2 ms·
I've felt exactly like this about NKS. I have tried many times to understand it, but I come up empty. Half the time I think "well, maybe IT IS just nonsense?" a
by ChicagoBoy11 4y ago
I've felt exactly like this about NKS. I have tried many times to understand it, but I come up empty. Half the time I think "well, maybe IT IS just nonsense?" and half the time I think I'm probably just not mentally sharp enough to get it. But I try every couple years or so, but the activity has yielded little more than being a paperweight in my house and a quiet exercise in looking at pretty pictures for me.
- kzrdude 4y agoI wonder what the second-hand value of that brick is. It's the only hope I have for that one.
- lupire 4y agoNKS isn't a new kind of science, but it's not nonsense. It's a poorly cited thorough monograph on cellular automata.
- cromwellian 4y agoHonestly I wouldn't put NKS in the same level as TAoCP. NKS is way more experimental, TAoCP is more of a survey of the entire field. NKS is mostly analyzing the results of his experiments, TAoCP is more about the complexity analysis and proofs of the various algorithms. Also, there couldn't be a bigger contrast between Stephen Wolfram and Donald Knuth. Knuth rightly should have a big ego, but he is a very humble, generous man. Wolfram seems to have a chip on his shoulder, fights with other academics, seems to want to be given credit for being "first!" on things. I love Mathematica, but Wolfram himself is a controversial figure who often gets in the way of his own work.