DeepMind AI teaches itself chess from scratch in four hours, proceeds to beat previous...

[yRaz]

Yes I do know how numbers work. The problem with this de-lema is you think objects can be counted, based on whether they may or may not exist. You're trying to chastise someone for speaking the truth, and its not working.

I'm arguing with the fact that you called quantum mechanics and astrophysics a conspiracy theory. That and the fact that you think we just make numbers up or that we don't have numbers to count such things.

and I don't know about you, but I learned to count objects at a very early age

 

[cliffordcooley]

I'm arguing with the fact that you called quantum mechanics and astrophysics a conspiracy theory.

That's not what I did. I called the thought of counting (as a fact) the number of electrons in the universe a conspiracy theory. If that is the only aspect of "quantum mechanics and astrophysics" then yes I suppose I am doing just as you say.

Lets look at our own solar system at things we can't see and calculate into the equation until we do see it. And even then we don't know the electron count, nor will we ever.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/25766...ly-close-to-earth-and-we-didnt-see-it-coming/

 

[yRaz]

That's not what I did. I called the thought of counting (as a fact) the number of electrons in the universe a conspiracy theory. If that is the only aspect of "quantum mechanics and astrophysics" then yes I suppose I am doing just as you say.

Lets look at our own solar system at things we can't see and calculate into the equation until we do see it. And even then we don't know the electron count, nor will we ever.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/25766...ly-close-to-earth-and-we-didnt-see-it-coming/

well it's not so much we have an exact number of the number of electrons in the universe, but we can look at the gravitation effects of objects, even billions of light years away, and then come up with an estimate. From that we can then calculate a margin of error for that estimate.

So I will agree with you that, yes, we don't have an exact number, but we do have a range that we believe that number is in. As with everything in science you do have to calculate a margin of error because we are well aware that nothing is absolute. The other thing is that electrons are always popping in of and out of existence so the number is always changing.

 

[cliffordcooley]

but we can look at the gravitation effects of objects, even billions of light years away,

See right there that is BS. Scientist assuming they know.

 

[Reachable]

There've been humans who could lift 1000 pounds. That's amazing for flesh and blood creatures who only weigh 150 or 200 lbs. There are hydraulic cranes that can lift 50,000 pounds. But they're cranes, made out of metal, and huge.

There are humans who play chess amazingly well. They can make these complex spatial decisions despite having to deal with their life as humans at the same time. There are computers that can play chess better than any human. But they're computers, who don't have to deal with anything other than making spacial calculations.

That's what we build machines for -- to be dumb objects that take one human faculty and expand on it.

 

[Abraka]

And this is why all this hype about "global warming" is ridiculuous.

We don't have to worry about global warming. We won't be alive by the end of this century. This is the last century in which humans exist. Screw global warming. Let the machines fry. Not that they'll be worried about a slight increase in temperature. They aren't as fragile as us.

 

[yRaz]

See right there that is BS. Scientist assuming they know.

they don't assume they know, they use general relativity and observations such as gravitational lensing to deduce what these things weigh. These are things that have been tested and found to be very accurate over time. Further, the instruments we use to make these measurements have a known level of uncertainty and we account for that by listing a margin of error next to that measurement. We've gotten to the point where instruments like the LIGO detectors can measure ripples in space time that are fractions of the width of a proton, is it so hard to believe we can weigh the universe?

we aren't assuming anything, there is a known level of uncertainty with all measurements made

And this is why all this hype about "global warming" is ridiculuous.

We don't have to worry about global warming. We won't be alive by the end of this century. This is the last century in which humans exist. Screw global warming. Let the machines fry. Not that they'll be worried about a slight increase in temperature. They aren't as fragile as us.

I can get on board with this, I'll be dead by the end of the century anyway. while I do believe in global warming, it's not my problem.

 

[Skjorn]

The difference between the electron count of the universe and the possible moves in a made up human game are totally different. One is a known number one is a wild *** guess.

 

[cliffordcooley]

The difference between the electron count of the universe and the possible moves in a made up human game are totally different. One is a known number one is a wild *** guess.

Skjorn we might as well give up. Some people actually believe in "Imaginary Numbers". They were also likely to be the ones behind the "New Math" movement.

 

[Skjorn]

Skjorn we might as well give up. Some people actually believe in "Imaginary Numbers". They were also likely to be the ones behind the "New Math" movement.

Well and then you got the other guying saying "We" like they were part of the group of people that did the research.