> If it's a lesser form of intelligence, as you imply
Different != lesser
> Probably, but
Then why even continue speaking if you agree
> our concepts seem to be tied pretty closely to language.
Me: “ChatGPT, explain how an electron orbiting a hydrogen nucleus would behave if classical mechanics held true.”
ChatGPT: “In classical electromagnetism, an electron orbiting a hydrogen nucleus would behave in a similar way to the way a planet orbits the sun, as described in my previous response. The electron would follow an elliptical path around the nucleus, and the force of attraction between the electron and the nucleus would be given by Coulomb's Law.
According to Coulomb's Law, the force of attraction between two charged particles is given by:
F = k * (q1 * q2) / r^2
Where F is the force of attraction, k is the Coulomb constant, q1 and q2 are the charges of the two particles, and r is the distance between them.
In the case of an electron orbiting a hydrogen nucleus, the force of attraction would be the force that keeps the electron in orbit. The electron would be attracted towards the nucleus by this force, but at the same time, it would be moving with a certain velocity, which would cause it to follow a curved path. This path would be an elliptical orbit, with the nucleus at one of the foci of the ellipse.
The electron's orbit would be stable as long as the force of attraction between the electron and the nucleus was strong enough to keep the electron in orbit, but not so strong that it pulled the electron into the nucleus. This balance would be determined by the size of the ellipse and the velocity of the electron. If the ellipse were too small, the electron would be pulled into the nucleus. If the ellipse were too large, the electron would escape from the orbit.
However, we know that this is not actually how an electron behaves in an atom. In reality, electrons do not follow classical orbits around the nucleus. Instead, they follow a more complex pattern described by quantum mechanics. This is because the principles of quantum mechanics are needed to accurately describe the behavior of very small particles like electrons.”
On the surface this looks impressive. Except that the answer about stable orbits is flat out wrong. The electron would spiral into the nucleus, quite quickly, because of Maxwell’s equations: a moving electron radiates electromagnetic energy. This is part of the foundational defense of quantum mechanics. If as you claim, language and concept are so closely tied, surely a language model with billions (trillions?) of parameters is capable of encoding a relational understanding of this magnitude.
> If it’s a lesser form of intelligence I almost find the results more impressive.
You get that you’re saying the least common denominator in conversational intelligence makes you go bzzzzz? That the one thing ChatGPT lacks, critical thinking, does not impress you?
You know, in the 90s, they had these things called tamagotchis… you might be interested.
