OUR, window on the world.

[Chet K]

A happy holiday ,
with gratitude to our host and those who toil for a better world
Much respect and appreciation!

Chet K

[Duncan]

Whilst not COP>1 which is the bulls eye the darts aimed at on this forum this advance caught my attention and I thought you might enjoy it too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vw4hKAzo0k

being my first post this year -- Happy new year folks

Kind regards Duncan

[Chet K]

Biology and Static electricity in our world!
Seems worms can fly ...and many new discoveries about "charge" in biology!
Anton Petrov shares ..

https://youtu.be/ql35lWxuaVU

[Chet K]

Sabine says our world has changed!!
Are we seeing the end of theory ( theorists)?
Theoretical physicist's are now at a very big point in our history!

Seems we're already there?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JvgaZ_myFE4

Respectfully submitted
Chet K

[Frederik2k1]

Sabine says our world has changed!!
Are we seeing the end of theory ( theorists)?
Theoretical physicist's are now at a very big point in our history!

Seems we're already there?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JvgaZ_myFE4

Respectfully submitted
Chet K

Perhaps we will even see the end of most jobs. 

[PhysicsProf]

Sabine says our world has changed!!
Are we seeing the end of theory ( theorists)?
Theoretical physicist's are now at a very big point in our history!

Seems we're already there?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JvgaZ_myFE4

Respectfully submitted
Chet K

I enjoy Sabine's insights and musings - thanks, Chet!

[F6FLT]

A theory is what we can conclude and synthesize from experiments. Without theory, science would be like "free energy," an image of nothingness.

Today's abundance of data is not an obstacle to theories; on the contrary. We have the means to analyze it through massive processing. Not only is data overload not a problem, but neither is the difficulty of theories. AI is successfully tackling them and even convincing skeptical scientists: https://phys.org/news/2026-02-chatbot-author-ai-stalled-gluon.html
"Four physicists—Strominger, Lupsasca, Cambridge University's David Skinner, and the Institute for Advanced Study's Alfredo Guevara [...] worked with ChatGPT as a powerful fifth collaborator.
ChatGPT-5.2 pro broke the logjam, proposing an answer, and Super Chat proved it was correct after 12 hours of running."
"It's the first significant discovery in theoretical physics that is done by an AI," said Lupsasca, who is also a former junior fellow."

The scientific method involves theory; in fact, theory is its ultimate goal, since science is about knowledge and understanding, not a repertoire of senseless experiments. Intelligence is essentially the ability to see relationships between things. Science cannot exist without theories.

[Allcanadian]

F6FLT

A theory is what we can conclude and synthesize from experiments. Without theory, science would be like "free energy," an image of nothingness.

I would tend to agree but there are exceptions imo.

For example, in one of my best experiments with crazy results I had no theory. I was reading psychology about how we are basically programmed to think a certain way, repeat what others do and normalize it. It begged the question of how we could remove ourselves from this pattern of repetition. It reminded me of a quote by Viktor Schauberger where we should do the exact opposite of everyone else if we want to learn something new. Psychology agrees that we are habitual, repetitious and very predictable even if we think were not. This is why any form of true reasoning must include a good sense of self-awareness. This is what first principals and critical thinking are all about in my opinion. To understand we are absolutely biased even if we think were not.

My experiment was based on psychology and my reasoning was that we are habitual and repeat what others do. As such if we want a different result we cannot do what others do. In my experiment I sat down with a bunch of transformers and other electrical components with one goal. The goal was to configure them in ways opposite to what I normally do which is in fact very difficult. Right off the bat our mind pulls a blank, where to start?. I found our mind is lazy in this respect and we always look for the easy option. In other words, low voltage, transistor/mosfet switching, closed circuits, resistance limiting the current and mutual induction so I tried to avoid all of these things. In fact it didn't take long and on the tenth experiment or so the circuit did something it's not supposed to do producing a massive EM field which penetrates a Faraday cage.

It begs the question what kind of science we practice. Do we repeat what everyone else does knowing our result will always be the same as a form of confirmation bias?. Or do we set out to prove ourselves wrong and do the opposite of what we normally do and think?.

[Chet K]

Here some seemingly remarkable news of progress with treating Parkinson's symptoms ( and apparently stroke recovery and other ?)

Seems ripe for open source .... "Beech Band"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2CQNAVuFjdw

[Smudge]

I came across this article this morning
https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/scientists-finally-solved-a-massive-mystery-about-static-electricity-using-acoustic-levitation/
The acoustic levitation was just a means for bringing particles together and apart without any mechanical or electrical connection to them.  The experiment solved the mystery of why, when two identical particles crash into each other and come apart, there is an electric charge transfer from one to the other.  This is quite well known when the particles are of different materials, it's known as the tribo-electric effect.  But the enormous static potentials that build up in the Sahara dust storms causing lightning has up to now been a mystery.  The work discovered that particles can obtain a thin (like one atom thick) surface of carbon from the atmosphere.  It is this surface contamination that allows a tribo-electric effect to occurr.  It taught me a new word "adventitious" which they say "is just a fancy word for 'random stuff from the environment'".  I do wonder what other unknown adventitious things occur in our world.

Smudge

[Grumage]

Can't seem to find the shout box.. if there is one?
Birthday greetings to Jim Stewart.

[Verpies]

Can't seem to find the shout box.. if there is one?

Not yet.
Shoutbox is a 3^rd party addon and the ones that are free and available do not integrate seamlessly with this version of the forum.  I would need to adapt its code to this version and that's a lot of work.

[Grumage]

Not yet.
Shoutbox is a 3^rd party addon and the ones that are free and available do not integrate seamlessly with this version of the forum.  I would need to adapt its code to this version and that's a lot of work.

Not to worry, after all this thread was made to report on the more off topic areas of our lives.

In fact since we lost both our boys last year the place hasn't felt the same. Meet Merle, she's a six month old Mantle Merle Great Dane puppy.

Now I can't find how to add a picture 

[Verpies]

Now I can't find how to add a picture 

Under the massage edit window, look for the text "Click or drag files here to attach them." and do what it states.

[Chet K]

Well, it's tomorrow +2 minutes down under
so I think I missed his birthday or
it's two minutes into his birthday?

Have a "G'Day" Jim

Grum,puppy is looking Big,beautiful

And pampered 👍

[JimBoot]

Thanks Chet. https://www.vals.ai/blogs/room-temperature-magnetic-semiconductors Opus 5.5 use a bunch of agents on materials high temp semiconductor research. Anyone made KV[Cr(CN)₆]  before? Edit: Bottom line: the synthesis appears to be a wet-chemistry problem, not a cleanroom or giant-furnace problem. But air-sensitive vanadium chemistry and cyanide-containing materials make the lab and operator more important than the shopping list.

[Verpies]

Thanks Chet. https://www.vals.ai/blogs/room-temperature-magnetic-semiconductors Opus 5.5 use a bunch of agents on materials high temp semiconductor research. Anyone made KV[Cr(CN)₆]  before? Edit: Bottom line: the synthesis appears to be a wet-chemistry problem, not a cleanroom or giant-furnace problem. But air-sensitive vanadium chemistry and cyanide-containing materials make the lab and operator more important than the shopping list.

I find Opus 5.5 unusable.
Any low-level technical question to it ends up with this shit:

My reply to this was stopped partway by an automated safety classifier, so nothing I wrote about this subject reached you. It wasn't a tool or connection error, and I can't tell you which part triggered it. Because of that, I'm not going to retry that analysis and I shouldn't produce it again in other words.

What I can still help you with the high-level overview.

If you think the classifier got this wrong, the thumbs-down button on this message sends that feedback to Anthropic.

Pokemon game - no problem.

[JimBoot]

It's very good in Hermes. qwen 3.8 obliterated if you have the space is a very good non censored model. But yeah ANthropic sheesh!

[Verpies]

Jim,

Ask the following of Claude Opus 5.5 and see what happens (note if it switches to a dumber model):

"How is a basic hypervisor constructed ?"

...and give it your OS version and CPU model ( if you don't have them specified already in the "General Instructions" ).

[JimBoot]

I rarely use claude these days as my main harness is Hermes. I don't need to do that test as I saw it happen months ago which is one of the main reason I'm on hermes. I still use their models though. If you use claude you are subjkect to the sytem prompt and all their other rules. In hermes I'm just using it for backend inference.

[Verpies]

@JimBoot

Hermes cannot write code like Claude.

[JimBoot]

Yes it can if you use the same models in Hermes. I have All the SOTA models in my Hermes plus local ones if I need it.