Too Many Early Galaxies and AI Easily Fooled | Hugh Ross and Jeff Zweerink
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 06. 2024
- #jwst #jwstimages #chatgpt
Join Hugh Ross and Jeff Zweerink as they discuss new discoveries taking place at the frontiers of science that have theological and philosophical implications, including the reality of God’s existence.
Too Many Early Galaxies
The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has revealed about ten times as many galaxies within the cosmos’s first 420 million years as what some big bang creation models predict. Astronomers are searching for an explanation for this overabundance of early galaxies. Possible scenarios include a high number of supernova events during the universe’s first 420 million years. Different big bang models predict different average star masses and different star formation rates during the universe’s first half billion years. It will take at least another year of JWST observations to determine which of these big bang creation models correctly describes very early and later epochs of cosmic history.
AI Easily Fooled
Powerful large language models (like ChatGPT) have demonstrated remarkable abilities to provide solutions to problems that require complex reasoning. Yet researchers want to discern the level of understanding by the AIs (artificial intelligence), just as a teacher wants to know how well a student comprehends a correct answer they provided. A recent study shows that despite generating good answers, AIs have very little understanding of the issues involved. Specifically, when confronted with challenges that involved absurdly wrong facts (like 8 x 7 = 14), the AIs will disavow the previous answer and apologize for being mistaken. This research demonstrates that, while AIs accomplish impressive tasks, they do not demonstrate some essential features of “intelligence.”
_____________________________
LINKS & RESOURCES
Rescuing Inerrancy - reasons.org/inerrancy
PLAYLIST - • Stars, Cells, and God
Too Many Early Galaxies
Haojing Yan et al., “Pointlike Sources among z 11 Galaxy Candidates: Contaminants Due to Supernovae at High Redshifts?,” iopscience.iop.org/article/10...
AI Easily Fooled
Boshi Wang et al., “Can ChatGPT Defend Its Belief in Truth? Evaluating LLM Reasoning via Debate,” arxiv.org/abs/2305.13160
_____________________________
CONNECT WITH US
▶️ Help us reveal God in science by supporting Reasons to Believe at: support.reasons.org/category/f...
▶️ Follow RTB_Official for more #apologetics content!
Facebook: / rtbofficial
Twitter: / rtb_official
Instagram: / rtb_official
Website: www.reasons.org
This is a great alternative to listening to the silliness of Ken Ham. Love this content.
I notice Ken is aging and misses some things any more. Still we should not condem anyone that has touched so many like he has done with the Ark project.
Even with his abilities becoming older his past contributions of demonstrating the feasibility of the ark has influenced many to Jesus I am sure.
Lets show the mercy of Jesus and thank him for Kens life of contributions to the kingdom of Christ Jesus.
Condm not lest you be condemed.
God Bless.
Love this channel!!!🙏🏆
Thank you!! Glad you enjoy our content! ❤️
You have a nice channel. Thx.
Thank you.
Very very interesting video!🙋💚
awesome channel
Chat GPT has add on apps, like scholar GPT and Consensus, that do have access to scientific research papers and will cite them.
Y'all need to put a Broadcast Compression on these videos before render. It's hard for me to hear Hugh on the other side of the room.
The QR code is the wrong link. Takes me to Apple at encyclopedia Britannica 😂
We're SO sorry for the inconvenience! There was clearly a misstep along the way. If you use this URL, it'll take you right where you need to go. reasons.org/inerrancy
Every discipline, every theory we ever made is dependent upon these measurements In not only the early galaxies but the expansion.
It's been great work out of jwst but the astronomers seem rather all over the place with trying to explain anything but tbh
2 times 35 is 7. Yeap, loads and loads of getting the wires crossed. Go back to methods of counting past your own frame of reference.
@@brendawilliams8062 what frame of reference does nature possess?
This is a human dashboard geo centric feature you and I share on this scale.
We live on this scale but surly you know when man made language math & time .
We just literally correlated subjective hamiltonian oscillating wave time .
Subjective space
Subjective choo choo train standardized time with background radiation not even 120 years ago.
500 years ago we was using this same ruler or measure.
Hell the Babylonian evolutionary primordial flood creation soup model is 5000 calander Counted time old .
But no one doubts that if we don't show up to work on time that we will no longer occupy that subjective space anymore.
We don't need some ecclesiastical input and perimeters telling us once upon a time evolutionary mythology everytime they put a scientific box around a system. This doesn't give it anymore value or make it more than it is.
In fact it just complicates and confuses dissaccossiates young minds from actually learning about our reality.
It gets in the way of the bottom up reductionism that nature favors
Its like some Karen mom standing Physics lol maybe you heard the nasa lady's article she went to bed after turning on jwst thinking everything she ever worked on or believed was all for nothing. This is not healthy or good science at all. It's a mistake made over and over throughout our history of science..
When we have nothing ,all we have is pardolia of mind form and shape to use.
But when we taste nature in every feild every discipline, every line of evidence it gets debunked as nature just doesn't work like humans can. We can manipulate our scales local systems unlike anything else found . We have a nasty habit of clinging to this bias
@brendawilliams8062 obviously it's very intuitive to know sight & touch is the least credible sense we have.
Our language stands as the perfect example of evidence on this.
Why objectivity is such a late emerging property is a question for God not his creation itself
Don't get me wrong it's value and benefit in drawing mazes around the mass displacement of space by product of gravity manifolds. But where to find the newly expanded 1 minute old plank length gradient of space between galaxies is very complex & hard but worth it.
Speaking so general about all this without precise words as the most scientific tool when strengthened by measure is the real problem at large.
Then acting arrogant with loose lips about it as if we found some magically input and perimeters leads to dark matter ,multi verses, parallel demenisions it's all from physicslism miss interpretations .
My classical American christian ancestors adapted long ago and now the past 80 years we have waited on everyone to catch up ,adjust and even funded the most money In human history to allow everyone to try and prove their beliefs yet here we are .
So far, I'm not impressed with AI. (it will get better, no doubt)
I asked AI
Q: why are fire engines red?
A: Fire engines were originally painted red because that color absorbs heat and is, therefore, a good choice for fighting fires. However, that’s not the only reason why fire engines are red. Red is also the easiest color to see at night, which makes it easier for firefighters to find each other.
Truth: I asked a child and a senior citizen the same question; They both said because 'red' means danger
You decide who is more intelligent............
#21_comment_MrRoss_PrettyCertainWeWillMeetEventuallyIn_HIS_Kingdom_till_ThenThankyouForBrighteningTheseLastDays🇺🇸✡️✝️