Computing a theory of everything | Stephen Wolfram 

Indeed haha

Yes

Me 2 lol

"Checking"

@@actualboosts3398 "Fact checking"

For some of us. To be precise, for those who own a PC and have internet access, which is more less 2.68 billion of the population, just a third of the whole. Even I would say lucky for those who have electricity access.

+Syn Slonca We're getting there my friend. Capitalism is generally favorable to those more opportunistic countries who have a good relationship to the bigger players like the US, Russia, or China. Other countries are definitely lagging behind, for reasons of which it is not entirely their fault. But as technology continues to advance in those modern countries, its advancements will continue to benefit those at the bottom.

no, it won't.

Wait until you hear about ChatGPT

hermosa teoría la de wolfram

@@subernasterd2727 si!!

learn english

Erik Coll He gots it

Has something happened recently since this talk?

Ziad Hatahet well...seems like he cracked it basically. His approach basically explains/predicts all mayor theories from relativity to quantum physics. Extremely cool and a true potential for a unified theory.

@@nickbroekman9360 Do you have any resources to read up on new developments?

Ziad Hatahet No but there is an extensive 3 hour intervieuw this month with Lex you can find on YT about this..

THIS.

That's part of the problem. Wolfram is a capitalist at heart, like Bill Gates. A theory of everything has to be a theory of everyone. You cannot have it both ways. This is why scientific knowledge is in some ways antithetical to technology, the later needs but also destroys the former. Hegemony and fascism are not compatible with truth, at least long term. The cult of personality, genius, and narcissism is a canard brought to you by the already powerful to justify their power. I doubt a TOE exists, or at least wouldn't want it to exist....look what we have done already with the knowledge of nuclear physics. A TOE could be truly horrifying. We're not ready or perhaps not ready to even understand it because we're looking for something unifying (and hence powerful, hegeomonistic and fascistic) which I doubt that's what is the universe in the end. My hope is that a true TOE, or something as close as possible to it, will more likely be a set of unifying principles that maximizes our knowledge of possible universes/conscious realities including parts of own and others, but calculating or (equivalently) attempting to manipulate or control this will be NP-hard, effectively enforcing free will. In such an understanding, a mouse will not be able to create all of our human universe, but it will be able to create "its" universe...and a TOE would allow a limited understanding of a large zoo of possible solipistic universes/realities for different conscious entities and even conscious states (dreams etc)...with "hopefully" no great unifying principle that will allow one to "conquer", "control", "enslave" (and thereby destroy) any other. If such a project is feasible in this century, it will take a greater understanding and inclusion of not just the insights of one person, culture, or civilization, but rather the entirety of conscious existence "on the level." In other words, any success along these lines will not and perhaps even be limited by taking too seriously the efforts of geniuses like Wolfram, unless we seriously consider those of the mice as well.

​@@zackbarkley7593 Thank you for your beautiful comment Zack. I have much to learn -- as evidenced by the fact that I didn't understand the latter half of this on any level deeper than a surface one. But it brought me somewhere quite beautiful, and there's maybe nothing I love more than seeing hegemonic power structures and physics discussed in the same paragraph -- and even connected as ideas!!

@@thoughtsfromahead Thanks. It got a bit obtuse in the end... :)

@@zackbarkley7593 thank you for your comment.

🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯

Search for his podcast with Lex Fridman

He is not more of a genius than say, Neil de Grass Tyson: big words, no real knowledge to back it all up.

@@obbavyakti5805 Tyson is a science communicator, he hasn't achieved anything much in the sphere of research. Wolfram has created Mathematica, and even did research on particle physics at the age of fifteen. Just google him up and look at his many achievements.

He doesn't have anything to do with real mathematics. WolframAlpha is a sugar-coated hoax.

@@obbavyakti5805 till a few years back the internet was looked down upon, however the businesses that didn't not accept the internet were the ones that ended up dying. OP here, makes very valid point about the challenging theories and trying to come to a conclusion. Stephen Wolfram is certainly not stupid let alone dumb. He has a huge company, in which scientists and physicists working around multiple ideas. You just dismissing it certainly makes zero difference to what the future beholds, but the reason I am commenting here is because the mindset of dismissing anything until its proven can be scary. No science teaches misinformation, however neither does it appreciate people looking down up novel ideas and technologies. The theory of relativity, black holes were such weird concepts that had not been proven and by many just dismissed. And what do you even mean by real mathematics? And if Wolfram Alpha was a sugar coated hoax there is no reason for the engine powering it to be used by countries and companies to predict their economical backing and future stock fluctuations.

Progress is always done by so called “heretics”. Look up the history of science. Bruno got burnt alive saying the earth went around the sun. 🤯

how ?

@@urigeheadmot1196 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rbfFt2uNEyQ.html Here!

Jus like Newton did

Your so right!

And he did it

He might have just done it. So far, it looks like hi actually did it.

Alexandru Jalea yeah maybe, but it’s pretty unclear atm, at least to me - and even if true, isn’t represented well in talks like this one.

@@snarkyboojum Considered that it *might* be because you don't grasp the implications? I was actually looking for his humble brag in this presentation, and although he mentioned that he was involved in physics, he doesn't actually talk about the fact that he was gifted.. Obviously it's implied, but then it would be almost intolerable for someone of his talent to spend any energy trying to be modest. I think he's just excited!

@@PhrenicPanic I have considered that, but I've watched a lot of material by him, and others, and I still don't buy the claims. This presentation doesn't do anything to change that - which was my main point.

@@snarkyboojum Mmmm, you're probably right.

learn english

i was thinking the same jaja

Here we go!

akiru bamiru I seriously doubt he has to _"sacrifice"_ time or anything else in order to do this work. Not doing it is the sacrifice. He's prolly making a sacrifice to stand in front of an audience who may or may not understand its value when he'd rather be home working on it. The price of the product is a _HUGE_ problem for a lot of people. I think that is what the dislikes are mainly about. And then there are the trolls who like to screw up algos just for fun...

achieving such an extraordinary things is no a sacrifice, if that's what you call sacrifice than everything we do is a sacrifice too

Sometimes kids roam about and press wrong buttons! Nothing to worry about! People are not so awful. Those who understand the talk sure love it. others just walk on ...

This is….sad.

AlienGamer LOL

Jennifer Grove :-)

+AlienGamer duh,

+AlienGamer www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=42Try this! Unfortunately Wolfram alpha doesn't seem to understand your humor :(

+Piyo Hoge :)

anything left to do?

There are many ways to attack his ideas of computation but u seem to have gone completely off tangent with a ridiculous criticism.

Ian Queteím Porta el algoritmo de RU-vid te trajo aquí por ver date un vlog pero en si date un vlog no te trajo

learn english

@@JuliusUnique it sound good idea but..... No