Comment by eru

13 hours ago

I agree with you in general. However:

> If Einstein derived them, who is "Lorentz"?

You can (re-) derive a lot of existing stuff.

4 comments

eru

Reply
kergonath  13 hours ago

> You can (re-) derive a lot of existing stuff.

Einstein was aware of Lorentz and the transform. He was aware of Poincaré as well. He knew the state of the art for his time.

  • eru  12 hours ago

    Re-deriving the start of the art cleanly with fewer postulates is good!

    • oliculipolicula  9 hours ago

      And so I'm skeptical of TFA's claim that "creativity _isn't [just]_ compression"

      Imho there's also a clean argument against the existence of LLM-understanding: chatbots have been unable to summarize to experts (see my reply to you in the other thread) their own findings.

      Even after prolonged interrogation. They were unable to _compress_ their own findings. Thus they might not actually understand what they have actually done. (They might barely pass an oral thesis defense)

      (One may object-- that proofs aren't data that can be "compressed". But then doesn't the process of abduction generalise the very idea of data? to.. ?)

      1 reply →