Albert and his boys

As in, Albert Einstein and the guys (and gals) of Physics. His ideas were central to the development of truth engineering. The trouble is, what are his ideas? He, himself, complained that once the mathematicians got hold of his model, he didn't understand it. Too, he covered a lot of bases over his time. So, in truth, we will have to track through all of that, over time. 

And space? Look at GenAI (which is really is AIn't as I have mentioned many times since 2021) and how it represents unwarranted "search" through hyper/multi-dimensional spaces. We will look at that closely. This recent work is dabbling with heterogenous stuff and assuming that transforms will bring in homogeneity. But, the work of Einstein dealt with things that were more amenable to being handled in the "canonical" fashion that homogeneity brings. 

Note: That last paragraph points to the essence of the main issue of the cloud which we can (and will) go into in detail (over time and space). However, when we look at the foundational issues being addressed by Einstein, we will see a close stepping forth (dance like) of mathematics and the operational so as to become problematic to the extreme. GenAI is a mere symptom of a huge problem. Time to start to grapple with that. 

All of this plus more is on the table as we bring truth engineering to bear using knowledge based engineering as an initial framework. Let's look at one book that will be of use for this work. It's his book with Infeld (so, E&I) with the title of The Evolution of Physics using archive.org's copy. The authors briefly start with the briefs and come through the usual trek of Galileo and Newton on down the pike. They look at the rise and fall of the mechanical view after which, of course, we get the introduction of "field and matter" that comes from the advent of relativity. They go through the ideas of (and which contributed to) special and general and finally end with a view of the quantum work that somewhat merges (interlaces) with relativity. 

Okay, we all know of the visual arguments that Einstein used (train, elevator, and others). The book has no mathematics, so the authors grunge out explanations using words. It works. On the other hand, there is something to what Feynemann mentioned with respect to not being able to understand quantumness without mathematics. 

I say, mathematics drove the development of the thoughts. We will spend a lot of time there. BTW, if there seems to be a different tone to these posts, that's quite observant. If not, that's okay, too. But, the work to date was mostly surveying all of the thoughts, as expressed over the past few centuries that relate to the themes associated with deciding what's true. That issue became imperative as the computer evolved, but we did not. 

Want an opinion? We have bent over backwards over the past few decades to make the computer look good. Oh yes. The biggest argument for this? The descent brought by misguided development of the web and its muddy cloud which was then fed into ML (machine learning) in order to become some sort of omni presence or know-it-all or what have you. How about overall jerk (3rd derivative, if you're an engineer)? 

But, back to E&I. I have been through the book several times. Why? I had it for some time and mostly dabbled (as Koestler mentioned with respect to library angels). Of late (blame GenAI's rise and verge toward a fall), I took the time to step through E&I's logic. Plus, having used GenAI to probe somewhat into the workings that were hidden, the imperative nature became apparent. So, we'll get through the whole of it. 

For now, I just realized that E&I mentioned television. The book is about 1938 in emergence to public access. E died in the 1950s. The book was republished. I said that he looked to make changes to bring it up to date and only did a few. So, the book stands as a point in time reference to needed discussion. 

See pgs 189 and 190 for the discussion of an inertial frame and its clock. E&I lay out how to pick some central position and try to synchronize. Remember, this was from the 1930s. But, there were rudimentary sets which showed the concept. Now, jump ahead. We have the internet with its cloud and more. Too, we have sophisticated clocks that can sync across the country. When we watch a game in the U.S., everyone seems to consider that the variability is minor with respect to delays and such. After all, consider the work put into supporting real-time streaming. 

It was good enough for on-line (say Zoom) meetings during the pandemic. People walk with phones to their ears (some drive, too) and seem to think that they're having a real conversation with little delay in the signals. Oh yes, for those who may want to know, we'll include some technical sidelines. 

For instance, the cloud? It's a bunch of services that are provided via distributed (some very much far apart) servers running synchronized  algorithms using high-speed connections. Oh wait? Everyone knows of Nvidia and its $trillions evaluation according to the ca-pital-sino (my neologism - see Fedareated). Right? That whole affair handles the relativity issue quite well, at least ostensibly. You know, we could be picky (and might due to the importance of the topic) and point out issues.  

But, that's later. People need their games even if it's like gambling and pulls money from the pocket and one's family needs. Same goes for GenAI which was done without due concern for things that are important. Don't worry, we'll get there. 

No, remember, E&I are not the only players in truth engineering. We're targeting that due to the interest in things quantum on the part of the computer people who like the ca-pital-sino and seem to want to have control more than is necessary. 

People's rights are being trampled with insidious algorithms. But, then, it's early yet. Will there be improvement or further decline. 

So, with that digress, let's put this off until tomorrow or after. 

Remarks: Modified: 03/21/2024

03/21/2024 --