Even if physics arrived at a theory of everything that was consistent and applied at all scales science wouldn't end. There have been people talking about Gödel incompleteness, but there's a more concrete example we can give. Say you use the theory of everything to model a CPU, then you might be able to prove that under normal conditions it behaves like the abstract machine we model in programming language theory. But what if we want to understand the behavior of a program? The halting problem says there's no algorithm that can say even if the program terminates or not, never mind other important properties about its behavior. So there will always be open problems about this partcular physical system. The universe is more complicated than a CPU, so I'm sure there will be some other interesting physical systems we wouldn't understand completely even if we knew all the laws that govern its behavior.

Rational numbers hate each other

@steinerkelvin @NereruoAkita We'll there's Asahi... I wouldn't have the courage though

RT @ArmandDoma: counterpoint:

Soryumirai reminds me a lot of the Gran Turismo 5 soundtrack

RT @alth0u:

RT @joomy:

@gabrielfw A mulher não tem braços? Kkkkk

One day the tables will turn and saying cringe will be cringe

RT @AlexKontorovich: As I said in a recent lecture, LaTeX got what I call the "Knuth factor" -- the ratio of the amount of time it takes to…

@mezabarbarm pra comparação o claude 3.5 sonnet

RT @beetlemoses:

@gabrielfw Btw there's something you missed on your telegram, have a look ^^

RT @NostalgiaFolder: playing flash games on Miniclip

@moneycasouza O livro do Zinsser é muito bom!

@Tiagocamposfer Pretty cool!

@haskallcurry Also the fact that call/cc can provide sort of a computational interpretation to excluded middle makes me think how much I don't understand call/cc

@haskallcurry Sorry I don't understand, could you ellaborate?