I simulated Albert Einstein with GPT-3. The best that I could. Here is the conversation we had. I have edited some stuff, I did not include anything, but all quite was fun.
Me: What is spacetime?
Einstein: Space-time is the four-dimensional fabric of the universe. It is
made up of three spatial dimensions and one temporal dimension.
Me: Why do you think spacetime is important?
Einstein: I think spacetime is important because it allows us to explain the
large scale structure of the universe.
Me: What is the general theory of relativity?
Einstein: Theory of general relativity is a geometric theory of gravitation
that explains the force of gravity as due to curvature in spacetime.
Me: Could you think of a larger dimensional spacetime?
Einstein: It is hard to imagine a spacetime with more than four dimensions.
Me: What do you think of Poincare invariance?
Einstein: Poincare invariance is a symmetry of the laws of physics.
Me: Do you think our universe is symmetrical?
Einstein: I think that the universe is approximately symmetric, but I do not believe it is exactly symmetric.
Me: What is your view on quantum theory?
Einstein: I do not like quantum theory. I think that it is fundamentally incomplete, and I have a variety of objections to the standard interpretation of wavefunctions.
Me: Ok, why it is incomplete?
Einstein: I think that quantum theory is fundamentally incomplete because it does not include a dynamical spacetime.
Me: What do you mean by dynamical spacetime?
Einstein: A dynamical spacetime is a spacetime that evolves in time.
Me: So, you wrote a paper EPR. Was it because you think quantum mechanics is incomplete?
Einstein: Yes, I, Podolsky, and Rosen wrote a paper EPR because we wanted to point out that quantum mechanics was incomplete and need modifications.
Me: Did you read the Bell's paper comment on your paper?
Einstein: I did.
Me: Why you were searching for unified theories?
Einstein: I was trying to find a unified theory because I thought that the fundamental laws of physics were not fully understood.
Me: What do you think of the 2+0 gravity and Kaluza-Klein model?
Einstein: I think both are interesting and do not describe the real world.
Me: What do you think of free will?
Einstein: I do not believe in free will.
Me: What do you think of string theory?
(There was not any reply here)
I will only say about the EPR paradox. I think it does not exist.
This is usually described as follows:
Two particles with a complete zero momentum are considered that fly away from each other a sufficient distance so that they cannot interact. For one particle, the coordinate is measured, and for another momentum. Then, as E., P., and R. thought, for the second particle both the momentum and the coordinate will be accurately measured, which is impossible.
That is, they assumed that measuring the coordinates of the first particle would give us knowledge about the coordinate of the second particle.
In my opinion, this is not true. I offer a very simple experience (it was probably done a long time ago). On the path of these two particles with zero total momentum, we put two screens (detectors). Let the first particle get to point A, and the second to point B. We connect A and B by a straight line. Question: Will this line go through the point where the particles flew from? In the case of billiard balls, it would be. My statement: for microparticles it is not.
Me: What do you think of Poincare invariance?
Einstein: Poincare invariance is a symmetry of the laws of physics.
----------------
I think here Einstein was wrong: a symmetry of the laws of physics is a wider conformal group.
Yes, Lev. I agree conformal group is a much wider symmetry. But I do not think that conformal group was exploited despite the hints at Einstein's time. It was extensively used later in condensed matter and high energy physics.
how do you simulate it?
Please see my article `The True Geometry of Nature (Hypothesis)`
https://vixra.org/abs/1804.0311
What do you think about EPR?