Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #896033 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-07-02 00:09 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 71 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
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 "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 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
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
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
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
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 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 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <PTKdndjUXso-vLX3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896076 |
On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >> >>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>> to enforce his madness. >>> >> >> Why do you pretend not to know? >> >> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >> >> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >> definition of second ? :-D >> > > What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, > about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ > in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined > according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? > > > According to "references", .... > > > Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, > and so on. > > > While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, > not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, > with that receivers >> stations. > > 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". > > The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that the "running constants" of physics get involved. So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why those aren't exactly "physical" constants. Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar measurements" is a thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <-nGdnaezj6g3vrX3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896078 |
On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> >>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >>> >>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>>> to enforce his madness. >>>> >>> >>> Why do you pretend not to know? >>> >>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >>> >>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >>> definition of second ? :-D >>> >> >> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, >> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ >> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined >> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? >> >> >> According to "references", .... >> >> >> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, >> and so on. >> >> >> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, >> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, >> with that receivers >> stations. >> >> 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". >> >> > > The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values > of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones > get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that > the "running constants" of physics get involved. > > So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme > Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. > > > Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and > Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants > that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, > for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in > the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about > what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why > those aren't exactly "physical" constants. > > > Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar > measurements" is a thing. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bIycnWjd8J1CuLX3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896079 |
On 06/09/2026 07:31 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: > On 06/09/2026 07:22 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >> On 06/09/2026 07:10 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote: >>> On 06/09/2026 01:32 AM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> Den 08.06.2026 19:42, skrev Maciej Woźniak: >>>>> On 6/8/2026 7:16 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Which definition of second is used in the synchronisation >>>>>> of the rate of atomic clocks? >>>> >>>>> Of course it's not yours. Your idiot guru >>>>> has forbidden synchronization of clocks >>>>> as it was violating his moronic symmetry - >>>>> and your SI idiocy has been invented >>>>> to enforce his madness. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why do you pretend not to know? >>>> >>>> Even you must know that the SI-definition of second >>>> is inbuilt in an atomic clock. >>>> >>>> Or do you think that all atomic clocks must be brought >>>> to the museum at Greenwich to be calibrated to the old >>>> definition of second ? :-D >>>> >>> >>> What about that _length_ and _distance_ have different units, >>> about the _metric_ and _norm_, about _distance_ being _length_ >>> in _time_, that time (its elapsed duration) could be defined >>> according to space-contraction instead of the other way around? >>> >>> >>> According to "references", .... >>> >>> >>> Otherwise those are going to vary under gravity, under acceleration, >>> and so on. >>> >>> >>> While there's often mentioned the GPS reference frequency, >>> not so much the GPS station operator's and station-keeping guide, >>> with that receivers >> stations. >>> >>> 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". >>> >>> >> >> The NIST Particle Data Group CODATA releases the measured values >> of fundamental physical constants every few years, the small ones >> get not only more precise, also _smaller_, helping also inform that >> the "running constants" of physics get involved. >> >> So, physics is according to NIST CODATA, with SI: Systeme >> Internationale, a reduced second, i.e. not first and quite reduced. >> >> >> Then most people are also unawares how things like Boltzmann and >> Planck constants as physical constants are much mathematical constants >> that reflect their placement in terms for algebraic reductions again, >> for example the roots of x^2 +-x +-1 like the molar gas constant in >> the Boltzmann constant, then as with regards to Planck constant about >> what mathematical reductionism is ongoing in the Planckian, why >> those aren't exactly "physical" constants. >> >> >> Anyways that "time" can be defined by "an average field of quasar >> measurements" is a thing. >> >> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron > > 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.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 10:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <11475ju$fsrh$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896080 |
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. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 01:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <0jWdnUSmIegmh_r3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896460 |
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. >> >> > "Hyper [....]" Hyper-active. Tweakers aren't reliable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 11:26 +0200 |
| Subject | Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <114787q$fv28$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896461 |
Hi, The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic perception of tie 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. pi-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 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. >>> >>> >> > > "Hyper [....]" Hyper-active. > > Tweakers aren't reliable. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 11:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <11478gh$fv28$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896461 |
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 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. >>> >>> >> > > "Hyper [....]" Hyper-active. > > Tweakers aren't reliable. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 11:37 +0200 |
| Subject | Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon (Re: Forget your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088 [Logic Tiling]) |
| Message-ID | <11478t5$fvic$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896465 |
Hi, A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of the energies of life and death of data packets. He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with CPU, GPU and NPU. Last but not least he can freely switch between symbolic and neural representation of knowledge forms, there is no abyss for him. Bye Mild Shock schrieb: > Hi, > > The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient > Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic > perception of time is a hot topic now. > > How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units > or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple > logical threads inside a group. > > Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need > a total new thinking of shared memory and more > message passing, and have a grip of vector and > > matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys > logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget > everything you have learned in your BASIC computer > > course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088. > > Bye
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-25 19:12 +0200 |
| Subject | The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) |
| Message-ID | <1196a2o$cfa0$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896466 |
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]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) |
| Message-ID | <119dlo6$houj$3@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896982 |
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]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-28 14:15 +0200 |
| Subject | Estimating P(doom E-graphs) to < 10% (Was: The future Numa Brains will be gorgeous) |
| Message-ID | <119dlop$houj$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896982 |
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]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 07:13 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <MEydnZAfLIzg-vr3nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896460 |
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]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-07-27 17:07 +0200 |
| Subject | Brova you enjoy made up nonsense? [Einstein tech cult] (Was: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <1147s6m$gebq$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896470 |
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]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-02 18:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration (Was: Nobody understands relativity) |
| Message-ID | <119omr8$pkou$3@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896460 |
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: $200,000.00
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>
>> Version release notes
>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>
>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>
>>>> Expected result:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>
>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> >>> See also:
>>>> >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-02 18:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite! (Re: Hyperspectral Measurements for Inter-Calibration) |
| Message-ID | <119omsb$pkou$4@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #896460 |
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: $200,000.00
>>
>> LoL
>>
>> Bye
>>
>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>
>> Version release notes
>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>
>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>
>>>> Expected result:
>>>>
>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>
>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> >>> See also:
>>>> >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-10-03 01:40 +0200 |
| Subject | So it was a race against Buzzard. Well done! [Langlands FML and SML] (Was: Dark Math Factories Interpret the Infinite!) |
| Message-ID | <119pfcm$nbsg$3@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #897064 |
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]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1109npe$76mb$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #896076 |
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]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <J6KcnZPfV6_dGLT3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896084 |
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]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6A29DCBE.3B20@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #896088 |
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]
| From | Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <C5mcnTjTDYfLkLf3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #896089 |
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 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web