I am a layman, so I will defer to the experts. But my understanding is that only physical objects are bound by relativity and SOL rules. The universe itself is not physical so the SOL rules don't apply and I have read in multiple places that the universe does/did expand faster. How that jives with time and space is something cool to think about.

Sure is!

The concept makes sense - spacetime itself not having mass and therefore not being bound by the same rules as things that have mass

Light has no mass though. A lot of theoretical physics seems to be a group of lazy (((people))) that made up ideas to make their equations work

Well, as I understand it, the modern view of light isn't so much that its a particle/wave as it is something that exists in spacetime itself. Kind of like the color of my shower curtain. I shake the shower curtain and the color ripples.

But there's no, err, shooting, of a separate particle, like a canon.

If you want to watch a show that will blow your minds, check out Through The Wormhole With Morgan Freeman (I know, but he is just the narrator). The show is a science doc that focuses on these questions and interviews top scientists from around the world.

It primarily focuses on the convergence of physics and philosophy.

I like Morgan Freeman.

I also like deGrasse Tyson.

I am not a fan of Tyson so much...a lot of his opinions rub me the wrong way, but that is just personal preference. He is definitely a smart guy

He teaches a pretty good lecture series on The Great Courses about explaining mysteries of the universe.

One cool thing he points out about relativity is that time stands still for photons since they travel at light speed which (if you believe it) means that a photon traveling across say 30 million light years of space does so in an instant.

He also understands that we don't really know anything about the universe.

If you ever want to blow your mind, look up some of the experiments in Retrocausality. Scientists claim they have proven that a future event triggered the present event (past from the future event's perspective) on the quantum level

And replicated the event in the lab and published complete with peer review

Not only does that photon not experience any passage of time -- space (space-time, ya know.) contraction occurs as well. So from the perspective of that photon it hasn't moved through space at all. It's merely emitted and absorbed instantaneously within a tiny portion of spacetime. Pretty cool stuff.

@Darth I think I heard about that! They had set up a transmitter and a receiver and thought they were close to the receiver receiving the transmission before it was sent.

Oh, I forgot about this since I have the whole server muted. So yes, relativity just says that objects moving through space can't go faster than light, space itself expanding isn't really covered by that, since it's not moving through anything. I haven't really studied GR so I don't know all about that though.

"Well, as I understand it, the modern view of light isn't so much that its a particle/wave as it is something that exists in spacetime itself."
Modern physics doesn't need to make a hard distinction between 'objects' and light, the same set of equations governs them. They both exist in spacetime, it's where everything exists, and they both have wave particle duality. Electrons have wave properties too, if you send them though a narrow opening, they behave in a way that a pure particle never could.

is there any way to get notifications from just one channel but not the others in a server?

I think you can mute channels.

@Joe-MN ^

https://discord.gg/ThkG7e New discord dedicated to sci + tech (and culture) with an emphasis on futurology and emerging tech (note: this server is not identitarian exclusive)

^ To be clear, this is not a replacement of this channel or server

Anyone into machine learning, deep learning, etc? @here

What’s that?

AI, I think.

@Why Tea I do some at work and did some for my degree

Do you ? @Why Tea

Cool. I've been reading some on coding it. My employer (big big company) is a huge player in it, but I'm not involved in it at all at work.

http://neuralnetworksanddeeplearning.com/chap1.html

Is this a good place to start (sure looks like it) and what other resources do you think are worth looking at?

@Deleted User Yes, one way / model of dealing with AI.

@Why Tea what resource to use and what to focus on depends a lot on what you're actually working on.

Are you doing some sort of image or signal processing? If so then yes Neural Networks sounds good and that site is a good start.

But Neural Networks aren't useful for every problem (though some academics are trying to push the idea that they are) so step one I would ask are you absolutely sure they are necessary for your work.

You can tell what machine learning things to focus on by laying out what type of inputs and outputs you are doing. The dimensions your data can fit are usually sequential vs non-sequential (i.e. a sentence is a sequence of words, an image is just a single vector of numbers) and categorical/symbolic vs cardinal vs ordinal.

Right, right. Thanks. But I'm not working on anything *specific* yet, as I'm trying to learn.

Of course one of the best ways to learn is to pick a thing you'd like to do, and try to solve the problem, but I'm not there yet.

@Why Tea in that case the best and most useful I've used and recommend is this one https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-034-artificial-intelligence-fall-2010/lecture-videos/

Excellent, thanks!

I love the MIT courses that are available.

MIT open courseware on Artificial Intelligence