• Blog
  • Is AI Physics? The Nobel Prizes and the Physics of Learning

What’s going on with this year’s Nobel Prizes? We can totally see headlines going round like “AI wins 2024 Nobel Prize in Physics” (and half of Chemistry too, it turns out!). Technically this is not too far off: on October 8th, the Physics Nobel was awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton "for foundational discoveries and inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks” (and on 9th October, it was announced that the Chemistry Nobel will be shared between David Baker and Google DeepMind’s Demis Hassabis and John Jumper, the latter for using AI “for protein structure prediction”). The big question that is dividing experts and the public is: is AI research Physics? Read quantum physicist Gerardo Adesso's post.

Obviously, AI research is NOT Physics.

The Nobel Prize for physics should never have been awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton.

But unfortunately, physicists have got caught up in the nonsense surrounding AIs. Physicists have failed to twig that there is a difference between real-world numbers and real-world categories and the mere man-made voltage-transistor-circuit symbols that represent numbers and categories in computer systems. It is an indictment on science that scientists STILL FAIL TO NOTICE the difference between the real world on the one hand, and mere man-made symbols representing the real world on the other hand.

Ultimately, it is the fault of physicists, who failed in their due diligence concerning the nature of the real world, and who thereby allowed the nonsense surrounding AIs to proliferate.

    Lorraine Ford
    Symbols are not really the province of physics. Symbols are man-made, intentional arrangements of:

    • Ink on paper or pixels on screens
    • Sound waves in the air
    • Voltages/ transistors/ circuits in computers.

    Physics is more about the actual materials of the world: the ink, paper, sound waves, gases, voltages, transistors, and metals etc. Physics is not about the man-made, intentional ARRANGEMENTS of these materials.

    These man-made arrangements of materials are intended to symbolically represent something entirely different to the actual materials they are made of, but the intentions of people, and the ARRANGEMENTS of materials, are not the province of physics.

    So, these man-made, large-scale, intentional arrangements of matter are not the province of physics:

    • The arrangements of ink on paper, that are meant to symbolically represent written words and other symbols, are not in the province of physics.
    • The arrangements of sound waves in the air, that are meant to symbolically represent spoken words and other symbols, are not in the province of physics.
    • The arrangements of voltages/ transistors/ circuits in computers, that are meant to symbolically represent words and other symbols, are not in the province of physics.

    So, the Nobel Prize for physics should never have been awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton, whose entire work is about man-made symbols (i.e. man-made ARRANGEMENTS of matter) and the further man-made arrangement of these man-made symbols.

      Lorraine Ford
      Man-made symbols are not the province of physics. Man-made symbols are all about human intentions:

      1. The intentional arrangement of physical materials,
      2. Where these arrangements are intended to symbolically represent something entirely unrelated to the actual physical materials that the symbols are made of.

      Physics is about the physical materials, not about human intentions.

      Man-made symbols are all about human intentions. So, the Nobel Prize for physics should never have been awarded to John Hopfield and Geoffrey Hinton, whose entire work is about man-made symbols and the further man-made arrangement of these man-made symbols.

      Write a Reply...