SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Stephen Wolfram thinks he may have found the theory that unifies physics: it's basically automata theory. According to his theory, the universe is basically an automaton running a simple set of computational rules. The link leads to his layman's summary of the work.
Even if this isn't how things work, it lends a completely new perspective: based on a relatively simple analysis of his idea, he derives the basics of relativity and quantum mechanics. His article makes for a mind-bending and fascinating read, but it's already a summary, and trying to do a summary of a summary here makes little sense. If you're into physics, mathematics or cosmology, have a look!
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Stephen Wolfram: The Universe Runs on Automata Theory
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 76 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Grelb's Reminder:
Eighty percent of all people consider themselves to be above
average drivers.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Thursday April 16 2020, @07:05PM (3 children)
Well I'd say the traditionalist is you. Why should a universe modelable by set of rules A need a creator more than a universe modelable by set of rules B? The very argument that the universe is designed vs the universe behaves this way because of necessity based on some characteristics is entirely bogus because "necessity" is a concept defined by the behavior of the universe itself. The gulf between reality and the rules governing it is the same gulf between the output of a program and its code. You can reverse engineer the output to some code but you have no way of knowing whatever was the original one. It's the same gulf between a videogame world and the pc it is running in, between a dream and a dreamer.
So, your clinging to a purely functional description of the universe, without states, which is already, even if not finally, compromised by the impossibility of modelling quantum scale interaction without resorting to probability (goodbye clockwork universe), denotes an irrational fear of alternative models.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday April 17 2020, @04:03AM (1 child)
I don't think you really read what I posted. Maybe my use of "God word" threw you off. I think too many people, though brilliant, make assumptions based religious traditions. Perhaps you jumped to the confusion that because I threw in the loaded "God" word that I was espousing a religious theme to the study of physical science.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2020, @12:57AM
Who modded you up!?
Nowhere in Wolfram does he invoke a creator or greater entity our outside-of-ours existence.
Go read what he's publicly put out, and comment intelligently on it if you want. Stop bullshitting about things you have zero clue about. Your ignorance is showing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 17 2020, @06:52AM
While it seems very smart to deny that you can understand the stuff which you are made out of, there is no actual rule saying you can't. So why don't you stuff your metaphysics in your metaphorical.