Viewing profile — concreteblock

I'm not the OP, but that is part of my belief system. It may seem ridiculous, but I'd be happy to discuss.

> But you didn't choose a compelling form of words to advocate your interest to other people. Why not? I thought it was a good question and the wording was compelling enough.

I think it's fundamentally a question of incentives. A mathematician's career prospects and status depends heavily on being able to prove things that others can't. Why spend extra …

The heisenberg uncertainty principle is a different type of uncertainty than the uncertainty modeled by probability distributions.

First part makes sense to me. But second part doesn't. I remember learning and successfully using the p=h* f/c formula in high school physics, but what is the justification for thi…

I may have missed this, but doesn't this just raise the question: Why is the fourier transform of position equal to momentum? I.e why is position conjugate to momentum? More genera…

If you unwrap a cone you get a circular sector. Similar idea.

Who sold him those shares?

IMO if all it takes is a few simple substitutions like “physics” -> “known laws of physics” to make the article or title make sense, then it’s unfair to say that the author has mis…

That's a good point. I guess our current mathematics is not good enough to say much about the macroscopic behaviour of large interacting models.

You are missing the point the article. Author is not trying to argue that AI is 'harder' than physics, like a freshman cs major might argue with their physics friends. Author is ta…

The title is 'clickbait' for sure, but not neccessarily incorrect. After all 'simple' can mean different things to different people. And the author clarifies what he means by 'simp…

Titles have to be short, and as such they can't hope to represent the contents of the article completely accurately. If you wanted to do that you would have to make the title equal…

Why would you even bother responding based on just the headline of the article? The author is not using 'simple' as a synonym for 'easy to learn'.

I don't really care about winning any global arguments. I see bad logic and I try to point it out. If you didn't like that some of your points were easily rebutted then you shouldn…

> At no point in time does Kelly give you more wealth with probability 1, Either you're claiming that the theorem I attempted to describe is false, or you're misunderstanding the t…

Okay, I see a link to 'infinity' there, because there are infinitely many reals. Is that what you're going for? If so, the link seems irrelevant and in particular I don't see how t…

In an effort to understand what you mean by 'induction' and 'infinity', can you explain where induction comes up in the following standard definition of a limit: "f has a limit L a…

As someone who has taught intro calculus a few times, one reason for the emphasis on computational techniques is simply that 90% of the students in such a class do not care/are not…

Yes, I think you’re right. As a mediocre mathematician, I don’t know of anyone in my good-but-not-top PhD program that struggled with computational math. This is the feeling that I…

> Again, Kelly gives us terrible advice. If you have a trillion to one payout on a coin flip, you want to bet less, not more! Why would you risk half your money, and have a 1/4 cha…

What exactly do you find arbitrary about this? When gambling or investing, more wealth is better than less wealth. 'Almost surely' is a technical term which means 'with probability…

You obviously wouldn't use Kelly criterion during a poker game because the assumptions don't fit. But on a larger scale it can be used for 'bankroll management' - what proportion o…

The first sentence of your post, while technically true, misses the point. This misunderstanding undermines many of your other points. The kelly criterion happens to be optimal wit…

Elliptic curves is a vast field of study and ECC is a subfield of it. The name kind of suggests this relationship. It’s like hearing that someone works at Microsoft and then asking…