Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?

On 21/09/2024 19:40, Brett wrote:

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 19:29:31 -0000 (UTC), Brett wrote:
>

Quantum mechanics is high IQ bullshit to make professors look important.

>
Quantum mechanics is real. Quantum effects are real. Transistors only work
because electrons can “tunnel” through a barrier with higher energy than
they have, which should be classically impossible.

 I did not criticize quantum effects, I criticized quantum mechanics which
is dumbshit SWAG that hides the truth of what is happening behind bullshit.
With greater understanding we can come up with classical explanations, but
those truths are too scary and could lead to the destruction of mankind.
 If you want to know what is really going on watch the Eric Weinstein The
Portal videos.
 https://youtu.be/xBx5Y1YLfZY?si=0sVFmvOh-bot2ok7
 Eric is a scary bright physicist, he does not know the truth, but he knows
it’s being hidden, and he shows you.
 “You can’t handle the truth.”
 https://youtu.be/9FnO3igOkOk?si=0xmQuxz6yaLnBkCC
 I don’t know the truth either, and if I did I would not speculate on it,
too dangerous.
 https://www.amazon.com/Experts-Vs-Conspiracy-Theorists-T-Shirt/dp/B0CKLLCN9M/ref=asc_df_B0CKLLCN9M
 

In case anyone wants a safe link to information about this particular muppet, without Google thinking they are interested in loony conspiracy theories on the level of "birds don't exist", you can read about him at <https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_Weinstein>.
"""
Repressed genius
For years as a mathematician he has said that he has some kind of theory of everything that will knock everyone out and overturn the field of physics, but he just can't publish it yet because the world isn't ready, and the information will only be suppressed.[6]
In 2020, Weinstein published his much-hyped Oxford lecture on his Theory of Geometric Unity.[7] It was met with silence and indifference among theoretical physicists and the scientific community at large.
On 1st April 2021, Weinstein released a draft of his paper online.[10] Given the 1st April release date and the author details on the cover page describing Weinstein as an "entertainer" and the paper itself as a "work of entertainment", it is unclear at this stage whether Geometrical Unity was an elaborate April Fools' Day Wikipedia prank all along.
"""
Rather than publishing his theories in peer-reviewed journals, like real scary bright physicists, he promoted his views on Joe Rogan's podcast. And he described himself as "not a physicist" (he is a venture capitalist, not a scientist) and that the paper was "a work of entertainment".  That should give you some idea of how seriously his ideas should be taken.
Actual physicists know that quantum mechanics is not complete - it is not a "theory of everything", and does not explain everything.  It is, like Newtonian gravity and general relativity, a simplification that gives an accurate model of reality within certain limitations, and hopefully it will one day be superseded by a new theory that models reality more accurately and over a wider range of circumstances.  That is how science works.
As things stand today, no such better theory has been developed.  There are a number of ideas and hypotheses (still far from being classifiable as scientific theories) that show promise and have not yet been demonstrated to be wrong, but that's as far as we have got.  Weinstein's "Geometric Unity" is not such a hypotheses - the little that has been published has been shown to be either wrong, or "not even wrong".
It's fine to come up with strange new ideas about how the universe works.  You then publish and discuss those ideas, and work with other scientists to weed out the clearly incorrect parts, try to expand and modify it to fit what we know about reality, and to think about how it could make predictions that could be tested.  That's part of the process of science.
It's not fine to believe half-baked ramblings from someone who doesn't understand what they are working with and won't listen to those who do. The alternative to "I don't understand quantum mechanics" is /not/ to believe whatever gobbledegook someone spouts on youtube.