Steven Trapp

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@AustinTunnell Well done! Would you be interested in an urban project in Cleveland Ohio?
6 lots making up a busy corner in a developing area close to downtown. I envision the project as historic renovation meets new build and development. I own one of the lots and my neighbors are on board.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

What a goal!
How do you not VAR the Argentina penalty and then come back and disallow this?

[بهاء خليل Bahaa khaleel @rosemag_3]

هذا الهدف المصري الملغى
سيبقى شاهدأ على فساد الفيفا
الى الابد

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@MrBeast 221,173

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@TylerDurden I’m not talking about the World Cup winner. I’m talking about selecting who qualifies for the knockout stage

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@TylerDurden I have a near arbitrage, ridiculously unbalanced odds of winning World Cup prediction bet for you

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@TylerDurden If anyone is out there with a big stack for prediction markets, please reach out to me and let me explain

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@TylerDurden There is a prediction bet available for the World Cup that has staggering odds in favor of profits. It’s a near arbitrage opportunity.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@nntaleb Nassim, may I please have the opportunity to explain the an arbitrage opportunity in the World Cup prediction market today? I am seeking a partner with the means to make a substantial wager.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@mathmaticulous This is mind blowing. I am reading the paper and left in awe with Part 1.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@JakeFleshner Space acclimatization

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@JakeFleshner Space acclimatization

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@Lodoghir @RaminNasibov I appreciate the thoughtful feedback. Quicksilver has been incredible. What you say about finding a lost history resonates with me, in reading Quicksilver I feel that I am encountering areas of history I might not have access to otherwise.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@Lodoghir @RaminNasibov How does it compare to quicksilver

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

it is interesting to me how many theoretical physicists, including Smolin, idolize the idea of a "grand unified theory".  It seems more realistic that humanity's understanding of "Everything" will always be limited. Is there not a "law of precedence" whereby each thing is preceded by something else? Similar to causal set theory as described by Smolin, with the caveat that there must be an unknown Prime causation behind each subsequent cause. 

In a similar vein, we are told the Big Bang was and there was no before it. It seems odd to brush aside the relevance of what preceded the Big Bang. Smolin seems to think that considering the idea of what was before (or perhaps outside) the Big Bang is irrelevant.  It seems imperative that the theoretical physicist model and attempt to develop testable hypotheses to stretch our understanding of time and space, instead of providing grand unified theories which truly do not provide a unified theory.  It seems a bit disingenuous for these authors to express a belief in understanding Everything with naive giddishness and then go on to present ideas that require further explanation or qualification.

I believe that it is not humanly possible to understand the entire cosmology of space and time. I believe the measurement problem will be resolved at some point in the future when we discover a much large region of space exterior to the known universe.  This will lead to a paradigm shift in the understanding of space and time involving, possibly involving the transformation of consciousness to a position exterior to the known universe, revealing the true nature of our universe to be like a dream in comparison to a greater truth.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

I disagree.

Why should we consider these numbers in terms of a 3-dimensional graph? The problem is presented in 2-D and there are no prompts to conceive of this number problem in terms of a 3-dimensional graph.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

This is why IQ tests don't work too well on really smart people.

Because sorta smart people tend to give the expected answer.

And really smart people tend to point out that the question is wrong, and start arguing with the test, or trying to correct it, thereby making the test impossible to grade and annoying everyone.

The expected answer to this is 72.

Because 2*2*2 = 8 and 5*5*2 = 50, so 6*6*2 = 72.

But the (really) correct answer is "I don't know."

Because what you have is two points on a 3 dimensional graph (x,y) -> z.

z = 2*x*y is one surface that can be drawn through these two points. And I suspect it's the simplest formula for a surface that can be so drawn, although I haven't bothered to check.

But an infinite number of contiguous surfaces can be drawn in three dimensions that encompass these points (2,2,8) and (5,5,50).

Each of these surfaces can be described by its own formula. Some of them will also touch (6,6,72). But others of them will touch (6,6, {something else entirely}) instead.

This might sound really, really pedantic. But it's not.

Everyone knows that the expected answer is the simple one, but that's only on a test... a fake artificial made up problem.

When we start trying to do this in the real world, which, after all is what this "IQ" thing is actually for, then using the same kind of "IQ test thinking" can get you in trouble.

"My 3-month-old son is now TWICE as big as when he was born. He's on track to weigh 7.5 trillion pounds by age 10." -@pronounced_kyle

Fitting the simplest-formula curve, as opposed to the correct curve, makes our predictions of real-world stuff dead wrong.

So this kind of test question promotes a dangerous habit of thought.

But, Devon, I hear some of you ask, doesn't the principle of Occam's Razor demand that we fit the simplest curve?

No. No, it does not. It does not require that we select the simplest possible answer, given what we have currently seen. It requires that we prefer hypotheses that make fewer assumption to those that make more.

These are two different things entirely.

If I see one black sheep, the simplest hypothesis is that all sheep are black.

The hypothesis requiring the fewest assumptions is that at least one sheep is black on at least one side.

You will note which of these is correct.

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to questions on IQ test. But questions on an IQ test only matter as much as they are relevant to the actual universe...

Where ideas like this are very relevant indeed.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

72?
2^2 + 2 ^ 2 =8
5^2 + 5^2 =50
6^2 + 6^2 =72

[David Bessis @davidbessis]

Erdös problem #3637845:
There exists exactly one function f from ℕ to ℕ such that f(2) = 8 and f(5) = 50.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@davidbessis 72

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@Andercot What do you think about the idea of electrons being fixed points as an explanation for the Casimir Effect? An electron lattice that atoms interact with.

[Steven Trapp @StevenJTrapp]

@Andercot Exterior to the universe, in the place where lights source comes from, things must move faster than the speed of light

[Andrew McCarthy @AJamesMcCarthy]

There is currently a ~Jupiter-sized mass of plasma floating 100k miles over the sun. I captured this photo just a couple minutes ago using a modified telescope from my backyard.