We don’t need mathematicians to clear the proof as valid if it is checked by a formal proof system. Mathematicians would only need to check the theorem itself to make sure it describes what it should describe.

I think chess and go are a bad comparison. Their solving does not conclude in some societal use. They are interesting only as problems, but mathematics is interesting as a solution too.

How so? Particularly in intuitionist logic it would seem to me that they are the same thing.

This is amazing! I think you can even see shockwaves from the engine sound at the bottom?

That last one is amazing.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/3334580/Steam_Revolution_The_Age_of_Rail/

It’s more of a transport tycoon like game, but it’s free, so if that’s your cup of tea you could try it.

The energy difference is only really relevant if the thing you’re hitting is significantly heavier or at least similarly heavy like a house or another car. For a person it’s still much worse, but that is moreso because of the high hood of the car.

I know pickup trucks are heavy, but I’m surprised they are 16 times heavier than a Honda civic. The more you learn.

It has far more than AAA value to me. AAA games are mostly boring imho.

I’ve flown with them once, but i was very happy with the experience. That might be because I’m used to Ryanair though.

I’m skeptical of this. Life doesn’t just need a certain temperature, it needs to convert lower entropy energy to higher entropy. A uniform environment temperature does not provide any usable energy. You would still need a star or some other energy source.

There is no such thing as “now” on these scales

I got sick with a 40+ degree fever. My lower voice is fine, but my higher voice has been ravaged for weeks. I also had a cough that lasted for about 3 weeks. No idea if it was covid as tests are not as easily available here anymore.

Category theorist: hold my beer.

Is this real or a joke? It reads like the “if you don’t use the turn signal the car doesn’t turn” meme.

Not sure how Amsterdam is relevant in this?

It has been proven that each mathematical reasoning system* either has a statement that cannot be proven true or false, or a statement that can be proven both true or false. In simpler terms, it has been proven that we can’t prove everything.

Gödels incompleteness theorem if anyone wants to look it up.

• only holds for reasoning systems that can reason about numbers

The factorio space age dlc. Particularly track 06 from Fulgora.

There is something wrong with your unit conversion to cm there. That, or you dated a horse.

I have encountered one issue in factorio where large blueprint strings can’t be imported in the Linux version. Other than that, the record has been pretty much spotless.

I am sceptical of this thought experiment as it seems to imply that what goes on within the human brain is not computable. For reference: every single physical effect that we have thus far discovered can be computed/simulated on a Turing machine.

The argument itself is also riddled with vagueness and handwaving: it gives no definition of understanding but presumes it as something that has a definite location, and also it may well be possible that taking the time to run the program inevitably causes understanding of Chinese after even the first word returned. Remember: executing these instructions could take billions of years for the presumably immortal human in the room, and we expect the human to be so thorough that they execute each of the trillions of instructions without error.

Indeed, the Turing test is insufficient to test for intelligence, but the statement that the Chinese room argument tries to support is much, much stronger than that. It essentially argues that computers can’t be intelligent at all.

Maybe false vacuum decay is happening all the time but we don’t notice because it’s a form of quantum suicide.