Genady

I don't get what is special in this thought experiment. I see just a standard situation with two places where gravity in one is stronger than in the other.

Well, perhaps the authors of that opinion piece, "a rabbi and a Washington state legislator" don't know this ^^^. Anyway, I'm glad that when my partner needed it, many years ago, I lived in Israel, where this was not an issue.

Here is a different minority's view on the subject: "limiting access to abortion is an imposition of governmental Christianity on us all." "What we — a rabbi and a Washington state legislator — have presented here are Jewish texts showing why access to abortion services are a religious requirement for Jewish Americans." Supreme Court’s Roe ruling would trample the religious freedom of every Jewish American (sfchronicle.com)

Such a primitive story!

I don't see any rationale for this statement. But why wouldn't you test your hypothesis on an historical data? Take several research areas. For each, run your suggested process for papers up to say year 2010. Compare your finding with actual developments after 2010. Do they correlate?

In this short paper renowned Harvard astrophysicist Abraham Loeb describes with "back of envelope calculation" a possible effect of a gravitational wave originated by a merger of two supermassive black holes in the center of Milky Way galaxy. Such merger would cause a measurable, up to 1 mm permanent increase of the distance between the Earth and the Moon. It would happen because the gravitational attraction between the two bodies would weaken during the time that takes for the wave to cover the distance between them, which is about 1 s. [2205.02746] Two Novel Observational Tests of General Relativity (arxiv.org)

Where I live we get fresh water by reverse osmosis powered by wind turbines.

I often see, "not fully understood."

The two most famous suicides: Two households, both alike in dignity (In fair Verona, where we lay our scene), From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean. From forth the fatal loins of these two foes A pair of star-crossed lovers take their life; Whose misadventured piteous overthrows Doth with their death bury their parents’ strife. The fearful passage of their death-marked love And the continuance of their parents’ rage, Which, but their children’s end, naught could remove, Is now the two hours’ traffic of our stage; The which, if you with patient ears attend, What here shall miss, our toil shall strive to mend.

Yes, except for the typo: you have 'a' twice and no 'm' with both k1 and k2. If you replace, say, F = k1a with F = k1m, then your k1 is what I've called 'x', your k2 is my 'y', and your k3 is my 'z' in the first comment above .

Same here. (i.e. much prefer to stay signed in)

A little side note: not just in North America anymore. Fresh from WHO: Europe's 'obesity epidemic' is killing over 1.2 million people a year, a new WHO report says | Euronews

1. F=xm where x does not depend on m 2. F=ya where y does not depend on a 3. F=xma/a=ya 4. y=xm/a 5. since y does not depend on a, xm/a does not depend on a 6. x/a does not depend on a 7. x=za where z does not depend on a or on m 8. F=zma @Agent Smith

Sorry, you're correct. I meant, the answer to the Alan Turing's question, Can a machine think? I've implicitly agreed with your observation that the description in his essay is similar.

This is a common question here. The answer is that study of religion is a scientific discipline as explained e.g. here: Religious studies - Wikipedia

I have a candidate answer to this question, Why anything exists at all. Murphy's Law: Whatever can happen, will happen.

That would certainly work. But they fail without a need to go to such an extent.

Yes. But again, it doesn't apply to the tests in question. These chatbots were trained in English (such as GPT-3), and the tests use words from the trainsets. The problem is not in the language. IMO, the problem is that the chatbots (or rather their creators) assume that the answers are in the language.

Sure. But not in cases that were tested. One more: A's father is B and her mother is C. Q: Who is C's daughter? A: A's mother.

And the answer is, No. Another little test in the Playground (see OP): Alice: That's telephone. Bob: I'm in the bath. Alice: OK Q: Who answered the telephone ? A: Bob

This survey,[2205.00965v1] State-of-the-art in Open-domain Conversational AI: A Survey (arxiv.org), identifies some of the challenges even in the most advanced natural language processing AI systems, including: 1. Poor coherence in sequence of text or across multiple turns of generated conversation. 2. Lack of utterance diversity. 3. Bland repetitive utterances. 4. Lack of empathetic responses from conversational systems. 5. Lack of memory to personalize user experiences. 6. Style inconsistency or lack of persona. 7. Multiple initiative coordination. 8. Poor inference and implicature during conversation. 9. Lack of world-knowledge. 10. Poor adaptation or responses to idioms or figurative language. 11. Hallucination of facts when generating responses. 12. Obsolete facts, which are frozen in the models’ weights at training . 13. Training requires a large amount of data. 14. Lack of common-sense reasoning. 15. Large models use so many parameters that make them complex and may impede transparency. 16. Lack of training data for low-resource languages.

Check e.g. here: What does an Astrophysicist Do and How to Become an Astrophysicist (yourfreecareertest.com) "At a minimum, you would want to start off by attaining a bachelor’s degree in astronomy, physics, math, or electronics."

Re other primates, I've just noticed this recent paper exactly on this topic: Dead infant carrying by chimpanzee mothers in the Budongo Forest | bioRxiv I agree with you that awareness of death is a part of human experience and as such it is reflected in art. But so are many other aspects of our complex experience. I am not sure it is so very special.

Not in their proper time.