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This discussion has been archived.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.
If bankers can count, how come they have eight windows and only four tellers?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by choose another one on Thursday April 16 2020, @09:55PM (1 child)
There is a throwaway comment in TFA about testable "bizarre new things that might be out there to look for".
Thing is though, if I understand it correctly, he doesn't have "a" model for the universe but rather a class of models, or more likely many many possible classes, so a prediction that is experimentally testable doesn't really get you very far, you just proved that the universe might be based on a model from a set of classes of models, but finding which one will take so long the universe will have moved on (or died).
If you start from "not only does God play dice, but... he sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen", then this might, eventually, prove that God is using 64 sided dice - but we can't know how many or where she's throwing them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2020, @01:10AM
He doesn't even have a class of models.[*]
What he has, is a framework in which to analyze the emergent properties of simple (hyper)graph rules. Mostly very simple (hyper)graph rules.
Why is this interesting? Because some rulesets produce networks which have properties which are spacelike, or spacetimelike.
Imagine discovering the tools of algebra and calculus, and throwing some functions, eg. describing slopes, at them, and noticing that some of the results seemed to match observations of balls rolling on slopes. Wouldn't this profoundly indicate that there's some way to apply those tools to real-world data predictively? That the systems described using the notation and cognitive framework of the tools might therefore in some way also describe the nature of reality?
Wolfram thinks he's found another mathematical perspective which might, in time, give us results in the same way as how we can derive systems using arithmetic and calculus which accurately-ish describe the world. His model uses very few axioms and, to translate to the physical world, maybe 2-3 assumptions (kinda like how we assume space and mass can be measured in some way, in order to get F=mv^2, impossible to tie abstract math to concrete world without at least one such), so it won't be able to provide any results which conventional mathematical tools cannot. BUT the efficiency of both solution-finding and solution-evaluating can be MUCH easier with the right tools, and this particular set of 'field glasses', he believes, might be productive.
Get it?
[*] ok fine he provides some example models and classifies them in a few ways eg. by dimensionality, but he provides those as didactic tools not as physical approximators.