logoalt Hacker News

bsaultoday at 2:14 PM3 repliesview on HN

something i've just realized : today long-standing maths problems are falling. It's great intellectually but won't probably have an immediate impact on our lives.

Now, what will happen once long-standing physics ( and chemistry and biology) problems will start to fall and at the same rate ?

Then we're going to enter a totally different world.


Replies

HarHarVeryFunnytoday at 4:10 PM

It's hard to see problems in those fields falling at anywhere the same rate as math, because they are all experimental fields.

There may be some problems of type type "why does X happen?" that appear answerable in terms of known science, but even these would need verification. If you want to make advances in fundamental physics, then a promising AI-generated theory might take a decade and billions of dollars to prove or disprove.

Math is a rather unique field in being entirely theoretical, axiomatic and self-referential. It is basically the best possible case not just for AI to advance without needing experimental verification, but also specifically for today's AI technology of auto-regressive LLMs and RL training, whereby valid reasoning steps learnt in one context will also be valid in another context (i.e. there is some generalizability of learnt reasoning) as long as you have learnt the pertinent aspects of that context that the validity depends on.

ForgotIdAgaintoday at 2:17 PM

Those long standing math problems solution may serve as building block for solving the experimental science ones.

numbers_guytoday at 2:33 PM

Not really. These same techniques fall flat on their face when applied to most physics and chemistry problems. All of academia has already been doing ML4Science for the last 8 years. God knows how many billions have been spent.

The only two major highlights are weather modeling and folded protein backbone prediction.

Mostly everything else, either lacks enough data, or there are contraits on the size of the foundational models that render them impractical or they just fail to generalize.

show 1 reply