Steven Rutledge

@Fackfascists @esjesjesj Relies too heavily upon, does not, in any way, suggest it should be relied upon at all. You are correct though, I do not begrudge you your opinion.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj The part where it says he says we rely too much on expensive technology. In my view, that is suggesting AI would be instead of those technologies, not in addition to. Clearly, your bias is different to my bias, and you do not interpret it that way. That’s fine.

So he doesn’t know how science works at all

@theblackestlist @esjesjesj No idea is an untenable position. You might think little, or insufficient, or you might simply disagree with him, but none is not defensible.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj He has demonstrated publicly many times that he has no idea what he’s talking about.

Solar micronova hypothesis: Weakened geomagnetic field lets solar plasma hit Earth → creates giant plasma filaments (cosmic lightning) that arc to hilltops. Conductive stone walls act as focal points, melting silica into glass via extreme localized heat. Explains patchy vitrification without uniform fires.

@GScott17 @SunWeatherMan Maybe a quick sentence or two…

They didn’t, Michael, and you know that.

@ewarren 80 percent of Americans support the proposed changes

Republicans in Congress know they’re in deep trouble for the midterms unless they can rig the rules. Donald Trump even said that passing the “SAVE” Act will “guarantee the midterms.” Don’t be fooled: the “SAVE” Act is their way to keep American citizens from voting.

@gerry67789 @GScott17 @SunWeatherMan I understand now.

@gerry67789 @GScott17 @SunWeatherMan I don’t understand how that would manifest as this

@Fackfascists @esjesjesj Could you show me, in the original post, where it advocates against supercolliders?

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj Whatever, mate. You can interpret it how your bias wants; I I will do the same.

@Fackfascists @esjesjesj There is absolutely no indication in this post that he is remotely saying that.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj According to this post he is. I don’t care enough to look further than what the post is saying.

@giaotvu @Fackfascists @esjesjesj Yep

@Stevenrutledge @Fackfascists @esjesjesj AI can crunch the data provided to it and may spot data points of interest more quickly, but thinking out of the box is outside of the possibility realm right now for the technology.

@sciencegirl Could pick up my kids toys…

The Robotics team from Wissahickon High School in Ambler, Pennsylvania built a robot Miss Daisy XXIV that picks up balls and shoots them into a container.

@Fackfascists @esjesjesj Elon is not saying that.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj I’m not talking about bigger ones, that Elon says we don’t need. We need bigger ones to take particle physics further. The existing ones can still do some useful science, but would be lateral movement not forward movement.

@PhilosopherJoeC @grok?

I don’t think so. Ask any AI.

@_LapsisBeeftech @suspended_affix @esjesjesj Yes.

@Stevenrutledge @suspended_affix @esjesjesj Dude Micheal Crichton could do that shit

@Fackfascists @giaotvu @esjesjesj He isn't. He is suggesting that physics has stagnated. He is suggesting that AI could overtake scientific research. Neither of those things is suggesting that we should not build supercolliders.

@Stevenrutledge @giaotvu @esjesjesj Elon is literally suggesting this…

Elon is not saying that. Finding the Higgs was like discovering a new continent; now the work is mapping it in detail. Future larger colliders would probe higher energy scales and far greater precision to directly discover heavy new particles, precisely map the Higgs potential, reveal hidden dark sectors, uncover new sources of matter–antimatter asymmetry, and test whether the Standard Model and quantum field theory themselves break down or require deeper underlying physics.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj What more can the existing colliders do to move particle physics forward? We found the Higgs Boson that CERN was literally built to do. Elon is literally saying, we don’t need colliders anyways; we can rely on AI.

@Fackfascists @esjesjesj We have not effectively gone as far as particle colliders can take science. Not even remotely.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj Clearly, he doesn’t understand particle physics… we have effectively gone as far as particle colliders can take the science. How is AI going to solve this? “Grok, do Gravitrons exist?” “All signs point to yes.” “We have discovered Gravitrons!”

That is an appeal to authority, and it is factually incorrect. It has become an ideological claim. It is not inherently one. It is also not a scientific one, it's a legal one. The reason prosecution has not proceed is multifactorial. Not the least of which is that he is pardoned.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj Your opinion doesn’t matter. What does matter is that most legal experts and, even more importantly, scientists in the appropriate fields have sided with Fauci. So why hasn’t Fauci been prosecuted? Because it’s an ideological claim not a factual one and they know they’d lose.

@giaotvu @esjesjesj Aristarchus was able to measure the circumference of the earth based on an off hand discarded observation of the suns position in a well. We have a lot of information. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that we don’t also build supercolliders.

@Stevenrutledge @esjesjesj Fundamental science is not the same as applied science. Supercolliders help scientists discover particle behavior at the subatomic level. How can AI discover that by just learning existing knowledge?