pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

No because no "run away" effect. "inverted" mass means that the mass goes on the other side... gravity works the same there.

pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

Or we could shift to an other side of the universe by "inverting" the mass of the ship where the speed of light is much higher[1].

Cosmology is so cool... too bad we do not have time for that: we cannot even cure the common cold!

[1]: https://januscosmologicalmodel.com/pdf/2014-ModPhysLettA.pdf Cosmological bimetric model with interacting positive andnegative masses and two different speeds of light,in agreement with the observed acceleration of the Universe

pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

Unfortunately, no... But the french used by Grothendieck is surprisingly simple : it should not be too much of a challenge with Google translate, a couple of months and some courage.

pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

  > ... **Not Judging** ...
  > ...
  > Despite it all, I hope to have achieved a truthful text that illustrates the
  > **unclassifiable** person Grothendieck was.
  > ...
  > The quite unusual style of writing—with sentences, subsentences, and the
  > excessive use of cross references—intrigued me. One of my friends, a
  > professional psychoan-alyst, declared that **the author was paranoiac**.

Ignore this guy and just read Récolte & Semailles[1]

[1]: https://www.quarante-deux.org/archives/klein/prefaces/Romans...

pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

"Why Does Julia Work So Well?

There is an obvious reason to choose Julia:

    it's faster than other scripting languages, allowing 
    you to have the rapid development of Python/MATLAB/R 
    while producing code that is as fast as C/Fortran"

https://ucidatascienceinitiative.github.io/IntroToJulia/Html...

pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

Basic Laws Of Human Stupidity

http://harmful.cat-v.org/people/basic-laws-of-human-stupidit...

pierre_d528

7 lat temudiscuss

> he would have a hard time convincing other scientists in its validity, because of his... other convictions.

atemerev apparently does not understand what science is ... but keep posting your personal convictions.

pierre_d528

8 lat temudiscuss

Yep: +1

pierre_d528

8 lat temudiscuss

So much truth in here... Specially for the "just funded" startups : they loose their souls fast when the investors start to get impatient. It's a trap in so many cases.

pierre_d528

8 lat temudiscuss

Requiem for GitHub (2016)

http://hintjens.com/blog:111

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

It's a great idea and I think it's much bigger than maths. If you do not already know about it, searching around what a "Dynabook" is cannot be a waste of time.

You may be interested in this kind of laying out a proof: https://lamport.azurewebsites.net/pubs/proof.pdf

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

> Scholze started teaching himself college-level mathematics at

> the age of 14

And also that a few people have exceptional intellectual abilities, built-in.

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

> Ed: ...

A few people have thought about this very idea. You may take a look at:

  "http://www.vpri.org/html/words_links/links_ifnct.htm"

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

> "intimidating"

Exactly.

/speculation

There is a point where one starts to see "behind" the symbols. It's a strange sensation, as if one could understand the ideas in a non-verbal way. The symbols become optional. Intimidation crawls back before curiosity at this point.

An amazing book on the subject is:

  "Hadamard - The psychology of invention in the mathematical field"

/speculation

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

"“I understood nothing, but it was really fascinating,” he said. So Scholze worked backward, figuring out what he needed to learn to make sense of the proof. “To this day, that’s to a large extent how I learn,” he said. “I never really learned the basic things like linear algebra, actually — I only assimilated it through learning some other stuff.”"

https://www.quantamagazine.org/peter-scholze-and-the-future-...

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

Yes! Just setup definitions then see what you can do (think algorithms) with them.

The rest is highly likely to be intellectual masturbation.

Insight: math helps create maps of what is out there, that's it.

The map is not the territory!

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

Treasures from Alan Kay and friends can be found here: http://www.vpri.org

Do check the STEPS project: a complete system in 10_000 readable LOC.

Really exceptional.

Bret Victor can be found here: http://worrydream.com

Friends can be found here: https://harc.ycr.org/member/

Make sure to check Alan Kay's answers on Quora: https://www.quora.com/profile/Alan-Kay-11

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

Should you go there, please do share news about your beheading startup.

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

Please, could you elaborate?

pierre_d528

9 lat temudiscuss

Misplaced but cannot comment under the original one.

You wrote: "I don't take notes. (It's worth pondering whether taking notes is really an aid to internal remembering...)"

This is fascinating. Somehow, when what is out there is reflected "correctly" in the mind, it stays there in a highly connected way.

Here is an other one that does not take notes and apparently understands things.

"After high school, Scholze continued to pursue this interest in number theory and geometry at the University of Bonn. In his mathematics classes there, he never took notes, recalled Hellmann, who was his classmate. Scholze could understand the course material in real time, Hellmann said. “Not just understand, but really understand on some kind of deep level, so that he also would not forget.”"

and:

"Yet even with the benefit of Scholze’s explanations, perfectoid spaces are hard for other researchers to grasp, Hellmann said. “If you move a little bit away from the path, or the way that he prescribes, then you’re in the middle of the jungle and it’s actually very hard.” But Scholze himself, Hellmann said, “would never lose himself in the jungle, because he’s never trying to fight the jungle. He’s always looking for the overview, for some kind of clear concept.”"

Source: https://www.quantamagazine.org/peter-scholze-and-the-future-...

An other one who described something similar was Alexander Grothendiek in "Récoltes et semailles": (apx traduced from French) "Understanding something is like removing shards from one's eyes." He was known to be completely still when trying to understand/solve something... yet it took him a lot of energy. Understanding something is also understanding how it works, thus simulating it in one's mind. In fact reflecting about something is probably identical to simulating it in one's mind.

Can this be thought in a repeatable way? (or at all?)

Pascal has the perfect excuse for my misplaced and not short enough comment.

pierre_d528

Submissions

Requiem for GitHub (2016)

MathFoundations210: Numbers as multipliers and particle/antiparticle duality I

comments