Oh! You think it’s all authentic? Ah. Let me explain the game again. I’m forced to call attention to what I have done. Then an enormous network of accounts that no one individually cares about explode in ridicule. Why? So the USG can continue to use academics to cover its statecraft. You see, I am fighting for academic freedom to go back to kicking ass. I am fighting the U.S. Govenrment’s right to direct and pressure science and academe to falsify the scientific and academic record. I have an amazing record on this. But I am forced to call attention to it. This allows a largely inauthentic bot network to rise up against me as if I am Satan or a Buffon. They can’t figure out which story to pursue. Witness: I wasn’t supposed to observe that Biden wasn’t president during “his presidency”. Geriatric neurologists were supposed to do that. But they were silent. I wasn’t supposed to observe that something is trying to hold back mathematics and physics before the Fields medalist letter and the @pmarca @bhorowitz revelations. Physicists and mathematician Professors were supposed to do that. But they were silent. I’m not supposed to have point out a Lagrangian/Action or equations at the top of my feed when @seanmcarroll lied that I have “none of that”. My colleagues are supposed to do that. But they are mostly silent. I wasn’t supposed to have co-authored the first article on Mortgage Backed Securities danger in 2001 while everyone was celebrating Greenspan and the Great Moderation. Economists and finance professors were supposed to do that. But they were silent. I wasnt supposed to call out Dale Jorgenson as chair of @HarvardEcon for trying to steal $ 1trillion at the direction of Senators Packwood and Moynihan while the Boskin Commision was sheepskin washing the crime. My colleagues in that department owed me that. But they were silent. I wasnt supposed to trace the H1B visa to a secret 1986 @NSF PRA program involving Myles Boylan, Peter House and Erich Bloch to destroy American Scientists bargaining position. The law was supposed to find this. It did not. I wasn’t supposed to have to point out that the 77 Nobel Laureates backing Daszak and the EcoHealth NGO cutout was cover for Bio Weapons research gone horribly wrong. That was the responsibility of biologists, virologists, epidemiologists and Ralph Baric. But they fell silent, I’m not supposed to point out that Peer Review in science really dates to 1975 and not Nov 1662, because Merton appears to have falsified the history…presumably to allow for journals to control the flow of science. Historians of science are supposed to be screaming this. But they refuse. Etc. And I’m not supposed to point out that Geometric Unity is our leading candidate for a “Theory of Everything.” And has been since I brought it to Harvard over 40 years ago. Because @seanmcarroll is willing to lie about it and the community is silent. This goes on like this… The world is stupid weak and crazy on every one of the above. Not by accident and in exactly the same way. Academe has been captured. And I have the most complete track record on this. By far. That’s why. It’s about a falsified institutional narrative being protected by a bot network and some very nasty accounts. Look at the modal account making the nasty comments. 300 followers not followed by anyone you follow. A bot. That’s how the game is played. And for some reason @elonmusk won’t put a stop to it yet on this platform. But I bet he will one day. Before @YouTube and @Reddit. And then the hate will dry up except for islamists, communists and a few other misguided souls. Now you know. 🤷‍♀️

I don’t think being critical of the amazing work AI is doing in pure math is fair to @OpenAI until I can start to say why I feel it’s not yet at the level of our top humans. It’s like AI has a style that is weirdly being taken to be universal (which it isnt). Hence the claim that Mathematians and Physicists are nearly obsolete. Ahem: there is no *public* indication that this is REMOTELY true. Yet. I would like to pose a collection of math physics benchmarks that are not about searching large spaces for counter examples and the like. These are 10 problems and issues that humans haven’t solved but which we likely will solve. Each feels to me like a deeply human math/physics problem. This isn’t an unfriendly challenge to @sama and team. It’s just pointing out that AI has yet to deeply touch any of the kind of things that many of us care MOST about in Mathematics and Physics. I’m just not a puzzle solver or a discrete conjecture guy. I’m into theory building and even the mathematical version of mysticism. Here goes an attempt: ————- A) What new Extraordinary Cohomology Theories/Co-cycles can AI find that we need, but do not know/understand? B) What areas of pure mathematics and theoretical physics are most polluted by human blind spots? Where is the training corpus most wrong? Show us you can go well beyond us by contradicting your training. C) What discarded ideas were discarded improperly and prematurely? D) What is a natural version of Grand Unification that doesn’t contradict experiment? E) Find a natural version of Super-Symmetry that doesn’t predict Superpartners and that predicts unification scale different from the Minimally SuperSymmetric Extension or the Standard Model. F) Pose a new, deep and surprising conjecture relating 3 or more of the following: representation theory, number theory, arithmetic/algebraic geometry, and analysis on manifolds, homotopy theory and Pseudo-Riemannian Spin Geometry. G) Integrate the Octonions, Magic Square and the 4 large exceptional lie groups, tightly into the mainstream of mathematics once and for all. H) Settle the issue of the 6 sphere and complex structures in Math or the Koide fine tuning mystery in particle theory. I) Explain the reason for there being 3 families of observed Fermions. J) Give a deep, natural and as yet unknown reason for the remarkable Fermi-Bose correspondence (e.g. Metaplectic vs Spin reps, Honest vs Berezin Integrals, etc.). Why should we have expected this correspondence to be this weird and this tight? ——— I don’t think humans are going to be ahead forever. AI will blow past us. So while I am not all that impressed yet at the math or physics, any non-tricky solutions to one of the above (with the possible exception of some answers to H) would feel different to me than the feeling I get from AI finding yet another funky counter examples to some Erdos problem, discrete puzzle or Combinatorial issue in Graph theory. We have always been humbled by Gauss, Galois, Dirac and Newton. That’s nothing new. If this is going to put us out of work soon, LFG. May the best mathematicians and physicists, carbon or silicon, win.