Skip to comments.
A Theory of Everything? Stephen Wolfram's Rule 110 May Change How We Understand the World
ABC News.com ^
| May 28, 2002
| Michael S. Malone
Posted on 05/28/2002 3:59:26 PM PDT by John H K
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
To: berned
Hey! We're twins! Ain't that a kick?
To: John H K
He sure has a lot of neat pictures in his book. How those patterns turn into life though is not answered unless one considers snow flakes and other interesting shapes in nature to be capable of turning into a genetic code somehow.
To: Physicist
"...discrete systems with a quantized length scale...."At a sub-nuclear level? Perhaps I'm confusing a concept of summed structure.
23
posted on
05/28/2002 5:20:33 PM PDT
by
onedoug
To: mc5cents
He (Wolfram) is several steps past "Creation:" "If I Flick THIS atom against THAT atom at THIS particular Velocity, I can create This Many Trillion interactions, resulting in THIS particular Socio-Religious Conflict on This paricular Insignificant Mudball of a Planet!"
"Scientific Determinism" is a Cultural "Dead End" which assumes that our Fate is "Predestined!" If it is so, the "Kamikazes" are correct; our culture is "non-viable!"
ON the CONTRARY; I believe that our "Fate" is only "approximate," & we DO HAVE the ability to direct our "Fate!"
THAT is what a "Merciful God" means........
Doc
To: berned
Computational systems we know of are designed and built. The universe is one too,
which would be interesting to understand the specifics of.
25
posted on
05/28/2002 5:26:09 PM PDT
by
onedoug
To: berned
Several hundred years ago when scientists were trying to understand HOW the universe worked, they felt that they were seeing and glorifying God throughtout the universe. Today, scientists try to explain HOW the universe works to glorify THEMSELVES! (Scientist and philosphers will also not be able to ever discover WHY the universe is: it is beyond their human limits.
26
posted on
05/28/2002 5:27:53 PM PDT
by
texson66
To: John H K
Sounds like Conway's Game of Life
(i.e. another version of the Turing machine)
hyped up to give Wolfram some more publicity
so that he can sell more of his overpriced software.
27
posted on
05/28/2002 5:28:47 PM PDT
by
Nogbad
To: John H K
He's describing kudzo -- the weed that is taking over the world
To: onedoug
At a sub-nuclear level? I don't understand that question.
Cellular automata are mathematical systems that postulate an arrangement of cells in some space. The cells have a finite size and don't overlap. The fundamental length scale in a cellular automaton is the minimum distance between the centers of the cells. Within the context of the automaton, there isn't any smaller meaningful length.
In a fractal, by contrast, the same structures are repeated at all length scales. Any piece of the fractal is indistinguishable from the whole, once scaling is taken into account. There's no smallest meaningful length in a fractal; the subdivisions are subdivided the same way every time.
To: Doc On The Bay
THAT is what a "Merciful God" means........ Doc
Agreed. And I would add that God did not just set something in motion and let "mathematics" take it course either. We, man, is such a pitiful thing in the grand scheme of things. How arrogant to think we can figure out the creator! How absolutely arrogant. Hubris comes to mind. Do some more math Mr. Wolfram. It will NOT lead you to God.
30
posted on
05/28/2002 5:36:29 PM PDT
by
mc5cents
To: texson66
Today, scientists try to explain HOW the universe works to glorify THEMSELVES! One of the great strengths of science is that the motivations of its practitioners are irrelevant. A conclusion is either right or wrong. If it's wrong, it will be exposed someday. Nature cannot be fooled.
Comment #32 Removed by Moderator
To: mc5cents
How arrogant to think we can figure out the creator! That would ring so true, if two sentences before you hadn't baldly asserted what the good Lord did or did not do.
To: Physicist
Ah yes, but people can be fooled....
34
posted on
05/28/2002 5:43:40 PM PDT
by
texson66
To: Physicist
I'm rather uncomfortable with the prospect of having humanity defined as a mathmatical formula. Of course, the leftists will love it.
35
posted on
05/28/2002 5:50:57 PM PDT
by
Justa
To: Physicist
"...an arrangement of cells in some space."Forgive my becoming less abstract, but a given space would have to be quantified, no? The difference say, between leptons and quarks to the entire universe. Within the scale of the so-called "creation event" might these "automata" be "superstrings"?
36
posted on
05/28/2002 5:53:07 PM PDT
by
onedoug
To: onedoug
I just got the urge to hunt for my old Tetris and Othello games.
To: John H K
shoulda-coulda named the book: The Old Hubris
To: Physicist
True. But I was not presuming to know what God did or did not do. I was simply trying to state that man has no business stating creation can be "solved" by some mathamatical formula.
39
posted on
05/28/2002 6:06:19 PM PDT
by
mc5cents
To: theprogrammer
I'm an algebraist. I prefer Maple.
40
posted on
05/28/2002 6:09:18 PM PDT
by
Nogbad
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson