6 ms·
If you are referring to the Jacobian conjecture Claude only provided a counterexample, not a disproof, neither of which is necessarily a “new brilliant scientif
by haldujai 2mo ago
If you are referring to the Jacobian conjecture Claude only provided a counterexample, not a disproof, neither of which is necessarily a “new brilliant scientific idea”.
- throw-the-towel 2mo agoThe whole "AI is a parrot" argument feels like moving the goalposts so quickly, you could actually hear the whooshing sound they make as they move.
- haldujai 2mo agoNo, that’s not my argument. Rather it is that a counterexample to a mathematical proof whether produced by human or AI may be a scientific discovery but it is not inherently new and brilliant by definition. The case for AI is also weakened when the model is steered by an expert.
- throw-the-towel 2mo agoSo what is your definition of "new and brilliant"?
- fourseventy 2mo agoA counterexample proves that the conjecture is false, not sure what you are talking about. And we can play word games all day about what counts as a "new brilliant scientific idea" but the fact is that no human had been able to solve it.