XPost: alt.atheism
From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl
jojo wrote:
> J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > jojo wrote:
> >
> >> J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>> jojo wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The Starmaker wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 23:47:38 -0800, The Starmaker
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Schrodinger's cat is alive or dead until we look?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> i'll tell ya..
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> there's no cat in the box alive or dead.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> there's no cat
> >>>>>> in the box
> >>>>>> if you're not looking.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> the cat no exist.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> it is your looking
> >>>>>> dat make dat cat.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> there is no moon.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> the moon doesn't exist.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> there are some things even Einstein no understand...
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> he no believe in action at a distance.
> >>>
> >>> It was obvious after 1905 that Newtonian gravity
> >>> must be incorrect. (because non-relativistic)
> >>>
> >>> But it took another 10 years to find the correct replacement,
> >>>
> >>> Jan
> >>>
> >>
> >> there is a growing voice that fundamental physics has stalled
> >> since the 1980s. maybe with ai we can change that.
> >
> > OK. May I suggest that you use your AI to write a research proposal for
> > A.E. for the year 1910?
> > (using only pre-1910 input)
> >
> > Jan
> >
>
> i take it you have no faith in ai to come up with novel solutions?
Of course not.
Theoretical physics is not language-based.
So large language models are irrelevant.
They can ony regurgitate language of the past.
Compounding talk about non-solutions cannot give the solution,
Jan
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
