SciPhysicsForums.com

Dedicated to the sci.physics.* UseNet groups of yesteryear

Skip to content

Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by FrediFizzx » Wed May 06, 2020 11:52 am

jreed wrote:I purchased "A New Kind of Science", and read part of it. It seemed like a simple idea, involving a massive amount of computation with one dimensional cellular automata. This had been done before by other researchers, but not publicized to this extent. I think the best description of it I saw was someone said it would be a good high school science fair project. I didn't get very far into the book, but still have it. This new theory seems like just an application of it.

Probably somewhat the right approach but with the wrong "points". The "points" are probably more point-like near Planck length and might be 7-spheres. So you need what the interactions between 7-spheres might be.
.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by jreed » Wed May 06, 2020 10:00 am

I purchased "A New Kind of Science", and read part of it. It seemed like a simple idea, involving a massive amount of computation with one dimensional cellular automata. This had been done before by other researchers, but not publicized to this extent. I think the best description of it I saw was someone said it would be a good high school science fair project. I didn't get very far into the book, but still have it. This new theory seems like just an application of it.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Joy Christian » Wed May 06, 2020 9:30 am

***

Physicists Criticize Stephen Wolfram’s ‘Theory of Everything’: https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... verything/.

***

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by JohnDuffield » Sun May 03, 2020 7:54 am

FrediFizzx wrote:John, well that is disappointing. I was curious as to what you found promising initially.
.
It was starting with simplicity, asking the question What is space? and appreciating that energy is real.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by FrediFizzx » Fri May 01, 2020 1:27 pm

John, well that is disappointing. I was curious as to what you found promising initially.
.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by JohnDuffield » Fri May 01, 2020 10:06 am

No Fred. Sorry, but I'm not spending any more time on this. I sent an email saying hello and got back a stock reply saying "we don't expect to allocate time to studying alternative theories". Alternative theories! When I'm the guy who's read the Einstein digital papers, and all the stuff by Schrodinger, Darwin, Born, Infeld, Maxwell, and others. They also said this: "If you think that your work directly informs what we're doing (e.g. maybe it gives us deeper mathematical insight into the limiting structure of the multiway causal graph, perhaps it provides us with a more precise understanding of the correspondence between our models and the holographic principle...". The holographic principle! I really do not take kindly to getting the brush-off from quacks. I started to formulate a reply, then thought, no, I'm not helping these people.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by FrediFizzx » Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:56 am

JohnDuffield wrote:I was just reading Wolfram's article. I thought some aspects of it were promising. There were other aspects of it that I thought were going in the wrong direction, but nevermind. That can be fixed. What's nice to see is a guy putting it out there.

John, can you please give us a couple of the aspects you found promising and some that are the wrong direction? Thanks.
.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by JohnDuffield » Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:53 am

I was just reading Wolfram's article. I thought some aspects of it were promising. There were other aspects of it that I thought were going in the wrong direction, but nevermind. That can be fixed. What's nice to see is a guy putting it out there.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by FrediFizzx » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:34 am

Guys, still off topic here. This thread is about Wolfram's ideas. Talk about that please.
.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Joy Christian » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:29 am

gill1109 wrote:
They had computer programs written by Luigi's student Massimo Regoli, which simulated violation of Bell's inequality using the most incredible tricks, for instance by multiplying Alice's outcomes by sqrt 2.

That is much more honest than the bait-and-switch trick your experimentalist friends use to "violate" Bell inequalities. Anyone who claims that a mathematical inequality is violated by something should be stripped off their high school diploma. That includes you and your experimentalist friends.

***

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by gill1109 » Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:35 am

Heinera wrote:
Joy Christian wrote: But Bell's theorem has no scientific merit whatsoever. It is merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system, as several people have repeatedly demonstrated in this forum.

According to the postmodernists and the school of social constructionism, all of physics is "merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system."

But you can make good hard cash by selling people quantum computers and quantum cryptography. Luigi Accardi was doing that in Japan 15 years ago, in a collaboration with a Japanese professor who travelled everywhere with a little Japanese PhD student, who carried his laptop and stuff like that. They had computer programs written by Luigi's student Massimo Regoli, which simulated violation of Bell's inequality using the most incredible tricks, for instance by multiplying Alice's outcomes by sqrt 2. Luigi always had some story about cross-sections and particle physics, this was how all the real physicists do it, so he was allowed to do it too. He had a portrait of Kolmogorov on his desk and claimed to be one of Kolmogorov's PhD students. It is true that as a Marxist student he had spent some time in Moscow. As a Marxist professor he and his wife had a Philippine live-in household-help who cooked lovely dinners for them and their guest (me). Because Luigi had quarrelled with all the other professors in Rome they had given him his own institute in one of the most peripheral Rome universities. I visited him there, he was the only person in the whole institute. It reminded me of one of those new neighbourhoods in "La Dolce Vita". Nothing was finished. The roads and paths didn't link up. You had to walk a huge distance from a metro station, largely through a random mixture of fields and building sites, to get there. Later, I had similar travel experiences visiting Mauro d'Ariano in Pavia.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Joy Christian » Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:15 am

Heinera wrote:
Joy Christian wrote: But Bell's theorem has no scientific merit whatsoever. It is merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system, as several people have repeatedly demonstrated in this forum.
***

According to the postmodernists and the school of social constructionism, all of physics is "merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system."

And Bell's theorem, in particular, is a spectacular example of that. :)

***

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Heinera » Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:52 am

Joy Christian wrote: But Bell's theorem has no scientific merit whatsoever. It is merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system, as several people have repeatedly demonstrated in this forum.
***

According to the postmodernists and the school of social constructionism, all of physics is "merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system."

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Joy Christian » Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:30 am

gill1109 wrote:
Joy Christian wrote:
FrediFizzx wrote:Ok guys, let's get back on-topic here.

Getting back on-topic, Heinera started this thread to point out that in 2002 Aaronson criticized Wolfram's "New Kind of Science" invoking Bell's theorem. But Bell's theorem has no scientific merit whatsoever. It is merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system, as several people have repeatedly demonstrated in this forum. In particular, in his argument Bell made the same silly mistake he ridiculed von Neumann for making, as I have demonstrated elsewhere: https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.02876. Sooner or later this paper will be published in a journal.

I hope so! Nobody should be censored. The debate about these matters goes on, decade after decade. Each new generation has to learn anew.

I am always amused by ventriloquy.

***

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by gill1109 » Mon Apr 27, 2020 11:40 pm

Joy Christian wrote:
FrediFizzx wrote:Ok guys, let's get back on-topic here.

Getting back on-topic, Heinera started this thread to point out that in 2002 Aaronson criticized Wolfram's "New Kind of Science" invoking Bell's theorem. But Bell's theorem has no scientific merit whatsoever. It is merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system, as several people have repeatedly demonstrated in this forum. In particular, in his argument Bell made the same silly mistake he ridiculed von Neumann for making, as I have demonstrated elsewhere: https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.02876. Sooner or later this paper will be published in a journal.

I hope so! Nobody should be censored. The debate about these matters goes on, decade after decade. Each new generation has to learn anew.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Joy Christian » Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:02 pm

FrediFizzx wrote:Ok guys, let's get back on-topic here.

Getting back on-topic, Heinera started this thread to point out that in 2002 Aaronson criticized Wolfram's "New Kind of Science" invoking Bell's theorem. But Bell's theorem has no scientific merit whatsoever. It is merely a politically and sociologically sustained belief system, as several people have repeatedly demonstrated in this forum. In particular, in his argument Bell made the same silly mistake he ridiculed von Neumann for making, as I have demonstrated elsewhere: https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.02876. Sooner or later this paper will be published in a journal.

***

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by FrediFizzx » Mon Apr 27, 2020 10:24 am

Ok guys, let's get back on-topic here.
.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by gill1109 » Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:55 am

Joy Christian wrote:
Joy Christian wrote:
Yes, we live in a world dictated by the rich and powerful elite even within the sciences.

I, of course, don't have that kind of money. Fortunately, I did not have to pay fees for any of my peer-reviewed publications. I received 100% exemption from both RSOS and IEEE Access.

gill1109 wrote:
You clearly have a friend among the rich and powerful.

I do not have any rich friends --- not one. Rich at heart maybe, but not rich with money.

I used to have one powerful friend, Abner Shimony, but he is no more.

I have another powerful friend, Lucien Hardy, but he is so committed to nonlocality that he does not like my criticisms of Bell's theorem.

gill1109 wrote:
I'm glad for you, since I was glad that these works got published

You are clearly lying. All you have done for the past eight years is to wrongly criticize my work and block it from being published in every which way possible, breaking all norms of decency.

***

I'm not lying. I'm committed to truth and to justice. I criticise your work "in good faith". Of course, I might be wrong, I'm not infallible. But I bare you no ill will. IN fact I'm grateful for you being the "sparring partner" which you have been, and I hope will remain. You have been a great stimulus, a great inspiration, for my own work.

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by Joy Christian » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:31 pm

Joy Christian wrote:
Yes, we live in a world dictated by the rich and powerful elite even within the sciences.

I, of course, don't have that kind of money. Fortunately, I did not have to pay fees for any of my peer-reviewed publications. I received 100% exemption from both RSOS and IEEE Access.

gill1109 wrote:
You clearly have a friend among the rich and powerful.

I do not have any rich friends --- not one. Rich at heart maybe, but not rich with money.

I used to have one powerful friend, Abner Shimony, but he is no more.

I have another powerful friend, Lucien Hardy, but he is so committed to nonlocality that he does not like my criticisms of Bell's theorem.

gill1109 wrote:
I'm glad for you, since I was glad that these works got published

You are clearly lying. All you have done for the past eight years is to wrongly criticize my work and block it from being published in every which way possible, breaking all norms of decency.

***

Re: Stephen Wolfram's new theory of everything

Post by gill1109 » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:27 pm

Joy Christian wrote:
Heinera wrote:
Joy Christian wrote:Is Wolfram's model published in a peer-reviewed journal? Rightly or wrongly, peer-reviewed publications are taken to be the gold standard of acceptability by the scientific community.

***

Who needs peer review when you've got his kind of money?

I'm sure that when his new book comes out in May there will be a lot of reviews by peers.

Yes, we live in a world dictated by the rich and powerful elite even within the sciences.

I, of course, don't have that kind of money. Fortunately, I did not have to pay fees for any of my peer-reviewed publications. I received 100% exemption from both RSOS and IEEE Access.

***

You clearly have a friend among the rich and powerful. I'm glad for you, since I was glad that these works got published

Top

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library