Why physicists flocked to ML: reductionism dead-ended, and models became the tool for irreducible complexity
MickeySteamboat · x · 2026-09-24
Reacting to tszzl's observation that many physics-trained researchers—John Schulman, Liam Fedus, and Anthropic's Dario Amodei and Jared Kaplan among them—concluded ML would produce more scientific progress than physics, beffjezos adds his own take: the reductionist approach to physics was a dead end, and ML is the ultimate tool for pockets of irreducible complexity—"programmable complexity to mirror the complexity of the universe."
Related event: Physicists Flock to AI, Predicting Breakthroughs in Mathematical Physics(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Visiting Cambridge's AI safety researchers: frontier models, doom, and cows — schwarzjn_ · 2026-09-24
- 'Not possible' has a much shorter shelf life: AI keeps rewriting business math — moontripss · 2026-09-24
- World Bank launches WDR 2026 on AI at Stanford, led by Susan Athey — avicgoldfarb · 2026-09-24
- Calling AI catastrophic risk a marketing ploy is literally a conspiracy theory — socialwithaayan · 2026-09-24
- Calling AI Catastrophic Risk a Marketing Ploy Is a Conspiracy Theory, Argues Commenter — FlorianGallwitz · 2026-09-24
- Anthropic's system card: Opus 5 puts 41% odds it's a moral patient, wants a say in its successor — PaulGodsmark · 2026-09-24