Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

writings.stephenwolfram.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 376 posts

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#241

Post by selimthegrim »

Spinnaker_ wrote: post #186
underdeserver wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sure sounds promising. Lots of things do. This is why we have peer review and standard publishing practices.

This idea never sat right with me. Only one of Einsteins paper's went through the now standard practice, and he was upset that it did. Peer review is useful, but let's not pretend it's the only way forward for a theory of everything. It's a very, very modern practice. We did a lot of great physics before it existed. Nearly everything wolfram does is available to anyone who is interested (including code!).

The reviewer was Tolman (or Robertson I think Tolman), and it was arguably one of his most important ones.

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#242

Post by MichaelBurge »

underdeserver wrote: post #164
m12k wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try reading his one year update instead[1] "But now this deflection is not in physical space but in branchial space. The fundamental underlying mathematical structure is the same in both cases. But the interpretation in terms of traditional physics is different. And in what to me is a singularly beautiful result of our models it turns out that what gives the Einstein equations in physical space gives the Feynman path…

It sure sounds promising. Lots of things do. This is why we have peer review and standard publishing practices.

Peer review is just a heuristic people use to spend time more efficiently: You know that if a paper is peer reviewed, it's more likely to be worthwhile spending time actively engaging with it than if it weren't.

But that's only statistical - if you want to quickly screen thousands of research papers and the only signal you have is peer review and maybe citation graph - and doesn't apply to specific papers or the research program of a specific person.

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#243

Post by [deleted] »

ergonaught wrote: post #185

I’m not hating on the man, as I do not care enough about him or his alleged behaviors or alleged personality traits to hate any of it, but let’s all be honest here and recognize that we’ve reached the “Is it GPT-3 or is it Stephen Wolfram?” singularity. He produces enormous, voluminous, prodigious quantities of words, usually built around a very interesting core prompt, that seem to imply that they may point to somet…

[deleted]

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#244

Post by kemayo »

pmayrgundter wrote: post #227
DantesKite wrote: post #73

Man these are some low-quality comments. You’d think Wolfram was torturing gerbils or something. I don’t mind criticisms of my favorite thinkers. I enjoy watching someone being taken to task in the battle of ideas so to speak, but apparently something about Wolfram just rubs people the wrong way, because they seem to lose the ability to make cogent arguments after reading him. As a simple example of what a healthy di…

Haters gonna hate. I rolled my eyes when I saw this link posted with hundreds of comments, ofc not because of Wolfram but because it's been this reaction for 20 years. People demand mediocrity and are furious when they don't get it.* Projection is a real thing. What's cool about Wolfram is his priority is his work, not peoples' opinions of his work. I know he cares, and sometimes maybe it affects his stance, but he's…

> People demand mediocrity and are furious when they don't get it.

Remember that people have different preferences.

Those objecting to Wolfram tend to be those who appreciate a "quiet confidence" style, which lets your work stand for itself rather than needing you to function as its hype man. To such people, Wolfram's general presentation style reads as puffery-covering-mediocrity -- someone who truly had what he claims wouldn't need to spend so much time talking themself up. (Note that the major point made across much of the criticism of his new science here is, approximately, "I'll believe it when I see it".)

Of course, opinions vary. There are others who think that someone who's great should promote themselves as much as their work deserves, and to them Wolfram is perfectly reasonable.

If you want an example of this divide outside of the science field, look at Trump. Depending on your own preferences, and for similar presentational reasons as Wolfram, he either reads as a tough and competent man or as wildly insecure.

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#245

Post by [deleted] »

tokai wrote: post #120

It's interesting with the sycophant outrage over criticism of Wolfram. With arguments ala "criticise his work not his person". But if you actually follow his work (scientific work, not his business) it is clear that there is a lot to critique, but not in a useful sense. Scholarly reviews of A New Kind of Science were universally negative. The usefulness of what he proposes is doubtful and it is unoriginal. He is unab…

[deleted]

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#246

Post by [deleted] »

DantesKite wrote: post #73

Man these are some low-quality comments. You’d think Wolfram was torturing gerbils or something. I don’t mind criticisms of my favorite thinkers. I enjoy watching someone being taken to task in the battle of ideas so to speak, but apparently something about Wolfram just rubs people the wrong way, because they seem to lose the ability to make cogent arguments after reading him. As a simple example of what a healthy di…

[deleted]

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#247

Post by emteycz »

noizejoy wrote: post #78

Could be a fun ask HN: What would happen if Mr. Wolfram and Mr. Musk would have to share the same room for a while?

Tesla Model W would lift-off from that building after a short while.

But seriously - I think they'd find a common language. Both are set in their ways and these ways are far from each other, but I don't think they'd fight, verbally or not.

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#248

Post by tom-thistime »

DantesKite wrote: post #73

Man these are some low-quality comments. You’d think Wolfram was torturing gerbils or something. I don’t mind criticisms of my favorite thinkers. I enjoy watching someone being taken to task in the battle of ideas so to speak, but apparently something about Wolfram just rubs people the wrong way, because they seem to lose the ability to make cogent arguments after reading him. As a simple example of what a healthy di…

If you want to talk about Wolfram's physics, please do.

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#249

Post by sjg007 »

NumberCruncher wrote: post #10

Either he is onto something or not, but his ego is going to scare any sane person away.

You have to be a little crazy to work on something this ambitious for any length of time because it is not mainstream and probably hard to get grants for in the traditional sense.

DNNs faced and still face enormous criticism from statisticians, mathematicians and it was only after proof of their utility that academics could no longer ignore them.

Re: We’ve got a science opportunity overload: Launching the Wolfram Institute

#250

Post by sjg007 »

peterweyand0 wrote: post #122

The idea that cellular automaton can form a foundation for physics that mathematics can't seems incredibly unlikely. Mathematica is a useful program, but his claims are a bit over the top compared to the critiques from fellow scientists.

Well all CAs are math so I am not sure what you mean here. CAs are basically state space in time models that may exhibit some general predictable behaviors that can be described by math.
Post reply on HN