8 billion is the wrong number to use in the denominator, since not every single person on Earth was actively trying to make progress in Navier-Stokes. Equivalently, we could say "1 out of every 5 billion AI prompts managed to solve 1 of the seven millennium prize problems".
As a former mathematician, I'm not impressed at all. I don't even care about the solution. I think an integral part of math is what the human mind can do, and if AI was required, then to me it's not impressive at all.
I never cared about merely solving problems. I care about the beauty that one can construct from the human mind, and that was the entire point, at least for me, to practise math. To me, what mathematicians have done with AI and Navier Stokes is worthless.
>I care about the beauty that one can construct from the human mind, and that was the entire point, at least for me, to practise math.
the result of this originates from the beauty of the human mind, even if the tool used blinds you to the (very human) conquering of a long standing problem.
> Keep in mind that 1 (or less than 5) expert human mathematician (Grigori Perelman) out of 8 billion humans managed to solve 1 of the seven millennium prize problems which was the Poincaré conjecture.
8 billion is the wrong number to use in the denominator, since not every single person on Earth was actively trying to make progress in Navier-Stokes. Equivalently, we could say "1 out of every 5 billion AI prompts managed to solve 1 of the seven millennium prize problems".
if this is the terminus of AI then my god we live in such a lame reality
As a former mathematician, I'm not impressed at all. I don't even care about the solution. I think an integral part of math is what the human mind can do, and if AI was required, then to me it's not impressive at all.
I never cared about merely solving problems. I care about the beauty that one can construct from the human mind, and that was the entire point, at least for me, to practise math. To me, what mathematicians have done with AI and Navier Stokes is worthless.
>I care about the beauty that one can construct from the human mind, and that was the entire point, at least for me, to practise math.
the result of this originates from the beauty of the human mind, even if the tool used blinds you to the (very human) conquering of a long standing problem.
Go touch some grass
Betteridge says?
> So don't be sad that this 90 year problem was solved, just be happy that is exactly what AGI should be.
???
I feel like I'm going crazy reading this stuff. Are we about to be passed a Dixie cup with Kool-aid in it?
They've gone full cult.