So math is like painting, you can just arbitrarily add a splash of color somewhere to change the mood…
Well math might be, physics for sure isn’t
I feel like you are forgetting QCD, where they actually added a splash of colour to change the mood of the reader.
!linkedinlunatics@sh.itjust.works back at it again with some more AI bs.
Ist there actually an upcomming alternative for Job profiles and stuff?
AI = 0 □
This really seemed like a good simplification until you threw in that d’Alembert operator at the end
Obviously the statement is obsurd. If you wanted to get super pedantic, if we let AI =√P*C and rearrange to get rid of the square root then we arrive Einstein’s full equation. E2 = (MC2 )2 + PC2. Where P is equal to the momentum of the object. Then AI is just a symbol for the energy stored in momentum. So they’re technically correct, which as we all know is the most important type of correct.
(MC^2 + C√P)^2 wouldn’t give you that result though, because you have to FOIL.
Instead you’d get M^(2) C^4 + 2MC^(3)√P + PC^2
And that’s not even the correct formula. It’s
E^2 = (mc(2))2 + (pc)^2
You can’t just naively apply a square root unless one of the terms is vanishing (momentum for a stationary mass, giving E = mc^2, or rest mass for a massless particle, giving E = pc = hf).
The way to remember this is that it’s equivalent to the Pythagorean theorem, A^2 + B^2 = C^(2).
So it in fact only makes sense if AI = 0.
In my experience, when E=mc² is written, physicists generally mean relativistic mass, making the formula extract, whereas m_0 is used for rest mass, as seen in the expansion E = m_0c² + m_0v²/2 + O(v⁴)
Where does that expansion come from? As far as I can tell, m0v^(2)/2 only gives you the kinetic energy of the object where v << c, in which case the difference between relativistic mass and rest mass is negligible?
And where does the O(v^4) term come from?
I love that’s it’s not “what are you on about?” it’s just a general what
I always found the difference between general and special whativity fascinating.
It goes on like this:
What
The
Actual
F***
Is
This?
what is one unit of ‘Artificial(A)’ and also ‘Intelligence(I)’ mathemetically defined as?
…besides e - mc^2
Wouldnt that be the same as using a multicore modeller computer, since AI is just semi randomizing code?
It wouldn’t be the same if he multiplied by ψ+ signifying that we are moving towards quantum future
I can suggest an equation that has the potential to impact the future:
H|ψ> = E|ψ> + AI
Here, I have chosen the time-independent Schrödinger equation, to symbolize the fact that AI is the most important innovation of all time.
…
This is all bullshit of course. Everyone knows that the AI term should be included in the Hamiltonian anyway 🙄
This doesn’t look right since you’ve written the equation for very slow movement (sub-relativistic) and including the AI term should increase all the velocities in your ensemble exponentially.
they did the meth right
Reading this is an actual cognitive hazard.
Ha! “Consultant / Technology Manager” – pretty sure he’s just working on the next buzzword buffet to justify his bloated comp package.
Oh well, gives me an excuse to link this Weird Al song that makes far more sense.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Both terms are linked by a blockchain.
I want to know who this idiot is.
I mean, the equation isn’t wrong given that AI basically becomes a rounding error and can be safely ignored.
his name is Chatgpt
I choose to believe he’s just looking for VC money and is not actually that stupid lol
It also means AI = 0
I’ve heard about an extended version of the equation:
E2 = m2c4 + p2c2
Or E = (m2c4 + p2c2)1/2If so, AI = (m2c4 + p2c2)1/2 - mc2
I may have the capabilities to be a technology management consultant
As I said in another thread where this was posted, that original post has the distinctive voice of ChatGPT. Could be another similar model, but I’d bet money that was written by an LLM.
How did it lose so much quality since it was posted just a week or two ago?
The ways of compression artifacts are mysterious.
😆
Yes it’s not https
yeah it reads exactly like something chatgpt would write
This reads like a post written by AI as well lol
LinkedIn is just another Microsoft-owned account you should just delete for your sanity
