False positives do happen, but the style of the article raises some &quot;crank&quot; red flags.<p>- Doesn&#x27;t get to the point until about halfway through<p>- Repeatedly mentions Einstein<p>- Appeals to quantum mechanics out of nowhere<p>The style is particularly hard to parse (or I&#x27;m particularly dense, but I am generally comfortable reading papers on variational inference, neural networks, etc). At the same time, a lot of it rings true-ish... Does anyone get where they&#x27;re going with this?