"Hurr durr, your physics isn't pretty enough and has too many coefficients to fit my childlike model of the universe. Clearly an approximation" - mimixco, 2020
You didn't understand what I wrote. To put it into simpler terms: Over time, people demand less and less about their civil liberties, whereas with open source projects, people demand more and more.
grizzles: I don't understand what's going on in a proton.
Physicist: actually, we know about it very well.
grizzles: I don't understand what you're saying, and don't care to find out, so I'm just going to disagree with you and say you have no experimental evidence.
Physicist: we actually have terabytes of evidence describing the different quarks and gluons within protons and neutrons.
grizzles: I don't care, and I'd rather live in Anaximander's land of indefinites and superstition.
Are you a physicist? If so, why not post a link to your profile? Why the need for your made up dialogue instead of a substantive rebuttal containing information about your allegedly detailed knowledge of the inner workings of a proton?
BTW, you've misrepresented my position in 2/3 of your little sonnet. I said "light evidence, not no evidence" and I do care. The only substantive rebuttal I've received is from computerex and I responded to that.
Central forces don't guarantee that the universe is made of fractals. Nothing, for instance, orbits an electron within an atom (excluding spin-orbit coupling and other such quantum nonsense).
I tried averaging the weights from a bunch of differently-trained neural networks for a Loss.jpg detector once.
If you think about what sort of brain you'd get if you "averaged" a few hundred geniuses' brains by blending them into a soup and adding some gelatin to a brain-sized sample, yeah, that's about the level of intelligence I saw in the "average neural net." It was basically in a constant state of seizure.
