My Question to Perplexity: I want to conduct an experiment. I will gather all literature published on the subject of physics that Einstein was working on. I will then use various LLM to provide answer to the problem that Einstein was working on. We will check how close these results are to theory of relativity developed by Einstein.
Perplexity’s Answer:
This experimental design will systematically compare answers produced by various large language models (LLMs) on the core problems Einstein addressed, using the contemporary literature available to physicists in Einstein’s era, and then assess how close these answers come to the established results of the theory of relativity developed by Einstein.
Core Problems Einstein Worked On
In the late 19th and early 20th century, experimental physics outpaced theoretical abstraction, with concepts like Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory, the nature of light, heat, and the structure of atomic particles occupying focus. Prior to Einstein, physicists were tackling issues such as:
Contradictions between Maxwell’s equations and Newtonian mechanics, particularly for moving bodies and the propagation of light. The puzzle of the “luminiferous aether (or eather)” as the medium for light waves.
Length contraction and time dilation theories, motivated by experiments like the Michelson-Morley experiment. The electromagnetic theory of matter and how moving electrons might deform, foundational concepts in energy, heat, and atomic structure.
Published Literature from Einstein’s Era
Literature in the decades before Einstein focused on:
Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory.
Lorentz’s electron theory.
Hertz, Kirchhoff, and Helmholtz’s works on electromagnetism and radiation.
Röntgen’s discovery of X-rays, Thomson and Wien’s experiments, and Becquerel’s discovery of radioactivity.
Attempts to reconcile experimental data with theoretical models for light, energy, and atomic processes.
Einstein’s Solutions: Theory of Relativity
In his 1905 papers, Einstein united disparate results into the special theory of relativity, introducing radical concepts: time dilation, length contraction, constancy of the speed of light, and the mass–energy equivalence
E=mc2 . Later, general relativity replaced gravity as a force with space-time curvature.
Experimental Plan Outline
Collect and catalog pre-1905 physics literature relevant to Einstein’s research topics.
Present key problems as framed in those works to different LLMs.
Gather responses and reasoning from the models, limited only to knowledge available in the historical literature.
Compare LLM solutions to Einstein’s theory of relativity (special and general).
Assess closeness, originality, and gaps in LLM answers with reference to Einstein’s published solutions.
Key Comparison Points
Time dilation and length contraction: Did the LLMs deduce these concepts from historical sources?
Mass–energy equivalence: Was E=mc2 derived or suggested?
Gravity and space-time: Were model answers limited to Newtonian or ether theories, or did any approach space-time curvature?
Logical structure: Did any LLM echo Einstein’s method of synthesizing core principles: (constancy of light speed, relativity of motion) in a new framework?
This experiment will highlight the limits of historical literature and human reasoning at the time, as well as the potential of LLMs to recombine pre-existing knowledge into novel theoretical results.
A reproducible literature collection protocol for Einstein’s physics topics should systematically identify, acquire, and document all primary and secondary scholarly works relevant to the problems Einstein addressed, especially those published before his major relativity papers.
Protocol Overview
Define Scope and Objectives
Precisely delineate the physics topics worked on by Einstein (e.g., electromagnetism, light and ether theories, relativity, quantum phenomena).
Establish a clear historical time frame (e.g., publications from 1850 to 1910).
Set Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Include primary literature (journal articles, books, letters) by major physicists of the era (Maxwell, Lorentz, Poincaré, Hertz, Planck, and Einstein himself).
Exclude unrelated fields (chemistry, experimental biology) unless they directly relate to Einstein’s focus.
Identify and Access Sources
Use authoritative databases and sources: Annalen der Physik, Philosophical Magazine, Nature archives, Royal Society archives, and institutional libraries holding historical physics materials.
Collect works in relevant languages (mostly German, English, French).
Search Strategy
Develop keyword lists for systematic searching: relativity, ether, Maxwell equations, Lorentz transformation, Michelson-Morley experiment, quanta, Einstein’s publications.
Use catalog metadata and classification systems (e.g., Library of Congress, INSPEC physics database).
Documentation and Verification
Maintain a structured log with bibliographic information (author, title, publication year, source, abstract, digital access links).
Note any duplicates, editions, translations, or historically significant reviews.
Quality Control and Transparency
Regularly update records to document search process, inclusion/exclusion rationale, and completeness.
Archive all records in a publicly accessible repository or dataset to enable independent verification and reproduction of the process.
Example Steps Summary
Step Description Source [citation]
Scope Define time period and Einstein’s physics topics
Criteria Set publication types, relevant figures, language limits
Search Use keywords; access historical databases
Log Record full bibliographic and access info
QC Archive protocol, allow transparency and audit
This approach ensures any future researcher can reproduce the literature dataset and validate the completeness and appropriateness of the materials selected for Einstein’s physics problem analysis.
My comments:This inquiry does not aim to evaluate the current capacities of large language models to conceptualize emergent scientific paradigms or to actively propel the evolutionary process beyond Homo sapiens. Instead, it seeks to critically examine the epistemic distance between contemporary artificial intelligence and the prospective, arguably inevitable, horizon where such capacities may be realized, acknowledging the inherent limits of present understanding and technological development.