trading on buyout rumors has replaced any semblance of fundamental valuation. The pending acquisition represents the likely final chapter for Sonim as an independent public company, crystallizing a more than 99% loss for its IPO investors.   

    (more…)
  • A Researcher’s and Inventor’s Guide to Mie Scattering Theory and Its Applications

    A Researcher’s and Inventor’s Guide to Mie Scattering Theory and Its Applications

    The Enduring Power of an Exact Solution: Foundations of Mie Theory

    Mie theory stands as a cornerstone of computational light scattering, providing a complete and rigorous analytical solution to Maxwell’s equations for the interaction of an electromagnetic wave with a homogeneous sphere. First published by Gustav Mie in 1908, this formalism is not a historical artifact but the foundational bedrock that bridges the gap between the Rayleigh scattering approximation for particles much smaller than the wavelength of light and the principles of geometric optics for particles much larger. Its enduring relevance stems from its ability to precisely describe scattering phenomena in the critical intermediate regime where particle size is comparable to the wavelength—a condition that characterizes a vast array of systems in science and technology.  

    The Physical Problem and its Mathematical Formulation

    The core problem addressed by Mie theory is the scattering and absorption of an incident plane electromagnetic wave by a single, homogeneous, isotropic sphere of a given radius and complex refractive index, which is embedded within a uniform, non-absorbing medium. The theory is a direct, analytical solution derived from Maxwell’s vector field equations in a source-free medium, a significant achievement at a time when the full implications of Maxwell’s work were not yet universally appreciated.  

    The solution strategy employs the method of separation of variables in a spherical coordinate system. The incident plane wave, the electromagnetic field inside the sphere, and the scattered field outside the sphere are each expanded into an infinite series of vector spherical harmonics (VSH). This mathematical decomposition is powerful because it separates the radial and angular dependencies of the fields, transforming a complex three-dimensional vector problem into a more manageable set of one-dimensional equations. The unknown expansion coefficients for the scattered and internal fields are then determined by enforcing the physical boundary conditions at the surface of the sphere—namely, that the tangential components of the electric and magnetic fields must be continuous across the interface.  

    Key Parameters and Outputs of a Mie Calculation

    The entire physical interaction is governed by a small set of well-defined inputs that describe the particle, the medium, and the light. From these, the theory produces a complete description of the particle’s optical signature.

    Inputs: The fundamental inputs for a Mie calculation are:

    • The particle’s radius, a.
    • The complex refractive index of the particle, ms​=ns​+iks​.
    • The real refractive index of the surrounding medium, nm​.
    • The wavelength of the incident light in vacuum, λ.  

    These are typically combined into two critical dimensionless parameters:

    1. Size Parameter (x): Defined as x=2πanm​/λ, this parameter represents the ratio of the particle’s circumference to the wavelength of light within the medium. It is the primary determinant of the scattering regime (Rayleigh, Mie, or geometric).  
    2. Relative Refractive Index (m): Defined as m=ms​/nm​, this complex value quantifies the optical contrast between the particle and its surroundings. The real part influences the phase velocity of light within the particle and thus governs refraction, while the imaginary part (the absorption index) dictates the degree to which electromagnetic energy is absorbed and converted into heat.  

    Outputs: The solution of the boundary value problem yields several key outputs:

    • Mie Coefficients (an​,bn​): These are the complex-valued expansion coefficients for the scattered field, calculated for each multipole order n (where n=1 corresponds to the dipole, n=2 to the quadrupole, and so on). They are expressed in terms of Riccati-Bessel functions of the size parameter and the relative refractive index. These coefficients contain all the physical information about the interaction. Even today, the deep physical origins of their resonant behavior remain an active area of research.  
    • Cross-Sections (σ) and Efficiency Factors (Q): The primary physical observables are the cross-sections for scattering (σs​), absorption (σa​), and extinction (σext​=σs​+σa​). A cross-section has units of area and represents the effective area the particle presents to the incident wave for that particular process. It is often convenient to express this in a dimensionless form as an efficiency factor, Q, by dividing the cross-section by the particle’s geometric cross-sectional area, πa2. These efficiencies are calculated by summing the contributions from all multipole orders, weighted by the Mie coefficients:   Qs​=x22​n=1∑∞​(2n+1)(∣an​∣2+∣bn​∣2)Qext​=x22​n=1∑∞​(2n+1)Re{an​+bn​}
    • Amplitude Scattering Matrix and Phase Function: For a spherical particle, the relationship between the incident and scattered electric field components is described by a simple diagonal matrix containing two complex functions, S1​(θ) and S2​(θ), which depend on the scattering angle θ. These functions determine the amplitude, phase, and polarization of the scattered light in any direction. The phase function, which describes the angular distribution of scattered intensity, is derived from these matrix elements.  

    The Spectrum of Scattering: Situating Mie Theory

    The power of Mie theory is best understood by seeing it as a master theory that unifies different scattering regimes. Its mathematical formalism naturally simplifies to well-known approximations in the appropriate limits. This demonstrates that a single, well-constructed Mie code can serve as a versatile tool for an enormous range of physical problems, from modeling nanoparticles to raindrops, simply by varying the input parameters. The table below provides a comparative framework.  

    (more…)
  • A Novice’s Look at Sidus Space SIDU [Web App]

    A Novice’s Look at Sidus Space

    Posing a Simple Question About Commercial Chips in a Radiation-Filled World

    Important Disclaimer

    This is not financial advice. I am a complete novice at this type of research. I hold degrees in Engineering Physics (B.S.) and Electrical & Electronics Engineering (M.S.), but my conclusions could be entirely wrong. I have previously bought and sold securities in both Sidus Space (SIDU) and Draganfly (DPRO). This report is for informational purposes only and represents my personal line of questioning. Do your own research. I am not responsible for any financial gains or losses.

    The Central Conflict

    Sidus Space, a company working on space and defense technology, has announced the use of NVIDIA’s Jetson platform for its on-orbit AI processing. This raises a fundamental question about equipment survivability in space. Let’s look at the two conflicting sides of this story.

    Side A: The Company’s Claim

    Sidus Space states its LizzieSat™ satellites use AI for “next-generation intelligence solutions” and touts its “AI-driven on-orbit capabilities.”

    “Sidus Space … announced the successful on-orbit operation of its Automatic Identification System (AIS) sensor onboard LizzieSat®-3… advancing the company’s strategy to fuse multi-sensor satellite data with onboard artificial intelligence…” – Sidus Space Press Release, Sep 10, 2025

    Side B: The Technical Reality

    The processor at the heart of their AI strategy, the NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX, is a Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) component. It was never designed or intended for use in space.

    “The NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX System-on-Module (SoM) is unequivocally not a radiation-hardened device… Its official product documentation makes no claims regarding its suitability for aerospace or radiation environments…” – An Engineering Assessment of the NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX

    Hardened vs. Tolerant: What’s the Difference?

    To understand the risk, we need to know the key terminology. “Radiation Hardened” and “Radiation Tolerant” sound similar, but they represent fundamentally different engineering philosophies and levels of reliability.

    Built for Purpose

    These components are intentionally designed from the ground up to survive the harsh radiation of space. This involves specialized manufacturing processes (like Silicon-on-Insulator), redundant circuit designs, and materials that resist radiation damage. The manufacturer provides a guaranteed performance specification (e.g., will survive up to 100 krad(Si)).

    A Staggering Difference in Resilience

    Independent testing reveals the gap between the Jetson Orin NX’s tolerance and the guaranteed resilience of true rad-hard chips. The metric here is Total Ionizing Dose (TID), measured in krad(Si). A higher number means better protection.

    Processor Head-to-Head

    Here’s how the commercial Jetson Orin NX stacks up against two processors actually designed for the rigors of space. Note the trade-off: immense performance for unguaranteed reliability.

    Metric NVIDIA Jetson Orin NX BAE Systems RAD5545 Frontgrade Gaisler GR740
    Type COTS (Commercial) Rad-Hard by Design Rad-Hard by Design
    AI Performance Up to 100 TOPS N/A N/A
    TID Rating ~37-39 krad(Si) (Tested) 100 krad(Si) (Guaranteed) 300 krad(Si) (Guaranteed)
    Destructive Latchup Not Immune (Requires external protection) Latchup Immune (Guaranteed) Latchup Immune (Guaranteed)
    Manufacturer Stance Not intended for space Designed for SpaceVPX QML-V Certified for space

    So, How Do You Square the Two?

    On one hand, we have a company making exciting claims about AI in space. On the other, the hardware enabling these claims appears fundamentally unsuited for the operating environment without significant, undisclosed, and expensive mitigation strategies (like advanced shielding or complex watchdog systems).

    Is this the “New Space” paradigm of accepting higher risk for higher performance? Or is it a critical vulnerability being overlooked? As a novice, I don’t have the answer. But the question seems worth asking.

    About This Report

    My skepticism stems partly from past experiences with related companies and underwriters like Think Equity and H.C. Wainwright, particularly with Draganfly (DPRO). The pattern of dilution and bold claims warrants careful scrutiny.

    Report Published: October 7, 2025.

    (more…)
  • Terrestrial Parts, Celestial Promises

    In the high-stakes world of defense satellites where failure is not an option, is Sidus Space taking a dangerous shortcut? The company markets its LizzieSat constellation as a “mission-critical” solution for government and intelligence clients, but a deep dive into its hardware reveals a startling choice: a powerful, commercial-grade NVIDIA processor that was never designed to withstand the harsh radiation of space. This episode exposes the critical mismatch between Sidus’s celestial promises and its terrestrial parts, and connects this technical gamble to a broader pattern of promotion involving its underwriter, ThinkEquity, and the cautionary tale of Draganfly. We’ll also question whether a U.S. Army contract for ground-based manufacturing is being used to create a misleading halo of legitimacy around a potentially flawed space venture.

    Doomscroll Dispatch
    Doomscroll Dispatch
    Terrestrial Parts, Celestial Promises
    Loading
    /