Science went wrong as soon as scientists became egotistical and arrogant. Secularism was a disaster for science.
>>17070751yeah I'm sure your farts smell like roses anon
People started dragging shit out and hiding information. Look at the math controversy right now. Math isn't secret, the equations and stuff are all public knowledge. But people are crying that AI is being used. Dragging it out for careers and press tours. The whole point of the internet was to share research and people started gatekeeping for status and money. And it slowed everyone down. When COVID happened everyone got together and put together a cure, pretty quickly and worked together. So no matter your views on COVID the response, containment and collaboration show what people can to as long as they aren't chasing fame.
>>17069713It's in the setting that selected genes (and it's a good thing)
You are right, modern science was invented by Muslim and Catholic theologians to study God's creation.
AI stealing science will ensure that the future of science is a bunch of wizard guilds hoarding their progress away from glaring eyes (rival wizard guilds)
Never forget the October 6 massacre
>>17070267Oy vey
i consneed. this is funny.
>>170702675779951551596
>>17071083>>17071004thanks bros, thanks to you, October 7-1 will not be forgotten
>>170710875331159559514
>scientific american says what if consciousness isn't realHow come when I say it people are like stfu you're insane..
>>17070793I think scientists should be the only people who have zero right to place their filthy hands on this topic. Something about them trying to forcefully jam it into their theories about matter makes me violently cringe
>>17070984I think scientists are the only people who have any fucking chance of figuring it out."your kind" had millennia and dindu shit. why? and why are you afraid of scientists having a go at it with modern tools? you literally had all of human history to explain it, and the fucking nonsense you came up with in the meanwhile is still a fucking drag to any discussion on the topic. we constantly still get this fucking brainrot.
>>17071139>I think scientists are the only people who have any fucking chance of figuring it out.They have zero chance of figuring it out because there's no objective, empirical test for it, which is why they have to resort to all kinds of consciousness denialism. Cope with it.
>>17071142there are some ... way out there tests, but not possible for a good bit of time until the tech becomes available. there are ways of almost proving it, I think.if you think it cannot be proven then why are you even having ideas about it? let me guess, you know the truth even without proof? you're magical that way innit
>>17071139>figuring it outPlease noThe panopticon is already too obnoxious as it is, even without having direct access to a complete theory of mind
are exactly the same as dogmas
>>17070374>What makes a religion is faithFaith in a supernatural being with dogma and institutions to support the belief in that god.If you have faith in a certain sport or brand of cars for instance, you are in a sports club or a car club, not a religion, it only becomes a religion when some supernatural being's egregore lore is being maintained by a human collective.>Nothing is truly supernatural.Immaterial beings or qualities that can't possibly fit into the natural physical order are supernatural unless you are conceding that gods are simply imaginary rather than supernatural which is why supernaturality doesn't actually exist given its just imaginary and not within the realm of real existence.>God would not be supernatural to himself. The whole point of god is that he transcends nature, supernatural is not in reference to oneself, but the to the natural world, if god or his miracles are beyond natural causes and consequence, god is supernatural.>What is supernatural, unnatural, etc, is merely a point of view.Not according to god who specifically tells job he is above nature.>Magic exists, itâs just the chemistry within the brain.The nonsensical stuff going on in your brain that doesn't conform to nature is called imagination, not magic.
>>17070381Relative to what? If not laws of physics, then what?
>>17070935> If you have faith in a certain sport or brand of cars for instance, you are in a sports club or a car club, not a religion, Nope. A religion is just a cult fad. Taylor Swift is a cult leader running her own religion. All religions are cults. >it only becomes a religion when some supernatural being's egregore lore is being maintained by a human collective.Nope. You have Buddhists who donât see the karmic cycle as unnatural. Buddha is natural. Hermetic alchemists (dabbling precursors to modern day scientists that inspired the image of the classic wizard) and natural philosophers into hermetic theory didnât see the world as not natural. >Immaterial beings or qualities that can't possibly fit into the natural physical order are supernaturalNope. The supernatural is only super and natural because it currently supersedes our understanding of it, and there is going to be a natural background to its stranger foreground. The supernatural isnât a literal affair. Itâs a relative one. > The whole point of god is that he transcends natureYouâre projecting on to God. God transcends our nature. He does not transcend his own. He is his own perfect physicist. By default he would be, as the one who orchestrated reality; no different from an alien who sees our existence as a simulation of a kind. > Not according to god who specifically tells job he is above nature.If a Christian waddled up to God and proudly told him that they took everything in the Bible literally, at face value, do you really think that God would be impressed? > The nonsensical stuff going on in your brain that doesn't conform to nature is called imagination, not magicBrain chemistry conforms to nature. Magic is literally just âwowâ. Thatâs the core logic behind magic and miracles and wonder. Itâs âsupernaturalâ because you went âwhoaâ, or âahhh-â.
>>17070936Relative to familiarity. Itâs all based around exposure logic. What is magic to one is not going to be magic to another. Amazement is relative. People like >>17070935 get fucking mind broken over basic critical thinking skills that anons like >>17070374 demonstrate ever so succinctly. Their intelligence is threatened because they missed something so fucking simple. Itâs like telling a surface level âTolkien fanboyâ that the elves donât see themselves as magical beings, or that Gandalf isnât a wizard back in the west. They typically throw a tantrum.
>>17071174They look at the wrapper of the candy bar and think itâs not candy because the brand is different from their preferred one.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.08144> To demonstrate the effect of this result we provide several examples of AI mistranslations of NL statements and proofs into Lean in practice, resulting in mismatches between NL proofs and their Lean âverificationsâ. These include OpenAIâs announced Navier-Stokes proof. In particular, we show that the formalised Lean proof does not correspond to the NL proof of blow-up of solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations.Has anyone on this board looked into OpenAI's proof? Or do we just trust them now?
>>17070988Yeah or people could just ignore it
>>17070960No need to look into it. Look at how the mathematicians seethe about it. If it was nonsense they'd be saying so.
>>17070991Most people are just taking their word for it instead.
>>17070988Anon, you're not following. On one hand, you have an unverified natural language proof. On the other hand, you have mountains of humanly incomprehensible gibberish in Lean (effectively useless to a mathematician). Now it turns out there isn't necessarily any connection between the two. The reason """agentic AI""" needs proof checkers in the first place is to continually sanity-check its reasoning and keep it on track.What OP's paper implies is that the LLM manages to find a way around this, where it does whatever it wants in Lean while lying in the CoT, meaning there's nothing to stop it from hallucinating a bunch in the NL "proof" so long as the parallel Lean proof checks out. Maybe the NL proofs are still correct, but why would they be? The LLM isn't even relying on their correctness to produce the result.Effectively, you end up with AI slop and mountains of useless Lean no one can understand. Whether or not some of the NL proofs end up being correct, the approach as a whole is failing.
>>17070999I think we should start thinking of incomprehensible papers with Lean certs like strong numerical evidence. The level of inherent uncertainty is unacceptable to be anything more.
How close can you take me?
>>17071141to the absolute, guaranteed no degradation. because your body will simply be fully destroyed, after your whole information is captured. thus for all intents and purposes you'd be at absolute zero (eg no movement, no entropy, no degradation)you need to find a good enough scanner, support media for the data, and some kind of guarantee you'll be reassembled at a later date. good luck.
Is Isaac right? Is Mercury eally the Solar System's most underrated real estate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR54x7RRJGw
>>17069936The speech processing part of my brain is a little trash so a video without a clear voice is ableist to me. I cant enjoy it while more capable people canIts either the feelings of the author or the feelings of the viewers and there are more of us than him
>>17069938>Its either the feelings of the author or the feelings of the viewers and there are more of us than himBut he's still larger, did you look at him? He's like the Jupiter to our Jovian moons
>>17069948Size isnt everything, he may be full of hot air while us moons may be full of life
>>17069731There currently are no humans on Mercury so there are no resource needs there. Never send humans there and the problem never exists.
>>17069932It's a speech impediment he's had since childhood and after working with a speech therapist, it's not as bad as it used to be. That doesn't negate the reality that it is distracting and can be hard to understand, just gives some context. If you watch multiple videos, you do start to get accustomed to it. I do wonder if this is something where AI could actually be useful. It wouldn't have to be a complete replacement of his narration with an AI voice but rather an AI directed alteration of his narration to make it more neutral.
How do I get better at physics? I look at picrel and have no idea what Iâm looking. The professor is a cunt all the lectures are vague concepts of the actual work. The exams and the work are nothing alike. The exams are 75% of the grade.
>>17070873>numericThere aren't any values that have been given though. Here it basically just tells the student to not make up values which is fucking retarded
>>17070874>must not know the equations.They're even given on the bottom of the paper, OP is just a retard
>>17070620>>17070684OP I have written an email to Dr Jacobs to let him know that the Indian student in his class is calling him a cunt on a Swiss Flat Earth Conspiracy forum. Don't you know that Americans get all uppity about that word?
>>17070703*SI
>>17070983>the Indian student>theThey are all pajeets, anon.
Who is this guy and why does he have a long forehead
>>17070283His name is Beldar, he comes from France and he is the first to ever successfully gnarfle the garthok.
>>17070294Fuck that kike gaynigger
>>17070888>1951his father is still alive btw
>>17071061>Louis W. Witten>April 13, 1921 (age 105)>His most recent paper was published in August 2025.
>>17070283As you get more recognition in your field, your head grows larger
hi guys. this is my first time using 4chan hihi.im in med skl (yipee) and i need help: i cant study!!!!! i cant sit down for shit despite me wanting to. i hate feeling behind and knowing less than my peers.this year, also known as PASS in france, has a 10% success rate to move on to the second year.i need ur help with memorizing/learning hundreds of pages worth of content weekly (more like daily but ok)idk if this is appropiate to post here but if im desperate. if i fail my parents are gonna deport me back home (nicht gut, hint: its libya).thank you dear 4chan users.
>>17070207go back
>>17070207Adderall. Also lmao your french.
Lol moi aussi je suis en PASS.T'es de quelle fac? Passe ton discordje galere aussi pas mal à travailler, pas assez de motivation surtout avec l'evolution de l'IA10% t'exagère c'est plutot 15-20%
is everyone just pretending that progress is being made?
>>17062424If they had used self healing concrete in the twin towers, the building would have repaired itself faster than planes could ever destroy it. You would need a huge swarm of planes impacting against the building rhytmically every couple seconds.
>>17062299>>17062581The amount of Material welfare destroyed by Smithoid-Marxoids is unfathomable. LITERALLY destroying all amenities in ordinary people's lives to inflate their fake and gay labor bubble. This is why the Romans, and every civilization, really, used to regularly massacre civilians.>if bridge too good caesar no need us>we must make bridge bad>*gets rightfully massacred for sabotaging the state and his fellow man*>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA SAVE ME MARX
>>17070205Ok what is this gay labour bubble you talk about, commies tried syndicalism syndicates did worked and ensured labor conditions, you act like every right you have as a workers was magically granted to you by capitalismThe market thought paying me benefits was somehow enjoyable
>>17062299Where are the Roman skyscrapers, spaceships and AI models?
>>17062517except vaccines are a pharma psyop that are toxic
A bus comes every 60 minutes. You make your way at a random time to the bus stop. There is only a 1/60 chance it arrives within the exact minute of you arriving to the bus stop. There is also a 1/60 chance it leaves just as you get there. If you did this every day, for say 100 days, you will hit an average wait time of 30 minutes.The odds are we arrived at the bus stop 30 minutes after the last and before the next. Right in the middle where the most points along the distribution would be. So if we were going to find another civilisation, the odds are, as there would be the most at 30 mins, and the fact that the odds are we are at the 30 mins too, we should be finding them now.However, we cannot be at the end of the timeline as we would see civilisations accumulated from the distant past, plus the random popping in and out of existence of other ones before they could advance as much as the oldest ones, which some would have started as near to the one minute mark as possible, meaning at the begining only civilisations just beginning could have existed, and as we haven't seen evidence of what could be called hyper advanced civilisations, we probably aren't even in the midpoint, but in the early stages.I'm confusing myself with the "maths" if you could call it that. Statistically, we should be finding other civilisations, but the odds of us being at the end is far far lower than the beginning, though the odds should be even.
>>17071066You sound like you are suffering from AI psychosis, a good cure for that would be a to read a book.
>artists are obsolete>actors are obsolete>voice actors are obsolete>animators are obsolete>music writers are obsolete>writers are obsolete>mathematicians are obsolete>multum other vocations are obsolete or close to itWhat do I do to avoid slaughterhouse? Not everyone will receive basic universal income. Medicine?
>>17070567>but they had a profession and were working as much as they could,Amazon jungle indians work around 5 hours a day. Its not a hypothesis from the stone age, you can visit them and see how much they work. They hunt, fish and keep small plots of bananas and cassava. They dont grow grains, which is why they could never store food which is why they never had money.
>>17071031>Amazon jungle indians work around 5 hours a day.They don't work at all. Work is for human cattle, not for jungle tribes.
>>17051968>>artists are obsolete>>actors are obsolete>>voice actors are obsolete>>animators are obsolete>>music writers are obsolete>>writers are obsoleteLmao lol
>>17051968None of them are obsolete. Some directors like Christopher Nolan will never use AI generated shite in his works, and they will still wildly outperform all the tripe at the box office.Mathematicians are still needed to validate the proofs.In code that goes into fighter jets or operates apparatus used in radiotherapy for example, they will always have to be verified by humans because there is too much liability involved to leave it solely to AI.There are going to be heaps of professions which survive this shit. Just a lot of people will have little to no use. Maybe they get UBI and can enjoy a life of freedom, or maybe they will be purged. Who cares either way.The suffering either stops sooner or you remain a cog in the machine brah frfr no cap.
>>17051968frogposters are obsolete
This time exposing their misleading wording about electricity and magnetism.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MNcxa_Gk5U
Ownage
>>17059055It's philosophy of science, he is right and going into the fundamental interpretation by humans and the issues of labelings.
>>17069030You dont know Bobo the Bear the destroyer of Crypto markets?
>>17069746Who is this nobody exactly?
>>17070744
/sqt/ - simple questions thread (aka /qtddtot/)Previous thread: >>16893204>what is /sqt/ for?Basic questions regarding maths and science. Also homework.>where do I go for advice?>>>/sci/scg or >>>/adv/>where do I go for other questions and requests?>>>/wsr/ >>>/g/sqt >>>/diy/sqt etc.>how do I post math symbols (Latex)?rentry.org/sci-latex-v1>a plain google search didn't return anything, is there anything else I should try before asking the question here?scholar.google.com>where can I search for proofs?proofwiki.org>where can I look up if the question has already been asked here?warosu.org/scieientei.xyz/sci>how do I optimize an image losslessly?Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>17070249
>>17070232What are gpt and the book solutions implying the integral equation for work is equal to? Aren't integrals always the entire area?The engine makes energy into work going A to B. What area/shape of the graph is this? If you stop there, why would you think the work is only a fraction of the shape/curve? Stopping at B means never using the engine again which is dumb, so you want to move it back into its original state A. How much work must be done on the engine to get it back from B into A (negative work depending on how you think about it)? Again, what area/shape of the graph is this? Overall, how much work did the engine actually do and how efficient was it?
>>17070249Cleopatra was considered one of the most beautiful women in the world. So beautiful that she tempted emperors. Her parents were siblings, as were her grandparents and several members of her ancestry as well.
>>17068811Oh hell yeah it would. There's definitely energy produced from friction, same as with a T Tauri star but get enough gas in a compact area, which is what you'd get around a black hole and you'd definitely get some fusion too. Probably star formation, a stellar nursery from hell but if any stars born in the accretion disk of a black hole are double stars one could get eaten and kick the other out into interstellar space at a pretty high velocity.
>>17070833Not true. Fusion isn't solely about velocity (temperature), it's about confinement (to overcome charge repulsion) and time (that proximity is long enough for quantum tunnelling to occur). Free particles, even if they managed to get to the required energies, don't meet those two criteria. In general high energy particles colliding don't fuse, they break apart.
