The Wolfram Physics Project • Hacker News Board

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#11

Post by floatingatoll » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:11 PM UTC

Wolfram’s header image apart from the article is available in light and dark variants that can be pinch-zoomed more easily:

http://www.wolframphysics.org/visual-summary/

Based on this image alone, having not yet read the article, it looks like he’s taken his prior insights on cellular automata (Conway’s Game type stuff) and advanced them forward to quarks and Feynman diagrams.

I typically have a very rough time with Wolfram’s writing but the image is, at least, simple enough to follow. “What are the rules for particle timeflows?” is certainly a question that’s interesting though my phrasing is probably terrible.

EDIT: Yup, it’s definitely quarks X cellular automata. Clearly an extension of previous Wolfram work, still just as enthusiastic / savior-ish as ever. I hope it pans out somehow in pragmatic real world outcomes someday. Bonus link to diagram showing a fate decision tree behaving like a Conway glider:

https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/data/uploads/2020/04/040...

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#12

Post by jjoonathan » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:12 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #8

caleb-allen wrote: post #4

If I have to read through so much of the article context disguised as bragging without anything resembling something new then maybe this Fundamental Theory is less important than Stephen Wolfram showing how many Important Things he's done

That is the reason we love Stephen Wolfram.

Stephen Wolfram: his physics might be completely unproven, but his blog posts stand as conclusive evidence that shameless self-promotion has no upper bound.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#13

Post by jjoonathan » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:14 PM UTC

ddevault wrote: post #6

Wow, this is... the worst. This is the most egregious clickbait I've seen on HN in a long time.

That's Stephen Wolfram for you.

He's genuinely smart and genuinely looking into an underexplored branch of theory with tons of upside potential, but he also does... this sort of thing, all the time.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#14

Post by Y_Y » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:15 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #10

tannhauser23 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be true, but science is full of pompous, self-indulgent men who make brilliant discoveries. Of course, science is also littered with cranks who make grandiose claims of discovery - especially in physics. Curious to hear what people who actually study this stuff think about this supposedly discovery.

The thing is, Wolfram earned his stripes as a very competent physics prodigy, and is clearly very, very smart. But as far as I can tell, no one studies this stuff except him and hist acolytes and I think few established physicists would be inclined too, so it's very difficult to evaluate his ideas. Is he a crank? For a classic definition of crank, no. Does this work represent a clearer understanding of physics than w…

He was smart enough to package up a Lisp computer algebra system (CAS) and sell it all over the place.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#15

Post by gunshai » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:19 PM UTC

caleb-allen wrote: post #4

If I have to read through so much of the article context disguised as bragging without anything resembling something new then maybe this Fundamental Theory is less important than Stephen Wolfram showing how many Important Things he's done

Through the grape vine I've heard this is "very much like Stephen Wolfram"

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#16

Post by ForHackernews » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:20 PM UTC

caleb-allen wrote: post #4

If I have to read through so much of the article context disguised as bragging without anything resembling something new then maybe this Fundamental Theory is less important than Stephen Wolfram showing how many Important Things he's done

Relevant: http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/

"A New Kind of Science: A Rare Blend of Monster Raving Egomania and Utter Batshit Insanity" (2002)

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#17

Post by verytrivial » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:22 PM UTC

I can't tell if this is real or the output of a neural network trained on Mr Wolfram's corpus of bloviation.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#18

Post by zerobits » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:22 PM UTC

Despite 80% of comments focusing on Wolfram's pompousness, this is an interesting expansion of cellular automata to arbitrary dimensions.

Coincidental timing of publication - one day after John Conway's passing. We may be in a n-dimensional Game of Life after all.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#19

Post by MengerSponge » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:22 PM UTC

teh_g wrote: post #2

The phrase 'a new kind of science' is a huge red flag, but apart from this I don't think I can evaluate what I'm reading. Does the article make any sense? Does it at least hint at a useful direction? Or is this a case of someone holding a hammer (the language) and seeing everything as a nail (how the universe works)?

It doesn't pass the smell test. I'll be very diplomatic and say this to our high school and undergrad readers: Mathematica is a lovely program, but working for this man on this project will not do good things for your scientific career.

Among the many many many red flags, Wolfram claims to have discovered that complexity can emerge from simple rules in the early 80's. This is a full decade after P. W. Anderson's seminal paper [More is Different](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/177/4047/393).

In fact, if you haven't RTFA yet, save your time and just read the original, rigorous, less self-aggrandizing paper: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/177/4047/393

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#20

Post by smoyer » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 3:23 PM UTC

I am not a physicist but as a layman there are two interesting things that my mind (which admittedly finds connections in things that others don't) thought of while reading the article:

1) Conway has obviously been in the news recently (RIP) and there have been quite a few articles talking about his "Game of Life". The fact that complex patterns emerge from three basic rules seems eerily similar to what Wolfram is now describing. Of course, computational power is now to the point where you can run many more games that we could the first time I entered the program into my Z80-based machine.

2) There's also been a lot of discussion the last couple years about whether we're living in a simulation. With Wolfram performing "zillions" of operations, could it be that there's actually someone living inside his computer wondering the same thing? As we progress in our computing ability, could this happen in the future? If we ourselves are living in a simulation, could those simulating us also be living in a simulation? Is it also turtles all the way up?