4 ms·

> But in future most proofs will be for consumption by other AI models in the pursuit of yet other proofs. What is the purpose of that? Its like art being pro

by mb7733 23d ago

> But in future most proofs will be for consumption by other AI models in the pursuit of yet other proofs. What is the purpose of that? Its like art being produced for AI to consume. What is gained from that?

fidotron 23d ago
Well if it proves useless presumably they'd stop doing it. But if AI is to recursively self improve understanding and evolving its own foundations, which are clearly mathematical, is essential. There is no need for humans to grasp what is going on in that loop.
- eru 23d ago
  Math also has applications, and they don't rely on human mathematicians doing the math.
saghm 23d ago
I mean, was the point of math ever just because some humans enjoyed doing it? Even though a lot of it is theoretical, there's been all sorts of useful things that have come out of it as well due to an improved understanding of the universe through new ways of thinking about it. If it got to the point where no human could understand it and there were no ways to actually use it, I don't think anyone would bother having their computers doing it at all.
- lacunary 23d ago
  wouldn't AI solving problems in science, engineering, economics, etc be able to apply the new AI math?
  - saghm 22d ago
    Yeah, that's kind of my point. I would have to imagine that the people investing in AI doing math (using "investing" loosely, not just financial but hardware/energy/opportunity cost as well, which may or may not seem roughly equivalent to money depending on your viewpoint) would just stop unless it remained possible to apply in some way or was understandable by humans.
- tomrod 23d ago
  > was the point of math ever just because some humans enjoyed doing it? Yes. Friends and I often work on Putnam problems and this series: The (Almost) Impossible Integrals, Sums, and Series by Cornel Ioan Vălean
  - eru 23d ago
    You can enjoy math, but that was never the only reason people in general did math. (It was the only reason for some people, sure.)
    - tomrod 22d ago
      Your claim confuses me. This history of math is replete with people doing it for the love of the game.
      - eru 22d ago
        As I said, these people exist. And math is fun! But it's far from the only reason people in general do and have done math.
  - saghm 22d ago
    What would stop you from doing that if AI happened to be doing a bunch of different or more advanced stuff? I assume that the fact that there are humans doing other or more advanced stuff doesn't dissuade you from doing it for fun?
TheOtherHobbes 23d ago
It's going to be hard to compete with something that has access to all of math at once and can find connections between elements that appear unrelated to humans. And at some point AI will start suggesting - or doing - physical experiments.
deleted 23d ago
[deleted]
rlt 23d ago
Presumably some of the proofs will have applications beneficial to humans beyond impressing other mathematicians, and AI will surface them, or use them directly.

by mb7733 23d ago

fidotron 23d ago

Well if it proves useless presumably they'd stop doing it. But if AI is to recursively self improve understanding and evolving its own foundations, which are clearly mathematical, is essential. There is no need for humans to grasp what is going on in that loop.

eru 23d ago
Math also has applications, and they don't rely on human mathematicians doing the math.

saghm 23d ago

I mean, was the point of math ever just because some humans enjoyed doing it? Even though a lot of it is theoretical, there's been all sorts of useful things that have come out of it as well due to an improved understanding of the universe through new ways of thinking about it. If it got to the point where no human could understand it and there were no ways to actually use it, I don't think anyone would bother having their computers doing it at all.

lacunary 23d ago
wouldn't AI solving problems in science, engineering, economics, etc be able to apply the new AI math?
- saghm 22d ago
  Yeah, that's kind of my point. I would have to imagine that the people investing in AI doing math (using "investing" loosely, not just financial but hardware/energy/opportunity cost as well, which may or may not seem roughly equivalent to money depending on your viewpoint) would just stop unless it remained possible to apply in some way or was understandable by humans.
tomrod 23d ago
> was the point of math ever just because some humans enjoyed doing it? Yes. Friends and I often work on Putnam problems and this series: The (Almost) Impossible Integrals, Sums, and Series by Cornel Ioan Vălean
- eru 23d ago
  You can enjoy math, but that was never the only reason people in general did math. (It was the only reason for some people, sure.)
  - tomrod 22d ago
    Your claim confuses me. This history of math is replete with people doing it for the love of the game.
    - eru 22d ago
      As I said, these people exist. And math is fun! But it's far from the only reason people in general do and have done math.
- saghm 22d ago
  What would stop you from doing that if AI happened to be doing a bunch of different or more advanced stuff? I assume that the fact that there are humans doing other or more advanced stuff doesn't dissuade you from doing it for fun?

TheOtherHobbes 23d ago

It's going to be hard to compete with something that has access to all of math at once and can find connections between elements that appear unrelated to humans. And at some point AI will start suggesting - or doing - physical experiments.

deleted 23d ago

[deleted]

rlt 23d ago

Presumably some of the proofs will have applications beneficial to humans beyond impressing other mathematicians, and AI will surface them, or use them directly.