The Wolfram Physics Project • Hacker News Board

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#171

Post by SkyMarshal » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:32 PM UTC

covidacct wrote: post #27

After a few iterations, I think I understand the point of this piece. It was a bit difficult to hone in on, though. The article suggests that working out the theory of something like rule production systems, and then figuring out how that theory relates to existing insights from physics, is the best path toward a Fundamental Theory of Physics. My primary source of skepticism stems from the fact that the theory of rul…

>For example, his "emulation cones" are a new name for a very old and extremely well-studied idea. The term "rulial space", similarly, is a new name for an idea that's well-developed in programming language theory.

What are the old names for these ideas?

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#172

Post by _jal » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:36 PM UTC

TrainedMonkey wrote: post #146

Incorrect predictions are all the rage nowadays, so here is mine: they will find an infinite amount of rule sets that could be the fundamental theory. However, none of it would be testable, so people would pick their own based on their notion of simplicity and beauty. Eventually people would start looking into common properties of the candidate solutions and transformations between them.

Take it further - eventually we will have conceptual physicists whose output is judged on purely aesthetic grounds, and rich people will collect them.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#173

Post by jonathan_gorard » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:36 PM UTC

9q9 wrote: post #159

jonathan_gorard wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our preprints are currently in peer review (for different journals, I should add). Nothing terrible has happened yet.

Why didn't you wait with the announcements until after the pre-prints were accepted by reputable journals?

It's relatively common practice in academia to make announcements about results while they're still in pre-print form (particularly given how slow the peer review process is for some journals).

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#174

Post by mellosouls » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:37 PM UTC

hobofan wrote: post #84

undefined1 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

N'ah. It's good that folks like Wolfram and Eric Weinstein are taking a different path. Sometimes that's what it takes for new breakthroughs to emerge. If nothing else it could spark new ideas or invigorate others to take bolder approaches and move outside their comfort zone.

What path is Eric Weinstein taking? I've heard about him for the first time yesterday, when a section of his appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast was linked, where he talked much too confidently about a subject he probably shouldn't.

Weinstein rented a room in an Oxbridge college to lecture on his theory of everything.

His recent campaign was for his brother who he feels was badly mistreated by a Nobel laureate who he alleges failed to credit him for important related work.

You can hear the latter case on a recent edition of his podcast, The Portal.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#175

Post by knzhou » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:43 PM UTC

jonathan_gorard wrote: post #173

9q9 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why didn't you wait with the announcements until after the pre-prints were accepted by reputable journals?

It's relatively common practice in academia to make announcements about results while they're still in pre-print form (particularly given how slow the peer review process is for some journals).

It's common practice to "announce" in the sense that you email colleagues about it and give seminars. It's not common practice to do a press blitz, solely directed at an audience that will be unable to criticize it.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#176

Post by Koshkin » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:43 PM UTC

Well, phenomena analogous to what is described by quantum mechanics, for example, have been found in physics of solids (e.g. phonons). Shouldn't be surprising, then, that such a universal and rather abstract structure as a graph (especially if you allow to 'update' it) can be made to reflect some aspects of physical reality. Computations are computations, whichever way you approach them. Classical electrodynamics, too, has several equivalent formulations (with the tensorial notation being pretty "graphical" IMHO), and some people do like to create a fuss around particular ones, but that ain't nothing we haven't seen before. What is important, though, is to always make a distinction between a model and the real thing: it wouldn't make sense to say that spacetime is some kind of a graph. (Or would it?)

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#177

Post by 9q9 » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

jonathan_gorard wrote: post #173

9q9 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why didn't you wait with the announcements until after the pre-prints were accepted by reputable journals?

It's relatively common practice in academia to make announcements about results while they're still in pre-print form (particularly given how slow the peer review process is for some journals).

I've never announced my papers before they were accepted by a conference or journal (other than putting them on arXiv). I would certainly not let my university's press office mention my work if it was not fully peer reviewed. I've never seen this from my colleagues either.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#178

Post by jjoonathan » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

gfodor wrote: post #96

jjoonathan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His self-promotional patter is so simple and consistent you can train half-convincing markov models on it; clearly he could intellectually understand the problem and tone it down a notch or five if he wanted to. He doesn't, and IMO that makes him responsible.

You literally are illustrating my point. He clearly doesn't. Motives unknown. Could be a personality disorder. In any case, rational people ought to just get over it.

No, I don't think I am.

> he simply cannot recognize these political concerns.

I'm saying that he clearly can, but he chooses not to.

If by "getting over it" you mean passing judgement and moving on to the theory itself, which is new and worth some thought & discussion, agreed 100%.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#179

Post by craftinator » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:48 PM UTC

9q9 wrote: post #159

jonathan_gorard wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our preprints are currently in peer review (for different journals, I should add). Nothing terrible has happened yet.

Why didn't you wait with the announcements until after the pre-prints were accepted by reputable journals?

I forget what kind of fallacy you're arguing, but it's definitely a fallacy of some sort.

Re: The Wolfram Physics Project

#180

Post by ur-whale » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 7:52 PM UTC

Octopodes wrote: post #95

sixo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside: let's put "worthy of a mandarin" away forever

I've never heard the expression before. Could someone explain its meaning please?

>Could someone explain its meaning please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(bureaucrat)