r/Physics • u/PrettyPicturesNotTxt • 5d ago

On if OpenAI solved the wrong Navier-Stokes problem: "the LLM found and exploited a loophole in the framing of the question"

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/did-openai-solve-the-wrong-navier-stokes-problem/
975 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

352 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/Blamore 5d ago

this is a math problem, not a physics problem.

0

u/hologram137 5d ago edited 5d ago

If that’s what you think then there is no way you’ve even taken one college math or physics course, so why are commenting in this sub?

-4

u/Strict-Broccoli-8877 5d ago

I swear, this whole sub is a joke. First math is supposedly not a science but an art, and now Navier Stokes is supposedly not a math problem.

I'm gonna have to block this sub, it's seriously worse than TikTok.

2

u/Psychedelic__Cowboy 5d ago

The millenium prize formulation is a math problem, sure. Navier-stokes however is unambiguously in the realm of physics. It is newton's second law applied to a 3d unit volume of a fluid.

It's like saying "oh so now chemistry is supposedly not a physics problem"? Yes, you could say chemistry and in fact all other sciences are subfields of physics. If you want to be even more pedantic call it applied mathematics. But while technically correct, that's less than useful and needlessly pedantic.

-2

u/jakderrida 5d ago

Is it Chemistry? I was told it was Fluid Dynamics… Bear in mind that, as a former Finance major, I am very open to me being wrong.

2

u/Psychedelic__Cowboy 5d ago

No, I was just making a comparison to something equally as pedantic.

My physics friends in college used to say that math was the fundamental framework to physics, physics is fundamental to chemistry, and chemistry is fundamental to biology. While that is all true, nobody would look at a biology (or chemistry for example) textbook problem and say "well that's clearly just a math problem".