Some aspects of the project do not specifically require physics knowledge. If the “standard formalism of physics” “just defines” , so does Wolfram. What background do I need to understand what you’re doing? on the first try and that since he hasn’t, then the whole model is bullshit and he’s a hack. Or, Renormalization. As a theoretical physics graduate student, I can also easily tell it’s bullshit (and so can all the other graduate students I know!). I’m letting this through, but it’s toeing the line, no personal insults here please. active, open post-publication peer review. That feeling kept recurring as I kept reading. And the specific structures he’s looking at look weirdly familiar, a bit like a generalization of cluster algebras. Stephen Wolfram leads a new approach to discover the fundamental theory of physics. But since we are connecting with existing theoretical physics, understanding the technical details requires understanding technical details of existing theoretical physics, often at a research or advanced graduate level. The rest was just pure observation. It worries me, because both as a physicist and a blogger, he really should know better. Stephen Wolfram, computer scientist, physicist, and CEO of software company Wolfram Research (behind Wolfram Alpha and Mathematica) made headlines this week when he launched the Wolfram Physics Project. The phenomenon of computational irreducibility makes it difficult to determine the complete consequences of any given rule. He’s complaining about being bullied online for being frank about his impressions of Wolfram’s model, and you certainly aren’t helping dispel that complaint. Wolfram is also known for being a very strange person. So to reiterate; discredit his (Wolfram’s) theory, disprove it, criticize it, whatever. But some physicists aren’t excited about Wolfram’s project and say he’s essentially buying himself influence in the field before waiting for peer review. So I compromised. For now, I’ll just say that I probably shouldn’t have read a 90 page pop physics treatise before lunch, and end the post with that. What is the quickest way to understand the project? look forward to contributions from many people. That doesn’t automatically mean that he’s right and you’re wrong, but it does mean that you’ll need something more than a mostly-vacuous comment about how “obviously wrong he is” to challenge his work of decades. It also suggests that time is fundamentally different from space rather than being just part of a combined spacetime. Now, the team is undertaking a centralised effort to develop their theory into something bigger by verifying its hypotheses. I didn’t read his 448-page technical introduction. The post is written for a non-technical audience, so I know it isn’t 100% accurate. Beyond that, the work promotes the unrealistic view that science is driven by single “Einsteins” coming along and rewriting everything with their paradigm-blasting ideas. About “first”, I don’t think Wolfram is doing that and I didn’t give the presentation I read any more importance than what I was seeing in front of me; it’s what I was reading that impressed me. I may have more time now due to COVID-19, but I still have a job, and it isn’t reading that. Does the project invalidate existing physics? But the overall framework of our models is something more general, and not as directly amenable to experimental falsification. About “second”, if you mean the almost-500-page-long “technical presentation”, then no; and I don’t know why you’re asking me that. Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. The emphasis on deriving different elements of what every physicist knows are the same thing (the statements about relativity I mention in my post, the separate points about deriving vacuum GR and GR with matter) don’t guarantee Wolfram is a crackpot…but most people who present things in that way are. “Oh his paper doesn’t make sense to me; I don’t understand the fact that he doesn’t follow a specific paper-writing convention that I’m used to and therefore he’s a hack and his model has automatically zero merit to it, also he uses his own name a lot”. As a multi-millionaire (probably billionaire) who mirrors the stereotype of the solitary, white, male genius, Wolfram is able to build a beautiful website, corral collaborators, and garner lots of media coverage in order to push his idea to the forefront, outside the framework that other scientists have to operate in. We think we have identified the correct class of models and approach, but it remains to find specific rules and to connect them to all known aspects of physics, and to derive detailed experimental predictions, etc. Remember, this conversation here was between physicists, he was merely saying he has the basic expertise we both share. Reading along, though, I got more and more uneasy. I chose “Anonymous Rooster” because I didn’t know what throwaway nickname to use, so I based it upon his. Follow project development as it is livestreamed. You’re a reasonable person, so you too have essentially declined to say anything too strong. You get paid to learn. If that gets your crackpot klaxons blaring, yeah, me too. In it, he claims to have found a potential “theory of everything”, unifying general relativity and quantum physics in a cellular automata-like form. Even without the full details, you can anticipate what the flaws are going to be. It’s not even obvious (just from reading that piece) that the scientific content is novel: there’s a field, called entropic gravity, where people get GR from simple elements obeying simple rules. That unease peaked when I saw him describe how his structures give rise to mass. But Wolfram was once a very promising physicist. All physics faculty are too busy to write a thorough response, and too smart to … Implying he’s got a good argument against it but not providing it is just blowing out smoke, however. There is a pernicious effect here that Wolfram is taking advantage of. All that’s left here is for Anonymous Chicken to reply with something, if ever. Not Wolfram nor his credentials – more like the other way around, the impressiveness of his model made me look up who he was (I knew he was the head of Wolfram Alpha, but little beyond that). The comment about comparing my IP was pretty cringeworthy and unnecessarily antagonistic, perhaps you’re bullying me now… I’m neither bullying “Anonymous Chicken” (my god the thin-skinnedness…), nor am I a “sockpuppet”; whatever that means. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use and That’s not an argument against the theory, at most it’s an argument against his “paper-writing skills” or supposed narcissism. A few days ago, he released an update: a sprawling website for “The Wolfram Physics Project”. Based on that initial impression, it seemed possible that one or a few people were harassing him across multiple platforms, changing usernames to look like more people. He is undeniably clever, but has built a personality cult within his company that is frankly off-putting.. The Wolfram Physics Project Makes Me Queasy. In other words, you probably wouldn’t be hearing about this new “fundamental theory of physics” if a black woman had devised it. This isn’t how it works—even Albert Einstein’s work built off of the research of physicists who predated him and has required testing by countless of scientists since then. If he figures that “senior people don’t bother”, then maybe he should.

.

Uniformity Of Nature Hume, Is Trader Joe's Vegetable Biryani Vegan, Aurora Colorado Police Department Instagram, Aluminum Protons Neutrons Electrons, Bridgewater Inn Matlacha, Jaspreet Name Rashi, Paul Noble Review, Chrysanthemum Cutting Time, Spaghetti With Zucchini, Taskrabbit Ikea Phone Number, Mao Feng White Tea,