I think it's so funny that "Open" AI has been more or less bought by Microsoft. Oh the irony.

The great filter is actually the absolute inevitability of a super nova restarting life, again for the 42 millionth time since the big bang. JK I made that up, but that would be pretty spooky right?

Are you making the statement that collapsing the wave function isn't changing anything? I can see why you might say that, but I don't think that is accurate.

Funny you should bring up Newtwon, he did his math using quaternions I believe, and through that came the concept of vectors.

Anyways, I'm curious what's wrong with the analogy? It represents a particular flow information, nothing else. The state of entangled particles do change when you observe one of them.

Mostly my assumption comes from taking a look at how the language of math has evolved over the years. For example, first and second derivatives are easily understood and we use them to speak about rate of change and acceleration. Without the derivative and the concepts behind it, it would be hard to talk about acceleration without using the math. So with the topic of particle entanglement and why it can't be used for faster than light coms, I would work backwards starting from an analogy such as - there are two boxes that each contain a blue marble, opening either box changes the color of both marbles to green - a term or phrase could then be made to represent that particular flow of information.

Amen, sir.

> The math IS the explanationYou're right and that's a great way of putting it, but there should be a way to use appropriate analogies to convey those concepts without using equations. It would be really cool if we then formalized said analogies into a set of domain specific terminology being used when talking about anything in the realm of quantum. For example, imagine how hard it was to communicate to your peers about vector fields before the concept of a vector was invented; having a word to easily encapsulate the mathematical meaning makes it easy for us to have discussions about velocity and magnets without using any actual number or formulas.

Sorry, don't mind my rant, I just feel like there needs to be a better way of teaching and communicating things in this field.

BUT WHAT IF>>

Hahahaha, I'm sorry, it's just so funny. Even as a physics major I wasn't really sure why it was that poking one qubit wouldn't be enough to "receive" a poke on the other side faster than light. That is until someone explained it for me. There is ALWAYS going to be someone who needs that explanation.

For what it's worth I think you did a great job!

Looks like you started this quite a while ago, how long has this been an area of study?

Can you make a github for your setup?

Without an expensive setup, how can one measure their own internal tempo?

Green technology certainly needed time to mature into a level of efficiency that at least pays back the carbon tax of producing the piece of hardware comprising the renewable energy source, e.g. a solar panel. And as it happens, tech that's more efficient tends to be more profitable.
But to your point, what would have been better is if big oil and other legacy stakeholders did not actively try to fight the transition to green-tech in the form of market-adoption disinformation campaigns and stifling investments into green R&D from as early on as the 1980s. And more recently by lobbying politicians to allow them into more ecologically protected areas.

They have literally paid money to politicians to keep things the same instead of just letting technology evolve the way it would naturally with regard to supply and demand. The problem hasn't really been the capitalist model, imo, it's the people who are morally willing to cut corners to make an extra buck with less effort.