← Back to context

Comment by mathisfun123

2 hours ago

> It was completely wrong but the outputs were surprisingly close to reality.

that's not how physics works. epicycles weren't wrong. there is no wrong/right - modern scientists don't believe in platonism. physics is a collection of models which are empirically tested. if epicycles makes predictions to more decimal places than relativity then epicycles are "right" and relativity is "wrong".

now think about how this translates to LLMs...

3 comments

mathisfun123

Reply
skydhash  2 hours ago

> physics is a collection of models which are empirically tested. if epicycles makes predictions to more decimal places than relativity then epicycles are "right" and relativity is "wrong".

Most models have relation to each other so it does not suffice to take one in isolation. It's one continuous world (in our knowledge) so almost everything relates to one other. The truthiness of something is not whether it fits some particular phenomena, but how does it generalize.

  • mathisfun123  2 hours ago

    > Most models have relation to each other so it does not suffice to take one in isolation

    You don't know what you're talking about (most people on here do not).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansatz

    • skydhash  2 hours ago

      > You don't know what you're talking about (most people on here do not).

      > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansatz

        After an ansatz, which constitutes nothing more than an assumption, has been established, the equations are solved more precisely for the general function of interest, which then constitutes a confirmation of the assumption. In essence, an ansatz makes assumptions about the form of the solution to a problem so as to make the solution easier to find

      I don't see where this contradict my statement. A good answer does not means the formula used is correct.