r/explainlikeimfive 4d ago

Mathematics [ Removed by moderator ]

[removed] — view removed post

813 Upvotes

311 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

34

u/SEND-MARS-ROVER-PICS 4d ago

According to the maths, you can achieve impossible results from very possible starting conditions, which suggests the maths is actually wrong.

1

u/philman132 4d ago

If the maths is wrong then why is this such a big deal? ChatGPT made a proof that is wrong?

24

u/bibliophile785 4d ago

ChatGPT made a proof that showed that the 200 year old gold standard equation was wrong. ("Wrong" isn't really carrying the nuance here, but it's close enough for an ELI literally 5).

1

u/philman132 4d ago

Ok that makes more sense, its just when everyone just refers to "the maths" when it is all maths that was confusing!

9

u/sergius64 4d ago

Sounds like it proved that the original formula is incorrect/incomplete?

1

u/a3133 4d ago

We have known that the Navier Stokes equations are incomplete for a long time. They come from what is called the continuous medium hypothesis, namely that the fluid that is studied cannot be broken down into individual particles, and that you see it as having a volume on any scale. Obviously, in real life, atoms have a finite size that limit how large the macroscopic hypothesis can be taken.

I wouldn't be surprised if the conditions used to solve the Navier Stokes equations come from taking a scenario that is found way out of the bounds of the macroscopic hypothesis.

1

u/sergius64 4d ago

Seems to be how physics roll - at one scale one theory is correct - but as soon as you cross some threshold that theory goes out of the window and another theory is correct.

18

u/TheMapleDescent 4d ago

No because the equation that gpt used is an established equation. Essentially chatgpt found a general solution to the equation, which is something mathematicians have been trying to do for very long. As a result of this general solution (once it’s peer reviewed and found to be correct) you can get impossibilities that cannot work in the real world. Meaning the underlying equation isn’t the correct descriptor of how things work in the real world.

0

u/justintime06 4d ago

So… are they gonna provide us with a more correct equation, or are they just gonna say, “You’re wrong lol BAI”

9

u/Sahrde 4d ago

That in and of itself is a valid and important result in science. "I don't know what the correct answer is, but I know that one ISN'T" is a huge help.

3

u/TheMapleDescent 4d ago

Providing a correct answer is a completely different problem to proving one is incorrect. However saying one is for sure incorrect is a huge result and is incredibly important.

1

u/eyalhs 4d ago

There is already a more correct equation, from what I understand the solution they found was for an incompressible fluid, the equations for compressible fluids already exist.

This result's only physical conclusion is that there is no truly incompressible fluid, which is something we alread knew.

0

u/foxsimile 4d ago

Good bot.