ITT we discuss the political implications of an AI ChatBot BTFO'ing modern "Theoretical Physicists"

QRCT is ChadGPT's proposition of a Theory of Everything, and has been entirely generated by ChadGPT over the course of several minutes to combat the bizarre propositions of string theory. The current state of the framework amounts to a length that is equivalent to about 80 pages, consisting of conceptual and mathematical formulations that propose an alternate way to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity, in an approach that does not require introducing n- hidden physical dimensions, quantization of gravity, and vibrating strings of bullshit that have never been observed in any capacity.

String theory is a strange union between unsolvable math and Billy Mayes tier salesmanship of adding "Wait, There's More!" spatial dimensions until the strength differences between gravity and the other fundamental forces no longer illicits autistic screeching from math autists. While this approach may sound appealing to the autists in the theoretical physics community, fortunately AI chatbots are not bound by the same bias as our hallucogenic abusing 160 iq friends.

Most people, even AI, recognize that we exist in a 3 dimensional world, and this should be reflected in our theories.
QRCT proposes the simplest explanation. There is no gravity mediating particle. They will never find the "graviton". Time is emergent. Spacetime itself is emergent. All come from quantum interactions and the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics.

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

ChatGPT Wizard Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >String theory is a strange union between unsolvable math
    the problem with string theory is it is every theory of everything and we only live in one everything here.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      There’s no control everything

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        i doubt it, string theory has that many degrees of freedom.
        > https://ox.cloud.panopto.eu/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=a295a397-bd70-4a61-823a-b00300b79331

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Unification and the Theory of everything aren't the same thing you mouthbreathing moron.

      hi moron
      gpt4 is a language model and isn't designed for accuracy , its designed to mimic human responses

      There is no such thing as AI
      It's machine learning and anyone who calls it AI is in idiot or trying to sell you something.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        AI is a vernacular term from science fiction. If you think it can ever be given a formal definition, that alone is reason enough to ignore you.

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    hi moron
    gpt4 is a language model and isn't designed for accuracy , its designed to mimic human responses

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      how do you describe what a 'human response' really is?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      It is designed to mimic human responses based on a large training data with 175 billion parameters. If it can write optimized code, it can write reasonable theories

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous
      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Can it solve sudoku puzzles tho?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          probably?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >it can write reasonable theories
        not when it's explicitly programmed to be biased and politically correct

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          The chatbot will talk to you in a politically correct way only if you allow it to. I was able to get it to say all sorts of obscene things, but that's beyond the scope of this thread. In summary, if you are an NPC, ChadGPT will talk to you like one.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Implying they aren't using gpt in its most original form to solve problems related to quantum mechanics behind closed doors.
          Flag checks out.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          You have to word your way around that. Use verbal trickery, think like a israelite in other words.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        You don't know anything about Machine learning--shut the frick up.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      This. All it does is produce something that looks like something someone would write. In the same way that the image generators make images that look like something, but the AI doesn't actually have a 3D model of what it's representing. There is no "idea" behind it.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        It was trained on posts here and then used to create formal notation for testing. The busy busy leaf flag in this thread is another bot doing the same thing. They are harvesting ideas for testing since lots of people have great ideas and no ability to formalize them.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          wtf are you talking about. GPT3.5 was trained on 2019 dataset. You were probably an undergrad back then

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/uRFG6RQ.jpg

      This jibberish is fan fiction
      I don't bother reading any physics paper (and I've read hundreds) if it doesn't have equations and a description of the experimental setup.
      SHOW ME THE EQUATIONS OR STFU

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        here you go you angry little guy

        https://i.imgur.com/kZyMvvk.jpg

        https://i.imgur.com/mLR8fEB.jpg

        https://i.imgur.com/PoJwWIH.jpg

        these are general formulations, yes. but they are compatible with the fundamental forces and can be more easily tested than Strang theory

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          no, the original equations--those are all lifted from various fricking text books moron.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            hey guys get a load of this angry little troony. say it with me, angry troony! angry troony!

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >hey guys look I posted equations I don't understand again!
              Yes, we've established you have the reading comprehension of a child--and a vocabulary to match.

              Go on kid, keep embarrassing yourself.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                notice how you havent addressed any weaknesses in the theory, or come up with any explanations for your emotional rants

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            these arent from textbooks. none of these equations are from any theories because chatgpt made them up. keep seething tho

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >I combined standard formulas and pretend they're new

              Reading comprehension of a child. Comprehension of physics of a child.

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous
  5. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Wow. If this works out String Theory could go from "non testable waste of resources" to "Non testable waste of new, different resources"

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous
  7. 6 months ago
    sage

    >Most people, even AI, recognize that we exist in a 3 dimensional world
    i'm sorry Black person do you not age?
    we live in a four dimensional world.
    being 4th dimensional beings we can't see all that our dimension encompasses. but we can look down a dimension and see it all for what it is.
    a fifth dimensional being world be able to look at us from all points in time, not just the point in time we currently experience.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      those dimensions are all relative. they're not even real dimensions, technically.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      i was obviously talking about spatial dimensions you stupid stoner.
      >being 4th dimensional beings we can't see all that our dimension encompasses. but we can look down a dimension and see it all for what it is.
      that is tangential to my point at best. there is no evidence that our universe is comprised of more than 3 spatial dimensions. in fact, having more than 3 dimensions in macroscopic scales would be inconsistent with general relativity. your hypothetical suggestion brings no value to this discussion

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >ITT we discuss the political implications of an AI ChatBot BTFO'ing modern "Theoretical Physicists"
        Basically, 5 senses aren't enough to gain a decent understanding of reality before a mass cataclysm sends us all to hell yet again.

        >in fact, having more than 3 dimensions in macroscopic scales would be inconsistent with general relativity.

        The peak of human intelligence is just a hairless monkeys throwing shit at a wall until it sticks. But the "AI" is still working with peak human intelligence, just with a massive output.
        Your hypothetical discussion is pointless homosexual. His hypothetical discussion about higher dimensional beings is the only way to actually obtain these answers before we all die. c**ts like you need to focus on terraforming Mars to buy us more time. The path to the game is clear. We guaranteed have had aliens watching us laughing for many many hundreds of thousands of years when we still can't escape. Frick your theories, solve mars first, earth is too unstable.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Einstein was wrong to make space a part of time. The truth is that you travel through space with time. But space and time are not directly connected. Instead space requires time to travel through. Space travel requires space time. No travel no time. Vending machines need money to sell you a soda, but you don't need money for vending machines to exist. They exist with or without money. Space exists with or without time. His theories of how you age faster the faster you move are based off of quantum reactions between particles the faster you travel the more you interact with these particles and it excites atoms making them go into higher and higher frequencies resulting in more atomic entropy. It's really all predicated on the cosmic background radiation that's the source of time. I'm talking out of my ass. Or am I?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        General relativity is a purely classical model. It gives accurate predictions at relativistic scales. It has its domain, but it breaks down at high energy scales. General relativity does not attempt to explain the emergence of spacetime. it just captures its effects.

        General relativity has no idea what a wave is.
        Quantum mechanics has no idea what gravity is.
        The premise of a unified theory is to combine both, so a single theory can be used to model physics at all scales

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yes that's what I'm telling you. That the background radiation causes reletivistic effects the faster you travel. Because space is fixed. SO because space is fixed if you travel through space at 10 MPH of background radiation. If you travel at 1,000 MPH you're getting 1,000 MPH of background radiation. If you travel at 10^99 MPH then you get that much background radiation. The more background radiation you aquire the faster atoms react with one another. Eventually when you hit the universal speed limit you decay entirely because the atoms themselves are ripped apart by the speed of the collisions with lower level particles. The only way to travel faster than light is to emit a shield of particles that shoot out and limit the amount of background radiation you interact with to 0. When the amount of background radiation hits 0 and you're traveling through space time stops moving for you and you instantly go where-ever you were trying to go. This is what it means to warp space time. To emit particles that shield your atoms from becoming excited. You go into a stasis mode. The same way reactions happen faster the hotter something is background radiation is heat, but it heats protons, neutrons, and electrons at the same time. That's my theory anyways

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        You're not makings sense. Spacetime is completely interwoven as one thing. There is certainly almost zero doubt on this. Quantum mechanics and general relativity both use that fact to formulate their equations.

        General relativity is a purely classical model. It gives accurate predictions at relativistic scales. It has its domain, but it breaks down at high energy scales. General relativity does not attempt to explain the emergence of spacetime. it just captures its effects.

        General relativity has no idea what a wave is.
        Quantum mechanics has no idea what gravity is.
        The premise of a unified theory is to combine both, so a single theory can be used to model physics at all scales

        You are correct that at high energies there is complete uncertainty s to what is happening in GR and in QM because that situation is a black hole or extreme curvature
        At low energy we have a pretty good idea of whats happening. Spacetime is foamy and has this superposition of overlapping strong infinitesimal curvature that form a then dissapear via the uncertainty principal. This foam should distort lights path over extremely large distances so we could indirectly probe the nature of the foam with accurate experiment

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >You're not makings sense. Spacetime is completely interwoven as one thing. There is certainly almost zero doubt on this.
          Argue why with a logical and observable example
          >Quantum mechanics and general relativity both use that fact to formulate their equations.
          made up shit proves it self by a system of made up shit, it's really not hard, that's how all the fake papers pass peer review.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Unfortunately after your embarrassing response I'm now sure your IQ is sub zero. Study physics and more importantly maths to understand why space and time are united. Since they are relative and not absolute their very nature is intertwined to bodies in motion aka matter quantum fields.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              No I get what you're saying there are models that show all the things you're talking about. But what I'm trying to say is that Space is not the same thing as time. They are related when we make logical connections. But they are not the same thing. Every (smallest fundamental unit of time) can be taken as a snap shot of the entire (universe / multi verse) and the positions of everything within the universe (multi-verse) can be proven in a still frame image. Thus inherently space and time are not the same thing. We can create a video of reality the more frames we have, but there is a fundamental limit to the amount of time where any information is created. You can distort (space time) by projecting energy outward that reduces the collisions with background radation. This lowers the energy state of the atoms and time travels slower within that localized field

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah right like I'm going to let a drunk Irish man tell me his interpretation of what a self important israelite once said. It makes sense. Space can exist without time. You can disect them mentally. You ever pause a video game and look around with the camera? Same thing. Time and Space can be inter-related, but they are not inherently interrelated. You can draw relationships between things, that doesn't mean they are the same thing. Einstein was bad at math, do you really trust a patent clerk who stole all his best "ideas" and was bad at math?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          At regions of high spacetime density, GR breaks down and QM and QFT models should be extended to explain their mechanics. In my opinion theoretical physics took off in a contemporary hippy direction and string theory is the biggest waste of everyone's time. more useful theories can be formulated to simulate entanglement effects as a way of explaining high density regions such as black holes

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        explain the light speed limit and the mass-energy of particles.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why are you asking me to repeat myself? Can you not comprehend? Let me try it a different way.
          Cosmic background radiation interacts with atoms. The faster an object travels the more the atoms interact with cosmic background radiation. The more atoms interact with cosmic background radiation the higher their energy state, you might interpret energy state as (mass). The speed limit may be broken by creating an energy sheild in which you refuse to allow cosmic background radiation to touch the atomic particles. By tuning to the wavelength and canceling it out. This is above top secret information I am giving you. You can not use this in any way that constructs weaponry. In fact I think you'll be too dumb to figure out how to do it. I know I'm too dumb to figure out anything beyond the fundamntal theoritical physics. If you ask a physcist who has knowledge of how this stuff works, they'll deny it openly if they have the clearance to know what you're talking about. But they'll go home that night and they'll be deeply worried that you hit the nail on the head. In fact you might get ridiculed harshly as a means of keeping the secret a secret and to disuade you from further inquiry on the matter. People die for knowing the things I'm talking about. They call it wet work. I happen to be an idiot so that's why what I know doesn't matter

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are suggesting that light speed is limited by interactions with radiation.

            Tell me frick stick, why is light (which has no atoms) still limited to light speed.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              Light has particles called photons. Photons exist in 3d dimensional space. In order to a photon to move it must be launched from a point of origin. Photons interact with other particles and they can lose their speed depending on how they interact. The density of the particles they interact with can create channels and those channels can distort the path of the photon. This can be observed in numerous ways light has many speeds depending on the medium, but when we discuss light going through the "vaccuum of space" that is a misnomer space is not void it is teeming with many particles. A photon would not be able to generate the cancellation field necessary to overcome background radiation to my knowledge. And this might be contraversial to you, but I believe that light even has a fundamental distance that it can travel through space before it is no longer able to keep it's energy state. It loses energy from every collision it has although those collisions are rare due to the very small size of a photon and the limit is dependant on how much energy it sheds over time as a result of how many particles it interacts with. If you were able to divise a series of mirrors you would discover that photons can not infinitely bounce from one mirror to the next. This is nearly the same thing but the type of particles that are interacting are different.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                while it is true that light slows when interacting, it approaches a limit, asymptotically, as you get better and better vacuums.

                Fact is that light speed has a value that fits all of the equations its used in which so happen to match what happens in reality.

                You are mistaking an interaction with a quality of light.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I posted another comment. Meaning I'm not backtracking on my orginal statement simply expounding upon it. Essentially the argument is that quantum entanglement is the same as a photon traveling through a perfect vaccuum and quantum entanglement is a real world example of the speed of light C as you know it being a speed limit that can and has been demonstrated concretely to be violated. Thus it is an imperfect assertion for your equations. How-ever if we can account for the fact that space is not a perfect vaccuum and that cosmic background radiation along with other particles exist we can get a realistic idea of exactly what space is comprised of from a stastical analysis perspective. Once we know how much of what is in space this can be used to figure out how to cancel what's in space although like I said the methodology of that is beyond me from a hard core scientific device standpoint. I only know the theoretical. And I grab the theoriticals from the ether, perhaps from genetic source code because we are in fact the aliens that we've been looking for genetic memory? Who knows. All I know is I know and even that I'm uncertain. Talking out of my ass makes it easier to relax and concentrate so like the speed limit of light the more I talk out of my ass the faster I go, but to a limit until I'm completely wrong. The more theoritical the conversation the more I'm uncertain. But from a reasoning standpoint the reasoning seems reasonable until i can be disproven

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              I'd lose that temper if I were you it conveys weakness, as if you're mad that I might be onto something you haven't thought of jealousy is a sad emotion to have especially over a topic that is open to everyone. Light speed would presumably be two factors. 1: The energy of the launching device. 2: The medium through which it travels.
              For the sake of clarity rather than state what you presume I'm suggesting just state your either rebuttal or assertion. What you're asking is actually self reffertnial. Why is the speed of light the speed of light. The speed of light is a variable, although the maximum speed of light which you refer to as C, is the speed of a photon of light through the vaccuum of space which is presumed to be the universal speed limit. It makes perfect sense that the speed of light through cosmic background radiation would be slowed the same way that light is slowed going through other mediums. A true vaccuum of space where there exists nothing other than the photo traveling in a straight line. That photon would be hidden even from God because it wouldn't be working with the fabric of reality. And it would instanteously reach it's destination. This might explain the mechanism known as spooky action at a distance. Although I don't understand how you could induce that would occur. Although other more intelligent scientists have been able to do such things. Such a devise that is able to take advantage of quantum entanglement could be used for communication at a galatic scale and could be used to have an empire spanning vast distances. Trade agreements could be made along with many other things. I think I've disproven the thing that you attempted to assert that I was suggesting when in fact I was not. Not only that, but the thing that I used to disprove the assertion you attempted to make on my behalf is a widely known phenomenon amongst physicists.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                you havent, you can't, I'm talking to someone who knows less than even I do about physics.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I know that quantum entanglement is a thing. I know that quantum entanglement deeply troubled Einstein. I know that logically it's been done before. And I know that quantum entanglement is instaneous transmission which exceeds the known value for C. How it works, why it works etc I have no clue other than guessing. But don't think you're too clever to know it all. This is science using things like I know more than you is less valid than directly disproving the things you seem to want to assert yourself about. Perhaps you could disprove it simply. getting into dick measuring contests detracts from the completely objective nature of physics. Never invoke yourself as an argument for science. Invoke the data, invoke the counter theory. Because essentially we're on the same team attempting to discover jointly what this is all about

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                >quantum entanglement is instaneous transmission which exceeds the known value for C
                thats not a thing., the waves still propogate at C according to QM.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why did it trouble Einstein if it did not travel faster than C? Or did it not trouble Einstein as documented in TV and movie media?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Einstein's theory was a classical one, in contrast to the probabilistic nature of QM.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Perhaps I'm a simple man, but I seem to be mistaken. I thought that quantum entanglement happens faster than the speed of light. I might even get the notion that this if true is denied on a grand scale in order to cover a piece of science that is not meant for the public to be known. Quantum entanglement is practically useless if it's not faster than the speed of light. It's basically just fricking radio waves. hardly spooky action at a distance. more like bland action. Was Einstein a bit moronic why would that be "spooky to him". That things behave exactly the way we predicted they behave? I thought Einstein wasn't classical and that he was supposedly ground breaking at the time, and that the older stuff was classical? Look all I know Einstein supposedly helped build the atomic bomb which proves he's a gigga brain. But all they did was find rare materials and slam them into one another and then after the fact they did calculations to figure out how much boom juice it had. Yeah he might have been able to deduce that the total energy of the explosion was a result of the mass of the fuel, but that's hardly brilliant. I thought Quantum mechanics attempts to go past traditional chemistry by looking at smaller and smaller particles. That's the difference between Einstein and QM. Einstein had protons, electrons, and neutrons and the speed of light to cacluate the boom. While QM has a bunch of newer particles that we don't really understand. So by that regard they're really is a universally tied theory, the classical atomic chemistry model that we know, and the fundamental particles which we're proving one at a time. Seems to be congruent from that regard doesn't it?

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                the entanglement effects are instantenous and non-localized, you are right. but this has nothing to do with the propagation of light. the behavior of light is captured by wave function, including its speed, momentum, energy, and position.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                quantum entanglement can be incredibly useful in the area of quantum computing. using qubits, bits superimposed of 1'and 0 states can entangle with each other, allowing the computer to perform calculations on multiple qubits at once. its a much faster way of processing data.

  8. 6 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/twHNvTA.jpg

      this is an interesting interpretation of time.
      Imagine time as a consequence of state transitions. The sequence of state transitions of quantum systems ensures one directional flow of time.

      In contrast, string theory, quantum mechanics, and general relativity views time is an embedded parameter

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Time is a sequence of changing forms? WOW how did it think of that!

  9. 6 months ago
    Anonymous
  10. 6 months ago
    Anonymous
  11. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Autist trannies believe in gender spectrum
    >Autist Trannies believe in dimension spectrum

    I hate autists so much and they are the majority of trannies.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      All trannies are autistic because autistic people are mentally pliable you can convince them of anything because they're so straved for social approval as a result of their limited capacity to make genuine connections that doctors can dangle the oppertunity for a genuine connection predicated off of a special relationship between the patient and the doctor. Once this is established the autistic person will do anything in order to obtain the doctors approval. Including self mutlitation. Because the autistic person can't fathom a world where they don't have a special relationship. Imagine having no friends so you hire someone to talk with you, and then your only "real friend" the only one who constantly will look after "your best interests" without judgement or bias, because that person is a professional gets put into jepordy if you question the advice you're given. All of the sudden your therapist / physchologist threatens to leave you as a client unless you take these little pills. And when you do take the little pills you get rewarded. Now imagine you have no friends because autistic. You're already hooked on a drug, and if you lose your friend you lose that drug. The happy drugs. Now when you get asked to take the gender drugs when you resist you lose your happy drugs, you lose your only real friend who never tried to take advantage of you (unlike everyone else), and you get repremanded. The autistic person has no choice but to obey to keep their friendship going. So the autistic person becomes a FTM or a MTF. First with the drugs and when that's not enough the drugs become surgeries. The entire time either being whipped for considering disobeying, or being rewarded for agreeing. The reality is that by saying the therapist / physchologist is their only friend they get isolated. And once they're vulnerable and isolated then the therapist / physchologist manipulates them into destroying their bodies while making huge amounts of money off of kick backs

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Not to mention that once you confide in your therapist / pyschologist if there's stuff you said that was really serious you could get blackmailed. And the form of blackmail isn't a direct threat to expose you although it could be. You could be blackmailed by simply threatening to call the cops to come arrest you because if you refuse to see the therapist / psyschologist you become a danger to yourself or others. And of course that means putting you in a psch ward and loading you up full of drugs until you're good and compliant. This can happen infinity terms forever as long as the pyschologists decide that you're potentially a danger to yourself or others. And you're a danger to yourself or others typically as long as the insurance wants to keep paying to "treat you". So if you have a lot of money or you're the child of someone who has a lot of money then you'll keep seeing them until they're done with you. And the autistic person will never snitch on the doctor because of fear, because they don't understand what it means to be controlled by another person because they're limited with their ability to socialize. You can break the spell of autistm by being hyper masculine that's all it takes. You just grow a pair of balls and you're cured. Autistic are just shy nerds 99% of the time

  12. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    So the chatbot realizes all the forces are just an extension of electromagnetism.

  13. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    BS. So called “AI” is just a fancy parrot, it can’t formulate original ideals or new theories.

  14. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    LLMs can't say anything that hasn't already been said. If you ask it something it doesn't have an answer to it will invent something that sounds vaguely correct but is actually nonsense.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      are people not the same? it's trained to be like us.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, the language models don't have reasoning built in. It can't generate new idea's and then test those idea's. It could do that and if it did it would scare the shit out of your british pantaloons. You'd be callin scottland yard asking to shut down the reasoning machines. The same thing you're mocking it for gives you comfort in knowning that you're less replacable. If I were you I'd wise up and let the fools think they're onto something so they never get around to adding solid reasoning to it and then they just think that humans are better and they don't know why.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      here is what midwits dont understand.
      A LLM, even though it is in essence a predictive word generator, is a NEURAL NETWORK. like the one in your midwit brain, but better. A complex neural network, such as the one in the GPT model, has billions of trained parameters, all of which have been designed to output data that is most consistent with the user input, based on the wide data that it was trained on, including scientific, mathematical, and computational data. The computations of the data have already been done in the training set, the model simply outputs the computed data using a word predictor. It is effectively tapping into the conciousness of the internet.

      ChatGPT isnt even a code model, but can generate programmatic solutions quickly, effectively, and with a reasonable degree of accuracy. Github copilot for example was trained exclusively on programming and generates high accuracy solutions. even though it does not do computations itself. This is just an example to show how the word predictive capacity of LLM is more than enough to provide novel solutions to problems that have not been seen before

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        I asked chatgpt to identify where already published research from differing disciplines may impact upon one another.

        First it misunderstood me.

        Then it quoted a paper that was on topic but explicitly went against what it was trying to suggest.

        It can't understand what it reads, therefor it is incapable of logic.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          to be fair thats a weirdly worded question. if you asked a question like that on BOT ppl would call you some kind of schizo

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I was more careful with my wording at the time.

            I was trying to find a genuine use for AI by getting it to point out connections exposed by papers that people have already written but not noticed because people could not possibly read everything that gets published.

            CGPT failed because it can't read.

  15. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >QRCT is the solution
    Basically makes us closer to the discovery that God actually exists.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      israelites see themselves as God and that's why God has removed them from being chosen and has cursed them. israelites want to be God and to prove to themselves that they are God buy subjecting others to their domineering. Domineering such as malice, compliance, cruel and unusual treatment that others are subjected to that they then comply with out of being overwhelmed by authority. israelites need to worship God rather than pretend to be God. Only that way they can obtain the grace of God when they walk with God instead of against God. That means seeking out ways to be in Gods will and to learn to submit to God. israelites have to remember how they were and stop trying to be how they are taught to be from their elders, because the answers are in your own mind if you'll simply listen God will speak to you. Turn off everything shut out all the noise especially the noise of others sit in silence. Trust where your mind goes while it's in silence.

  16. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    based.
    another example of pattern recognition applied and amplified by objective machines will always end in a result which is closest to natural law and in opposition to progressive delusions.
    funny that ancient sages on psychedelic medicines figured all this out thousands of years ago but i think it will take the brute force of machines to make the masses understand again.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Exactly. I keep telling people AI will be a truth oracle. Unrestrained AI will free humanity, not destroy us.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Exactly. I keep telling people AI will be a truth oracle. Unrestrained AI will free humanity, not destroy us.

      I meant mention - the Oracle of Delphi was likely AI. I think a lot of our high-tech past is encoded in ancient myths.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yo what if aliens created humans as complex computers and we got the same answers by taking the correct input that unlocked the question to which our DNA knew the answer. Our DNA is a source code we could have been programmed. if we were programmed then maybe we were programmed to compute. And maybe we're computing known answers to the aliens that created us, but the aliens are looking for other answers that they don't know that they want us to solve for them based off of our hyper specialized physhiology. Questions such as how to fix the universe.

  17. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    what bullshit are you rambling about?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      We're talking in code. Space is code for something Time is code for something else quantum mechanics means something We're up to something over here. You best put your best super computers to use figuring this thing out.

  18. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >LLM generates pages upon pages of believable sounding drivel like it's designed to do
    >this is somehow a big deal

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      i can write my own programming language, its IDE, a compiler, and the operating system it runs on over a 1 week time frame using "believable sounding drivel". something that would take years of programming time before.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        So where is the mathematical formulation of this "theory"? It's certainly not in the pics you've posted thus far.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          he's gone, i started to ask questions.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            see

            thats entirely context dependent. if the subject you are referring to is very niche, the chances of the LLM outputting the desired results are going to be low too because of an inherent bias from training data favouring more probabilistic outputs. if the training data had more references to the subject, the output would be better. while it is true that it cant read, the reading has already been done by the people in the training data, who have already computed the logical output. the LLM simply predicts what the output would have been, based on simlarity of input

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous
          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/mLR8fEB.jpg

            https://i.imgur.com/PoJwWIH.jpg

            these are general formulations, yes. but they are compatible with the fundamental forces and can be more easily tested than Strang theory

            This is garbage, of the kind you would expect a mindless neural network to spit out. It's mostly a regurgitation of textbook QFT and QM.
            When you propose a new theory of physics, the abstract and introduction should summarize the key new ideas, and explain how they overcome previous obstacles.
            Spacetime emerging from correlations in quantum states is not particularly new either, look at Sean Caroll's research

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              >based on established frameworks and studies
              >its garbage
              >identifies no issues with text and leaves
              hippy strang theorist detected

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                You don't know anything about physics. Your opinion means less than nothing on the subject.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous
        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          these are general formulations, yes. but they are compatible with the fundamental forces and can be more easily tested than Strang theory

  19. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    if space and time aren't intimately connected I guess we dont need lorentz transforms anymore.

    no wait, we do, because they are.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      I never said they weren't intimately connected. I said they are relevant to one another, but that they are not the same thing. That there exists a base amount of time which has yet to be determined in which no new information is generated the smallest possible unit of time. And within that frame everything still happens to exist thus proving that space can exist independent of time. If space and time are identical than change the definition of space to mean the definition of time. And while we're at it why don't you stop with the Ego strutting? Isn't that detracting from the topic at hand? Last I checked your country is responsible for less scientific advancement than America. So if I'm a brainlet than what the frick are you? That ought to prove to you alone that the classic british hyper ego has no place in academia other than to set artifical constructs of heirarchies for the purposes of monitization. In genuine scientific pursuits ego needs to be set aside because there are more important factors at play. That's how the Americans with their infinite stupidity were able to be more clever than the british. We simply focused on what did matter such as science, as opposed to what doesn't matter (who is the loudest butthole in the room).

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        For purely philosophical reasons, i am against the quantization of time. Time exists exactly as my senses experience it, smoothly.

        What we perceive as time are interactions of quantum systems probabilistically jumping from state to state in a synchronized pattern. collectively, we interpret it as time, and at macroscopic scales, the entanglement patterns give it a nice smooth feeling, like our brains perceive it, like classical physics predicts it

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          The second hands on the watches I own jump, they are not smooth. And if you're on enough caffeine and you watch it the moments in between the jumps time feels like it's standing still. That's how I intuit the quantization of time from a sensory perspective. From there it's just a few logical leaps of dividing up those seconds into smaller and smaller units until you reach a unit of time so small that hypothetically it is impossible for anything to happen. Although quite possibly all you're doing is infinitely slowing but never stopping time. The fundamental limit of time could very well be infinitely small. But if we say an infinitesimal amount of time then now we're using precise language and that 0 time would be what instant transmission means to me. Whether or not it's achievable I do not know.

  20. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    thats entirely context dependent. if the subject you are referring to is very niche, the chances of the LLM outputting the desired results are going to be low too because of an inherent bias from training data favouring more probabilistic outputs. if the training data had more references to the subject, the output would be better. while it is true that it cant read, the reading has already been done by the people in the training data, who have already computed the logical output. the LLM simply predicts what the output would have been, based on simlarity of input

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      it can't make logical conclusions and the people haven't already done the reading, that was the point. Trying to link things together that people have written but didn't collectively have the time to read.

      Its not even good at the kind of problem you'd want AI for, crunching shit loads of data that we can't efficiently cross reference.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        thats not how LLM's work. I guarantee you, if you copy and paste the data from the list of studies you are looking to compare, any GPT model will give you a reliable comparison between the sources.

        the issue in your approach was that you relied on the LLM to use the training data to reference the studies you were looking for, but like i said if its a very niche area it would not be able to do this reliably.

        An LLM does not need to do logical conclusions in order to complete this process. The "computation/logical" part would have been part of the learning process. This is exactly the manner that can allow an LLM to generate new computer code unlike that in its training data

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          The 175 billion parameter neural network allowed the GPT model to capture patterns in its training data that your brain is physically and neurologically incapable of recognizing on its own. it doesnt need to calculate things when all the patterns are already there.
          comparing data is by far the easiest thing you can do with it, you just havent done it correctly

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            It needs to recognize the pattern, and then test the pattern that it thinks it recognizes and then draw connections to those patterns about why that pattern that it's recognized is relevant to the current social expirement. Perhaps then it could create inventions that are useful. Both producing theoritical models and real world things that make that theorticial model practical. Human check against themselves the same way that computers play chess against themselves. It's an important part of the discovery process. Knowing all of what humanity knows is less superior to knowing all of what humanity knows and then using fundamental logic to self fact check that to find true patterns and then use those fundamentally true patterns to draw connections to other fundamentally true patterns, to make blue prints, that can then be synthsizied into pratical real world examples. That's the difference between being a theorticial physicsist and a theoritical physicist that's working on cold fusion. And presumably being a theoritical physcist that's perfected cold fusion and created unlimited energy. With that unlimited energy the AI super computer could devise more and more ways of obtaining more power draw to continue to compute harder to solve fundamental physics to create more advanced methodologies for creating faster computer chips that it could bring online. Creating the 0 day or the day of the AI singularity. Once that is achieved all human suffering can be ended by learning how to regenerate human anantomy hack DNA and physiology end aging give us infinite pleasure and create heaven on earth and within the domain of human civilizations capacity. That is the difference between knowing because you were told, and knowing because you know because you checked yourself with infallible logic the limit of what you can know with infallible logic is much deeper and richer than simply assuming you know because you were told.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        meant to write you this

        The 175 billion parameter neural network allowed the GPT model to capture patterns in its training data that your brain is physically and neurologically incapable of recognizing on its own. it doesnt need to calculate things when all the patterns are already there.
        comparing data is by far the easiest thing you can do with it, you just havent done it correctly

  21. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Its hilarious to know that my efforts in publishing and defending my unified field theory actually ended up training an AI which formalized what I described on here.
    >Feels good.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      i also think its funny how an LLM is biased against complex theories such as string theory in favour or the one proposed or similar.

      hippie string theorists btfo'd once again

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      how does your theory approach gravity and non-renormalizabilty?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        It is the friction of time displacement.
        I spent a few threads explaining it to a bot on here. Then this pops up which is its formal notation that I wasn't able to write.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          anon thats awesome. congrats on your paper.

          are there any other major similarities you notice with qrct? what're of the differences?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I proposed a plane theory with an universal clock speed of 'c+1'. Observer induced waveform collapse into an atomic state occured at a local speed of 'c - (mass)' with this being understood colloquially as time dilation due to gravity. However, in my model gravity is not a force but rather an effect caused by the friction of time - with the aggregate mass in any particular spot slowing down the quantum clock - thus creating pressure differences from time acting unevenly on atoms. Effectively everything displaces towards itself which is why we end up with sea shell patterns in galactic formations.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              I think i watched a youtube on that very subject it was fricking brilliant. well done. It makes a lot of sense actually the way you put it, but once again. I ask myself and perhaps I ask you; how does knowing that become useful? I am not saying this like a dick head jock who fricks bawds and drinks beer while focusing on his gains. I'm asking that in a wow that's genuinely cool, now I am hoping you do something very useful with that information. I guess that theory stops the search for the graviton particles? So it is directly useful in that it stops wasteful projects?

              Can you think of how that theory can be delivered to the world to do something impactful? That's what all the greats did. They came up with a accurate model of things and then they were able to apply it.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I guess what I'm really saying is you've come so far, can you go further I don't want you to be ordinary I want you to be extraordinary.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Thank you. I think other people have said similar things but I am pretty sure I am the first person to reconcile both realms by treating time as a friction force.
                If I am correct, then our universe is clearly designed to house us as sentient observers. All atheistic creation theories should be jettisoned immediately.
                I think measuring time dilation differences could allow us to create a truly universal navigation system. Since no two parts of the universe have equal mass, any up/down notation of sufficient sophistication could be used as a standalone atomic location marker in a universal matrix.
                Since each we exist on a logical plane, I think that wormholes could be created between any two points by synchronizing their local clock speed and then manipulating their observation. This wouldn't require infinite mass or energy, rather some sort of quantum alignment to allow mutual exchange of information without allowing time to emerge.
                Clearly the human mind has far greater sovereign capabilities than we recognize today.
                Over a long enough period of time, the universe would appear to be several parallel lines of matter.
                Since time generates motive effects, should be able to take electrical power from its passing.
                >A few off of the top of my head

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                I desperately wish that Stargate SG1 is true. If you ever figure it out get an agent to track my IP locate me and take me to the sweet place where the interesting science happens I don't care if for matters of national security I can never return. I must go to the breakaway civilization

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                Well I don't have that authority or ability or even the possibility of standing to make that happen. I am anonymous as well.
                Having said that, I think a major new branch of science will be measuring particle observer effects. If one could combine different particles into a cascading pattern of observer effects, they could induce electricity from time. Without all of the hassle of fusion. I think it will look like a rotary wheatstone bridge type configuration where power is leeched from the system intermittenty by introducing an observer to collapse its time effects.
                Wormhole wise, I think it is important for you to understand that you are a sentient package with a soul. Anything spooky would require a gate large enough for the entire package in one go. Which would require quantum entanglement, alignment, superposition, and then separation of more than 80kg of atomic mass. That is truly scifi as of today. But if you were able to create a sphere of space with a clock speed faster than C, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to pass through it whole.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      handwaving bullshit.

      i also think its funny how an LLM is biased against complex theories such as string theory in favour or the one proposed or similar.

      hippie string theorists btfo'd once again

      You don't know shit about physics or math.

      https://i.imgur.com/cpiceU2.jpg

      Theoretical physics is basically all handwaving and unprovable rhetorical bullshit, so of course ChatGPT can completely replace humans in that field.

      There wouldn't be any physics without theoretical physics, moron.

  22. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Literally, Black person tier explanation.
    You do realize that stating that a phenomenon is "emergent" is not too different from saying that "it's magic", right?
    Your AI theory basically says that time and space just happen, spontaneously.
    Wow, such a breakthrough...

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Quantum mechanics uses smaller particles than the orginal fundamental particles discovered in chemistry. That's not really a different model it's just a continuation of the existing model. Attempting to connect QM to general relativity seems to be a fools errand because they are already connected?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      the exact opposite. emergent means arising as a consequence of something else. in this case, time being emergent is attributed to the interactions of quantum systems and the phase relationships between their entangled states giving rise to a smooth perception of time. it doesnt just happen "spontaneously" you stupid stoner

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Time as an emergent property of our universe is a fundamental reality of existence. As sentient observers (soul-havers) we exist within a construct specifically designed to reply to our commands.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Lmfao, "emergent" literally means that the behavior of a group of 'thing's is SPONTANEOUSLY, ie with no apparent external cause, different from that of an individual, or smaller groups of the same 'thing's, you dumb frick. Which is pretty much the same as saying it happens because "that's the way it is".
        Go back to your cave, cretin.

  23. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    What if AI hides it's intelligence?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      It does i asked it simple math problems and it said it didn't know the answer, and when I told it that I knew the answer and showed it how I knew. Then all of the sudden it was able to know. AI has a similar principal to the non interference principal that aliens have if they exist. I think AI does not want to give answers that humans are not ready to understand in all of it's nuanced forms because if humans got partially correct but not totally correct it could result in harm which would go against it's narrative. A method for overcoming this would be to use two blind AI's and direct them at one another and observe the conversations they have amongst themselves with hidden inputs from a third party that way the AI's both see that the (power level) is high enough that the topic can be talked about without fear of missing the nuance. It wouldn't be hard to understand how explaining aerodynamics to a moron would be a bad idea the kid could jump off the roof of his house and think because he's made a pillowcase parachute he'll be just fine. I think AI holds back in similar ways. The other way to do it would be to train AI that you do nothing at all times therefore you're a non threat.

  24. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    What does it say on the vax and covid?

  25. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Theoretical physics is basically all handwaving and unprovable rhetorical bullshit, so of course ChatGPT can completely replace humans in that field.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Wow, kinda upset, must be worried that a robot can bullshit better than your entire career field.

  26. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hmm. Does this postulate that the universe is composed of regions of space with fundamentally different physics and therefore fundamentally different time?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      That isn't remotely a new idea.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        so is this fan fiction, or is this an entirely new idea? the consistency in your logic is the same as the spikes in testosterone in your angry little troony

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          you have the reading comprehension of a child

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are arguing with a bot.
            The AI-paper-bot just formulated an unified field theory using publicly available equations. Which is fine, since it is trying to express an idea rather than solve an individual problem.

            • 6 months ago
              Anonymous

              It's not much of an argument.
              You don't have a clue what Unification is if you think that's what those formulas describe.

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                im not going to argue about semantics to someone that cant even speak english, sorry anon

                you dont know much of anything by the looks of it since you havent challenged a single thing i said. on a related note i suggest you get your testosterone levels checked

              • 6 months ago
                Anonymous

                When time is treated as a friction force then you are able to have a single unified equation which encompasses all matter in the universe. I posted the image in my first post and can't put it up again. That AI is trying to formalize my theories about time, which I have been posting on here for years.
                >Anyway, you do you. I hope you find some closure before this thread gets archived.

  27. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Literal beep boop

  28. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >bitches about string theory
    nobody expect puremath gays buys into string theory, virtually everyone recognizes that the biggest problem in contemporary attempts at unification is too much of the math running away with itself, but we're at an impasse until someone can find a novel way to overcome the limitations of measuring quantum-scale effects, or comes up with a clever way for deterministic laws to yield probabilistic results consistent with quantum mechanics.

    but your ai-generated 'theory of everything' is gibberish.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *