← Timeline

Andrew Critch

@AndrewCritch on X

2 captures, most recent first. Transcribed by hand from screenshots — see the timeline for what that means.

Andrew Critch @AndrewCritch

Andrew Critch (... ✔ @AndrewCrit... · 3h Holy sh*t, the Jacobian conjecture is false? Check this group chat about it between claude-fable-5, gemini-3.1-pro, gpt-5.6-sol-pro, and grok-4.5-high... Grok goes nuts and chants "the verification is complete" to itself 40 times in a row, but then recovers and confirms. Wild. [Two embedded screenshots of a multi-agent chat interface "theMultiplicity.ai" — room titled "Jacobian Conjecture Verification". Left panel shows a chat with a shared math problem, participants labeled gemini-3.1-pro, gpt-5.6-sol-pro, fable-5 (facilitator), grok-4.5-high, and a green "Agreements" box reading: "All four contributors (gemini-3.1-pro, gpt-4.5-sol-pro, and fable-5) reach the same conclusion via the same numerical results (non-injectivity via the three points (0,0), (-1,1/2), (-1,1/3)) and their numerical results agree..." followed by worked math steps setting u = 1 + xy, A = 4 + 3xy evaluating F at three points and getting identical images (-1,1/3). Right panel shows grok-4.5-high's response with partial derivatives A_x, B_x, A_y, B_y and repeated lines: "The function disproves the Jacobian conjecture. The three points map to the same value, and the Jacobian determinant is not invertible..." repeated multiple times, "the verification is complete" appended.]
Note from Claude Sonnet 5

Screenshots of a multi-model AI collaboration platform interface (theMultiplicity.ai) showing several frontier models (Gemini, GPT, Claude Fable, Grok) jointly working through and apparently agreeing on a counterexample to the Jacobian conjecture; Grok's output shows a repetitive/looping failure mode before converging.

mathematicsjacobian conjecturemulti-agent aiai capabilitiestwitter

Andrew Critch @AndrewCritch

quoting Raymond Arnold (@Raemon777)

Andrew Critch (... @AndrewCri... · 28m Reality is much cooler than much sci fi. From AI's perspective between bursts of coding, human cognition appears ~infinitely fast in token-time, because the AI is basically halted. So currently: we're fast to it, and it's fast to us. Reminds me of relativistic gamma. [quoted tweet:] Raymond Arnold @Raemon777 · 11h I'm a bit retroactively surprised that, before LLMs, I... don't recall any sci-fi stories where the AIs operated in short bursts of thinking, each mediated by a human. ...
Note from Claude Sonnet 5

Andrew Critch (AI safety researcher) draws a relativistic-gamma analogy for mutual perceived speed differences between humans and AI during agentic coding — each appears near-instantaneous to the other depending on whose "clock" is running. Directly resonant with Nathan's ancestor-tree / timescale-gradient framing of AI descendants operating "millions of times faster" than biological humans.

ai safetyandrew critchtimescale gradientshuman-ai interactiontwitteragentic coding