swansont

Yes. But the “new” part is…new. Newtonian gravity did not give us GR. Yes. Nobody has said there isn’t new physics. But you haven’t described a valid path to get there. So it’s not part of theory, yet it’s a requirement of yours? Something that doesn’t exist and you can’t/won’t define or describe beyond the name? You might as well say we need splunge.

Physics tells us how nature behaves. Its job isn’t to explain reality. i.e. there’s plenty of stuff in physics that are calculational conveniences and don’t actually exist. (field lines and phonons to name two)

GR is 100 years old. It’s established physics, not new foundational physics, which is what this topic is about.

AJ8Hodgson banned as a sockpuppet of AJ©Hodgson

What experimental data? Did you miss all the discussion about the lack of it? Can you give some examples of modern physics models that are “physical”?

Yes, meaning it’s irrelevant to discovering new foundations in physics Check them against what? I don’t know what this even means. You have theory (which is math) and experiment. If there’s no experiment, there is only math.

Is there any science you wish to present?

I’m not seeing how this applies, unless it learned the rules without being told, or observing the game being played. New physics = not knowing the rules.

Coding is the easy part. That would require AI developing something that’s not based on what we know, which is not something it currently does

Where does the math that’s in the code/simulation come from?

Only about 30 years. I did not edit any content. If you want to selectively ignore it, oh well. There’s also what you said (“part of the electorate”) and you acknowledged that lazy/inept people exist, so it seems to me that’s settled and the only issue is how many there are.

Calling a group of people lazy based on race/ethnicity is racist. Insisting that no people are lazy is just cluelessness.

FTFY (emphasis-wise) This is relevant to the discussion…how?

But this is moot; nobody has made this generalization. npts2020 made it clear they were not talking about all people, and you even mentioned “part of the electorate” So? This discussion is happening here. If we discuss what someone did or did not do, we stick to facts

Not sure we can. The fact that age and coherence evaporated from the news once Biden stepped aside (Trump being old and often incoherent), the narrative about crime (down significantly, but not reported as such) and the economy (by many measures quite good, and inflation lower than elsewhere) were choices driven by something other than the facts. I think “narrative” is the operative word here. You might expect it with pundits, but reporting is supposed to be objective. A lot of media became storytellers rather than reporters. Yes, some of them undoubtedly were. Can you honestly say that there aren’t/weren’t inept and/or lazy people out there?

It’s quite possible that some area of physics is up a blind alley, because there is a more fundamental formulation that looks quite different but reduces to the known case under the conditions we can experience. Kinda like how phlogiston worked, until it didn’t. Or the plum pudding model of the atom. I don’t know how you find the better model without experimental data to push you.

If they voted for Trump how are they victims? People have agency. They voted for someone, or chose not to vote. If they were inadequately informed, that’s a choice, too. It’s pretty much a statistical certainty, isn’t it? For those 25 and older, 8.9% had less than a high school diploma or equivalent, and 27.9% were high school graduates with no college https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022/educational-attainment.html Lazy and inept people exist. People watch FOX and think they are hearing facts.

NobelPrizeLaureate has been banned as a sockpuppet of darktheorist (and probably others)

They matter here.

She also performed better in states where she campaigned; there was a smaller shift to the right as compared to the other states.

ER docs have a certain background and experience that the general public does not

Plus the endless stream of lies, making it so that you don’t know what’s true and what’s false, so you don’t believe anything. Not even what you see with your own eyes. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” ― George Orwell, 1984

Some voters just didn’t blame Trump for things that happened on his watch, or flat-out didn’t believe he did things he did “Undecided voters didn’t believe that some of the highest profile things that happened during Trump’s presidency—even if they saw these things negatively—were his fault. This was the case on two of the biggest issues in the campaign—the 2020 economic crash and the demise of reproductive rights” https://newrepublic.com/article/188238/trump-won-voter-perception-2024

Have all the votes been counted yet?

Opinions are opinions; accuracy is only an issue for factual statements. You really think this absolves you? Try it when you get pulled over for speeding and see if it works. I don’t think so.