3 ms·
I thought A New Kind of Science was wonderful. It's a deep dive into cellular automata by a very creative, systematic and productive mind. He doesn't succeed in
by hirundo 8y ago
I thought A New Kind of Science was wonderful. It's a deep dive into cellular automata by a very creative, systematic and productive mind. He doesn't succeed in remaking physics with these models, but he does succeed in demonstrating that the natural world is full of vast computational potential that emerges everywhere from simple interactions. It's a vision of an awesomely fecund ordinary reality.
- dmos62 8y agoI loved the book as well. I found it exceptionally well written, researched. The content was eye-opening and the author was . This is the first I notice that there's so much discontent with it. I'm not sure where it's coming from. Edit: actually, I'm understating things. I found not only his central ideas very noteworthy, but how he managed to portray the historical development of mainstream science as largely random (as opposed to the, now silly, idea I may have had that today's science is somehow "optimal") was great and a positive influence on my outlooks, I'd say.
- Retra 8y agoI think a lot of the discontent is that (reportedly, I have not read it) he seems to present the material as 1. largely his original work, and 2. revolutionary, while the ideas may be interesting and well presented, neither of those things are actually true.