• Professional astronomers; watch your back

    From RichA@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 13 23:58:01 2023
    https://phys.org/news/2023-10-supernova-ai.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Quadibloc@21:1/5 to RichA on Sat Oct 14 06:11:03 2023
    On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:58:03 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
    https://phys.org/news/2023-10-supernova-ai.html

    If astronomy stopped when supernovae were found, this would be a
    problem. Since, instead, detecting supernovae is just the first step,
    and the reason we want to find them is so that we can observe them
    in detail to be able to draw scientific conclusions about them...

    the threat of machines replacing astronomers is still quite distant.

    I mean, if this AI stuff were really any good, it would have proved the
    Riemann hypothesis by now!

    John Savard

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RichA@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Sat Oct 14 13:59:51 2023
    On Saturday, 14 October 2023 at 09:11:05 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:58:03 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
    https://phys.org/news/2023-10-supernova-ai.html

    If astronomy stopped when supernovae were found, this would be a
    problem. Since, instead, detecting supernovae is just the first step,
    and the reason we want to find them is so that we can observe them
    in detail to be able to draw scientific conclusions about them...

    the threat of machines replacing astronomers is still quite distant.

    I mean, if this AI stuff were really any good, it would have proved the Riemann hypothesis by now!

    John Savard

    There was an accusation that a documentary done recently contained a faked (A.I.) photo. Showed a group of men in the late 1800's. One guy who presumably should have
    been holding a mug instead can be seen with the mug hovering in mid-air in front of him. A.I. isn't perfect.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Martin Brown@21:1/5 to Quadibloc on Sun Oct 15 12:15:15 2023
    On 14/10/2023 14:11, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:58:03 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
    https://phys.org/news/2023-10-supernova-ai.html

    If astronomy stopped when supernovae were found, this would be a
    problem. Since, instead, detecting supernovae is just the first step,
    and the reason we want to find them is so that we can observe them
    in detail to be able to draw scientific conclusions about them...

    Ironically supernova watch is still something where amateurs contribute
    to professional surveys since there are so many galaxies to monitor.
    Once an SNR is reported bigger professional scopes are turned on it -
    catching the light curve on the rise is very important.

    It is far more advanced for asteroid detection for planetary defence and
    comet hunting since that has already been automated. The days are long
    gone when most comets have human discoverers names on them. A human
    discovered comet is now something of a rarity.

    Professional astronomers are mostly astrophysicists and spend only a
    tiny proportion of their time actually observing. The rest of the time
    is spent preparing the observational programme and interpreting the data
    that results from it. Observing itself is less than 5% of all the time
    spent. You can only get big telescope time for sensible proposals...

    Technical staff tend to operate the telescopes for astronomers in the
    bigger facilities since there isn't time to waste learning to drive one!

    AI will probably help weed out weak observing programme though.

    the threat of machines replacing astronomers is still quite distant.

    I mean, if this AI stuff were really any good, it would have proved the Riemann hypothesis by now!

    Remember they claimed the four colour map theorem quite a long time ago.

    It is not beyond the realms of possibility that Google's zero AI will be
    able to break some previously intractable mathematical conundrum before
    too much longer. A combination of brute force and directed attack with a
    tiny amount of human guidance is the most likely route to success.

    The AI Go programs have found novel defensive structures that have never previously occurred in all of recorded human play and to everyone's
    surprise have become stronger than the very best humans at Go.

    --
    Martin Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From W@21:1/5 to RichA on Sun Oct 15 03:55:30 2023
    On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:59:52 PM UTC-4, RichA wrote:
    On Saturday, 14 October 2023 at 09:11:05 UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
    On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:58:03 AM UTC-6, RichA wrote:
    https://phys.org/news/2023-10-supernova-ai.html

    If astronomy stopped when supernovae were found, this would be a
    problem. Since, instead, detecting supernovae is just the first step,
    and the reason we want to find them is so that we can observe them
    in detail to be able to draw scientific conclusions about them...

    the threat of machines replacing astronomers is still quite distant.

    I mean, if this AI stuff were really any good, it would have proved the Riemann hypothesis by now!

    John Savard
    There was an accusation that a documentary done recently contained a faked (A.I.) photo. Showed a group of men in the late 1800's. One guy who presumably should have
    been holding a mug instead can be seen with the mug hovering in mid-air in front of him. A.I. isn't perfect.

    There is usually a "report button" on most social media sites.

    Use it every time that you suspect a faked "photo" in what is supposed to be non-fiction.

    "AI" has trouble drawing hands, for some reason. For now, that's a feature, not a bug.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)