Read on Twitter
Time for some physics.
So. Stephen Wolfram published an article detailing a new way of doing physics, in which he imagines the universe as forming from very simple rules that act together to form complex structures. I'm not going to explain all of it because honestly the details
So. Stephen Wolfram published an article detailing a new way of doing physics, in which he imagines the universe as forming from very simple rules that act together to form complex structures. I'm not going to explain all of it because honestly the details
get a little technical, but basically, Wolfram imagines the world to be an interconnected series of abstract points in space with some sort of substitution rule that, when applied, creates graphs of those points that lead to bigger and bigger hypergraphs. These hypergraphs then
lead to an apparent continuity that we call "space". More interestingly, however, time is no longer another dimension, like we think of it in our current theories, but rather it is the succession of the application of the substitution rule of the universe. But far more
mindblowing is the fact that his model has no matter: what we call "matter" is actually a sort of "clumped space", a mesh of the abstract points. So "matter" is "made of space". And everything is made of space. Black holes are a mesh that is no longer connected to the hypergraph
and thus are not causally connected (causal invariance is a very important element of Wolfram's model). In a sense, black holes contain "another universe" inside of them.
So, if you ask me, I like the idea. I like the idea that everything is made of the same thing, of hypegraphs
So, if you ask me, I like the idea. I like the idea that everything is made of the same thing, of hypegraphs
and their relations. But there are many issues with his model. I won't detail all of them, because several people have already done so. My biggest problem with it is, honestly, the way Wolfram went about it.
Wolfram is a famous man - and he published his 445 paper for the world
Wolfram is a famous man - and he published his 445 paper for the world
to see. He received a lot of press coverage. But he did this without any sort of peer review. It's like he's trying to skip the process. He's also giving the wrong idea that science is all about one genius changing everything. Science is a collaborative process and he's trying to
claim all the glory for himself. It's simply a gross way of going about it, honestly. The idea is beautiful, yes. But the way it was presented is hideous and harmful.
I like the theory. I'm not sure I like the man, though.
I like the theory. I'm not sure I like the man, though.
I was going to get more into explaining the model and why it's not as good (yet). But I honestly lost motivation halfway through writing this thread.
