We assume the answer to this serious question is yes.
Two important points are that the B-matrix statistical chain AI predicts that energy entanglement exists in both quantum and classical physics on an equal footing and that energy entanglement has a maximum signal velocity or flux transfer rate equal to the speed of light C (no infinite or spooky action at a distance).
The two giant scientists missed the above two points.
It is worth mentioning that many of our respectable contributors and readers frequently ask how do you judge and correct the scientific work of the giants A. Einstein and E. Schrödinger? Does this mean you are smarter than both of them?
The answer is that we use the AI of the statistical chains of matrix B and it is this AI that is smarter than Einstein and Schrödinger and not the author himself.
Finally, it should be noted that the purpose of this Q/A is not to underestimate the great achievements of the brilliant Einstein, Schrödinger, among others, but to address the major flaws in their theories, if any.
The assertion that artificial intelligence has "deceived" Albert Einstein and Erwin Schrödinger is based on the idea that their theories overlooked key aspects of energy entanglement. Specifically, the B-matrix statistical chain AI predicts that energy entanglement exists equally in both quantum and classical physics and that its maximum signal velocity is limited to the speed of light, avoiding the notion of infinite or "spooky action at a distance." While these two scientific giants made groundbreaking contributions, they may not have fully accounted for these aspects in their theories. However, the purpose of this discussion is not to diminish their achievements but to highlight potential gaps in their work. The evaluation and correction of such scientific theories are not a matter of individual intelligence surpassing that of Einstein and Schrödinger but rather a reflection of AI’s advanced computational capabilities, which can analyze complex statistical patterns beyond human limitations.
A striking example of Einstein's defeat by artificial intelligence is chess.
Einstein played chess regularly (because he believed it could improve human intelligence), especially with his close friend E. Lasker.
E. Lasker was a professor of mathematics and world chess champion at the time.
The debate between the two giants went as follows [1]:
Einstein: I suppose chess is a fake game because the white player has the first move and should therefore have a forced win!?
E. Lasker: But no. The first move advantage for the white player is counterbalanced by the advantage of greater information for the black player.
Therefore, white's advantage decreases as the number of moves increases.
Normally, before the 20th move, both sides are exactly equal for any arbitrary opening.
Einstein worked hard on this problem but to no avail.
He eventually announced that the complexities of chess had defeated the human brain.
It was only at the beginning of the 21st century that the world got a precise answer to this problem.
Artificial intelligence scientists introduced two supercomputers A and B equipped with cutting-edge AI algorithms.
When supercomputers A and B played chess against each other, all games ended in a draw for any type of opening!
1-
Did Einstein regularly play chess?, Quora Q/A.
No, artificial intelligence did not deceive A. Einstein and E. Schrödinger, as AI did not exist during their lifetimes to influence their work. The claim that the B-matrix statistical chain AI identifies energy entanglement in both quantum and classical physics, with a maximum signal velocity equal to the speed of light, represents a modern perspective enabled by advanced computational tools. While Einstein and Schrödinger laid foundational principles for modern physics, their theories were constrained by the knowledge and technology of their time. The use of AI today allows for the re-examination and potential refinement of their ideas, but this does not imply deception—rather, it highlights the evolving nature of scientific understanding. The goal is not to diminish their monumental contributions but to build upon and address limitations in their theories using contemporary tools.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Materials Science
- Materials
- Composites
- Nanocomposites