Ghideon

Thanks for your reply. I just lost interest in this thread; I am more interested in computer science and (financial) markets than purely political ideas.

Suggestion: Go to the sandbox topic in this forum, there you can learn how to use the forum features. Your idea sounds like a paradox, it requires huge improvements in international affairs, globally and regionally and trust in some organisation that will create this AI. But if that can be achieved there is no need for your proposed AI system anymore, the problem you wish to adress is already solved when establishing the model(s) used in the system. It sounds like you want an improved version of the United Nations* and then let them create a digital, "AI"-based, version of the United Nations. *) Including it's specialised agencies and programmes

Thanks for your reply. Let's assume we have constructed a prototype or candidate AI model that we think is capable of adressing issues of current financial markets*. Who would have the last say on go/no go for such a system on the scale you suggest? My guess: Then, assuming the system passes that hurdle and is up and running. Who would decide who and how the AI is operated? My guess And when there is a disagreement abut whether to trust the AI or not, or to replace or update the model depending on new events (a pandemic for instance) Who has the final say? My conclusion: -The issues you describe falls outside the scope of computer science, the problem is within other domains. -Your proposal about AI will not work, party for the reasons you have already hinted in your posts. This does no in any way say that it is useless to try to use AI or related concepts when establishing policies. But you need a well defined problem and something that could be modelled or parameterised in a way that an AI can be used. *) "AI" as currently available, not some fantasy super advanced future system like in a sci-fi movie. As far as I know, current understanding of for instance complex systems, political systems and economical systems limits our ability to develop mathematical models that an AI could be based on.

Ok. When an idea is tricky to formulate it may help to ask questions instead of posting repetitions? Anyway, here is a quick take on how to formulate a starting point for discussing what the OP maybe is about: Note: The above text is an illustration of what the OP might want to discuss, not actual questions I have. I have no intention to hijack the thread, I'm just curious about the topic; hence this attempt at helping @chrisjones to formulate something that can be discussed.

After reading your repeated parts of text my answer is no: as far as I know it is beyond the limits of current capabilities of AI (machine learning); AI can not yet be applied to something as vaguely described and unclear as the things stated in the opening post.

Capital market, stock market, bond market, ETF, commodities, currency or some other financial market? Or maybe the power market for trading electricity? I'm curious, do you by "AI" mean some generalised model that should work with all kinds of markets?

Defensive wounds.

As far as I know that is generally true, I'm unaware of any battery chemistry that allows for unlimited storage. Self-discharge depends on storage environment, chemistry, brand, temperature (and probably others I have missed). I intentionally neglected all this in my ball-park calculation. Another thing I neglected is that a wrist watch may have functions that temporary draws additional power; backlight, alarm etc. Maybe OP returns with follow-up questions or additional information to take into account...

I agree, a detailed analysis requires more assumptions and/or information from OP. Let’s try to rephrase the answer: under the stated assumptions, constant power usage, and ideal and lossless conditions the current will be below 1 micro ampere.

Assuming that a LR41 battery lasts for 5 years in a digital wrist watch and initially contains 30 mAh then a quick calculation gives the average current 0,46 micro amperes.

Additional note: given the limited information supplied in the question I have assumed columnar transposition.

The message, the chiphertext and the key seems to match as far as I can tell. Key 5263174 is correct.

Can you clarify the question a little? Protons are only positive (+). I do not know any drive that fits your description; are you asking about a hypothetical device? If you wish to discuss regular off-the-shelf hardware do you wish to discuss SSD* or HDD or both? *) HDD, hard disk; electro-mechanical data storage device that stores and retrieves data using magnetic storage. SSD, solid-state storage device that uses integrated circuits to store data persistently

Are the numbers correct? 0.05" sounds small for an usb receiver. If the numbers are indeed correct my best guess is that the volume is too small to fit enough mass even if Osmium or Iridium is used. (Disclaimer, I haven't cross checked my quick calculations)

Thanks for the reply Sorry, no it does not. There is not enough information to start a scientific discussion or make any assumption. heatless pseudo-infinite energy isn't my area of expertise but when major search engines draws a blank about some physical concept it likely does not exist and therefore can not work. Side note: Using software to automate this would be within my area of expertise ...

How does your friend, who created the thing, answer your question? I do not know what a heatless pseudo-infinite energy source using blueshift and rapid spatial expansion is, can you provide an explanation?

Thanks for your reply. I agree to your points and the example provided is a good illustration worthy some thoughts. I considered the ability to distinguish between things a skill necessary to survive rather than an example of primitive/basic mathematic operators. An example is the ability or required knowledge to sort out edible berries and reject poisonous ones. This means that I could interpret "primitive"/"basic" in different ways*: 1 Early use of mathematics in human history. 2 The first kind of primitive operator I grasped. 3 Primitive operators defined in contemporary mathematics. I would probably apply different lines of thought regarding the title's question depending on which one of the alternative interpretations I choose. *) There are others, these are the ones I see from my participation and comments so far in this topic.

">" I think this was one of the first "mathematics-related" things I grasped* before counting, numbers, addition or other mathematics. That there could be more (or fewer) of something and more or fewer of different things. Understanding for instance "there are more apples than there are oranges in this picture" came before counting items in the picture. I have no formal or mathematical argument, this is more of a personal reflection. I note that @iNow's argument probably could be used here to put divison "/" before comparison ">"; first one realises that there are apples and oranges rather than one singe pile of fruit. Then comparisons (or other operations) can take place. edit (just saw Studiot's post): I note that my example above starts with this, I did not think of that as an operation. *) This was early in life so my recollection may be incorrect. I did of course not know or understand the specific notation or the mathematical implications at that time.

Today I learned that you are not allowed to remove litter from this grass covered beach. The reason is related to science. The beach is used as a reference for marine litter. The information collected from the reference beaches about the litter that floats ashore can be used in scientific modeling or studies. (Obviously you are also not allowed to add any litter but that rule applies nation wide in public places.)

I’ll try to explain once the material is posted in a format that can be quoted.

That does not answer the question.

Then please explain how it is valid in physics to state that those two equations are equal .

The introduction seems to claim that photon energy hv equals the energy given by E=mc2. Please clarify how it is valid in physics to do so. (accessing the forum by phone, I don’t have time to figure out how to quote from the pdf attached )

I know about Shrödinger's thought experiment. I do not know why you refer to that thought experiment in this case. You made claims about time and movement, which was my reason for asking about the case of 0 K and particle decay as an example. Particle movement (or their kinetic energy) and temperature is related, which one reason it is easy to refute your claims as they were stated. You added the cat to the discussion after earlier claims were found to be wrong. They are still wrong.

Im still hoping for some relevant answer about about particle decay where your claims are contradicted by scientific observations.