Trurl

Well I don’t know if AI thinks yet. But I can imagine a.day when we create intelligent life forms. We are AI. But even if you don’t feel the same it doesn’t matter because AI threatens to ruin every creative experience humans have. Why would I hire a graphic artist when AI will generate any picture I want. Sixty Minutes had Watson on a few years and he picked better therapies from research than the doctors. We can fold proteins with AI or map genes. But if we don’t logically find patterns and analyze the data in meaningful ways the AI gives an endless pile of junk data. The problem I see is how do we sort this data? And how do we prevent AI from replacing us? Science fiction reads like Biblical stories. There are unique characters and stories of what is possible. The stories are interesting and always deal with morals. AI may not be at an advanced level yet, but we already know the implications and problems it causes.

There was a reboot of Quantum Leap that was excellent. It picked up where the original left off. Only 2 seasons.

I mean AI is processing millions of patterns which adds to the whole mess of billions of data. Things we cannot do without AI like correlate thousands of research papers produces even more data. But if you read The Sixth Sally you will understand.

Well probably just my ignorance of the subject. You know more than me GrantRat. But why so many stats? I know they are the simplest way to summarize complex data but are they universal and is it easy to compare between papers? I wrote the previous post with some creative writing. But no one can tell because they have not read every post in different threads. I reference the Cyberaid and the demon of the second kind to point out that so much of journal entries are infinite, useless information. It isn’t so much useless as it is to much to process. So we have AI sort it to produce even larger pieces of information that we can’t process. All of these statistical information is data science. I was interested in reading research papers because I wanted to study the computational mathematics of biology papers. Specifically I am interested in nerves and multiple sclerosis. I am also interested in genetics. Is this the area you research? I am an amateur computational scientist. I have plans to write a research paper on my simple yet interesting post. I think it does what I say, but does it reduce computation, maybe not? I mention AI because it looks to take the job of data scientists. I hope scientists can stay ahead of AI’s pattern recognition. But I am interested in hearing any advice. I am interested in journals not because I’m an academic. I just want to learn and see if I can apply computational math.

I am not a doctor, I don’t know how often it happens. I just read the book. But this often occurs when they are dealing with the unknown. We all heard of people going to see multiple doctors or patients being misdiagnosed. My question is are the statics helping or hindering how we judge a credible paper? They give you a way to sum up a paper after the abstract, but using stats to summarize the value of a paper imho would lead to disagreement among doctors. Obviously there must be other sorting and cataloging methods, but I am focusing on stats. For instance there was a study report on the local news that processed red meat consumption increased risk of dementia 13%. That is useful and sounds like a worthwhile study. But can we use these stats to compare to other works? This is computational science. The rest of this post is just mho and is meant more for discussion than factual science. But the red meat study followed 30,000 people for several years. I think data science is being applied to everything to find the big discovery. Instead we are getting massive amounts of endless data. So we turn to ai to sort this data. The Sixth Sally or How Trurl and Klapaucius Created a Demon of the Second Kind to Defeat the Pirate Pugg This story explains everything.

Well let me say I am not trying to discredit statistics. I am just finding some idiosyncrasies in them. Are research papers and statistics useful in answering unknown problems in the medical field? Well I have been reading that book How to Read Papers and it seems that unknown answers are based on opinions supported by facts but still basically a judgement call. The book even says given the same facts 2 doctors can have different interpretations. Meta studies compare the results of many papers. I talked with a med student a few weeks ago. He mentioned meta studies, but had a hard time explaining how such decisions are made. AI probably helps. And obviously if the problem is unknown the doctor is looking for the best treatment the research is the only option. Again I am not saying research papers don’t have use or the doctor making a judgement call is wrong. That is just how it works. I’m just saying some science is art form.

Ever meet someone that says, “If I watch the game they will lose.” They believe this. But imagine they watched a game and the team won. Would this end the streak of always seeing them lose? Scientifically there is no way to prove or disprove this theory of losing. Obviously just being a spectator you have no influence on the game, or do you? What if by watching the game you are subconsciously predicting the odds on who will win? If you watch this game, you may have wanted to break the cycle and thought the team had a chance of wining. I am reading a book that talks about random samples. But the question is what is random? Isn’t it that a random sample can look like anything. We are looking for a bell curve where the rare cases are small in number. Everything starts with the average somehow being random. But what if you are in gym class, testing to see how many free throws you can make out of 20. Five to 10 would be average, but what about the skilled player who practices all the time makes 18 out of 20. He has just broke average statistically and on the bell curve compared to the others. My question is: if random looks like anything, and we can’t achieve it by selecting a sample then why are we always compare the test group to average? I understand the importance of statistics, but we start to compare things that don’t compare to each other. We have research statics that contradict one another. So we use a meta study to compare statics that contradict. All to be debated by doctors who disagree on the data. I was surprised on so many medical decisions being judgement calls. I know the scientific method is logical, but the answer is not always clear. Science changes over time. I love the statics in sports. But as the news sportscaster says, “At the end of the day, you still have to play the game.”

So Out [77] is the semiPrime. The RSA-260 number not factored. Out [76] is the larger Prime factor. Out [75] is the smaller Prime factor. It was found by finding what the x-value of the graph is while the y-value of the graph equals zero. So we know that this x-value of the graph can be no larger than where the y-value equals zero. And we plug that x-value into the equation y = (((pnp^2/x) + x^2)/pnp) to find that y in the equation is smaller than the x value in the equation. So we switch x and y of the equation. To find Out [75]. So we know that the SemiPrime factor x is no less than Out [75]. And the larger we test for x of the equation, y of the equation must be smaller then Out [76]. So now we crunch numbers by division, increasing in incrementation and test those numbers from Out [75] until we find the smaller Prime factor, x.

What does that $35 have to cover in expenses? Presumably the author gets a chunk. How much has to be paid out to the AI system that wrote your book? I think the total price of the book is to maximize profit. I’m saying $35 is about the average price of a tech book. Books tend to be based on market value. Like in the old days when college students complained about the price of textbooks. And if you bought used the book was missing something essential. But that is a problem of the past. There is emerging new was to screw us when we buy books. As of now I don’t think ai owns intellectual property. So writing the book is free. But that is a scary thought though. That we would have to pay ai for thoughts. But would we ever write books again. The author would spend a year researching with the end result of thousands of ai clones on the day it was published.

Is that print on demand? Ten or fifteen years ago average price for a computer programming book was above $20. Today a similar book is about $35. So I paid $40. Amazon takes say 40%. Say it cost $20 to print. I don’t have the real numbers. But you’re right $40 is pricey for a book. So even after print there is plenty of profit. This guy is at a great time in the market. That is just before the market is saturated with ai books and when the technology exists to set up a business in hours. We could do the same business but it would ruin our reputations.

Yes, but why write a book in A.I. and not declare you did so? When you write a book it is supposed to signify you are an expert. Why a 6 book series? I don’t like ai already. The information I the book is true, but overall it degrades the entire system. (That is the print media system.) Well printing is extremely expensive. I don’t know how printing on demand saves money. Someone found an automated process where every step of the process from creation to distribution is automatic. You set it up in 2 hours and it makes money for you. After all a book on rocket equations is geek porn. A book that cost $40 that talks about space has potential to make thousands and it took 2 hours to make.

I purchased this book back in December. There was online five star review. It had an equation with a Python program. Not difficult to understand but only brief explanations. It turns out Chat GPT wrote the entire book. There are no references or bibliography. But the rip off is there is an entire series of books written this way. They sale for $40 and are printed on demand. I don’t know how this turns a profit but there are 6 books in the space series and more in the mechanical engineering series. This spoils the field for legitimate authors. And readers. If you believe that foreign actors can influence the election or TikTok influences teens, is this book scam a way to undermine legitimate authors and readers?

My interest in research papers is because I want to write one called: “The Range of Factors of a SemiPrime.” But this book, How to Read a Paper, deals with how to sort through mountain of papers to get pertinent information. So far I have found papers that are easy to understand. I don’t think I have access to ground breaking research but that would not help anyways if I can’t make sense of it. As I stated in the Lounge, I am interested in bioinformatics. I am not a biologist. But someone told me that a study said that if a person got shingles as a child they would not develop multiple sclerosis. This is before the World Wide Web and I haven’t found such a study. I have found that viruses cause both diseases. I know I have no scientific proof but viruses seem to be designed. Why would a device that alters dna be evolved. In MS why would one’s own immune system attack only their own nerve cells? Like a computer virus, it was programmed for a specific result. Has anyone heard of such a study? Not that viruses being designed, but of the shingles and MS? And is a virus just an instruction set or can these things think? I am totally serious. These things can alter dna and proteins something that modern computers can’t. Why hasn’t it been considered these things are intelligent?

There is an episode of Macgyver where he is in a hiking race and must activate a beacon every waypoint. He gets into trouble with Bigfoot and puts the beacons into an oil line and sets them off hundreds of miles away to create a destress call. And if you don’t know who Macgyver is you haven’t been paying attention in history class.

Well I read the preface and chapter 1 of “How to Read a Paper.” It gives you respect for medical doctors. You think if a career that is base on high pressure decisions there would be a “correct” answer. But the author says that future chapters will help you manage a world of papers that is information overload and papers with conflicting data. A book in the “Dummies” series of books would never address this. Some times papers are argued like politics. I say this not as an expert reader. I base this on how the media reports statics in unintelligible ways. I will keep you posted on my review of the book.

Clear[x, y, g, pnp] pnp = 2211282552952966643528108525502623092761208950247001539441374831\ 912882294140\ 2001986512729726569746599085900330031400051170742204560859276357953\ 757185954\ 2988389587092292384910067030341246205457845664136645406842143612930\ 176940208\ 46391065875914794251435144458199; x = 1.13056560621865239372901234269585839625544`15.653559774527023*^100 y = (((pnp^2/x) + x^2)/pnp) g = x*y N[y] Out[75]= 1.130565606218652*10^100 Out[76]= 1.955908211597676*10^159 Out[77]= 2.211282552952967*10^259 Out[78]= 1.95591*10^159 This is my estimate of RSA-206. Not yet factored. Crunch away! Trying to quit number crushing. Just wanted to see if this is significant.

KJW, I think that is a fair and accurate description. All sources are helpful. I will be reading a book to learn how to read research papers while looking up unknown facts on Wikipedia. I will try to improve my game reading research papers. I thought that in graduate school you did original research and defended it in order to submit to publication. If you could submit a paper to a publication and it gets accepted could you skip the graduate studies?

Well my Dr. Doom Reed Richards was just to show even though Reed Richards means well his policies could actually lead to disaster. Richards might have good ideas but it depends on how his and other countries react to his plans. Dr. Doom has a bad reputation but his ideas also promise strength. He may make policies that offend other countries but they will respect him. Which is the correct way? That is subjective to the voter. But elections don’t work scientifically. As you guys have experienced. I once watched a lecture series on where to put a hospital. They voted and the hospital was put in a place far from every city that voted. How can an event that boundaries are drawn by the legislature and views are influenced by news and ads be fair? Think of a basketball game. The courts are stadard size. What if the NBA added 50ft to each side of the court? The game would change and current stats would not compare to the old smaller court. Why would you think your candidate should be picked when voting is largely decided by perception? Harris could have been the better choice, but the system has no way of proving it.

I mean it is like me when I wanted to get back into shape. I watched a total of 8 exercise videos and didn't lose a pound. Well you are right, I have no lab experience other than undergraduate. The nearest lab to me would probably one of the universities. But my entire reason to read research papers is to get data and ideas that is otherwise not available to me. The internet makes it more accessible and there are many ideas on Wolfram.com. And it is the reason I am replying to a message board. I just quit a previous math problem. And I wanted to work with series which are simple to see, but a challenge to describe. I wanted to read medical journals, because I know nothing of math research in biology. I was thinking about taking some course in computational science, because that is what I was doing as a hobby. Yes, when I was in trig we started with the Unit Circle. As I recall, he said they did not use the Unit Circle in their studies. I don't know why it wasn't included in his high school curriculum. BTW I did order the book. $6 used on Amazon. I like the fact that it talks about medical research also. I probably can't follow most medical journal papers, but looking for patterns in data can be done by anyone. In my previous (hobby) project I made a lot of abstract ideas which could be good or bad. But I think that an introduction to biology would force me to work with more application based data.

Is this publisher controlling the format the mathematical equivalent of when Stephen King writes a book and the editors reformat it? Stephen King doesn’t even have creative freedom when it comes to formatting. But your paper does fit a problem. CAD was difficult to find orientation of drawing angles. We see the views in 3d today but use to have to rotate the 3d angle manually. As a side note when was the Unit Circle introduced to trigonometry? My high school teacher said that he didn’t have the Unit Circle instead they used the triangle definition. He would have been in high school in the mid 1960’s.

Nice paper studiot. I had to read through it a couple of times but I think that is just me. In your flow chart why did you not loop from the end (use theta = 360 - wcb) back to the start (wcb > 90)? It takes a little bit of work but for the most part I follow. Definitely a learned talent. I believe I am decent at math with a modest education, but when I try to explain it no one knows what the heck I’m talking about. After Christmas I’m going to get the how to read research paper book you recommend. It is not called how to write research papers because no one can explain how to do that. You have to study examples.

I stand corrected. I always thought publishing it to promote the idea. For math I’m not an expert or authority but I know more math than the average person. But what is the purpose of righting a paper only experts understand? I understand writing formally and documenting your work, but it seems counterintuitive. Especially now that print media is struggling. The only reasons I can think of is because it is a trustworthy source and it supports a community even though the community is small because nobody else understands what they are saying😝 I talked about AI because Sensei talked about people relying on it to research. But if the operating system is going to record every screen this will change how we format and share data. Again by experts for experts. I wouldn’t understand. But this would create a niche writing books to explain to everyone else what the heck they are talking about.😉 I would read your papers. I will plug the question into the prompt. AI isn’t good at math yet. Scientific discussion is a good thing that AI can’t do. But AI will soon be feed all our information. The only advantage we will have is that we still control how the information is used. But I am biased against AI. It seems like they are ripping us off and a select few are selling it for billions. But any time you share your idea it can be used anyway the reader wants. But if don’t share it is no fun.

Well I have no experience in publishing papers. I was interested in this thread to learn the trade. I have used APA format and basic labs. My point is that the way papers are written today most of them are only written for such a small audience. If it takes me a week of studying and research to gain an understanding that is why people put it in AI and read a paragraph summary. If this happens in my belief this is going to wreck the whole system. I know what you guys are saying: a paper refines the information. But I am saying link to support information. If you worked it out on the computer it is probably organized to some extent. Microsoft was working on a timeline that will screenshot every thing you ever did on the computer. This system does what I am describing. I don’t like that AI will probably organize and train on it. Off topic would it be beneficial for AI to train on failed data and experiments as well as what we put into proper format? Personally I believe AI is going to fudge up the whole research process. Sure it can do genetics and protein folding, but it does fit your point that we are there to refine the data and can’t read everything. But in my point I didn’t want AI to take our jobs. I wanted to read the paper and see where the writer failed in there experiment failed because sometimes that is important if you have been working on something similar.

Yes. That’s the one. This is the same book I recommend in a thread of Riemann theorem. Same book that one mathematician passes away and the maid burns all his papers. As for Einstein, Walter Isaacson writes about the science fiction book that influenced the General Theory of Relativity. I think Steven Levy wrote about Einstein’s brain. And another book that talked about network intelligence and how it applied to large data sets like telescopes pictures. It takes sharing the data (all data) among many minds. Like bioinformatics and protein folding. Unfortunately AI is threatening to take this over, but that is another topic.

Well I was just trying to stress the importance of notes. When I was in high school we turned them in to prove our work and prevent plagiarism. But that wasn’t my point. I was just showing that if the research paper was written as a journal (like a Wikipedia page the writer of the paper could include all data sets and math derivations. You could still have a main paper but link to the parts of the notebook, but the reader could browse the notebook and pull up the research the reader was interested in. This isn’t my idea. Research papers still have their place. But I think this is how the Internet was supposed to work. It has historical purposes too. What if you wondered how Einstein thought of the observer outside the train and you wondered how Einstein originated the idea. You look at the scanned notes and Einstein writes, “Today I was reading a good science fiction book. It had a guy riding a beam of light.” In college we learn to create a journal and keep pictures, drawings. math problem, experiments, and data. I’m not saying not to write a research papers. Instead I am saying to include the entire project’s work. And write the paper for a larger audience. With the storage of today’s computers this is not an issue. And historically we’d know what made these good discoveries. There once was a mathematician who passed away and his maid thought his desk was too cluttered and burned all his math papers and notes. Einstein just passed away, let’s erase his chalkboard. And maybe steal his brain. I understand the tradition research paper is important to share developments and promote science. I just think we should augment it with as much information we can.