Chat GPT makes some mistakes about the theory of relativity

[TonyYuan]

Who is "we" in this scenario?

Where is "we"?

Here we are the observers,
We can be on A, or we can be on B. We can also be neither on A nor B, we are just observers.
It looks like you're going to tell us where we think about this problem will affect the time speed of A and B, great James R, we start to look forward to your analysis.

 

[TonyYuan]

The first sentence is approximately correct. The second is GPT trying to produce a plausible-sounding answer to an underspecified question; its answer is, at best, incomplete.

Fortunately, you have me - a human being who understands special relativity - to help you on this, so you don't need to rely on monkeys with typewriters.

Here, GPT is churning out an answer based on the "twin paradox" scenario. It has made assumptions about the scenario that are not contained in what you wrote. It is "hallucinating" the question. This is a common feature of GPT.

Your answer is equivalent to saying nothing. Please give a clear and clear answer. GPT's thinking is clear, and talk with GPT is smooth and logical. GPT is a good assistant, GPT is not a god, but its honesty can bring us closer to the truth. Of course, sophistry humans can cover up the facts by denying GPT.

James R, the greatest SRT scientist in sciforums, I hope you will pay attention to my question, carefully analyze my question, and then give your answer. Who's time is slower, A or B?

 

[TonyYuan]

GPT is an assistant at your service at any time, it is very honest, but it is not a god, it also has flaws, so we define it as an assistant. The knowledge of GPT in many fields has surpassed many independent humans, such as physics professors, mathematicians, doctors, financial workers and so on. GPT will let those sophistry show his tail.

 

[TonyYuan]

My conversation with GPT about SRT has been shared with you. If you can patiently read the conversation between me and GPT, you will realize that SRT is a fallacy. The West has made outstanding contributions to natural science. Although SRT and GRT have plunged the world into darkness, this still cannot conceal the great achievements the West has made in the past few hundred years. I still believe that the West will continue to lead the development of world science , the West has scientific soil.
James R, chemist, etc. You are all lovely people. Freedom, democracy, and equality are the best soil for scientific development.

 

[billvon]

ChatGPT makes mistakes, it can only reply to you based on the existing information it can look up. It's like you go to Google to search for something, you may see wrong information

It is much, much worse than that. Google will not plain fabricate information. ChatGPT will.

GPT is an assistant at your service at any time, it is very honest

It is not at all honest.

If you can patiently read the conversation between me and GPT, you will realize that SRT is a fallacy.

Again, if you are basing your beliefs on what ChatGPT tells you, you are just as wrong as that lawyer that was punished for the false information it gave him.

 

[James R]

Tony:

Here we are the observers,
We can be on A, or we can be on B. We can also be neither on A nor B, we are just observers.
It looks like you're going to tell us where we think about this problem will affect the time speed of A and B, great James R, we start to look forward to your analysis.

If A and B are in relative motion at constant velocity, then an observer riding on A will determine that clocks on B are running slower than clocks on A. Conversely, an observer riding on B will determine that clocks on A are running slower than clocks on B.

This is basic time dilation. You can look it up in any introductory book on special relativity. Or search the web.

GPT's thinking is clear, and talk with GPT is smooth and logical. GPT is a good assistant, GPT is not a god, but its honesty can bring us closer to the truth. Of course, sophistry humans can cover up the facts by denying GPT.

GPT simply uses a complicated algorithm and a neural network to predict what word ought to come next in the text it is producing. It knows nothing (other than stuff about the frequencies of words and how often they are found near one another). It produces text that may or may not be factual.

Talking about the "honesty" of GPT is a mistake. It has no concept of honesty. Having said that, in its training it was rewarded for producing output that made sense to human beings, was helpful and polite, so that's what it tends to do a lot of the time.

James R, the greatest SRT scientist in sciforums...

Aw, shucks. Do you want my autograph?

The knowledge of GPT in many fields has surpassed many independent humans, such as physics professors, mathematicians, doctors, financial workers and so on. GPT will let those sophistry show his tail.

GPT has no subject knowledge. It is a text generator. It knows nothing about physics, sewing, politics or history. It doesn't "know" anything - except some encoded stuff about language.

My conversation with GPT about SRT has been shared with you. If you can patiently read the conversation between me and GPT, you will realize that SRT is a fallacy.

I already told you where GPT went wrong.

Why are you ignoring what I - the greatest SRT scientist in sciforums - told you, Tony?

The West has made outstanding contributions to natural science.

Yes. So what?

Although SRT and GRT have plunged the world into darkness, this still cannot conceal the great achievements the West has made in the past few hundred years.

The theory of relativity isn't a conspiracy to conceal the great achievements of the West. What ever gave you the idea that it is, Tony?

This is crazy talk. Are you okay?

I still believe that the West will continue to lead the development of world science , the West has scientific soil.
James R, chemist, etc. You are all lovely people. Freedom, democracy, and equality are the best soil for scientific development.

Thank you, Tony.

Is there anything else I can help you with?

 

[TonyYuan]

If A and B are in relative motion at constant velocity, then an observer riding on A will determine that clocks on B are running slower than clocks on A. Conversely, an observer riding on B will determine that clocks on A are running slower than clocks on B.

This is basic time dilation. You can look it up in any introductory book on special relativity. Or search the web.

Well done James R, you gave a solid answer.
Now let's go back to the twin paradox experiment.
Can you use your conclusion just now to explain the twin paradox experiment? According to your statement, A on the earth acts as an observer, and B's time slows down, so B will be younger.
But if B acts as an observer, A's time will also slow down, and A should be younger.
But the final conclusion of this experiment is that brother A on earth will be older than brother B on the spaceship.
Can you explain it based on your previous analysis?

 

[James R]

Well done James R, you gave a solid answer.

I gave a correct answer.

Now let's go back to the twin paradox experiment.
Can you use your conclusion just now to explain the twin paradox experiment? According to your statement, A on the earth acts as an observer, and B's time slows down, so B will be younger.
But if B acts as an observer, A's time will also slow down, and A should be younger.
But the final conclusion of this experiment is that brother A on earth will be older than brother B on the spaceship.
Can you explain it based on your previous analysis?

No, I can't. The twin paradox is a different scenario.

In the twin paradox, brother B accelerates at the start of the outbound trip, at the turn-around point of the trip and at the end of the inbound trip. Those periods of acceleration introduce an asymmetry between A and B, because A does not accelerate.

A full analysis of the twin paradox either requires some messy integration and SR, or else GR - take your pick. Either way, the twin who accelerated ends up younger than the one who didn't, in that scenario.

Oh, and there's no "paradox" - just in case you think there is.

 

[TonyYuan]

I gave a correct answer.

No, I can't. The twin paradox is a different scenario.

In the twin paradox, brother B accelerates at the start of the outbound trip, at the turn-around point of the trip and at the end of the inbound trip. Those periods of acceleration introduce an asymmetry between A and B, because A does not accelerate.

A full analysis of the twin paradox either requires some messy integration and SR, or else GR - take your pick. Either way, the twin who accelerated ends up younger than the one who didn't, in that scenario.

Oh, and there's no "paradox" - just in case you think there is.

I can tell you that your answer is almost the same as GPT. So let's forget about twins for a moment.
OK, on to our questions.
As an observer, A catches up with B, so when they meet, does A see a younger B?
As an observer, B was caught up by A, so when they met, did B see a younger A?
If there is a C at the place where A and B meet, may I ask C as an observer, in the eyes of C, is A younger or B?

 

[Sarkus]

What do these questions, what does this analysis of relativity, have to do with the accuracy or otherwise, and reasons thereof, of ChatGPT? Is this a physics thread, or one about ChatGPT?

 

[TonyYuan]

What do these questions, what does this analysis of relativity, have to do with the accuracy or otherwise, and reasons thereof, of ChatGPT? Is this a physics thread, or one about ChatGPT?

GPT is like Google, but GPT is smarter. Don't you guys use GPT to help with some of your work?
We should keep an open mind about GPT, we can use it or refuse it. This is the freedom of everyone, and this is the embodiment of the free society we aspire to.

 

[James R]

I can tell you that your answer is almost the same as GPT.

The reasons for that are the ones I mentioned in post #13, above.

So let's forget about twins for a moment.

Do now agree that the answer I gave you is correct, regarding the twin paradox?

If you do, then we can move on.

As an observer, A catches up with B, so when they meet, does A see a younger B?

Your scenario is underspecified.

Where did A and B start from? Were they together at rest when they started? Were they both the same age when they started?
Did one or both of them accelerate at the start? Or did the scenario start with them both already travelling at their different constant speeds?

You say they meet up. Does that mean that one of them accelerates until he has the same speed as the other one? When does that happen? Or do you mean that A passes by B, still travelling at a constant speed, without slowing down?

There's no way to answer your question, until you fully specify your scenario.

As an observer, B was caught up by A, so when they met, did B see a younger A?
If there is a C at the place where A and B meet, may I ask C as an observer, in the eyes of C, is A younger or B?

I can't answer these questions either, until you fully specify the conditions of the scenario.

 

[James R]

What do these questions, what does this analysis of relativity, have to do with the accuracy or otherwise, and reasons thereof, of ChatGPT? Is this a physics thread, or one about ChatGPT?

I don't think Tony can decide what the thread is about. It's sort of about both, I think.

 

[James R]

GPT is like Google, but GPT is smarter.

Please read post #26 to learn why GPT is not "smart".

Don't you guys use GPT to help with some of your work?

Not yet. Do you rely on it to help you with your work? You know it makes mistakes and gets stuff wrong, so you shouldn't rely on it for anything important.

We should keep an open mind about GPT, we can use it or refuse it. This is the freedom of everyone, and this is the embodiment of the free society we aspire to.

I thought that, originally, you were saying something about GPT and the Emperor's New Clothes.

Wasn't the point of posting your chat transcript to show that GPT was wrong?

 

[TonyYuan]

Do now agree that the answer I gave you is correct, regarding the twin paradox?

If you do, then we can move on.

No, I can't. The twin paradox is a different scenario.

In the twin paradox, brother B accelerates at the start of the outbound trip, at the turn-around point of the trip and at the end of the inbound trip. Those periods of acceleration introduce an asymmetry between A and B, because A does not accelerate.

A full analysis of the twin paradox either requires some messy integration and SR, or else GR - take your pick. Either way, the twin who accelerated ends up younger than the one who didn't, in that scenario.

Oh, and there's no "paradox" - just in case you think there is.

Don't you think it's ridiculous if you think that your answer can win the support of others? Your answer is almost identical to GPT's answer, but we can talk to GPT to make it realize that there is a problem with its answer, but for you James R, I think it would be better to leave this topic on hold.

 

[TonyYuan]

Your scenario is underspecified.

Where did A and B start from? Were they together at rest when they started? Were they both the same age when they started?
Did one or both of them accelerate at the start? Or did the scenario start with them both already travelling at their different constant speeds?

You say they meet up. Does that mean that one of them accelerates until he has the same speed as the other one? When does that happen? Or do you mean that A passes by B, still travelling at a constant speed, without slowing down?

There's no way to answer your question, until you fully specify your scenario.

OK, both A and B start from the earth, and A and B have exactly the same age when they set off. (I hope you stop asking me which astronaut looks younger because of regular facials).
Are they resting together, why ask this question? Do you still need to know if they live in the same room and sleep in the same bed?
They have their own speed, I think they have either actively accelerated or passively accelerated, your question still looks very strange.
Do they have to be at the same speed when they meet? Bolt raced against the great James X, Bolt started slow, but he caught up to James X, Bolt gave James X a 0.1 second smile. I don't think anyone thinks they have the same speed when they meet.
In the same way, there is no relationship between meeting and whether you are accelerating.
James R gave so many constraints, and added N constraints to a simple physics problem. Hope my answer satisfies you.
There is a saying in China: "Get shot while lying down", GPT is innocent. But it became a victim. GPT is just an honest assistant, it doesn't quibble like some humans do.

 

[TonyYuan]

Wasn't the point of posting your chat transcript to show that GPT was wrong?

There is a saying in China: "Get shot while lying down", GPT is innocent. But it became a victim. GPT is just an honest assistant, it doesn't quibble like some humans do.

“Chat GPT makes some mistakes about the theory of relativity”
Is this the title of my post? Can James R modify the title of our post at will? Today's Western society places great emphasis on human rights and freedom. Did James R come from the Middle Ages in Europe?
James R, did you travel from the Middle Ages under the guidance of Einstein's SRT?

 

[mathman]

ChatGPT makes mistakes, it can only reply to you based on the existing information it can look up. It's like you go to Google to search for something, you may see wrong information, although you have thought a lot before adopting this wrong view. But just such an example, can I deny you? Can I say you are the wrong person? Obviously not, you are still a person full of wisdom, a person who can be respected.

Chatgpt said it was a real case, but it wasn't. Chatgpt lied!

 

[James R]

Tony:

Don't you think it's ridiculous if you think that your answer can win the support of others?

No. Why would thinking that be ridiculous? Especially since my answer is correct.

Your answer is almost identical to GPT's answer, but we can talk to GPT to make it realize that there is a problem with its answer, but for you James R, I think it would be better to leave this topic on hold.

Okay. Time to close the thread, then? Are you done?

OK, both A and B start from the earth, and A and B have exactly the same age when they set off. (I hope you stop asking me which astronaut looks younger because of regular facials).

So they are together, at zero velocity, on Earth, at the start. Therefore, to get to different speeds, they must both accelerate to the required speeds. Right?

Are they resting together, why ask this question?

I asked "were they together at rest"? That means: did they both share the same (zero) velocity, initially? That's what "at rest" means, in physics.

Maybe a language issue.

Do you still need to know if they live in the same room and sleep in the same bed?

No. You misunderstood me. See above.

They have their own speed, I think they have either actively accelerated or passively accelerated, your question still looks very strange.

Okay. They both accelerated. That means we can't just use SR, which only usually works for constant relative speeds. Once you introduce accelerations, we'll need either GR or some complicated integration.

Do they have to be at the same speed when they meet? Bolt raced against the great James X, Bolt started slow, but he caught up to James X, Bolt gave James X a 0.1 second smile. I don't think anyone thinks they have the same speed when they meet.

Okay, so the person passing the other person does not slow down and join the other person. He just flits past at very high speed and the two of them don't meet up again?

In the same way, there is no relationship between meeting and whether you are accelerating.

If you're travelling at 100 km/hr and I'm travelling at zero km/hr, then if you want to meet with me, you're going to have to slow down from 100 to zero. That means you have a non-zero acceleration while your speed is changing. Agree?

James R gave so many constraints, and added N constraints to a simple physics problem.

No. I asked you to give a complete specification of your scenario. You still haven't done that.

Please do it. Then we can talk about it. You must specify exactly what the motions are of person A and person B. Where do they start from? How many times do they accelerate? For how long do they travel at constant speeds? Where do they end up?

“Chat GPT makes some mistakes about the theory of relativity”
Is this the title of my post? Can James R modify the title of our post at will?

Yes, I can. In this case, you posted two separate threads. One had a useless title, like "Can James R answer this?", which also defeats the purpose of having a public thread. (If you want to direct a question specifically to me, why not use private messaging?)

Your other thread title was something about Chat GPT and the Emperor's New Clothes, but then it had this transcript of your chat with GPT about relativity.

I made a decision as a moderator to merge your two threads, on the same topic, into a single thread. I gave it a title that more accurately describes the content of the thread.

Today's Western society places great emphasis on human rights and freedom. Did James R come from the Middle Ages in Europe?

Yes, Tony. I'm actually 800 years old.

James R, did you travel from the Middle Ages under the guidance of Einstein's SRT?

Yes, Tony. I did exactly that. Good guess.

Now, once you've finished trying to be cute, are you going to post your scenario with all the necessary details, and your questions about it, or are we done?

 

[TonyYuan]

Tony:

No. Why would thinking that be ridiculous? Especially since my answer is correct.

Okay. Time to close the thread, then? Are you done?

So they are together, at zero velocity, on Earth, at the start. Therefore, to get to different speeds, they must both accelerate to the required speeds. Right?

I asked "were they together at rest"? That means: did they both share the same (zero) velocity, initially? That's what "at rest" means, in physics.

Maybe a language issue.

No. You misunderstood me. See above.

Okay. They both accelerated. That means we can't just use SR, which only usually works for constant relative speeds. Once you introduce accelerations, we'll need either GR or some complicated integration.

Okay, so the person passing the other person does not slow down and join the other person. He just flits past at very high speed and the two of them don't meet up again?

If you're travelling at 100 km/hr and I'm travelling at zero km/hr, then if you want to meet with me, you're going to have to slow down from 100 to zero. That means you have a non-zero acceleration while your speed is changing. Agree?

No. I asked you to give a complete specification of your scenario. You still haven't done that.

Please do it. Then we can talk about it. You must specify exactly what the motions are of person A and person B. Where do they start from? How many times do they accelerate? For how long do they travel at constant speeds? Where do they end up?

Yes, I can. In this case, you posted two separate threads. One had a useless title, like "Can James R answer this?", which also defeats the purpose of having a public thread. (If you want to direct a question specifically to me, why not use private messaging?)

Your other thread title was something about Chat GPT and the Emperor's New Clothes, but then it had this transcript of your chat with GPT about relativity.

I made a decision as a moderator to merge your two threads, on the same topic, into a single thread. I gave it a title that more accurately describes the content of the thread.

Yes, Tony. I'm actually 800 years old.

Yes, Tony. I did exactly that. Good guess.

Now, once you've finished trying to be cute, are you going to post your scenario with all the necessary details, and your questions about it, or are we done?

The meaning of James R has been clearly presented. The dilation of time does not only depend on the speed of A and B, but also depends on the acceleration of A and B. James R, is my understanding correct?
James R told us that the initial velocity of A and B is very important, and the acceleration of A and B is also very important. James R, when you talk about velocity and acceleration, do you consider reference objects?
James R From your description, we can see that you take the earth as a reference object, and you endow A and B with an initial velocity of 0. Do you agree with me?
When we observe A and B, we must understand the acceleration and deceleration process of A and B from the beginning to the present. Only in this way can we know who will be younger between A and B. If A comes from the earth, and B comes from a planet that James R does not know, does that mean that James R can never know the initial velocity of B, nor can he know the acceleration process of B, nor can he know the total time dilation on B? ?
For the two brothers in the twin paradox experiment, the elder brother left the earth in a spaceship, and the elder brother has acceleration and deceleration processes, so according to James R's point of view, the elder brother will be younger. But did James R notice that our earth has been accelerating relative to the sun? This acceleration is obviously different from that of his brother. How does James R think about the impact of the acceleration of the earth on his brother's time dilation?
As the great James R who came from the Middle Ages and was proficient in SRT, did you teach Einstein the great SRT? Or are you and Einstein the twins?