On 1/13/2026 at 11:45 PM, Markus Hanke said:

You know, that’s a pretty useful general guideline to have, so far as personal speculations in physics go 👍

The reality is that issues such as dark matter/energy etc have been deeply thought about for a long time by a large number of very brilliant minds. You can’t just dismiss and disregard that. It is therefore exceedingly unlikely that the next major breakthrough is going to happen on some social media forum.

That being said, I think that most in the physics community agree that our current models are provisional, and that our understanding is evidently off somewhere. The problem is being looked at from all angles - not a day goes by where not a new paper appears on arXiv about proposed new particles, modifications of gravity, discretization of spacetime etc etc. It’s an area of very active research.

I was reviewing various Manifolds and Spaces last night and I just don't understand what the are trying to model. Seems to me everybody is lost in the weeds somewhere. Esoteric models that work in the minds of the geniuses in University's math and physic departments, but are inaccessible to laymen like myself. I just don't agree with their assumptions and its downhill from there. I used to be rather sharp. Borderline Mensa material. Have lost a lot over the years and have forgotten most of what I ever figured out. But over the last month I made some insights into my study of the 12 equal sections of the sphere and have made some major strides in mapping the categories of Aristotle, Kant, and classifications of Roget onto the 12 directions of the faces of a Rhombic Dodecahedra. Things have been falling into place for me, major findings in two life long projects, so I wanted to share here. I am basically thinking that we would be better off using a volume math than the Cartesian Coordinates and Spherical approximations. The Rhombic Dodecahedron packs just like spheres pack so it seems you could do most everything you can do with Spheres with Rhombic Dodecahedra. i came up with a Geometric Scheme that starts with 38 Plank sized Spheres packed around a central void. First 6 in an Octahedral arrangement and the next shell of 32 forms a Truncated Octagonal envelope. Truncated Octagons tesselate space so you could build out shells around a central Truncated Octagon, and each shell forms an Rhombic Dodecahedral envelope. I figure you can use the geometry of a Truncated Octagon for sub atomic studies. Then when you build out to the size of a Carbon Atom you can flatten out the sides and build out crystals and hydrocarbon chains using the Rhombic Dodecahedra whose shells build out into a Cuboctahedra envelope.

I think its elegant and special, but I seem to be alone in my judgement. The Truncated Octahedron seems to tesselate as if its in the position of the voids between Dense packed spheres and the Rhombic Dodecahedra tessellates exactly like they are centered on the body of the dense packed spheres. Both the TO and the RD have the same13 axis. 7 through the faces of the TO and 6 through the faces of the RD. Seems we could do something with 7 axes.

31 minutes ago, Genady said:

It doesn't sound right. Anyway, here is how it looks:

except I understand the Sun and Solar System are tilted forward 60 degrees in the direction of travel

I would like to understand all the angles and directions and build a gimbled experiment platform that would always have a face pointed in the direction of travel

still confused about the direction, I had read the Galaxy is rotating Clockwise with the South Pole facing up?

32 minutes ago, tar said:

I understand the Sun and Solar System are tilted forward 60 degrees in the direction of travel

Yes, the galactic North Pole and our North Pole do not coincide, but this doesn't change the sense of rotation. Important fact is that the galactic North Pole lies in our northern hemisphere.

AFAIK, our galaxy rotates clockwise as viewed from the galactic North Pole.

This is what I remember from my astronomy class years ago.

3 hours ago, tar said:

still confused about the direction, I had read the Galaxy is rotating Clockwise with the South Pole facing up?

You realize that Galactic North and South are purely arbitrary distinctions ?
It is an accepted convention that keeps everyone 'on the same page'.

5 hours ago, tar said:

I was reviewing various Manifolds and Spaces last night and I just don't understand what the are trying to model. Seems to me everybody is lost in the weeds somewhere.

You need to remember though that just because you don’t understand it, doesn’t mean it’s not useful or doesn’t work. It evidently does, because we are using those findings in practical applications.

I myself do not understand in detail how a mobile phone is constructed, since electrical engineering is not my area of expertise. But it still works.

5 hours ago, tar said:

Esoteric models that work in the minds of the geniuses in University's math and physic departments, but are inaccessible to laymen like myself.

The average person in any math or physics department at a university isn’t a genius, with very few exceptions - they’ve just decided to put in the work necessary to learn the concepts. In-depth mastery of any subject requires time and effort, that’s just how it is.

10 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

You need to remember though that just because you don’t understand it, doesn’t mean it’s not useful or doesn’t work. It evidently does, because we are using those findings in practical applications.

I myself do not understand in detail how a mobile phone is constructed, since electrical engineering is not my area of expertise. But it still works.

The average person in any math or physics department at a university isn’t a genius, with very few exceptions - they’ve just decided to put in the work necessary to learn the concepts. In-depth mastery of any subject requires time and effort, that’s just how it is.

I agree. Anyone with great skill in some endeavour has usually put in a lot of time and effort, probably decades, into being where they are. We should admire their perseverance to get where they are, and not dismiss them as likely wrong because we don't personally understand.

On 1/10/2026 at 10:25 AM, tar said:

I opened this thread to talk about the wisdom of giving Grok this power to fool.

Late to the thread, a few observations:

Grok was found last year to be echoing the views of its billionaire creator, so much so that it would sometimes search online for Musk’s stance on an issue before offering up an opinion.

Grok has posted about “white genocide” in South Africa in its responses to users, who are asking a variety of questions, most of which have nothing to do with South Africa.

Grok, before some modification (which may not entirely end the ease with which it can be manipulated), has praised the views and actions of Adolph Hitler and made antisemitic comments about how Jews run everything.

Grok has also been used to produce photos of public figures doctored to show them scantily dressed or naked. We are told this is also fixed - I guess we'll see.

So, before I read further, I have to ask if one could do better with Gemini, GPT4, Claude, et al.

On 1/10/2026 at 12:54 PM, tar said:

We as humans should stay in direct contact with each other and not be shielded from each other by unthinking AI filters and algorithms. My thought is what if you could set your own filters and let who you want to let talk to you, talk to you. Your instance of Grok could be your receptionist and guard.

Don't forget mindless sycophant. That's what really brings in the customers for these AI companies.

Filtering as you describe can sometimes exclude useful data.

17 hours ago, tar said:

I was reviewing various Manifolds and Spaces last night and I just don't understand what the are trying to model.

Was this a request for a simple guide to manifolds and spaces ?

I have less than zero interest in Grok, but I can help with this.

11 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

You need to remember though that just because you don’t understand it, doesn’t mean it’s not useful or doesn’t work. It evidently does, because we are using those findings in practical applications.

I myself do not understand in detail how a mobile phone is constructed, since electrical engineering is not my area of expertise. But it still works.

The average person in any math or physics department at a university isn’t a genius, with very few exceptions - they’ve just decided to put in the work necessary to learn the concepts. In-depth mastery of any subject requires time and effort, that’s just how it is.

Again +1 for well put insight.

This is a new variation on Sir Oliver Heaviside's famous remark to the Royal Society

Gentleman, Should I refuse my dinner because I do not fully understand the process of digestion ?

12 hours ago, studiot said:

Gentleman, Should I refuse my dinner because I do not fully understand the process of digestion ?

Lol, nice one ☝️

On 1/15/2026 at 6:13 PM, tar said:

I just don't understand ... I just don't agree ...

'Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour grapes.'

On 1/10/2026 at 7:25 PM, tar said:

I am trying to create the idea of a human partner for every instance of Grok 4.1.. The resulting Human/AI weave can be thought of as an emergent mind.

Why?