This actually sounds super familiar.
Those who first embark on the spiritual path are always mystified on how to discern between "our own random thoughts" vs "divine thoughts", which has a striking parallel with pseudorandomness vs "true randomness".
The concept of "true randomness" is actually ill-defined in general, but here it just means something that looks random but is actually cheaply generated using some very simple pseudorandom generator.
In fact, intuitive people often solve apparently "NP" (not necessarily NP hard) problems using inspirations. The idea that highly awakened people can solve their problems with "coincidence" (aka "synchronicity") is actually the daily-life equivalent of solving NP problems in P time.
It is actually an interesting question whether AI can really solve difficult math problems better than humans (not individually, but as a whole). Given that mathematics is generally NP-hard, we'd have empirical evidence whether humans can solve NP problems (using "intuition") better than machines....
No comments:
Post a Comment