3 ms·

Are you sure? Because https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2020/04/finally-we-may-have-a-path-to-the-fundamental-theory-of-physics-and-its-beautiful/ https://wri

by WJW 6y ago

Are you sure? Because https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2020/04/finally-we-may-have-a-path-to-the-fundamental-theory-of-physics-and-its-beautiful/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2020/04/finally-we-may-h... definitely implies that he believes his "hypergraph with update rules" model is how the universe actually works and what remains is to find the particular structure and update rules that describe our own universe. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very interesting model that is quite flexible and could be used for a great many things. But if we're moving the goalposts from "can we go faster than the speed of light in our own universe" to "can we go faster than the speed of light in a universe I constructed from arbitrary rules" then the result becomes much less interesting.

BobbyJo 6y ago
It'd be weird if the guy forwarding a theory didn't believe in it. An I think there is room in between believing a framework can explain things and believing it is.
outworlder 6y ago
> definitely implies that he believes his "hypergraph with update rules" model is how the universe actually works and what remains is to find the particular structure and update rules that describe our own universe. This goes back to his obsession with cellular automata. There's an outstanding amount of references to "I" in your link. Great works of science usually reference the works of others...
uoaei 6y ago
It makes sense that the first steps toward developing a sufficiently robust theory is making sure your model can recreate the various phenomena that you are interested in modelling, no? The goal is to get to a theory that reflects the behavior of the universe, and figuring out how to emulate the various idiosyncracies inherent in how the universe evolves over time (finite speed of information propagation, etc.). Finding testable aspects of the model is only possible after actually applying the theory, seeing where it falls short, and identifying ways to validate ambiguous conclusions.

by WJW 6y ago

BobbyJo 6y ago

It'd be weird if the guy forwarding a theory didn't believe in it. An I think there is room in between believing a framework can explain things and believing it is.

outworlder 6y ago

> definitely implies that he believes his "hypergraph with update rules" model is how the universe actually works and what remains is to find the particular structure and update rules that describe our own universe. This goes back to his obsession with cellular automata. There's an outstanding amount of references to "I" in your link. Great works of science usually reference the works of others...

uoaei 6y ago

It makes sense that the first steps toward developing a sufficiently robust theory is making sure your model can recreate the various phenomena that you are interested in modelling, no? The goal is to get to a theory that reflects the behavior of the universe, and figuring out how to emulate the various idiosyncracies inherent in how the universe evolves over time (finite speed of information propagation, etc.). Finding testable aspects of the model is only possible after actually applying the theory, seeing where it falls short, and identifying ways to validate ambiguous conclusions.