2λ @2lambda21

Terence Tao, UCLA mathematics professor and Fields Medallist, on why AI may be succeeding at science while scientists get worse at it: Tao starts by naming the tension directly: "There is this paradox that on the one hand AIs are becoming more powerful and more capable and making fewer mistakes, and they are ostensibly achieving a lot of the goals that we think scientists are trying to do. They're running experiments. They're analyzing data. They're writing papers." Experiments run, data analyzed, papers written — the exact outputs any university or funding body would cite as proof that science is working. Tao's concern is what those outputs stop telling you: "It may be that it comes at the cost of the AI picks up some skill but no human scientist gets any better at doing the science." The skill still accumulates, just in the wrong place. The system gets more capable while the people operating it stand still, because the work that used to build a researcher is now the work being handed off. And the cost shows up in the one thing scientists are supposed to be able to do: "No human can communicate exactly what just happened and why. This scientific discovery is interesting, why this proof is new and what features it has and how it connects." That final clause is the sharp end of it. Tao is describing a result nobody can place — a proof that arrives with no one able to say what makes it new, how it's built, or how it connects to the rest of the field. Understanding is a separate achievement from getting the answer, and it can quietly disappear while the answers keep arriving on schedule. Which is why he thinks the target itself needs re-examining: "We may have to sort of redesign our conception of what science is and what we actually want out of science. What exactly is science for and what are we trying to do? And is there a danger that we are optimizing the wrong thing when we are pointing our AI tools at science?"

Ptm que animal noble es el cuervo, hablan, tienen buena skin, ragebaitearon a Edgal Alan Poe, todo bien

ceciarmy @ceciarmy

2 weeks ago

Estos cuervos querían llevar a su humano hasta su árbol favorito y, como él no podía volar, fueron caminando con él. Cada pocos pasos se giraban para comprobar que seguía detrás. 🐦‍⬛

56 3K 37K 1.3M 3K

One second-order equation determines the straightest curves a manifold will admit: d²xᵏ/dt² + Γᵏᵢⱼ(x) (dxⁱ/dt)(dxʲ/dt) = 0. Riemann supplied the metric that generates those symbols in 1854; Christoffel isolated the connection coefficients fifteen years later. The extra terms, built from the Christoffel symbols of the metric, cancel the fictitious accelerations that the coordinates themselves produce, so the left-hand side is the covariant acceleration and vanishes. The resulting curves are the geodesics - great circles on the sphere, meridians, the world-lines of freely falling particles.

“Cuando Nolan me dijo que quería que una hora en el planeta Miller fuera equivalente a siete años en la nave, mi reacción fue inmediata: eso es imposible, el planeta caería en el agujero negro. Pero él, como buen director con visión, respondió: haz los cálculos de verdad. Y tenía razón. Usé matemáticas, me sumergí en fórmulas complejas… y descubrí que, si el agujero negro gira casi al máximo permitido por la física, la relatividad sí permite una dilatación temporal tan extrema. Increíblemente, ese planeta podía existir. Al borde del colapso, pero posible. El cine pedía una locura… y la física, si se le exigía con rigor, la entregaba.” “Y la famosa escena final no es sólo poesía visual. Cooper no flota mágicamente: está dentro de una estructura construida por una civilización superior, un tesseracto —una nave en forma de cubo de cuatro dimensiones espaciales— que viaja por dimensiones más allá de nuestro universo. Gracias a eso, logra volver a la Tierra sin romper las leyes físicas. Todo eso está detallado en mi libro. De hecho, fue un acuerdo con Nolan: el que quiera entender la película de verdad… va a tener que leerlo. Y esa fue mi manera de asegurarme que el cine, la ciencia y la curiosidad convivieran en una sola historia.” Kip Thorne, astrofísico ganador del Nobel y asesor científico de Interstellar.

Así se grabó Amores Perros.

doctor worm @awaitingtrial

3 weeks ago

138 11K 74K 2.5M 3K

Place a ball on a saddle it falls, spin the saddle it stays…a ball is trapped in a time-varying quadrupole gravitational potential

i love this fucking movie man

tentando arrumar meu horário de sono, mas o mundo fica tão bom e silencioso entre 00:00 e 5 da manhã

Growing up hearing “Wikipedia isn't a valid source” and then entering a workplace where people say “just ask ChatGPT” is a surprisingly strange timeline

Jude Bellingham consoles 17-year-old Gilberto Mora and they exchange jerseys. ❤️‍🩹

Johannes Kepler discovered that planets move around the Sun in elliptical orbits, not perfect circles. r = ℓ² / [m²μ(1 + e cos θ)] This relation gives the distance of a planet from the Sun at any point in its orbit and became one of the foundations of celestial mechanics.

Electromagnetic Waves (Circular Polarization)

If this doesn’t give you goosebumps you’re not a physicist

Courage

Un abrazo fortalece la salud física y emocional: libera oxitocina, reduce el estrés y contribuye al bienestar integral. Infografía de @UniversumMuseo 👇.

Eclipse total de Luna visto desde Puebla. 📸 Arturo Rentería Lartundo, del Instituto de Astronomía - CU - UNAM.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

😢 ¿Una lloradita puede equivaler a correr varios kilómetros? Infografía de @UniversumMuseo. ⬇️

#UnDíaComoHoy se celebra el Día Internacional del Gato 🐱… ¡Prrrr! Para que tu michi siga ronroneando, te compartimos una nota de @unamglobal con recomendaciones sobre sus cuidados. ¿Y tú nos compartirías una foto de tu minino o minina 📸? > bit.ly/46V6gBi

Chocolett @chocolettchoo