Yeah agree. I first picked it up before I self-studied the 18.06SC course and bounced off pretty hard, then I'm going through it again now and it's an absolute joy, but is really packed.
It looks great. But it's missing one critical feature of "fast-food" apps like TikTok: the content is not easily digestible. Which is understandable, because scientific papers are dense.
Maybe a good idea would be to parse the abstract through an LLM to make it more understandable (maybe caching the results so it's not expensive)? Maybe also using some standard style, like starting with a couple of "dumbed-down" sentences of the article for the non-expert, and progressively explaining better.
Please don't follow the original comments suggestion; I feel that "easily digestible" is not compatible with what makes the idea shine in the first place.
Your suggestion delegating such functionality to a local LLM is quite nice as a choice but adding it as a core functionality is quite antithetical to leverage the arXiv part, without which everything reverts back to a bland and generic whateverTok format.
Although the suggestion seems to be aware of the fact and provides both a good reasoning and a quite good solution (progressively deepening explanations), the implicit information and nuance lost in a summary by an unreliable LLM would undeniably turn this from a useful and interesting idea to a cool party trick no one uses for more than 5 minutes.
Thanks! I'll text you here when I add the feature. It wouldn't be core, so I think that having two modes where you can read easily papers with LLms or not will be of great help.
Good read. It is also refreshing to read how Schrödinger came up with his equation even if it was not clear how to interpret it.
He was attempting to formalize de Broglie's "particles as waves" concept, which, according to the article, "could obtain the quantization rules of Niels Bohr and Sommerfeld by demanding that an integer number of waves should be fitted along a stationary orbit."
Schrödinger's equation put that claim on firm mathematical grounds. It gave correct predictions. But just what this new "wave function" was remained up to interpretation.
I don't know about this book, but I highly recommend "Linear Algebra Done Right" by the same author. It is a very clear presentation of Linear Algebra. Although I would recommend it for someone who already took a first course on it.
My High School teaches it as the introductory Linear Algebra course and - while it is a bit difficult - it does an excellent job priming students to think about Lin Alg as a higher order discipline.
After doing it both ways, I really appreciate introducing vector spaces and linear transformations before even touching matrices.
May I ask what high school? We did not have a linear algebra course in my New York high school. I would have liked to have been able to take linear algebra then.
Pretty exclusive private bay area school - not the norm by any means. It's offered as one of the electives after calculus - multivariable, linear algebra, and a rotating set of others.
Author here: you can generate the Groebner basis in lex order or compute a resultant, but it doesn't automatically backsubstitute the system at the moment. This is mostly because I haven't committed yet to a format to describe roots of polynomials. It's on the todo list though :)
This is a visualization of what the states of a qubit can look like in two different physical systems (particle spin / photon polarization). Despite their differences, they can be described using the same mathematical object: a unit vector, here represented on the famous Bloch sphere.
I have worked on this aspect on quantum computation [1]. The main problem is that reversibility is a feature of isolated quantum systems. In practice, they are not isolated.
Why? It's not just because of small interactions with the environment that we cannot control. It's that even the apparatuses that we use to control/drive the logical instructions (lasers, electrical transmission lines) should be taken into account if the computer is to be considered isolated. But usually they aren't, and this leads to inevitable losses of reversiblity in the data register.
In other words, unitary (reversible) operations do not come for free.
I think that in quantum computers it is more likely that energy-efficiency will come from some sort of algorithmic advantage.
I mean, creating a new Google/Apple ID is one thing, but it's also quite annoying to log out of your primary ID.
So I'm wondering, did anybody try if this works with multiple users on Android?
On iOS apparently you can log into separate accounts for iCloud and the App store, but never tried that either.
Yes, I have two accounts, one for italian and one for canadian apps. I have an italian sim card that i can monitor only with the carrier's italian app, so i need this configuration.
