9 hours ago
BACKGROUND (QuantaMagazine) ... AI has solved one of math’s $1 million Millennium Prize problems: Mathematicians at OpenAI showed that the Navier-Stokes equations, which describe how fluids flow, can sometimes “blow up.” But the massive result is not without controversy.
- - - - - - - - - -
SABINE HOSSENFELDER
https://youtu.be/eR2q8s4VB1w
VIDEO EXCERPTS: OpenAI claims to have solved the Navier-Stokes Millennium problem. It's not a secret that I've been working on the same problem in the past year with OpenAI's models and I'm sure so have many others. So, what are we to make of the solution? And is it really as useless as the critics complain?
Let me say that I've been struck by how extremely negative the reaction has been to the OpenAI proof. Like you'd think that mathematicians and physicists would be interested in how the proof works, how OpenAI managed to get it done, what else can be done with it.
Instead, everyone's complaining that OpenAI didn't leave it to humans. For decades, they've complained that private business has no interest in pure maths. Now, they're complaining private business does have an interest in pure math.
Okay, but first, let me tell you what we're even talking about...
[...] Finally, let me add that I'm aware there's some controversy about whether an OpenAI's model sneaked in on someone else's research. I have to admit that I'm super not interested in people's stories. I really just care about science. You might say, "Okay, but if you care about science, you need to keep people motivated to do it. So, you must care about people, and if their results get stolen, they won't continue doing it."
Well, I guess that's the question we have to answer. Do we need to keep people motivated by giving them a million-dollar prize? Or do we just leave it to AI to begin with? And will AI companies continue to be motivated if they notice there's no money to make with it?
In summary, I think there's a 90% chance this proof is correct, but a 99% chance that mathematicians will continue to complain about it...
AI solved a Millennium Problem and everyone is angry ... https://youtu.be/eR2q8s4VB1w
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/eR2q8s4VB1w
- - - - - - - - - -
SABINE HOSSENFELDER
https://youtu.be/eR2q8s4VB1w
VIDEO EXCERPTS: OpenAI claims to have solved the Navier-Stokes Millennium problem. It's not a secret that I've been working on the same problem in the past year with OpenAI's models and I'm sure so have many others. So, what are we to make of the solution? And is it really as useless as the critics complain?
Let me say that I've been struck by how extremely negative the reaction has been to the OpenAI proof. Like you'd think that mathematicians and physicists would be interested in how the proof works, how OpenAI managed to get it done, what else can be done with it.
Instead, everyone's complaining that OpenAI didn't leave it to humans. For decades, they've complained that private business has no interest in pure maths. Now, they're complaining private business does have an interest in pure math.
Okay, but first, let me tell you what we're even talking about...
[...] Finally, let me add that I'm aware there's some controversy about whether an OpenAI's model sneaked in on someone else's research. I have to admit that I'm super not interested in people's stories. I really just care about science. You might say, "Okay, but if you care about science, you need to keep people motivated to do it. So, you must care about people, and if their results get stolen, they won't continue doing it."
Well, I guess that's the question we have to answer. Do we need to keep people motivated by giving them a million-dollar prize? Or do we just leave it to AI to begin with? And will AI companies continue to be motivated if they notice there's no money to make with it?
In summary, I think there's a 90% chance this proof is correct, but a 99% chance that mathematicians will continue to complain about it...
AI solved a Millennium Problem and everyone is angry ... https://youtu.be/eR2q8s4VB1w