I wonder if we’ll end up in a weird situation a decade from now, where every conjecture will collapse into one of two states: counterexample found by AI, or assumed to be true.

▲

vouaobrasil 26 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

No way. Mathematicians don't assume things to be true even if there are no counterexamples.

	▲	scrubs 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Agree. I give up isn't the MO of many with graduate degrees.

▲

AIiscoming 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Might be a lot faster than you think.

I'm wondering though when we as a society / all the normal money flowing into universicites and research start to recupe and invest AI resources more deliberate.

Like are we working with ai on superconductors (easiest example i have, i don't know enough math).

Whats the most 'math' we need to advance for human progress?

	▲	kergonath 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Like are we working with ai on superconductors Yes, we are. Basically, for any scientific problem worth any funding, there is someone using AI on it. That said, for materials science it’s usually not LLMs, or even transformers (unless the AI used to write slop papers count). But there is a menagerie of AI or deep learning models that people are trying to use.