Who is Stephen Wolfram?

You know who Stephen Wolfram is, right?

Whether you love him or, you know, don’t love him, there’s no denying that Stephen Wolfram has founded a host of fascinating projects... most of them named Wolfram-something-or-other.

What are all these Wolfram-branded projects?

Who is Stephen Wolfram?

—

Some of the things Stephen Wolfram created:

not to mention:

More about Stephen Wolfram:

Stephen Wolfram’s education:

Some of Stephen Wolfram’s special subjects:

Some of Stephen Wolfram’s books:

Other people involved in the Wolfram Physics Project:

Reference:

Image:

Some of my own projects:

—

Kootenay Village Ventures Inc.

[EugenethePhilostopher]

I've been using Mathematica for something like 15 years at this point. The system is unbelievably flexible and can be used for anything. I love it.

[houstongalloway]

He showed up in person at MIT Lincoln Lab when I worked there and gave a talk. So, I did see him in person. He had no notes with him and appeared to be speaking extemporaneously with his laptop connected to Wolframalpha an shown on the big screen. It was fascinating but felt like a random walk though his thoughts.

[harriehausenman]

Interesting insight! 🤗
Great video, as ususal.

[GEMSofGOD_com]

I'd say two things to answer the question: 1) He wrote a book-length summary called “The Physics of Subatomic Particles” when he was 14. He published his first scientific paper at the age of fifteen, and received his PhD in theoretical physics from Caltech by the age of twenty. 2) He has read 10.000 books.

[GGoAwayy]

He's so elusive! Rarely does he ever speak publicly. This figure is shrouded in mysteries.

[eytansuchard]

Hi Jonathan Gorard. This is about merging between the Geometric Chronon Field Theory and Hypergraphs. Some thoughts on my favorite quantization program - Hypergraphs. There are some problems in the Wolfram-Gorard Hypergraphs. To cover the known forces, the hypergraph would require different types of edges. Time edges for the EM field, 3 types of space edges for chromodynamics and another type of two edges for covering the second Lagrangian plane, i.e. electroweak force of the Geometric Chronon second Lagrangian plane. In this case, the resulting hypergraph can be embedded in a 4D spacetime. Also there will be two such hypergraphs, an observer hypergraph, possibly deterministic and the observed probabilistic hypergraph where the chronon fields, which describe accessible events will be. These two hypergraphs will intersect in accessible events. This construction does not look too good. Why not have chronon / event wavefunctions in an embedding spacetime, which is not a physical object and get granularity of accessible events by solving PDEs. If Jonathan Gorard wants to work with my team, fine, but he needs to see these problems. His model is not sufficient to describe the 4 interactions we know of. As Albert Einstein once said, "simple but not any simpler" is a rule which describes the delicate balance between overfitting and over generalization. The latter means the model is too small to predictively describe phenomena in Nature. Gravity is emergent in the Geometric Chronon Field Theory once we contract spacetime in the 4-directions to where a Geroch function curve bends to or around sources of such directions or anti-gravity around sinks of such 4-directions. See "Electro-gravity via geometric chronon field and on the origin of mass" in ResearchGate. It corrects serious errors in the peer reviewed version from 2017. The original model of the Geometric Chronon Field Theory in 2003 was also a cellular automata. It was called "Transformatron". You can leave me a message through ResearchGate or Academia. You can also contact Dr. Sam Vaknin. See: "Introduction to Chronon Field Theory (Vaknin-Suchard)" on YouTube. Best regards, Eytan Suchard.

[marshalmcdonald]

I've heard a few of Wolfram's interviews...dude has a good vibe. He seems warm and sincere. I value these traits highly.

[thesleuthinvestor]

I'd like to challenge Steven Wolfram to do what-- in my opinion-- can not be done: Write a program (or train an AI, if he wishes) to write an original novel that, 1. when a human reader picks up and starts reading, he / she could not put it down, and 2. when finished reading, he / she could not forget it. That is, create a program or AI that can write an unputdownable and unforgettable novel. The inherent problem is of course that all math, logic, programming, e c., depend on categories, aka features. No categories, no math. And in order to write novels, the writer must know human ontology, which starts where categories end, as per the old Greek parable of Plato's cave, aka Reductionism. My contention is that an AI could not do this. But I'd be happy if Steve can prove me wrong...

[createurzatsit]

My hope is that these new ideas, and computational irreducibility in particular, will result in a general theory of emergence.
We see emergent phenomena everywhere, in every field of science, and we can define everything, and ourselves, as a vertiginous interweaving of emergences. What immense progress if we could conceive of the deep, universal springs of emergence! In my humble opinion, this would be even more fruitful than the project to refound physics alone.

[ai_serf]

I'm been toying around with subtitution systems, ala AABA with several rules { AA->AB, BB->BA, AB->BB } and playing around with the idea of pluralism vs ordered rules or a precedence list. How do we deal with contradictions? EIther have rules for a conflict, or mabe branch out the graph such that there isn't a contradictions.. le sigh. difficult stuff for me.

[drgetwrekt]

If the Universe is procedurally generated, the first credit goes to the 2 writers of the classic videogame Elite tho!

[stevevitka]

Simple question, why doesn't computational irreversibility, just like the halting problem and Godel incompleteness, lead to the conclusion that it is impossible to build strong, safe AI using statistical or maybe any methods? I'd think Wolfram would be sounding the alarm.

[lined]

Seems like a question of communication, representation, perspective and network tags - likes and/or dislikes besides – recognition, appreciation or respect and participation are more important and less questionable. Positioning, connectivity could influence emotions one or another way.. Why is science apparently gaining dominance above rudimentary emotions??

[kubrickguy]

You never blink, you blink only five times in over nine minutes...