Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
One year ago, LLMs couldn't do graduate level physics calculations. now they can.
But Suvrat Raju draws a sharp line: being fast at processing information isn't the same as having vision.
Breakthroughs in theoretical physics come from compression and conceptual reframing, not from crunching more data. Right now LLMs are great research assistants pulling up a calculation from "some textbook somewhere" in seconds instead of days.
Whether they ever get to the conceptual leaps, the actual new ideas, nobody knows yet. could saturate. could not.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
The Nobel Prize in physics goes to Francis Halzen for contributions to the IceCube experiment and the discovery of astrophysical neutrinos
You can learn more about the IceCube experiment here: @uw_icecube
BREAKING NEWS
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the 2026 #NobelPrize in Physics to Francis Halzen “for decisive contributions to the IceCube Neutrino Observatory and the discovery of high-energy neutrinos of astrophysical origin.”
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
I wrote a set of papers with Xi Dong and Don Marolf in recent years, and now that the broad project has concluded, I thought I'd summarize it. (1/9)
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Replying to @tomekkorbak @dylanbowmanSF
Being better than humans at searching and writing down the formal proof of a theorem does not equate being "beyond human level at math".
This is not all of math, any more than arithmetics, or computing integrals (symbolically or numerically) is all of math. It's one "mechanical" task in the whole activity that happens to be automatable.
Mathematicians invent new concepts, new frameworks, new abstractions, new definitions, and formulate conjectures.
This requires intuition and creativity that current AI systems do not have (yet).
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
It is interesting to see that the Declaration on Math and AI by 25 Field Medalists seems to make sense to many people with a background in the humanities while many people trained in just science, math and tech seem to dismiss it as a 'protectionist guild' or 'careerism'.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Fun project: I asked GPT to scan all photos of my bookcases during the last five years and make a list of books. There were about 2000. This is the physics list of about 200 books:
300 Years of Gravitation — Stephen W. Hawking and Werner Israel (editors)
A Brief History of Time — Stephen W. Hawking
A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down — Robert B. Laughlin
A First Course in General Relativity — Bernard Schutz
A Many-Colored Glass — Freeman Dyson
A Most Incomprehensible Thing — Peter Collier
A Student's Guide to Maxwell's Equations — Daniel Fleisch
A Treatise on Thermodynamics — Max Planck
Advanced Classical Electromagnetism — Robert M. Wald
An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics — G. K. Batchelor
An Introduction to Modern Astrophysics — Bradley W. Carroll and Dale A. Ostlie
An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory — Michael E. Peskin and Daniel V. Schroeder
An Old Man's Toy — A. Zee
At Home in the Universe — John Archibald Wheeler
Atomic Energy in Cosmic and Human Life — George Gamow
Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge — Niels Bohr
Atomic Spectra and Atomic Structure — Gerhard Herzberg
Atoms, Radiation, and Radiation Protection — Bogard, Downing, Coleman, Eckerman, and Turner
Big Bang — Simon Singh
Birds and Frogs — Freeman Dyson
Black Holes & Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy — Kip S. Thorne
Black Holes: The Key to Understanding the Universe — Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw
Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars — Stuart L. Shapiro; Saul A. Teukolsky
Boltzmann's Atom — David Lindley
Candid Science IV: Conversations with Famous Physicists — Magdolna Hargittai and István Hargittai
Challenges in Plutonium Science, Volumes I-II — Los Alamos National Laboratory
Classical Mechanics — Herbert Goldstein, Charles P. Poole Jr., and John L. Safko
Concepts of Modern Physics — Arthur Beiser
Cosmic Catastrophes — J. Craig Wheeler
Cosmological Constants — Jeremy Bernstein and Gerald Feinberg (editors)
Cosmology's Century — P. J. E. Peebles
Covariant Physics — Moataz H. Emam
Cycles of Time — Roger Penrose
Dreams of a Final Theory — Steven Weinberg
Dreams of Earth and Sky — Freeman Dyson
Einstein Gravity in a Nutshell — A. Zee
Einstein on Einstein — Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
Einstein’s Legacy — Julian Schwinger
Einstein's Unfinished Revolution — Lee Smolin
Electricity and Magnetism — Edward M. Purcell; David J. Morin
Electrodynamics — V. D. Barger and M. G. Olsson
Electromagnetism — David Tong
Elementary Nuclear Theory — Hans A. Bethe and Philip Morrison
Encounters with Einstein — Werner Heisenberg
Exploring Black Holes — Edwin F. Taylor and John Archibald Wheeler
Facing Up: Science and Its Cultural Adversaries — Steven Weinberg
Faraday, Maxwell, and the Electromagnetic Field — Nancy Forbes and Basil Mahon
Fashion, Faith, and Fantasy in the New Physics of the Universe — Roger Penrose
Faust in Copenhagen — Gino Segrè
Fearful Symmetry — A. Zee
Feynman’s Lost Lecture — David L. Goodstein and Judith R. Goodstein
Fly by Night Physics — A. Zee
Formation and Evolution of Black Holes in the Galaxy — Hans A. Bethe, Gerald E. Brown, and Chang-Hwan Lee
Foundations of Modern Physics — Steven Weinberg
From Eros to Gaia — Freeman Dyson
From Falling Bodies to Radio Waves — Emilio Segrè
From X-Rays to Quarks — Emilio Segrè
Fundamentals of Physics I: Mechanics, Relativity, and Thermodynamics — R. Shankar
Fundamentals of Physics II: Electromagnetism, Optics, and Quantum Mechanics — R. Shankar
Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity — John Baez and Javier P. Muniain
General Relativity — Robert M. Wald
General Relativity for the Gifted Amateur — Tom Lancaster and Stephen J. Blundell
General Relativity: The Essentials — Carlo Rovelli
Geometrical Methods of Mathematical Physics — Bernard F. Schutz
Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam — John Archibald Wheeler with Kenneth Ford
Gravitation — Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne, and John Archibald Wheeler
Gravitation and Cosmology — Steven Weinberg
Gravity and Spacetime — Hans C. Ohanian; Remo Ruffini
Great Experiments in Physics — Morris H. Shamos
Imagined Worlds — Freeman Dyson
In Praise of Simple Physics — Paul J. Nahin
Infinite in All Directions — Freeman Dyson
Intermediate Quantum Mechanics — Hans A. Bethe and Roman Jackiw
Introduction to Electrodynamics — David J. Griffiths
Introduction to Nuclear and Particle Physics — A. Das; T. Ferbel
Introduction to Quantum Mechanics — David J. Griffiths; Darrell F. Schroeter
Introductory Nuclear Physics — Kenneth S. Krane
Lake Views — Steven Weinberg
Lonely Hearts of the Cosmos — Dennis Overbye
Mechanics — L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz
Modern Quantum Mechanics — J. J. Sakurai; Jim Napolitano
My View of the World — Erwin Schrödinger
National Geographic Picture Atlas of Our Universe — Roy A. Gallant
New Pathways in Science — Arthur S. Eddington
Newton's Principia for the Common Reader — S. Chandrasekhar
No-Nonsense Quantum Field Theory — Jakob Schwichtenberg
Notes on Quantum Mechanics — Enrico Fermi
Nuclear Radiation Physics — Ralph E. Lapp and Howard L. Andrews
Pale Blue Dot — Carl Sagan
Perspectives in Modern Physics — Robert E. Marshak (editor)
Physics and Beyond — Werner Heisenberg
Physics and Philosophy — Werner Heisenberg
Physics for Students of Science and Engineering — David Halliday and Robert Resnick
Physics: Foundations and Frontiers — George Gamow and John M. Cleveland
Physics from Symmetry — Jakob Schwichtenberg
Physics in the Twentieth Century — Victor F. Weisskopf
Principles of Quantum Mechanics — R. Shankar
Principles of Stellar Evolution and Nucleosynthesis — Donald D. Clayton
Proceedings of the Conference in Honour of Murray Gell-Mann's 80th Birthday — Harald Fritzsch and K. K. Phua (editors)
Q Is for Quantum — John Gribbin
QED and the Men Who Made It — Silvan S. Schweber
Quanta and Fields — Sean Carroll
Quantum Field Theory, as Simply as Possible — A. Zee
Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell — A. Zee
Quantum Generations — Helge Kragh
Quantum Mechanics — Leonard I. Schiff
Quantum Mechanics: Non-Relativistic Theory — L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz
Quantum Mechanics of One- and Two-Electron Atoms — Hans A. Bethe and Edwin E. Salpeter
Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei, and Particles — Robert Eisberg and Robert Resnick
Quantum Profiles — Jeremy Bernstein
Quantum Theory — David Bohm
Quantum Theory and Measurement — edited by John Archibald Wheeler and Wojciech H. Zurek
Quarks, Leptons and the Big Bang — Jonathan Allday
Readable Relativity — E. M. Durell
Relativity — Albert Einstein
Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology — Richard C. Tolman
Rutherford and the Nature of the Atom — E. N. da C. Andrade
Schrödinger’s Cat — John Gribbin
Sears and Zemansky's University Physics — Hugh D. Young; Roger A. Freedman
Seeing in the Dark — Timothy Ferris
Selected Papers — Chen Ning Yang
Selected Papers of Freeman Dyson with Commentary — Freeman Dyson; edited by David Kaiser
Selected Papers of Léon Rosenfeld — Robert S. Cohen and John J. Stachel (editors)
Selected Works of Hans A. Bethe with Commentary — Hans A. Bethe
Six Impossible Things — John Gribbin
Solid State Physics — Neil W. Ashcroft and N. David Mermin
Space, Time and Gravitation — Arthur S. Eddington
Spacetime and Geometry — Sean M. Carroll
Spacetime Physics — Edwin F. Taylor and John Archibald Wheeler
Special Relativity and Classical Field Theory: The Theoretical Minimum — Leonard Susskind and Art Friedman
Statistical and Thermal Physics — Frederick Reif
Statistical Physics — L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz
Statistical Thermodynamics — Erwin Schrödinger
Symmetry — Hermann Weyl
The Accidental Universe — Alan Lightman
The Big Picture — Sean Carroll
The Biggest Ideas in the Universe, Vol. 1: Space, Time, and Motion — Sean Carroll
The Birth and Death of the Sun — George Gamow
The Character of Physical Law — Richard P. Feynman
The Classical Theory of Fields — L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz
The Collapsing Universe — Isaac Asimov
The Cosmic Code — Heinz R. Pagels
The Creation of the Universe — George Gamow
The Dynamical Theory of Gases — James Jeans
The Elegant Universe — Brian Greene
The End of Time — Julian Barbour
The Fabric of the Cosmos — Brian Greene
The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volumes I-III — Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, and Matthew Sands
The First Three Minutes — Steven Weinberg
The Fly in the Cathedral — Brian Cathcart
The Flying Trapeze: Three Crises for Physicists — J. Robert Oppenheimer
The Formative Years of Relativity — Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
The Geometry of Spacetime — James J. Callahan
The Hunt for Vulcan — Thomas Levenson
The Internal Constitution of the Stars — Arthur S. Eddington
The Kinetic Theory of Gases — James Jeans
The Left Hand of the Electron — Isaac Asimov
The Magic Furnace — Marcus Chown
The Meaning of Quantum Theory — Jim Baggott
The Nature of Space and Time — Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose
The Nature of the Physical World — Arthur S. Eddington
The New Quantum Universe — Tony Hey and Patrick Walters
The One: How an Ancient Idea Holds the Future of Physics — Heinrich Päs
The Oxford Handbook of the History of Physics — edited by Jed Z. Buchwald and Robert Fox
The Oxford Solid State Basics — Steven H. Simon
The Physical Review: The First Hundred Years: A Selection of Seminal Papers and Commentaries — H. Henry Stroke (editor)
The Principle of Relativity — Albert Einstein, H. A. Lorentz, H. Minkowski, and H. Weyl
The Principles of Quantum Mechanics — P. A. M. Dirac
The Quantum Theory of Radiation — Walter Heitler
The Quark and the Jaguar — Murray Gell-Mann
The Road to Reality — Roger Penrose
The Road to Relativity — Hanoch Gutfreund and Jürgen Renn
The Scientist as Rebel — Freeman Dyson
The Second Creation — Robert P. Crease and Charles C. Mann
The Second Law — Peter Atkins
The Sourcebook on Atomic Energy — Samuel Glasstone
The Story of Spin — Sin-Itiro Tomonaga
The Theoretical Minimum: Classical Mechanics — Leonard Susskind and George Hrabovsky
The Theoretical Minimum: Quantum Mechanics — Leonard Susskind and Art Friedman
The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics — Hermann Weyl
The Theory of Relativity — Wolfgang Pauli
The Theory of the Relativity of Motion — Richard C. Tolman
The Trouble with Physics — Lee Smolin
The Universe at Large — Hermann Bondi
The Universe in a Box — Andrew Pontzen
Theoretical Physics — Georg Joos
Thermal Physics — Charles Kittel and Herbert Kroemer
Thermodynamics — Enrico Fermi
Thermodynamics and the Kinetic Theory of Gases — Wolfgang Pauli
Third Thoughts — Steven Weinberg
Thirty Years That Shook Physics — George Gamow
Too Big for a Single Mind — Tobias Hürter
Truth and Beauty — S. Chandrasekhar
Uncertainty — David Lindley
Understanding Physics: Light, Magnetism, and Electricity — Isaac Asimov
Would-Be Worlds — John L. Casti
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Overall, I’m very surprised at how little media coverage there’s been around the OpenAI / Hugging Face attack. It’s clearly one of the most important things to happen this year.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
a very nice podcast interview of Prof. Sunil Mukhi by @ayushphy
youtu.be/7PINSiTslfI
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Enjoyed this conversation about physics and many other things. Looking forward to doing more science outreach!
A fascinating conversation with theoretical physicist Pratik Rath(@PratikRath15 ) on how physicists think about some of the deepest problems in modern physics. We talk about Einstein and Dirac, antimatter, quantum gravity, black holes, holography, string theory, and the question of whether AI can actually contribute to scientific understanding.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Introducing XY one, our first open source project.
Built as a proof of concept.
XY one proved that you don't need lacs of rupees for nanometer resolution instruments.
We are open sourcing it, visit f2r.site for more info.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
ICTP Announces 2026 Dirac Medal Recipients
ictp.it/news/2026/8/ictp-ann…
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
I want to clarify my thoughts on problem-solving in mathematics, and the potential consequences of AI for the field. For context, I’m quoting here my post in reply to Daniel Litt (who, echoing others, I find very clear, grounded, and insightful in his thinking).
The claim
The short version is that I think problem-solving is an immense, and pervasive part of modern mathematical research. Consequently, if human problem-solving disappears by virtue of the AIs becoming strictly and substantially better at it, then most of the time currently spent by modern mathematical researchers will have to be spent on an activity that is altogether pretty different. Whether such an activity is viable as a professional endeavour is something I am unsure of, but strongly encourage others to think about and try to envision, so that if/when the time comes, we can steer such a future into being.
Allow me to make this somewhat concrete: by problem-solving I mean questions of the form “is T true? If so find a proof. If not, find a disproof.” where T is a precise mathematical statement. I’ll also include “find an example of S, if there is one” where S is some structure (variety/category/property/isomorphism/….).
The argument
Ok. Now as I said (and some have echoed) I spend ~all of my time problem-solving as my primary goal. This has sub-goals, but my entire main research field disappears if someone solves the Zilber-Pink Conjecture in its more general form. This is a single conjecture (precisely stated!) and lots of mathematicians, postdocs, and graduate students are engaged in picking apart special cases of it, trying strategies, finding analogies to develop intuition, etc.. Of course, lots of motivation and intuition and analogizing and understanding have gone into deciding to make the ZP conjecture a focus! But the fact remains that this is now what is being worked on ~all of the time by this community. This is true of many mathematicians. They have a problem (or ten) and spend most of their time doing it. If someone solves it, they have to find a different problem. This can be a big, disorienting process involving a lot of energy, and is neither trivial nor always fun (though often rewarding in the end).
People have written a lot about Theory building vs. Problem-solving, and I want to first of all clarify I have nothing against theory building or theory builders! It is a valuable part of mathematics, and while there are differences in perspective between the “camps” there is way more mutual respect and agreement.
However, I gather there is a perception that theory-builders spend most of their time not-problem-solving, and I think this is largely untrue. Now I’m not a theory-builder primarily (though I’ve partaken a LITTLE BIT by necessity) so I am outside of my comfort zone. As such, I apologize for mistakes and welcome corrections!
But theory-building constantly runs through problem-solving. Let’s say you want to define the right notion of a cohomology theory. Of course you must make candidate definitions. But then what does it mean for it to be the right one? Well, you start asking if it has natural properties. These are T statements. Does it satisfy a Kunneth formula? Is it functorial in the right way? When you have the wrong one you have to find the properties it’s missing, and when you have the right one you have to prove that it indeed has those properties.
Again, I am not saying nor do I believe that this makes problem-solving “real math” and theory-building lesser. I am just trying to draw attention to the way I think research mathematicians operate, and mathematics is practiced.
To put all this a different way, imagine you had access to an AI oracle that could resolve statements T, but somehow lacked any creativity to build technology or make definitions (I think this is unlikely, but for the purpose of this thought experiment lets imagine it). How would your mathematics change, if you were a theory builder? Well, you make a definition, and want to know if it’s the right one. You immediately ask your oracle a thousand questions. From “are these basic properties true” to “ooh, so is this deep conjecture true?” and start getting back answers, and amending your definitions. You could invent and resolve entire research directions in days. But the confusion you would have had to push through to flesh out your theory would largely (probably not entirely) be instantly resolved and the whole process sped up tremendously by your oracle. A big part of the process would be gone. This is very very different to modern mathematics.
One more thought
This post is too long already, but I’ve seen some people say that they only do mathematics to find truth and others valourize that as the only virtuous way to be. I do not do mathematics only to find truth. I do it largely because I enjoy it and I am good at it. I also find it beautiful and am grateful I get to spend my days understanding beautiful things. But I enjoy the challenge, the process, resolving confusions, finding strategies, grappling with problems. I would like to push for this being de-stigmatized. Mathematicians are people who need money, housing, food, love, exercise, and a great deal of other stuff including various forms of meaning.
There are many people whose primary enjoyment of math comes through problem solving in one of its incarnations. If that disappears, that is not a trivial issue and many of them might not want to do it anymore (even if there were some way to proceed).
Replying to @littmath @willdepue
Hey @littmath , I've seen you post this sentiment a lot, and want to push back a bit (in my formal twitter-posting debut!). So my math career has almost entirely been "solve this problem". Now, of course there is an enormous amount of other activities such as formulating toy problems, identifying which ones are worthwhile, theory building, and selection and formulation of the original problems. But typically for 80%+ of my time, I know what problem I'm trying to solve and am just trying to solve it.
I've seen the view expressed a lot that this is sort of not-the-main-point, and is just a part of figuring out the appropriate mathematical structure and phenomena. It's not that this is untenable, but I feel this is a somewhat overstated perspective. For one thing, talks (almost) always start/end with "here is the theorem I have proven".
Its not that the view you have of math isn't coherent, but I could equally formulate the point of math as
1. Find a fun phenomenon
2. Make a problem capturing it as nicely as possible
3. Solve it, possibly by building theories and formulating sub-problems.
so that problem-solving become the central point of math, and theory building as a side-effect. Indeed, mathematicians offer measure the value of a theory by the problems it can solve. This is at least an important part of a theory.
I actually feel you and I are not far apart in our mathematical taste, so I'm curious how much we actually disagree here (I suspect the answer is "some").
Sorry for the overly long post! I am very much a twitter-newbie and will have to adjust.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
College and university administrations have really forgotten their institutions' role in public discourse.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
The bigger problem is that just like the nuclear race, it’s not one that either side can really “win”. So instead of pointlessly burning through cash, people and goodwill in an AI arms race and fear mongering, it will be much smarter to negotiate and reduce the common danger like we did with the Soviet Union.
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Dear @DrJitendraSingh @GoenkaPk , last time Skyroot launched (successfully) at the post launch we saw both of you in what looked liked an attempt to take credit and putting founders behind
i know the justification is you'll wanted them in frame, the intention was good, but the optics of the same were horrible,
We all have grown up hearing stories how Satish Dhawan took all of the criticism and shielded Dr Kalam from media criticism , what we saw at sky pc is complete opposite, this is not ISRO culture
If they succeed move away, let them have their limeliight, if they fail, shield them , take the credit, sit in the middle or whatever, i know both of youll have done a lot to make this happen, but then its your job, its why you're appointed/elected.
a lot of young ones are looking at this, dont set a bad example
Press meet on #Prarambh mission success happening now. Shri. @DrJitendraSingh, Union Minister of State for Space, Dr. @s_ssnath, Chairman @isro, @GoenkaPk, Chairman @INSPACeIND on dias, along with Skyroot Founders.
#Prarambh #OpeningSpaceForAll
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
I found recordings of Strings 2026 on YouTube, and the sound quality is good. I'll probably repost Strings 2026 again. Here are the event playlists.
youtube.com/playlist?list=PL…
Ayushphy Cosmological retweeted
Replying to @Kaju_Nut
The generation that got the most out of these schemes is now sitting as full professors.
Maybe they never had to think about affordability once they got in.
Maybe calling out DST funding decisions is just not worth the career risk.
Either way, the silence says a lot.
Institutions don't collapse because they run out of money. They collapse when the people who should've spoken up... don't.



























