My comment was in the context of the article, which states that AI doesn’t need physics Having models doesn’t imply what you probably mean by “knowing about ph

My comment was in the context of the article, which states that AI doesn’t need physics Having models doesn’t imply what you probably mean by “knowing about physics”, it just means having a representation of something that is not that something (like a map of the world is a map, not the world) So, depending on how the dog’s understanding of the world works, it maybe doesn’t need any models, I can’t really know But I do know, that if I want to describe anything, using any symbols whatsoever, then I’m implicitly creating a model of what I’m trying to describe with the symbols So, if I’m trying to communicate and understand physical phenomena using AI, then I’m implicitly creating a physics model, whether I want to call it that or not