Dang, I’d say it’s relevant because the actual article contains complaints from Wolfram as well as bashing the concept peer reviews. There’s a similar issue wi

Dang, I’d say it’s relevant because the actual article contains complaints from Wolfram as well as bashing the concept peer reviews. There’s a similar issue with the ABC conjecture proof. You just can’t dump your magnus opus on the scientific academic community and then expect everyone to realize your genius and rubber stamp it. Peer review is at the core of science. Whatever value Wolfram’s theory has, until it can move from backpatching and curve fitting into making testable predictions, then it will, like string theory, remain in the realm of pure mathematical model and as you may know there’s a nigh infinite number of parameterizable models you can fit, but if they don’t make any new predictions, there’s no reason to adopt them.