pierre_d528

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

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

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.

  > ... **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...

"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...

Basic Laws Of Human Stupidity

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

> 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.

Yep: +1

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.

Requiem for GitHub (2016)

http://hintjens.com/blog:111

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

> Scholze started teaching himself college-level mathematics at

> the age of 14

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

> 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"

> "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

"“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-...

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

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

Please, could you elaborate?

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.

I came across this video trying to understand what are quantum computers about... After all, Feynman himself said: "If you think you understand quantum mechanics then you don't understand quantum mechanics." and "If you cannot build it, you do not understand it."

I wonder if anyone could link to something that makes the stuff clear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKAF9OCQtIo

"QBism is NOT NEW but at least people are reviving what Bohr thought. QM just involves expectations of observables and the Born rule is just "metaphysical fluff." The confusions are all about false counterfactuals."

Your contribution is very interesting : it shows how little a diploma (a.k.a. "education") has to do with any kind of ability to produce anything useful.

http://oxrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/32/4/475.abstract

http://oxrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/32/4/538.abstract

http://ner.sagepub.com/content/224/1/R29.abstract

https://newrepublic.com/article/124943/america-overeducation...

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/03043932949...

https://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/lpritch/Education%20-%20docs/...

http://repec.iza.org/dp5401.pdf

http://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/news/records/2013/December/Differ...

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605...

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2862754

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2016/11/01/are-we-still-goi...

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/18/study_finds_l...

https://www.amazon.com/Academically-Adrift-Limited-Learning-...

http://www.opencolleges.edu.au/informed/features/21-myths-th...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/05/06/federal-stud...

http://longevity3.stanford.edu/blog/2014/10/15/the-consensus...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2016/11/01/are-we-still-goi...

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2012-12-31/research-...

http://economics.mit.edu/files/10414

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162505...

http://www.nber.org/papers/w18315

http://www.nber.org/papers/w19895

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/12/upshot/how-to-improve-grad...

http://hechingerreport.org/how-often-do-community-college-st...

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-i...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2013/05/28/half-of-co...

I know at least one of these people (IQ 155).

Here is the fundamental problem she has: lower IQ people will deny the obvious even in front of their eyes.

The combined delusion of all these people literally build our world that for her appears like a cheap stupid fairy tale (specially IQ 110-120 people that try to trick lower IQ people for money (advertisement etc)).

She is surgeon and only deals with children: it keeps a lot of the low IQ people at bay. When she is not fixing children, she is riding horses. Much else is just fake to protect her from low IQ people.

These 2 poor souls physically segregated themselves from low IQ people, she did the same... to a less extreme level (accepted to pretend/lie when needed).

If she had seen a big warning sign saying "high IQ hurts", she would probably have had found help and more people to soften the terrible loneliness she experiences.

Average web page is > 2MB[1]

Lol... you are really clueless.

[1]: https://www.soasta.com/blog/page-bloat-average-web-page-2-mb...

"Many people here are politely explaining to you that these tools have great intentions but that they are poorly designed,"

So, the "design" of the iPad is superior to the "design" of the Dynabook?

Despite paperless vision of the future thx to "software", usage of printers has just begun to stop growing.

Patronizing and blind or high priests of the "rentware" cult.

Here is something wonderfully tangible:

  Alan Kay and a couple of friends built an entire system in 2.8MB in 1998[1].

You can actually DO stuff with these techs: "How Smalltalk Enables World Record Breaking Performance"[2]

Guys behind V8 are smalltalkers.

Nothing "theoretical" here, just science. I do not care about pompous theory. For example, I do not believe in real numbers. I let "theory" to poets and most academics.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUud1gcbS9k [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx9dgLW9m7w

The cloud is going back to mainframes (e.g. Chromebook). Kay and 2.8MB system (Squeak). TCP/IP in 160 SLOC (Ian Piumarta).

You mix Open source and Free software.

Go have a real degree first (real science like physics), then maybe go back to computing.

Cannot catch up with the 70s!

People I know think before they act and sometimes do better.

They also see much more than an "industry" or a "product".

Best thing of all: we may have ≠ POV and still not hurt each other. Freedom!

Well, Alan Kay and a couple of friends built an entire system in 2.8MB in 1998[1].

It is 2016 and "large companies" are still overrated.

People who think we cannot do better are ignorant and probably overrated.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUud1gcbS9k