Like the majority of visitors to this site, I’m fascinated by the concept of the mind, it’s inner mechanisms and the possibility that consciousness is indeed our link with a nether existence currently beyond our comprehension. However, in conjunction with these more ethereal interests, I am also an avid science buff. The realms of astrophysics, quantum mechanics and other studies involving the particulars of our expansive ‘physical’ realm are, to my mind, equally fascinating. It is for these reasons that the claims made by Dr. Stephen Wolfram that he had “cracked the code to the universe” first attracted my attention. I’m unsure as to how many of you are familiar with Dr. Stephen Wolfram (the man or his works) and his new theories involving Cellular Automata, but for my part, I find it all incredibly intriguing.
Essentially, Wolfram suggests that life, the universe and everything, regardless of its complexity (or apparent complexity) can be traced back to one fundamental ‘algorithm’. One simple sequence that is capable of generating infinite and seemingly random aberrations that Wolfram believes can account for everything up to and including consciousness and free will. Despite the fact that the scientific world is reluctant to endorse any part of Wolfram’s theories, there are very few who deny his genius.
If any part of Wolfram’s theory is borne out in the near future, the implications for us, as willing interlopers within our own minds, could be dramatic. Will we have to accept that this fantastic little trip we call consciousness, our actions and even our dreams are pre-ordained… Not by God, Allah, Buddha or Vishnu, but by the Universe itself? And if so, is this necessarily a bad thing?
You can try either www.wolframscience.com Both are primarily concerned with promoting his new book (A New Kind of Science) but there is a good deal of material that can be absorbed on both sites. There have been several articles published recently (most notably in WIRED & TIME magazines) so try entering his name in Google and it should yield plenty of results.
I was hoping for a little more ‘discussion’ on this one… OK, let’s see how this flys…
One of the more specific criticisms that Wolfram makes regarding current scientific theory pertains directly to Darwinism. If Cellular Automata provides science with one, or even a group of specific equations that govern all form and action within our universe, can there be any room left for evolution? If the starting conditions for existance as we no it revolve around a mathematical formula that predetermins each and every possible variable, then complexity begins to take a back seat to density. Wolfrim’s implication then become clear; Natural selection, far from being the struggle of an organism to attain a more desirable and durable form to survive, is merely a means by which matter and energy expand to satisfy one element of an immense calculation… Now, all metaphysical and philosophical conjecture not withstanding, I know (not think) that my concious existance is real. Whether it be in dreams or ‘life’, it is an entriely palpable experiance for me, and I’m sure that the same can be said of the reader (THAT’S YOU) aswell. If Cellular Automata is the real deal, doesn’t it give you just a little buzz to know that no matter how big the picture, no matter how many squillion times smaller than a star or a galaxy you are, that your existence is an entriely legitimate offshoot of the same equation that spawned the universe itself?
The weakness of math is that it predicts oneness…a point of total integration…but it cant explain it…
Math cant explain a point of total integration…there, would be a total connection of cause and effect…it would be its own origin…dimensions like our space time could easely be folded in…integrated…like a 2 dimensional space can be integrated in a 3 dimensional one…and so on…
Have you also thought of the following…
If time is more dimensional and curved in it self…then all moments of time would already exist…there would be now creation in the view of the whole
because everything has already always been there…no beginning and no ending…still in lower time dimensions…ppl like us would notice nothing of this and would believe in free choice…
Those who believe in one algorithm…will end in believeing in a point of total integration…no longer can it be projected on space time or as math…it is beyond that…the most perfect is also the most simple form of all…oneness and total integration…unity…
Every particle’s path can be predicted with mathematics, once we know every thing about that particle and every other particle it interacts with, unless there is truly a chaotic particle. Therefore, from the mooment of creation we are destined to live our lives only one way. You may say we have choice, but that choice is pre-determined.
You may disagree with me here, but that would probably be your predicted instincts telling you that your life is significant and unique, and we all may believe that too.
Jeff I’m not sure if i understand why maths can’t explain it’s own creation, afterall we can explain our’s.
Time is relative and we could only say that everything always exsisted if we were sort of immune to time, above time if you will.
I totally agree with you that all things are predetermined…and our choice is only a feeling of freedom because we experience we make that choice…
So dont get me wrong here…For myself, i find the model that all moments of time already exist the most logic…and indeed then our choices are already made and integrated…I dont believe in creation because then time would have had a beginning…I dont c the bigbang as a begin of time…2month ago 2 scientists from princeton university in England have come up with a model that is the same that i came up with last year…
That is that the universe has always existed and that the big bang had a diameter and did not come out of nothing…well all the details would be a long story…can give you the site if you want…
Well Alex math cant explain unity…a point of total integration because for math you need formules…and a formules need proportions and relations between divided objects…dont now how to say it better in englisch…iam dutch…like a=4x or 3x= z*j but if you have oneness…unity then you say a=a
Well you cant do much calculation then can you…in unity all things will fall away against eachother…so what would you do with a formule then…I learned this on from a math teacher on univerity…he told me this
And its true math cant do much with unity…only with a relation between divided objects…Unity is the border or end for math…
now is point time dimensional…with our memory we experience linear time…for einsteins relativity we need already a 2 dimensional time…if al moments of time already exist…time would at least be 3 dimensional…
you cant create time…its already in existence…but for us point dimensional time awareness it even looks if we move in time…but from the perspective of everything…in space and time everything is still because there is nothing new…but this only works in a more dimensional spacetime…
I believe like you everything is predetermined…and what i let c here is not the truth but just a model…
But its nice to talk about it with someone…someone like you!
These ideas are all appealing to a certain degree, but there appear to be certain assumptions being made about the constancy and rigidity of existing mathematical theory… The notion that the path of any one particle can be mapped mathematically is gradually being shown to be less and less reliable; Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle (a cornerstone of current Quantum Theory) demonstrates that, once you reach below the molecular level, it becomes incredibly difficult to pinpoint the position of any given proton, electron or atom in space or time.
Regardless, Wolfram’s theory is not so much a venture to demonstrate the supremacy and infallibility of math as it exists today, or to use math to explain the complexities of determinism and free will… It is, in Wolfram’s mind, something far more subtle that has been lost in the shuffle of modern scientific theory…
Additionally, I would not be so eager to dismiss the notion of free will as the ‘playing out’ of molecules of varying complexity. To make any assumptions regarding free will, determinism or even time based on even the most intricate scientific theory is itself ridiculous! The notion that the universe is ultimately a gargantuan buffet dinner being served to a green toenail in a small restaurant just outside Tumbridge-Wells is, in my mind, as logical as any other theory put forward to date…
Try thinking of the entirety of ‘space time’ being represented on the monitor your looking at this very moment; You, me, our planet, our solar system and even our entire galaxy wouldn’t even constitute an electron orbiting an atom that made up one small pixel… So, at this early stage in human development, I am reluctant to say “I Believe” anything, and I certainly wouldn’t rule out my own conscious existence as an elaborate illusion to shift matter from point A to point B. Only one thing can be said for certain at this point; Everything we have observed in the universe to date functions… From the largest cluster of galaxies, right down to the smallest proton half, everything works… And so far as I can tell, we appear to be the only ‘things’ within a couple of billion clicks that can observe any of this magnificence… And that in itself is an encouraging thought…
Well I haven’t read the books but I’m not sure what new things Wolfram is bringing up. It sounds a lot like chaos theory(simple algorithms producing comlex patterns) which produced all that cool spirally computer art that was so popular a while ago. Apparently Wolfram has done work specifically on chaos theory as well. Duke University Chaos theory intro
Quite honestly it reminded me of the 40 year old “game” of Life. Early computer guys were quite fascinated with these simple algorithms that would create stable and moving patterns. Check it out, doesn’t this 1960’s invention feel familiar.
I’m not disagreeing with anything Wolfram seems to be saying, just not picking up the “revolutionary” part. Here’s a friendly Ray Kurzweil critique of Wolfram’s new book.
Actually, Kurzweil’s website looks pretty cool. Think I’ll give it a look through.
It seems that Ray Kurzweil may have his own reasons for dismissing Wolfram’s work… The two men both operate in similar scientific fields (Wolfram in Cellular Automata, Kurzweil in pattern recognition), but when you examine the particulars, it seems that the they may find themselves in direct and ‘personal’ competition; Wolfram graduated from Oxford, Cambridge & Caltech by the time he was 20, was published in physics journals by the time he was 15 and was also the major contributor to Chaos theory as it exists today. In addition, he also founded the software company that created Mathmatica (The Capo de Capo of high end Math software used in industry & education worldwide). Kurzweil also has his own software company, which has had nominal successes in fields such as music production, advanced search engine technologies, optical character and speech recognition technologies. Add to this a multitude of scientific awards for various publications on A.I and the future of mechanical consciousness.
I would have been more receptive to Kurzweil’s article had it not spent the first four paragraphs bitching about how arrogant Wolfram is. Other reviews I linked to through Kurzweil’s site were equally obsessed with the notion that ‘A New Kind of Science’ is a work of ‘popularization’. A book designed for all us ‘poor widdle’ simpletons who can’t grasp the fundamentals of science and who’ll swallow anything so long as there are a few pretty pictures along the way. Scott Aaronson even had the audacity to say that Wolfram’s book “could form an excellent basis for an undergraduate general-science course”. When smarmy comments such as this become the basis for scientific criticism, it is plain to see that Wolfram has plucked a very sensitive nerve…
When two distinguished scientists meet head to head on an issue as significant as this one, it is my belief that you have to judge by achievement. Both Wolfram and Kurzweil have enjoyed considerable success in their respective fields, but Wolfram has already changed the world once… Kurzweil has written speech recognition software, and if you’ve had the chance to use it, it’s pretty shit!
"If time is more dimensional and curved in it self…then all moments of time would already exist…there would be now creation in the view of the whole because everything has already always been there…no beginning and no ending…still in lower time dimensions…ppl like us would notice nothing of this and would believe in free choice… "
…thats was beautiful. I clearing agree with that opinon. Its hard to accept, becuase your lost already in your self denial. So i fyour true to yourself (always) you slowly or begin to see how life is and what control that we have over it. I said befoe life is like a coloring book. Al the lines and shapes are already made all you have to do is color them in. That means to me, life itself has happen and ended(not really) It never ends though, its eternity. Everything in life has been discovered and explored, but when its new to us its seems already known, so you really dont learn things… you re-discover what was once known. But what do i know, i just sit back and opionate other peoples situations, and conclusions.
Hah hah. If anyone here hasn’t read it, go read Slaughterhouse Five by Vonnegut. I would like to think that we really do exist in only 3 dimensions, however, and time is real. But hey, chances are I am right/wrong anyway, if you know what I mean.
Very interesting stuff, thanks for getting me onto it.
I think the main point in kurzweil’s article is that although cellular automata and rule 110 gives rise to some complexity, this complexity is extremely meagre compared to say that of a human.
You can see it for yourself - the images produced by rule 110 quickly get very boring. Even after a billion iterations, they are still very crappy looking. If the complexity really did continue to increase after each iteration, a billion iterations later we should be seeing some pretty mind blowing pictures. Cellular automata does have some limited applications, it is used to create smoke and fire FX in computer games, but i’m yet to see it create the equivalent of a mona lisa.
rule 110 the answer to life, the universe and everything? This guy has seriously lost the plot (no disrespect intended, Mathematica is an absolutely brilliant piece of software). What do expect from someone with an astronomically inflated ego that excludes himself from the scientific community for 10 years?
nethertheless, I do wholeheartedly agree with his theory that simple rules give rise to complexity, i just don’t agree that what he is saying is the ultimate answer to everything or that he wast he first to think of it.
i really don’t see how any of this (or any other scientific theory for that matter) explains or does away with free will. Nor can I prove that free will exists (I merely believe it does). Actually, it doesn’t make any difference whether it does or does not exist (but that’s another matter…)
?!