241–250 of 316 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“That’s funny…” implies you had a pre existing theory about how it was supposed to work.
You don't need a preexisting theory though, you just need to lack one that explains the results of an experiment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need a preexisting theory though, you just need to lack one that explains the results of an experiment
Why would someone do an experiment without a theory to test? How would they know that a particular result was interesting without a theory about the expected result?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a feedback loop. Experimental results suggest new theories, which suggest new experiments to test those theories.
That's what I am thinking when commenters compare LLMs with humans. Humans got the experimental loop going through the real world, pure LLMs are brains in vats. They need experimental confirmation to become truly creative. But on the other hand are the commenters who think AGI to ASI is going to take hours. When is there time to experiment anything? Even ASI needs real world confirmation to do research.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!) but “That’s funny …” — Isaac Asimov
“That’s funny…” implies you had a pre existing theory about how it was supposed to work.
Let’s say you measure a particle going c*2. Without theory you wouldn’t even notice this.
Is that your point?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this mean for synthesis? You just have to try a ton of times and get lucky? Is there some way to influence site substitution?
I was a chemistry major, but didn’t take it up as a career so I won’t pretend to be an expert. There are a lot of tools in the chemist’s cookbook for dealing with exactly this sort of problem. It doesn’t mean it’s easy, but experienced chemists will understand how to approach solving this.
All this LK-99 related activity is exciting and all, too bad Twitter hype merchants hijacked the narrative (first Al now superconductivity they got them in every flavor it seems). It's important to remember that scientists are people too and they'll bandwagon trending claims to get their name out there. I'm no expert but the videos here are far from convincing and the other paper about simulating LK-99 is just that a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Time to invest in lead futures?
Maybe there'll finally be a strong economic driver for ripping out all the old lead plumbing around the world, heh. Watch how quick Flint, MI gets their stuff updated if someone can make a buck on the old pipes!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can have a global grid of solar power. Since you don't loose energy on transmission and half of the planet is illuminated by the sun at any given time, you can have uninterrupted solar energy 24/7. The fuel is practically unlimited, the only cost would be the initial cost of building it and then only maintenance cost.
great idea! Can't wait you get funding for this project
It's not a piece of cake, but it's not a wild idea either. Adding a pair of LK-99 lines alongside each existing undersea optical line potentially gets you there by just increasing the maintenance budget. Lossless power transmission could change a lot of previously fundamental assumptions.