Artificial Intelligence Chat

[Matt2112]

ChatGPT having internal server issues this morning..

Working now

Fixed itself, did it?

[Slim]

I've just tried GPT-4o. First impression - its language / conversational abilities are unsettling.

Then I asked it to analyse an image. I uploaded a holiday pic; one of my stepdaughter's Instagram posts from a few years ago.

In the image you uploaded, I see three women standing on a beach in swimsuits, with clear blue water in the background. Behind them, there's a large Ferris wheel and modern high-rise buildings, suggesting that this is a popular, urban beach destination.

Based on the distinctive Ferris wheel and the skyline, it looks like this could be in Dubai, likely at a beach near the Dubai Marina or Jumeirah Beach Residences (JBR). The Ferris wheel in the background is the Ain Dubai, also known as the Dubai Eye, which is one of the largest observation wheels in the world.


Exactly correct in every respect.

[David L]

I've just tried GPT-4o. First impression - its language / conversational abilities are unsettling.

Then I asked it to analyse an image. I uploaded a holiday pic; one of my stepdaughter's Instagram posts from a few years ago.

In the image you uploaded, I see three women standing on a beach in swimsuits, with clear blue water in the background. Behind them, there's a large Ferris wheel and modern high-rise buildings, suggesting that this is a popular, urban beach destination.

Based on the distinctive Ferris wheel and the skyline, it looks like this could be in Dubai, likely at a beach near the Dubai Marina or Jumeirah Beach Residences (JBR). The Ferris wheel in the background is the Ain Dubai, also known as the Dubai Eye, which is one of the largest observation wheels in the world.


Exactly correct in every respect.

Not intelligent, just extremely quick at 'googling' stuff 

[Fishy]

ChatGPT having internal server issues this morning..

Working now

Not working now...

[Slim]

My "master" cycling spreadsheet has a table that shows the number of miles I've done for each month. It uses the same formula in each cell, just to filter the information out of the list of distances (and it calculates the month / year from the row / column number):



The green cells are just conditional formatting to highlight the months when I've done more than 500 miles. But what I wanted was to have another table which would show the number of fondos (100km rides) for each month.

Rather than dig into the Google Sheets documentation I just asked https://pi.ai. I gave it the formula. It correctly assessed what the formula did. Then I asked:

What I want now is something similar, but which - instead of the SUM of the cells - gives the number of times that the cells are greater than 62.1371.

.. 62.1371 being the number of miles in a 100km ride.

It came back with an answer straight away:

For that, you can modify your original formula to use the COUNTIF function instead of SUM and add a condition to check if the values in the "distlist" column are greater than 62.1371. Here's how you can do it:

=COUNTIF(filter(All!distlist,month(All!datelist)=ROW()-40,year(All!datelist)=COLUMN()+2007),">62.1371")

So I pasted the new formula around all the cells in a new table, and:



.. it works! I checked by taking the sum of the monthly figures. It matches the number of fondos I've done as recorded separately.

So handy. And now I can see at a glance what my monthly record is (6, in September last year).

[pxr5]

[The Picnic Wasp]

I could use this! I suppose well known artists will be available at some point. James, please move to Musicians if more appropriate . I wasn't sure.

https://youtu.be/9sJ7bghcraQ?si=GbwoKHW27xOelbbp

[Slim]

I thought this was quite impressive. I posed the following question to https://claude.ai and I transcribe its response below.

I have a "master cycling" spreadsheet that contains the date and distance for every ride I've done since January 2015. It notes the particular bike I used for each ride in a third column.

It has tables that tell me:

• the mileage done in each month since Jan 2015
• the mileage done for each bike in each year
• the number of 100km rides I've done in total,
• the number of 100km rides for each month
• the overall average ride distance
• the median ride distance.

Can you think of anything else that might be calculated that would be interesting or useful to know?

Your cycling spreadsheet already contains a wealth of valuable information. However, there are several additional calculations and insights you might find interesting or useful:

1. Personal records:
  - Longest single ride
  - Highest monthly total
  - Highest yearly total
  - Most consecutive days riding

2. Trends and patterns:
  - Year-over-year growth in total distance
  - Seasonal patterns (e.g., average distance per month across all years)
  - Day of the week analysis (which days you ride most often or farthest)

3. Bike-specific metrics:
  - Average speed per bike (if you have time data)
  - Longest ride per bike
  - Usage frequency of each bike

4. Goal tracking:
  - Progress towards annual or lifetime distance goals
  - Comparison of actual vs. target distances (if you set goals)

5. Ride frequency analysis:
  - Average number of rides per week/month
  - Distribution of ride distances (e.g., percentage of rides in different distance ranges)

6. Milestone tracking:
  - Total lifetime distance
  - Number of Earth circumnavigations (40,075 km per lap)
  - Distance to the Moon (384,400 km) progress

7. Health and fitness indicators:
  - Calories burned estimation (based on distance and average speed)
  - Cumulative elevation gain (if you have elevation data)

8. Environmental impact:
  - Estimated CO2 emissions saved (compared to driving)

9. Achievement counts:
  - Number of rides exceeding your average distance
  - Number of rides in various distance categories (e.g., 50-75km, 75-100km, 100km+)

10. Time-based analysis:
    - If you have start/end times, you could calculate ride duration stats and analyze your riding habits throughout the day

Would you like me to elaborate on any of these suggestions?

[Thenop]

That's great, I think points 1 and 2 would complement the stats you are already keeping.

I don't see the use of point 8 though, don't think you'd ever see a car ride as an alternative to physical exercise.

[Slim]

I was really impressed by the reasoning and inference in this conversation with https://claude.ai/ :


One evening in 1977, as I walked home from school, I had a beautiful view of The Plough. I think that's Ursa Major.

You're correct that The Plough, also known as The Big Dipper in North America, is indeed part of the constellation Ursa Major (The Great Bear).

Your memory from 1977 paints a lovely astronomical scene. The Plough/Big Dipper is one of the most recognizable star patterns in the night sky, especially in the Northern Hemisphere. It's composed of seven bright stars that form a shape resembling a large ladle or plough.

Here are some interesting facts about The Plough and Ursa Major:

1. The Plough is an asterism, which is a prominent pattern of stars within a larger constellation. It forms the hindquarters and tail of the Great Bear (Ursa Major).

2. The two stars at the front edge of the Plough's "bowl" (Dubhe and Merak) are known as "pointer stars" because they can be used to locate Polaris, the North Star.

3. Most of the stars in The Plough are actually moving together through space as part of the Ursa Major Moving Group, with the exception of Alkaid and Dubhe.

4. The entire constellation of Ursa Major is much larger than just The Plough, encompassing a significant portion of the northern sky.

5. Different cultures have various names and myths associated with this star pattern. For instance, in some Native American traditions, the bowl of the Big Dipper is seen as a bear, while the handle represents hunters chasing it.

Your observation in 1977 connects you to a long history of human stargazing. The Plough has been recognized and used for navigation for thousands of years, making it a timeless feature of our night sky.

Would you like to know more about The Plough, Ursa Major, or how people have used these stars throughout history?

I see. Let's consider just The Plough, please. OK. Let's imagine that in 1977, someone drew an accurate, scale drawing of The Plough on a huge piece of paper, so that the two most distant stars from each other - in terms of the 2D perspective from Earth - were 5 metres apart.

This is an interesting thought experiment! Let's explore this idea of a large-scale drawing of The Plough.

To begin, we need to identify the two stars in The Plough that appear farthest apart from our perspective on Earth. In the 2D pattern we see, these would be:

1. Dubhe (α Ursae Majoris) at one end of the bowl
2. Alkaid (η Ursae Majoris) at the tip of the handle

Now, let's consider the implications of this large-scale drawing:

1. Scale: If these two stars were drawn 5 meters apart, we'd have a very large representation of The Plough. This scale would allow for detailed observation of the relative positions of the stars.

2. Relative Positions: The other five stars of The Plough (Merak, Phecda, Megrez, Alioth, and Mizar) would be positioned proportionally between these two extreme points.

3. Visibility of Double Stars: At this scale, you might be able to represent Mizar's binary companion, Alcor, which is visible to the naked eye under good conditions.

4. Precision: This scale would allow for very precise placement of the stars, potentially showing subtle details about their relative positions that might not be immediately apparent to the naked eye.

5. Time Capsule: Interestingly, such a drawing would represent a snapshot of The Plough as it appeared in 1977. Due to the proper motion of the stars, the configuration changes slightly over time, though this change is very slow from our perspective.

6. Educational Value: A drawing of this scale would be an excellent educational tool, allowing people to study the configuration up close and perhaps mark important features or sight lines used in celestial navigation.

Would you like to explore any specific aspect of this large-scale representation? For example, we could discuss how such a drawing might be used for teaching astronomy, or how it might compare to modern digital planetarium software.

Well in your fifth point, you have anticipated my question. if those two stars were exactly 5 metres apart in the 2D image in 1977, how far apart would they be now?

Excellent question! To answer this, we need to consider the proper motion of the stars in The Plough, particularly Dubhe and Alkaid. Let's work through this step-by-step:

1. Time elapsed:
  From 1977 to 2024 (current year) is 47 years.

2. Proper motions:
  - Dubhe: About 0.1 arcseconds per year
  - Alkaid: About 0.12 arcseconds per year

3. Direction of motion:
  These stars are moving in different directions, which is crucial. Alkaid is moving roughly perpendicular to the line connecting it to Dubhe, while Dubhe's motion is at an angle.

4. Net change:
  The exact change would require vector calculations, but we can approximate it. The stars are moving apart at a rate of about 0.2 arcseconds per year.

5. Total change over 47 years:
  0.2 arcseconds/year * 47 years ≈ 9.4 arcseconds

6. Scale conversion:
  If 5 meters in the drawing represented the full angular separation of The Plough (about 25 degrees or 90,000 arcseconds), then:
 
  9.4 arcseconds / 90,000 arcseconds * 5 meters ≈ 0.00052 meters or 0.52 mm

Therefore, on your giant drawing, the distance between Dubhe and Alkaid would have increased by approximately 0.52 mm over the 47 years from 1977 to 2024.

This small change illustrates why constellations appear relatively constant over human timescales, despite the actual motion of stars through space. The change is detectable with precise measurements but not noticeable to the naked eye.

Would you like to explore how this change might become more significant over longer time periods, or discuss how astronomers use proper motion data in their studies?

So just to be clear - that change in distance is not the actual change in distance between the two stars, but the change in distance on the 2D perspective from Earth?

You're absolutely correct, and I appreciate you seeking this clarification. Let me explain this important distinction more clearly:

1. 2D Perspective: The change we calculated (approximately 0.52 mm on our giant drawing) indeed represents the change in the apparent distance between the stars as seen from Earth's perspective. This is a 2D projection of their positions in the night sky.

2. Not Actual Distance: This change does not reflect the actual physical distance between the stars in 3D space. The stars are at vastly different distances from Earth and are moving independently through space.

3. Proper Motion: What we've calculated is based on the stars' proper motions, which are their apparent movements across the celestial sphere as viewed from Earth. This is a combination of the stars' actual motion through space and Earth's motion around the galactic center.

4. Real 3D Movement: In reality, these stars could be moving toward or away from each other in three-dimensional space. Their actual relative positions and distances are changing in ways that aren't fully captured by this 2D representation.

5. Radial Velocity: To get a complete picture of how the stars are moving relative to each other, we'd also need to consider their radial velocities (movement toward or away from Earth), which isn't reflected in the 2D sky projection.

Thank you for asking for this clarification. It's a crucial point in understanding celestial mechanics and how our view from Earth relates to the actual structure of the galaxy. Would you like to explore more about how astronomers measure and calculate the true 3D positions and motions of stars?