A Little Weird » Blog Archive » Wolfram, Again

A Little Weird

reality bizarres the standard

December 2nd, 2009 by Sean Wolfram, Again

I know a lot of you guys aren’t convinced that Wolfram’s theory of everything is correct. The more I think about it, and the more I digest his book… the more I become convinced that he has simply figured it out. I believe Wolfram will go down in history for being the first human being to discover how reality works. Again, if you haven’t seen his presentation, start here. If you need more detail, then buy his book.

Part of me always hesitates to align myself with one particular mindset. I like to hold conflicting views in my head, and force myself to see things from different perspectives. But Wolfram’s theory is just… genius. It’s amazingly convincing. It speaks directly to my programmer’s mind, and gives me clarity. Or maybe I’m just sick of all the philosophical questions, and Wolfram has become “good enough” for me :-).

-

It’s important to realize: Wolfram’s theory doesn’t really make predictions about how reality behaves. It sounds strange… you would think that if you know how everything works, then you should be able to predict what’s going to happen. Wolfram’s genius is in dispelling this assumption. How does PK work? Are OBEs real? Is there life after death? I still don’t know. Wolfram’s theory isn’t in the same ballpark as these questions.

Wolfram’s theory only really asserts two core ideas: 1. Reality is deterministic. 2. Reality is inherently unpredictable.

As you can see, these two ideas don’t really offer solutions to any “real world” problems. We still need to worry about global warming. We still need to explore space. We still need to eat, breathe, love, and survive. Nothing really changes.

But these ideas… They just feel like such a giant sigh of relief. They say, in a loud booming voice: Everything is OK. There’s always a third option. Reality is divinely balanced, and no one can take that away. Every experience is new and unique, and the only way to know for sure what’s going to happen is to wait and see.

And these ideas aren’t just nice thoughts anymore. They’re proven, in black and white, in Wolfram’s book.

I feel satisfied. Yes, I still have an infinite number of things to learn and experience — but that’s the point! My philosophical self has been extinguished. Thank you, Wolfram.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009 at 8:19 pm and is filed under Philosophy, Belief Systems. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

### 7 Responses to “Wolfram, Again”

1. Not_Important Says:
   December 3rd, 2009 at 12:16 pm

   When I was a little younger, for some time, I was really involved in AI and neural networks programming. My thought was this:

   If I ever could create an evolving algorithm of a virtual world with virtual evolving entities populating that world, and if those entities would ever become smart enough to be aware of themselves and their virtual surroundings, and if they started to explore the rules, conditions and limits that my code imposes on them… would they ever understand that that thing they call “determinism” has a set of layers of truth that lead across the software and hardware continuum of my PC up to me, the ultimate creator…

   ?

   What I say is this: determinism is fine with me, but determinism itself may be a product of countless layers of “truth” that we might not be able to even start to be aware of. Can your mind even keep up with it? What if the truth is so deep, that that thing you call “mind” cannot even approach it with a thought?

   If you’d decide to look at the world as a plain thing, then, perhaps, Wolfram solved it. But, as an ancient person would ask: “What about the Elephants and the Turtle?”

2. Not_Important Says:
   December 3rd, 2009 at 12:22 pm

   Besides, I suggest looking up the following concepts:

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_regression
   and the “Infinite Turtle Theory”

   But specially the Infinite regression

3. Not_Important Says:
   December 3rd, 2009 at 12:26 pm

   … oops this got cut off…

   If infinite regression is a valid thought, then it would mean that the sequence of truths is endless or maybe even being created at each moment at an infinite rate. What if there is no ultimate truth, what if it was a dynamic, evolving abstract “thing”?

4. Sean Says:
   December 3rd, 2009 at 2:02 pm

   hey NI

   Yes, what I think you’re getting at is Godel’s incompleteness theorem:

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems

   Basically, what it says is: if you have a *consistent* belief system (meaning, you don’t believe in things that contain contradictions), then there are an infinite number of truths, and there are things that are true, but unprovable.

   In the end, I think this affects Wolfram’s theory in that we’ll never be able to prove Wolfram’s theory is 100% correct. Just like we can never reach the temperature of absolute zero. But we can get closer and closer.

   No one will have 100% absolute truth… it’s really just a question of: to what extent are you willing to go in order to be satisfied with the result? Wolfram’s theory reaches that satisfaction-threshold for me.

5. Sothilde Says:
   December 3rd, 2009 at 9:33 pm

   I still don’t understand this desire to assume that reality is deterministic

6. breaker Says:
   December 4th, 2009 at 1:23 am

   Sothilde: there is no desire to assume this model any more than there is a desire to assume any scientific theory that makes sense. It’s not a matter of desire, it’s a matter of deciding what the best explanation is and accepting it, not because of how we want the universe to work, but because of how it likely does.

   Anyway, Wolfram’s model is good and it makes sense, but does it bring you closer to your goal? Does it actually apply? This is, of course, assuming that you are still working towards the goal of proof that you set in May or something, Sean.

7. Sothilde Says:
   December 4th, 2009 at 10:30 am

   Breaker:
   Well, if you really think it trough until the end, then assuming non-determinism makes just as much sense as assuming determinism, maybe even more so. What makes one assumption more likely or valuable than the other, apart from its coherence with any other assumptions that are already in place?

   In my opinion this whole way of thinking is flawed. This whole approach of trying to understand reality by saying “what if reality is like this or this, would that make sense?”. That way you’re not figuring out reality, you’re figuring out the logical consequences of your assumptions. Basically you’re creating just another belief system which has your assumptions as its dogma.

### Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

- ## Pages

  - Welcome!
  - Blog
  - Forums
  - Games
    - Emergence Game
    - Geiger Game
    - Lottery Game
  - Contact

- ## Experiments

  - Lottery Project, Part 1
  - Lottery Project, Part 2

- ## Categories

  - Belief Systems (28)
  - Books (7)
  - Consciousness (4)
  - Conspiracy (5)
  - Dream Phenomenon (24)
  - ESP (17)
  - How-To (11)
  - Lottery (32)
  - Note to Self (21)
  - Personal Development (17)
  - Philosophy (31)
  - Random Stuff (11)
  - Science (26)
  - Subconscious (14)
  - Uncategorized (1)
  - Video (16)
  - Website (13)

- ## Archives

  - November 2011
  - November 2010
  - June 2010
  - February 2010
  - December 2009
  - November 2009
  - October 2009
  - August 2009
  - July 2009
  - May 2009
  - April 2009
  - March 2009
  - February 2009
  - January 2009
  - November 2008
  - October 2008
  - September 2008
  - August 2008
  - July 2008
  - June 2008
  - May 2008
  - April 2008
  - March 2008
  - February 2008
  - January 2008
  - December 2007
  - November 2007
  - October 2007
  - September 2007
  - August 2007
  - July 2007
  - June 2007
  - May 2007
  - April 2007

- ## Links

  - A State of Mind
  - Dreaming to Infinity
  - Monroe Institute on YouTube
  - Shifted Perspectives
  - UC Berkeley on YouTube

- ## Meta

  - Login
  - Valid XHTML

All Content, Images, Video, Text, and Software is © Copyright 2007-2009 Sean Connelly and their respective authors. All Rights Reserved.
Best viewed with Firefox, with minimum resolution of 1024 x 768. Microsoft can suck my balls.
A Little Weird is proudly powered by WordPress - Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).