4 ms·

I don't necessarily understand what Gisin is up to (it might help if somewhere he has an explicit delta between his axioms and K's?) but I might indeed have a p

I don't necessarily understand what Gisin is up to (it might help if somewhere he has an explicit delta between his axioms and K's?) but I might indeed have a propensity to find it interesting. Schlep is the startup's equivalent of quantum tunnelling: you can't hope to out-schlep the established players in their own potential wells, but small amounts of schlep judiciously applied might get you through classical barriers, into a less-contested well?

gradschoolfail 2y ago
Uhh for that you might have to bundle up something together with the Greene pilgrimage.. dont think he published his axioms anywhere [but you could also invite one of his students to a meal..] Update: the review that set me on that future trail was this https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.06572 https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.06572 Note: percival applied significant patch to KAM
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  from its abstract, Gisin's https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-021-03378-z https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-021-03378-z seems worth pursuing, as I believe intuitionistic mathematics is so popular in computer science because we are always busy forgetting information.
  - aebtebeten 2y ago
    OK, the bits [sorry] that I read don't seem to go any deeper than the "could it be" above. My recollection of the basic problem in reconciling QM with GR is that of simultaneity: how do you manage to have an "open" future when various potential observers' future-fronts are all angled to each other? I'd guess that the hyperbolic nature of light cones mean [hands waving madly enough to fly me to Africa] that there's enough wiggle room such that any conflict-resolving process occurring at space-like separations has finished by the time the events are in a past time-like cone; we don't even necessarily need a timelike source of random bits, as they are always naturally impinging from the rest of the universe. What am I getting wrong with that model? [Subtle gods could then leverage chaos to work in ways undetectable by their creations?] Lagniappe: https://xkcd.com/378/ https://xkcd.com/378/
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      after short reading, looks like PCs went out with the Convention: those who were not already without their heads on 4 Brumaire IV were without their jobs? EDIT: also seem to have been plenty of zampolit in the VMF. Lagniappe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrector#Roman_Antiquity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrector#Roman_Antiquity EDIT2: 林白樂 via PMWL probably liaised with PoWaBu? EDIT3: AIS wouldn't have had a commissar in his unit in 1945, but he would've had a zampolit, which makes his own behaviour seem even stranger?
      - gradschoolfail 2y ago
        Sorry, not sufficiently erudite to parse PoWaBu renominative only? Zombified PCs overcame (thermidorian/stalinist) reaction? (cf Lannes, reading like a serial founder story, compare Villeneuve, reading like a serial bigcorp CxO) Yes, AIS was a weirdo?
        082349872349872 2y ago
        PoWaBu was a dead end anyway — now I'm much more interested in the overlap between 鮑羅廷 (MMG) and PMWL (1923-1925?); they would've had at least two languages in common. Thanks for MSN; I wonder why he hasn't been publishing with Springer, where he'd be easier to find?
        082349872349872 2y ago
        hmm. I'm not sure where MSN is going with all the mechanism to handle partiality. JUNK makes everything total, so composition just works, and refinement doesn't need to take into account domain; the following: f \refines g <=> f`x ~ g`x NB. (~) is (<=) for bunches is true for ∀x, not just implied when x in dom`g. On the other side, for program correctness, I'd always thought the whole point of Hoare triples was that in {p}f{q};{q}g{r}, {p} is chosen (wp or wlp) explicitly so that never not {q} ... which in turn ensures {r}.
        2y ago

gradschoolfail 2y ago

Uhh for that you might have to bundle up something together with the Greene pilgrimage.. dont think he published his axioms anywhere [but you could also invite one of his students to a meal..] Update: the review that set me on that future trail was this https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.06572 https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.06572 Note: percival applied significant patch to KAM

082349872349872 2y ago
from its abstract, Gisin's https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-021-03378-z https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-021-03378-z seems worth pursuing, as I believe intuitionistic mathematics is so popular in computer science because we are always busy forgetting information.
- aebtebeten 2y ago
  OK, the bits [sorry] that I read don't seem to go any deeper than the "could it be" above. My recollection of the basic problem in reconciling QM with GR is that of simultaneity: how do you manage to have an "open" future when various potential observers' future-fronts are all angled to each other? I'd guess that the hyperbolic nature of light cones mean [hands waving madly enough to fly me to Africa] that there's enough wiggle room such that any conflict-resolving process occurring at space-like separations has finished by the time the events are in a past time-like cone; we don't even necessarily need a timelike source of random bits, as they are always naturally impinging from the rest of the universe. What am I getting wrong with that model? [Subtle gods could then leverage chaos to work in ways undetectable by their creations?] Lagniappe: https://xkcd.com/378/ https://xkcd.com/378/
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    after short reading, looks like PCs went out with the Convention: those who were not already without their heads on 4 Brumaire IV were without their jobs? EDIT: also seem to have been plenty of zampolit in the VMF. Lagniappe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrector#Roman_Antiquity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrector#Roman_Antiquity EDIT2: 林白樂 via PMWL probably liaised with PoWaBu? EDIT3: AIS wouldn't have had a commissar in his unit in 1945, but he would've had a zampolit, which makes his own behaviour seem even stranger?
    - gradschoolfail 2y ago
      Sorry, not sufficiently erudite to parse PoWaBu renominative only? Zombified PCs overcame (thermidorian/stalinist) reaction? (cf Lannes, reading like a serial founder story, compare Villeneuve, reading like a serial bigcorp CxO) Yes, AIS was a weirdo?
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        PoWaBu was a dead end anyway — now I'm much more interested in the overlap between 鮑羅廷 (MMG) and PMWL (1923-1925?); they would've had at least two languages in common. Thanks for MSN; I wonder why he hasn't been publishing with Springer, where he'd be easier to find?
        082349872349872 2y ago
        hmm. I'm not sure where MSN is going with all the mechanism to handle partiality. JUNK makes everything total, so composition just works, and refinement doesn't need to take into account domain; the following: f \refines g <=> f`x ~ g`x NB. (~) is (<=) for bunches is true for ∀x, not just implied when x in dom`g. On the other side, for program correctness, I'd always thought the whole point of Hoare triples was that in {p}f{q};{q}g{r}, {p} is chosen (wp or wlp) explicitly so that never not {q} ... which in turn ensures {r}.
        2y ago