Like there are literally stacks of papers in the computer graphics literature that have precisely these kinds of algorithms their proposing here. We've done this, done this, done this, and done it again over and over. What is the actual contribution supposed to be here?
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've read it too and it appears to be mostly hot air. It is mostly a proto-hypothesis based on the ideas of Wolfram's causal graph research without it having much truth to it. He just wants a Theory of Everything to be automata described by logical rules w/ context-free grammar.
-
He does give analogies of what difference components could be, such as time, space, energy, momentum, but it doesn't seem to be _the_ things themselves. He does just admit that he hasn't got the rules yet and his proto-hypothesis heavily relies upon it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's neat and it might pose some interesting restrictions on the space of solutions in other theories?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/171/ Like, the maths looks neat, but there's a lot of neat maths. I don't really see why I should believe this has a greater connection to physics than Conway's Game of Life has to real life.
-
Yeah exactly. Speaking of which, you reminded me of this William Poundstone book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Recursive-Universe-Complexity-Scientific-Knowledge/dp/048649098X … No grand claims about fundamentals of the universe, but an enjoyable foray in Game of Life, Turing machines, physics, FWIROI.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It sounds like PuzzleScript for universes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
so let me get this straight. he's claiming that all the properties of the universe are an emergent result of applying some kind of small rule on graphs over and over again, on the order of 10^500 times.
-
and proves this by comparing it to what happens on scales of ~10^1
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Wolfram's syllogism: Automata make complicated things. Physics is a complicated thing. Therefore automata make physics.
-
To be a little more fair, Wolfram's actual contribution here is that some automata have rules that preserve invariants, akin to conservation laws/invariants in physics.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.