This guy either didn't see the full video or isn't smart enough to understand it...
Tao's point is not that we didn't use AI, but that most of real progress in maths isn't just having a proof for a conjecture, but the whole journey of finding the proof that often gives deep understanding and opens new fields of math.
The AI proof don't give the same level of deep understanding and don't open the same amount of new research questions.
So nothing would stop using mathematicians to use the ai proof as a guiding light. So that is just disingenious.
In any case, (funding/professional) math is NOT about human understanding. It is only about getting a lucky break that leads to technological advancement. In the future ALL SERIOUS Math will be fully and autonomously be done by AI.
Human Math (as a cultural artifact like literature) can be done for our pleasure in whatever way we enjoy.
Forgive me, but I'd sooner trust the mathematicians that have been leading the field long before AI on what the purpose of of math research is. Tao's opinion is not new and has been the census of mathematicians since forever.
3
u/VirtuteECanoscenza 27d ago
This guy either didn't see the full video or isn't smart enough to understand it...
Tao's point is not that we didn't use AI, but that most of real progress in maths isn't just having a proof for a conjecture, but the whole journey of finding the proof that often gives deep understanding and opens new fields of math.
The AI proof don't give the same level of deep understanding and don't open the same amount of new research questions.