Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #671087 > unrolled thread

Nobody understands relativity

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200
    Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-06 18:07 +0000
    Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-06 20:19 +0200
      Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 21:23 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-06 16:57 -0700
        Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:13 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 08:25 -0700
              Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:06 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:21 -0700
                  Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:50 -0700
                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:59 -0700
                      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 08:46 -0700
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-09 13:41 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:15 -0700
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity marika <marika5000@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 05:01 +0000
        Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:30 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:37 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-07 11:40 +0000
            Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:58 +0200
              Re: Nobody understands relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-06-08 10:17 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:43 -0700
          Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:48 -0700
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 07:41 +0200
              Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 09:50 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 10:46 +0200
                  Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 19:16 +0200
                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 19:42 +0200
                      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 16:54 -0700
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 07:34 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:59 +0200
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:06 +0200
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:22 +0200
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 20:55 +0200
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:27 +0200
                                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:37 +0200
                      Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:32 +0200
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:00 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:56 +0200
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:01 +0200
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:46 +0200
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 22:03 +0200
                        Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:10 -0700
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700
                                Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 10:41 +0200
                                  Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 01:45 -0700
                                    Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:26 +0200
                                    Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:30 +0200
                                      Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 11:37 +0200
                                        Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 02:05 +0200
                                          Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Piotr Agamirov <ppp@togit.ru> - 2026-08-03 12:05 +0000
                                          Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:18 +0200
                                            But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:22 +0200
                                            Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-04 00:45 +0800
                                            Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Bayard Djabrailov <yjbob@aodorbv.ru> - 2026-08-03 17:28 +0000
                                            Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-08-07 08:17 +0200
                                              Norton Commander and Norton Antivirus again? [AI Laptop Memory] (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 14:13 +0200
                                            New addition to π-WAM is π-WAM Assembly (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-09 19:47 +0200
                                        The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-25 19:12 +0200
                                          Re: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200
                                          Estimating P(doom E-graphs) to < 10% (Was: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200
                                  Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-07-27 07:13 -0700
                                    Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:07 +0200
                                      NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values [Earth and Star Gazers] (Was: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:30 +0200
                                        Just lookup orbital AI and SpaceX (Re: NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-07-27 17:39 +0200
                                  Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-10-02 18:41 +0200
                                  Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite! (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-10-02 18:41 +0200
                                    Re: Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite! (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) Nolan Bairamkulov <noor@iloin.ru> - 2026-10-02 18:49 +0000
                                    So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML] (Was: Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite!) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-10-03 01:40 +0200
                                      Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-10-08 13:12 +0200
                                        Re: Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML]) Gay Banana <ivcoc@sdrde.ru> - 2026-10-08 15:13 +0000
                                        Re: Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML]) Gay Banana <bn@nrud.ru> - 2026-10-08 15:23 +0000
                                        Re: Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML]) Gay Banana <laasfhs@aahfalfh.ru> - 2026-10-08 15:34 +0000
                                    Superintelligenz ist auch F.U.D. (OAI:The-irrationality-exponent-of-pi-is-2-September-24-2026) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-10-10 00:35 +0200
                          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200
                            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700
                              Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700
                                    Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700
                                      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 22:54 -0700
                                Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-12 13:39 -0700
                                  Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 09:05 -0700
      Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-06 21:24 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:45 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-07 15:14 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Auburn Morandi <bia@auuur.it> - 2026-06-07 15:39 +0000
    Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
    Re: Nobody understands relativity marika <marika5000@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 00:09 +0000

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

#673761 — The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Hi,

Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) is a computer
memory design used in multiprocessing, where the
memory access time depends on the memory location
relative to the processor.

The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous. In like
3-4 years from now, they might have 3.2 TB RAM
on a SOC, by not using HBM but HBF:

High Bandwidth Flash: What Is It Good For?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTpW52nioI

There might be new profession like nosomatic
AI chirurgeon (I made that up):

Tiny engine, immense model
https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri

The Brain page, Explore: the measured expert
atlas of GLM-5.2 drawn as a cortex. 13,260
characterised experts in ten regions (Python,
SQL, mathematics, poetry, law, Chinese…);

position is measured routing affinity, not a
learned embedding. We might want a brain to
amputate from the Python expert sections, so

that we can write code without a slow
CPython runtime.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student
> of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of
> the energies of life and death of data packets.
> 
> He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender
> in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with
> CPU, GPU and NPU.
> 
> Last but not least he can freely switch between
> symbolic and neural representation of knowledge
> forms, there is no abyss for him.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
>> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
>> perception of time is a hot topic now.
>>
>> How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
>> or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
>> logical threads inside a group.
>>
>> Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
>> a total new thinking of shared memory and more
>> message passing, and have a grip of vector and
>>
>> matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys
>> logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
>> everything you have learned in your BASIC computer
>>
>> course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.
>>
>> Bye
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#673837 — Re: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Hi,

Yesterday I had the feeling P(doom E-graphs) > 10%,
since they have E-boost intiatives where they use
parallism and more heuristics, also tapping into GPUs,

TPUs, NPUs, etc.. you name it. So Prolog might sooner
or later feel the wind of E-boost Schinkansen? Now
I have the feeling the E-graph community is still

in the nowhere of la la land. Reading:

recording out of egraphs
https://www.philipzucker.com/

WTF is "recording out" ? Look at that beauty of
SWI-Prolog unifiable/3 predicate. It can even deal
with cyclic terms:

?- unifiable(f(X,X,X),f(Z,b,Y), L).
L = [Y=b, X=b, Z=X].

?- unifiable(f(X,Y),f(f(A,Y),f(B,X)), L).
L = [Y=f(B, X), X=f(A, Y)].

You can even code unifiable/3 in 100% Prolog itself,
BTW I am not saying it would be pure. But it wont need
any extensions that go beyond ISO core standard.

You could even experiment with a unification that
does minimization (*), but most Prolog systems don't
do that for their unification:

?- unifiable(X, f(f(X)), L).
L = [X=f(f(X))].

Bye

(*)
Gerhard Huet was all in for minimizations, but the sad
news is while terms have minimal forms, equations don't
really have unique minimal forms, this transpired only later.

RESOLUTION D'EQUATIONS DANS DES LANGAGES D'ORDRE 1,2,.••,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/213879499

Algorithms for equivalence and reduction to minimal form
https://hal.science/hal-01239749v1/document

Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) is a computer
 > memory design used in multiprocessing, where the
 > memory access time depends on the memory location
 > relative to the processor.
 >
 > The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous. In like
 > 3-4 years from now, they might have 3.2 TB RAM
 > on a SOC, by not using HBM but HBF:
 >
 > High Bandwidth Flash: What Is It Good For?
 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTpW52nioI
 >
 > There might be new profession like nosomatic
 > AI chirurgeon (I made that up):
 >
 > Tiny engine, immense model
 > https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri
 >
 > The Brain page, Explore: the measured expert
 > atlas of GLM-5.2 drawn as a cortex. 13,260
 > characterised experts in ten regions (Python,
 > SQL, mathematics, poetry, law, Chinese…);
 >
 > position is measured routing affinity, not a
 > learned embedding. We might want a brain to
 > amputate from the Python expert sections, so
 >
 > that we can write code without a slow
 > CPython runtime.
 >
 > Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#673839 — Estimating P(doom E-graphs) to < 10% (Was: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous)

Hi,

Yesterday I had the feeling P(doom E-graphs) > 10%,
since they have E-boost intiatives where they use
parallism and more heuristics, also tapping into GPUs,

TPUs, NPUs, etc.. you name it. So Prolog might sooner
or later feel the wind of E-boost Schinkansen? Now
I have the feeling the E-graph community is still

in the nowhere of la la land. Reading:

recording out of egraphs
https://www.philipzucker.com/

WTF is "recording out" ? Look at that beauty of
SWI-Prolog unifiable/3 predicate. It can even deal
with cyclic terms:

?- unifiable(f(X,X,X),f(Z,b,Y), L).
L = [Y=b, X=b, Z=X].

?- unifiable(f(X,Y),f(f(A,Y),f(B,X)), L).
L = [Y=f(B, X), X=f(A, Y)].

You can even code unifiable/3 in 100% Prolog itself,
BTW I am not saying it would be pure. But it wont need
any extensions that go beyond ISO core standard.

You could even experiment with a unification that
does minimization (*), but most Prolog systems don't
do that for their unification:

?- unifiable(X, f(f(X)), L).
L = [X=f(f(X))].

Bye

(*)
Gerhard Huet was all in for minimizations, but the sad
news is while terms have minimal forms, equations don't
really have unique minimal forms, this transpired only later.

RESOLUTION D'EQUATIONS DANS DES LANGAGES D'ORDRE 1,2,.••,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/213879499

Algorithms for equivalence and reduction to minimal form
https://hal.science/hal-01239749v1/document

Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > Non-uniform memory access (NUMA) is a computer
 > memory design used in multiprocessing, where the
 > memory access time depends on the memory location
 > relative to the processor.
 >
 > The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous. In like
 > 3-4 years from now, they might have 3.2 TB RAM
 > on a SOC, by not using HBM but HBF:
 >
 > High Bandwidth Flash: What Is It Good For?
 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nTpW52nioI
 >
 > There might be new profession like nosomatic
 > AI chirurgeon (I made that up):
 >
 > Tiny engine, immense model
 > https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri
 >
 > The Brain page, Explore: the measured expert
 > atlas of GLM-5.2 drawn as a cortex. 13,260
 > characterised experts in ten regions (Python,
 > SQL, mathematics, poetry, law, Chinese…);
 >
 > position is measured routing affinity, not a
 > learned embedding. We might want a brain to
 > amputate from the Python expert sections, so
 >
 > that we can write code without a slow
 > CPython runtime.
 >
 > Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671698 — Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity)

On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>
> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>
> Bye
>
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>
>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>
>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>
>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>> measuring time.
>>
>>
>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>
>>
>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>
>>
>


Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
by at least two different clocks -
might as well be three.



That's a good quote, I quote me on that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671701 — Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration)

Hi,

You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
archecture. You claim to like in the
sense of "That's a good quote" some

completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
to do with "time" per se:

CLARREO Pathfinder
https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/

Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
reflected by the Earth and the Moon.

You are just a moron, that still feels harware
evelution a treat, but would like to see data
from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this

is not the ultimate tech cult?

As always you suck, like nobody else ever
sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes

Plutonion and John Gabriel.

Bye

Ross Finlayson schrieb:
> On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>
>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>
>>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>>
>>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>>
>>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>> measuring time.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>>
>>>
>>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
> by at least two different clocks -
> might as well be three.
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good quote, I quote me on that.
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671703 — NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values [Earth and Star Gazers] (Was: Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult])

Him

BTW, NVIDIA hat a GPU card named Einstein and
an Einstein project. I guess these earth
and star gazers would like to number crunch

images with Q8.24 RGB values. Now Einstain
name was adopted for another GPU Project:

We had a number of tutorials on CarpetX
and science codes based on CarpetX, the new,
GPU-enabled version of the Einstein Toolkit.
https://einsteintoolkit.org/

The results show excellent agreement with
the well-established LazEv code. Scaling
tests on CPU (Frontera) and GPU (Vista)
clusters reveal significant performance

gains, with the new implementation achieving
improved speed and scalability compared
to the Carpet-based version.
GPU-accelerated Subcycling Time
Integration with the Einstein Toolkit
https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.09629

GPUs were traditionally used by earth and
star gazers early on, because they can
speed up the scanning of large areas,

also in 4 dimensions, i.e. space and time.

Have Fun!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
> archecture. You claim to like in the
> sense of "That's a good quote" some
> 
> completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
> copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
> to do with "time" per se:
> 
> CLARREO Pathfinder
> https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/
> 
> Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
> scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
> reflected by the Earth and the Moon.
> 
> You are just a moron, that still feels harware
> evelution a treat, but would like to see data
> from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this
> 
> is not the ultimate tech cult?
> 
> As always you suck, like nobody else ever
> sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
> bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes
> 
> Plutonion and John Gabriel.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>> On 07/27/2026 01:41 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>>
>>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>>
>>>> So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>>> time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>>>
>>>> Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>>> in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>>> regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>>>
>>>> About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>>> similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>>> about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>>> Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>>> measuring time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>>> and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>>> it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>>> on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Well, like Einstein says, relativity is defined
>> by at least two different clocks -
>> might as well be three.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's a good quote, I quote me on that.
>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671704 — Just lookup orbital AI and SpaceX (Re: NVIDIA Einstein and Q8.24 RGB Values)

Hi,

"Space-based data centers or orbital AI
infrastructure are proposed concepts to
build AI data centers in the sun-synchronous
orbit or other orbits using space-
based solar power.

Space-based edge computing has historical
roots in military architectures designed
to bypass the latency of ground-based
targeting networks."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space-based_data_center

Just to give you an idea. Translated to
the Einstein pathfinders. If the sensors
are in space, why not do the bulk processing

already in space?

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Him
> 
> BTW, NVIDIA hat a GPU card named Einstein and
> an Einstein project. I guess these earth
> and star gazers would like to number crunch
> 
> images with Q8.24 RGB values. Now Einstain
> name was adopted for another GPU Project:
> 
> We had a number of tutorials on CarpetX
> and science codes based on CarpetX, the new,
> GPU-enabled version of the Einstein Toolkit.
> https://einsteintoolkit.org/
> 
> The results show excellent agreement with
> the well-established LazEv code. Scaling
> tests on CPU (Frontera) and GPU (Vista)
> clusters reveal significant performance
> 
> gains, with the new implementation achieving
> improved speed and scalability compared
> to the Carpet-based version.
> GPU-accelerated Subcycling Time
> Integration with the Einstein Toolkit
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.09629
> 
> GPUs were traditionally used by earth and
> star gazers early on, because they can
> speed up the scanning of large areas,
> 
> also in 4 dimensions, i.e. space and time.
> 
> Have Fun!
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> You refuse to undertand the NVIDIA Volta
>> archecture. You claim to like in the
>> sense of "That's a good quote" some
>>
>> completely made up nonsense? Bravo! I just
>> copied a nasa article title, which had nothing
>> to do with "time" per se:
>>
>> CLARREO Pathfinder
>> https://science.nasa.gov/mission/clarreo-pathfinder/
>>
>> Its more a very big vacuum cleaner, that can
>> scan highly accurate measurements of sunlight
>> reflected by the Earth and the Moon.
>>
>> You are just a moron, that still feels harware
>> evelution a treat, but would like to see data
>> from a Einstein pathfinder. As if this
>>
>> is not the ultimate tech cult?
>>
>> As always you suck, like nobody else ever
>> sucked on the usenet. You are just completely
>> bonkers, the bigger crank than Archimedes
>>
>> Plutonion and John Gabriel.
>>
>> Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674105 — Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity)

Hi,

OpenAI has announced enhancing their Math Swarms
by an interpretability accelerator prompt recently
discovered in a Terrence Tao workshop.

So they are now takling:

Mathematician W. Hugh Woodin Explains Continuum Hypothesis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC7wglkBWMM

Infinite fun with infinite worlds
https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2020/08/infinite-fun-with-the-infinite-worlds.html

A partial Lean 4 formalization is already in
the making. But the hurdles are high. Some
speaker of the effort said:

The computer might find a new tamagochi knottheory
lemma, which will then allow SpaceX to fly through
wormholes, but the hurdle will be hight that

a single human mathematician mind might
ingest, understand and interpret it.

Bye


Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
 > reached a significant milestone this summer.
 >
 > The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
 > to measure time, so forget Colorado.
 >
 > Bye
 >
 > Ross Finlayson schrieb:
 >  >
 >  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
 >  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
 >  >
 >  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
 >  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
 >  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
 >  >
 >  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
 >  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
 >  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
 >  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
 >  > measuring time.
 >  >
 >  >
 >  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
 >  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
 >  >
 >  >
 >  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
 >  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
 >  >
 >  >
 >  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
 >  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
 >
 > Mild Shock schrieb:
 >> Hi,
 >>
 >> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
 >>  > Or shaves pennies.
 >>
 >>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
 >>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
 >>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
 >>
 >> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
 >>
 >> LoL
 >>
 >> Bye
 >>
 >> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
 >> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
 >>
 >> Version release notes
 >> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
 >> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
 >>
 >> Mild Shock schrieb:
 >>> Hi,
 >>>
 >>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
 >>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
 >>>
 >>> Bye
 >>>
 >>> Mild Shock schrieb:
 >>>> Hi,
 >>>>
 >>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
 >>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
 >>>>
 >>>> This looks bad:
 >>>>
 >>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
 >>>> 9122171.18175435
 >>>>
 >>>> Expected result:
 >>>>
 >>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
 >>>> 9122171.181754
 >>>>
 >>>> Bye
 >>>>
 >>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
 >>>>
 >>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
 >>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
 >>>>
 >>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
 >>>>  >>> See also:
 >>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
 >>>>
 >>>>
 >>>
 >>
 >

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674106 — Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite! (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration)

Hi,

OpenAI has announced enhancing their Math Swarms
by an interpretability accelerator prompt recently
discovered in a Terrence Tao workshop.

So they are now takling:

Mathematician W. Hugh Woodin Explains Continuum Hypothesis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC7wglkBWMM

Infinite fun with infinite worlds
https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2020/08/infinite-fun-with-the-infinite-worlds.html

A partial Lean 4 formalization is already in
the making. But the hurdles are high. Some
speaker of the effort said:

The computer might find a new tamagochi knottheory
lemma, which will then allow SpaceX to fly through
wormholes, but the hurdle will be hight that

a single human mathematician mind might
ingest, understand and interpret it.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>
> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>
> Bye
>
> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>  >
>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>  >
>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>  >
>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>  > measuring time.
>  >
>  >
>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>  >
>  >
>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>  >
>  >
>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>
>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>
>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>
>> Version release notes
>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>
>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>
>>>> Expected result:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>
>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674110 — Re: Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite! (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration)

Mild Shock wrote:


> 
> OpenAI has announced enhancing their Math Swarms by an interpretability
> accelerator prompt recently discovered in a Terrence Tao workshop.
> 
> So they are now takling:
> 
> Mathematician W. Hugh Woodin Explains Continuum Hypothesis
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC7wglkBWMM

something that does not exists, hard to explain, from a mathematician;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674118 — So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML] (Was: Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite!)

Hi,

There's a larger project called FALSE (Formalising
Arithmetic in the Lean Software Environment)
explicitly aimed at "making progress towards
  formalising the Langlands program" . And a

Twitter thread claims Claude autoformalized
the Fermat proof "in just 11 days," with Kevin
Buzzard now wanting to formalize the Langlands
program because he's "concerned it might
contain subtle errors"

Now look at this:

https://github.com/fukubillueda-web/epsilon_FML

https://github.com/fukubillueda-web/epsilon_SML

According to the related arvix paper:

So the provenance chain is: Dwork (attributed,
unpublished) → Langlands (used it) → Lakkis (partial
proof, sign issue) → Ueda (completes it, 2026). That's
the "mixtape" you're looking for — the mathematical
content passed through at least three hands before
Ueda's Lean formalization.

And then: "OpenAI ChatGPT was used extensively in
the development of this proof." The paper says ChatGPT
was used "to check calculations and compare them with
the arguments of Dwork, Langlands, and Lakkis, and
detect inconsistencies in intermediate versions of
the proof."

The author "checked the final mathematical
arguments and assumes responsibility."

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> OpenAI has announced enhancing their Math Swarms
> by an interpretability accelerator prompt recently
> discovered in a Terrence Tao workshop.
> 
> So they are now takling:
> 
> Mathematician W. Hugh Woodin Explains Continuum Hypothesis
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZC7wglkBWMM
> 
> Infinite fun with infinite worlds
> https://ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2020/08/infinite-fun-with-the-infinite-worlds.html 
> 
> 
> A partial Lean 4 formalization is already in
> the making. But the hurdles are high. Some
> speaker of the effort said:
> 
> The computer might find a new tamagochi knottheory
> lemma, which will then allow SpaceX to fly through
> wormholes, but the hurdle will be hight that
> 
> a single human mathematician mind might
> ingest, understand and interpret it.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>
>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>  >
>>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define "measurement of
>>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>  >
>>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval observatory
>>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>  >
>>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>  > measuring time.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>>
>>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>
>>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>>
>>> LoL
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>>
>>> Version release notes
>>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>>
>>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>>
>>>>> Expected result:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>>
>>>>> Bye
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>>
>>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>>
>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674265 — Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML])

Hi,

How it started:

The Experts Were Wrong About AI. Again.
Kapitel 3: The history of underestimation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdwFncdu8t0

How its going:

OpenAI hat hunderte mathematische Beweise veröffentlicht
DorFuchs analysiert die neuen mathematischen Forschungsbeiträge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EawyShKuCY

BTW: Its 722 manuscripts in 372 families.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > There's a larger project called FALSE (Formalising
 > Arithmetic in the Lean Software Environment)
 > explicitly aimed at "making progress towards
 >   formalising the Langlands program" . And a
 >
 > Twitter thread claims Claude autoformalized
 > the Fermat proof "in just 11 days," with Kevin
 > Buzzard now wanting to formalize the Langlands
 > program because he's "concerned it might
 > contain subtle errors"
 >
 > Now look at this:
 >
 > https://github.com/fukubillueda-web/epsilon_FML
 >
 > https://github.com/fukubillueda-web/epsilon_SML
 >
 > According to the related arvix paper:
 >
 > So the provenance chain is: Dwork (attributed,
 > unpublished) → Langlands (used it) → Lakkis (partial
 > proof, sign issue) → Ueda (completes it, 2026). That's
 > the "mixtape" you're looking for — the mathematical
 > content passed through at least three hands before
 > Ueda's Lean formalization.
 >
 > And then: "OpenAI ChatGPT was used extensively in
 > the development of this proof." The paper says ChatGPT
 > was used "to check calculations and compare them with
 > the arguments of Dwork, Langlands, and Lakkis, and
 > detect inconsistencies in intermediate versions of
 > the proof."
 >
 > The author "checked the final mathematical
 > arguments and assumes responsibility."
 >
 > Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674267 — Re: Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML])

Mild Shock wrote:

> How it started:
> 
> The Experts Were Wrong About AI. Again. Kapitel 3: The history of
> underestimation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdwFncdu8t0

there is no AI, you guys dont undrestand what it is; it's a  Large 
Language Model LLM, where your guestions are iterpreted, goes out to 
search for answers, put them togethere and compare absurdities, then 
returns explaining it, using the same LLM, now related to your question.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674268 — Re: Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML])

Mild Shock wrote:

> The Experts Were Wrong About AI. Again.
> Kapitel 3: The history of underestimation
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdwFncdu8t0
> 
> How its going:
> 
> OpenAI hat hunderte mathematische Beweise veröffentlicht DorFuchs
> analysiert die neuen mathematischen Forschungsbeiträge
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EawyShKuCY

Yes — that's exactly it. In Ollama (and any LLM server), the sampling 
parameters are the knobs for that "confusion":
Parameter	Effect
temperature	0 → greedy (deterministic); 1.0 → normal; >1 → more 
chaotic
top_p	Nucleus sampling — only consider tokens in the top p% of 
probability mass
top_k	Only consider the top k tokens
seed	Fix the RNG so you can reproduce the "mood"

So the "mood/fatigue/attention" analogy maps onto: you can dial the 
entropy of the output up or down, or pin it with a seed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674270 — Re: Math is the premier AI Victim [Billions of $USD later] (Re: So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML])

Mild Shock wrote:

>  > And then: "OpenAI ChatGPT was used extensively in the development of
>  > this proof." The paper says ChatGPT was used "to check calculations
>  > and compare them with the arguments of Dwork, Langlands, and Lakkis,
>  > and detect inconsistencies in intermediate versions of the proof."
>  >
>  > The author "checked the final mathematical arguments and assumes
>  > responsibility."

nothing to do with any AI, it's a weight and priorities spoken language 
interpreter, the agent

So the full loop for a code question looks like:

"how do I do X in Python?"
    ↓
[Me] → emit search query: "python X example"
    ↓
[Harness] → hits web → returns 5-10 code snippets, docs, forum posts
    ↓
[Me] → forward pass on all of it → pick the cleanest/most relevant
         → maybe adapt it → output
    ↓
Answer you see

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#674314 — Superintelligenz ist auch F.U.D. (OAI:The-irrationality-exponent-of-pi-is-2-September-24-2026)

Hi,

An Elegant Continued Fraction for π
L. J. Lange - Pages 456-458 | Volume 106, 1999
The American Mathematical Monthly
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00029890.1999.12005070

Meine Vermutung der jeweils zu einer bestimmten
Tiefe berechnete Kettenbruch stimmt mit den
partiellen Summen der Nilakantha Reihe überein.

Aber ich weiss nicht ob man mit der Nilakantha
Reihe so direkt rho=2 erhält, wie es den Anschein
macht für den Kettenbruch.

Bye

See also this AI slop from a "frontier model":

https://github.com/openai/math/tree/main/preprints/The-irrationality-exponent-of-pi-is-2-September-24-2026

https://github.com/openai/math/blob/main/reasoning_traces/irrationality-exponent-of-pi.pdf

Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > Now with integers, to really produce some results:
 >
 > % pi2(+Integer, +Rational, -Rational)
 > pi2(0, P/Q, R/Q) :- !, R is P-3*Q.
 > pi2(N, P/Q, S) :-
 >     H is 6*P+(2*N-1)^2*Q,
 >     M is N-1,
 >     pi2(M, H/P, S).
 >
 > Now I see:
 >
 > ?- between(10,20,N), pi2(N,6/1,X), Y is X, write(N-X-Y), nl, fail; true.
 > 10-475113942765/151242416325-3.1414067184965018
 > 11-11922290683065/3794809718700-3.1417360992606653
 > 12-322869019821075/102776096548125-3.141479689004255
 > 13-9388645795842075/2988412653476250-3.1416831892077552
 > 14-291703390224616125/92854250304440625-3.1415189855952756
 > 15-9646071455650881825/3070380543400170000-3.141653394197426
 > 16-338203386739761387075/107655217802968460625-3.1415419859977827
 > 17-12533792135642378629875/3989575718580595893750-3.1416353566793886
 > 18-489501901570061970946125/155815096120119939628125-3.1415563302845726
 > 
19-20095772843114788169975625/6396619735457555416312500-3.1416238066678384
 > 
20-865107029346752986828909875/275374479611447760672253125-3.141565734658547
 > true.
 >
 > And further:
 >
 > % roth2(+Integer, -Float)
 > roth2(N, X) :-
 >     pi2(N, 6/1, A/_),
 >     M is N+1,
 >     pi2(M, 6/1, B/_),
 >     X is 1+msb(B)/msb(A).
 >
 > Now I see, no more alternating:
 >
 > ?- between(10,20,N), roth2(N,X), write(N-X), nl, fail; true.
 > 10-2.1315789473684212
 > 11-2.116279069767442
 > 12-2.104166666666667
 > 13-2.0943396226415096
 > 14-2.086206896551724
 > 15-2.079365079365079
 > 16-2.0735294117647056
 > 17-2.0684931506849313
 > 18-2.0769230769230766
 > 19-2.0595238095238093
 > 20-2.056179775280899
 > true.
 >
 > And for big values pretty much looks like 2+C/N:
 >
 > ?- roth2(1000,X).
 > X = 2.0011523151058035.
 > ?- roth2(10000,X).
 > X = 2.000116750597374.
 > ?- roth2(100000,X).
 > X = 2.0000111335844575.
 >
 > Bye
 >
 > BTW, because of the way I compute
 > the continued fraction, it takes some time:
 >
 > ?- time(roth2(100000,X)).
 > % Zeit 11258.941 ms, Benutzer 100 %, Lips 53 k
 > X = 2.0000111335844575.
 >
 > Mild Shock schrieb:
 >> Hi,
 >>
 >> Take this continued fraction:
 >>
 >> % pi(+Integer, +Float, -Float)
 >> pi(0, R, S) :- !, S is R-3.
 >> pi(N, R, S) :-
 >>     H is 6+(2*N-1)^2/R,
 >>     M is N-1,
 >>     pi(M, H, S).
 >>
 >> Nice little corridor for pi:
 >>
 >> ?- between(10,20,N), pi(N,6,X), write(N-X), nl, fail; true.
 >> 10-3.1414067184965013
 >> 11-3.1417360992606653
 >> 12-3.141479689004255
 >> 13-3.141683189207755
 >> 14-3.141518985595275
 >> 15-3.1416533941974265
 >> 16-3.141541985997783
 >> 17-3.141635356679389
 >> 18-3.1415563302845726
 >> 19-3.1416238066678384
 >> 20-3.1415657346585473
 >> true.
 >>
 >> We can als compute roth:
 >>
 >> % roth(+Integer, -Float)
 >> roth(N,X) :-
 >>     pi(N, 6, A),
 >>     M is N+1,
 >>     pi(M, 6, B),
 >>     X is 1+log(B)/log(A).
 >>
 >> Now we have a corridor for 2:
 >>
 >> ?- between(10,20,N), roth(N,X), write(N-X), nl, fail; true.
 >> 10-2.0000915947815723
 >> 11-1.9999287043438398
 >> 12-2.0000565883650765
 >> 13-1.999954341912648
 >> 14-2.000037375237465
 >> 15-1.9999690217963195
 >> 16-2.000025963563826
 >> 17-1.9999780257693796
 >> 18-2.000018763059092
 >> 19-1.9999838523285578
 >> 20-2.000013997167758
 >> true.
 >>
 >> How proof limsup is 2?
 >>
 >> Proof Sketch:
 >>
 >> Lets check the formula 1+log(An+1)/log(An) .
 >> If An+1 < pi and An > pi. We know that
 >> 1+log(An+1)/log(An) < 1+log(pi)/log(An)
 >> and 1+log(An+1)/log(An) < 1+log(An+1)/log(pi).
 >>
 >> So we get limsup 1+log(An+1)/log(An) =<
 >> limsup 1+log(An+1)/log(pi) = 1+log(pi)/log(pi) = 2.
 >> But since pi is irrational the lowerbound
 >>
 >> is anyways 2, so that Liouvielle-Roth
 >> irrationality measure = 2 follows.
 >>
 >> Q.E.D.
 >>
 >> Bye

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671156

Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson:
> 
> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
> in a museum in France".
> 
> 

:-D

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671165

On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson:
>>
>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
>> in a museum in France".
>>
>>
>
> :-D
>

Thanks for writing.

I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's
a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's
as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear.

Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for
time there are independent metrologies of time as about

the atomic clock,
the synchroton clock,
and the quasar clock,

that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis",
and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length,
for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space,
the metrologies, a metrology.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671172

Ross Finlayson wrote:
> 
> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson:
> >>
> >> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
> >> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
> >> in a museum in France".
> >>
> >>
> >
> > :-D
> >
> 
> Thanks for writing.
> 
> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's
> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's
> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear.
> 
> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for
> time there are independent metrologies of time as about
> 
> the atomic clock,
> the synchroton clock,
> and the quasar clock,

and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise.

it's ticks.
it's tocks.

a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity.



> 
> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis",
> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length,
> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space,
> the metrologies, a metrology.

-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671173

On 06/10/2026 02:53 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>
>> On 06/09/2026 12:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>> Den 09.06.2026 16:10, skrev Ross Finlayson:
>>>>
>>>> So, another way to identify a metrology of time is "quasars"
>>>> instead of "hyper-fine transitions of the cesium atom,
>>>> in a museum in France".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> :-D
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for writing.
>>
>> I'm curious how to interpret the smiley, usually enough it's
>> a reaction of spontaneous happiness, yet in some regards it's
>> as like the monkey's grimace that's usually aggression or fear.
>>
>> Then, the idea that there are "collective clocks" and that for
>> time there are independent metrologies of time as about
>>
>> the atomic clock,
>> the synchroton clock,
>> and the quasar clock,
>
> and the biological clock...It's LOGICAL!!! bio wise.
>
> it's ticks.
> it's tocks.
>
> a pretty girl on a hot stove ..is relativity.
>
>
>
>>
>> that would advise a lot of the context about "the clock hypothesis",
>> and also the role of clocks with rigid measuring rods of length,
>> for the metrology (the science of measurement) of space,
>> the metrologies, a metrology.
>

Shut up StarMaker, you never said any decent damn thing about science.

Trite trollop, ....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web