Ghideon

from your document: It seems completely incompatible with established physics, can you elaborate? For instance, how do your ideas explain the photoelectric effect?

I may depend on what your computer is connected to. Even if you have a dynamic IP address the device that responds to ipconfig /renew command does not necessarily hand out a different IP address. Note @swansont's spot-on response; renew the lease means that the same IP can be reused. An example of two situations where same IP is reused (there are others and a thorough answer would require insight into details): -Static lease (DHCP reservation); the IP is reserved for a specific device -the server may assign the same IP address because it's the next (or only one) available.

Ok! As an engineer, perhaps you could consider revisiting and rewriting your explanation, focusing on ensuring that the mix of scientific terms and concepts is presented coherently and aligns with established scientific principles and theories?

Your code does not seem syntactically correct.

Your descriptions do not match program code you have posted. What program do you try to describe?

What does "within range" mean? What do you mean by "approaches"?

The question is copied from https://www.iypt.org/problems/, @flyer6 can you be more specific regarding your interest in the competition?

You may have misunderstood the output from the LLM*. Your claims does not seem to match the code you posed above. What are your results from testing your program? Ok, you missed the point. *) LLM=Large Language Model

Maybe it helps to view the lack of patterns in more dimensions? I've generated a surface plot of the function x×y for x and y ranging from 3 to 100. This plot represents a smooth, continuous surface, as expected from the multiplication of real numbers. Within this plot, every prime and semi-prime number in the given range is represented. Notice that the surface is uniformly smooth. There are no distinct features, patterns, or anomalies that visually distinguish primes or semi-primes from other numbers: Let's modify the surface plot; the function is based on @Trurl's program code: This plot is also smooth. Again there are no distinct features, patterns, or anomalies that visually distinguish primes or semi-primes from other numbers. Using another algebraic function will not help; there are no patterns. Plotting a larger area does not help either; the surface is smooth for any numbers. please report your progress so far.

The video, which delves into quantum mechanics and theoretical physics, does not mention 'photons' at all in the transcript. Can you explain how the video is relevant? (Note: thanks to machine learning and NLP I did not watch the video)

You can test using the numbers I provided: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/124453-simple-yet-interesting/?do=findComment&comment=1219386 Finding large primes with your approach unfortunately does not work; mathematical reasons why has been presented already.

I do not count that statement ("there is no such thing as programming without programming") as a law in computational science.

Thanks! For some reason I did not initially notice your quote @dimreepr It provides an answer to my initial question in this topic; Is there a scientific law or theorem that makes artificial consciousness impossible?

The LHC primarily accelerates protons (and can also accelerate ions). The concept of "atom in orbit" does not apply to the operations and experiments conducted at the LHC at CERN so I do not know what you are asking.

Ok. Just show the mathematical equations and we'll insert numbers from publicly available CERN data. (Note: "atom in orbit" is not related to my question as far as I can tell.)

That is true. Your descriptions need to be more precise. (as @swansont said above) Pick any reasonable example of your liking. Also define what you mean by "orbit" is in reference to the circular motion of particles in LHC. @Bufofrog gave a correct answer above for celestial bodies in orbit and I do not know if that is what you mean here.

Maybe this helps: draw a simple diagram of LHC and show what forces there are, according to your theory, that cancels? Then we can compare your idea with what is happening according to established physics?

One example: The original post discusses RR as a fundamental property of space interacting with moving objects, not something that can be easily nullified by operational forces of a machine.

That does not seem logically coherent with your earlier statements regarding the nature of RR.

Thanks for your reply. Please explain the details how there is cancellation.

Example: Consider the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. As far as I know it operates effectively irrespective of Earth's rotation or its orbit around the sun, which constantly changes the LHC's orientation. According to your theory, the LHC's performance should vary with these changes, necessitating regular adjustments? Could you explain how your theory accounts for the consistent operation of the LHC under constant change of orientation? What does the lack of adjustments for absolute motion tell you?

What fiscal system is that? In a typical sales tax system, the tax is levied only on the final sale to the consumer. Your description does not match any existing system that I am familiar with, so I'm curios.

I guess it depends on the context. My car has a voice control for navigation; to me as a user that specific function behaves like a "specialised bot"*. In this case the price of "the bot" is included in the price of the car. Would I pay for it if it was an optional app? Maybe. *)I classify this as an application "AI" since there is a capability to imitate intelligent human behaviour. I have no insight in the implementation.

The ethics of providing such a vague and potentially misleading prediction would be questionable, especially if the higher being has the power to foresee and influence events. So the ethical question is more about the higher being's role in potentially setting up a situation that could lead to violence. Also the provided scenario mixes logical possibilities with ethical questions so that the ethical question gets obscured by the need to address logical issues.

No. Here are a few steps that may be associated with data preparation, none of these requires* NLP. (Locating Data: Identifying data sources.) (Collecting Data: Gathering or importing data.) (Data Ingestion: Obtaining and importing data for use or storage.) Data Cleaning: Correcting or removing inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Data Validation: Ensuring accuracy, consistency, and relevancy. Data Transformation: Converting data to a suitable format or structure. Data Integration: Combining data from various sources into a unified view. (Data Storage: Storing clean, ready data for future use.) Those within parentesis I consider of secondary importance to the software you describe and implemented by other tools. But I consider them important for the analysis I think you have in mind and may give a more complete view of steps involved. *) NLP could of course be incorporated; I do expect the current trend regarding AI (including NLP) and LLM's to affect vendors of analytics software and that is best discussed in a separate thread.