Stephen Wolfram's post about spacetime

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter David Neves
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spacetime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Stephen Wolfram's blog post about spacetime, exploring various perspectives on his ideas and their implications for physics. Participants engage with the theoretical aspects of Wolfram's model, its relation to quantum mechanics, and the broader implications for scientific research.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about Wolfram's rigid structure of spacetime, suggesting it contradicts the emergent nature of other physical features.
  • Concerns are raised regarding Wolfram's understanding of quantum mechanics and its implications for his model of the universe.
  • John Conway's critique of Wolfram's ideas is mentioned, emphasizing that he believes the universe cannot be modeled as a cellular automaton due to its non-deterministic behavior.
  • Wolfram's affinity for concepts like spin networks and their potential to unify general relativity and quantum field theory is noted, with some participants drawing parallels to other theoretical frameworks.
  • There is a discussion about the value of new perspectives in fundamental research, with some participants advocating for the exploration of alternative models, regardless of the researcher’s reputation.
  • Some participants question whether Wolfram's prominence influences the reception of his ideas, suggesting that similar work by lesser-known physicists might not receive the same attention.
  • Concerns are raised about the credibility of Wolfram's previous work, particularly his book "A New Kind of Science," which some participants feel did not achieve its ambitious goals.
  • There is a recognition that diverse approaches in research can contribute to the development of a more comprehensive understanding of fundamental physics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with no consensus on the validity of Wolfram's ideas or the implications of his approach. Disagreements exist regarding the interpretation of determinism in the universe and the appropriateness of cellular automata as a model for physical phenomena.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions highlight the limitations of Wolfram's model in relation to established theories and the need for further exploration of its principles. The conversation reflects ongoing debates in theoretical physics regarding the nature of spacetime and the foundations of quantum mechanics.

  • #31
Is anyone here into Causal set theory? This artificially looks to be like that sort of thing.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
To me "silly" is like "simple" as a criteria for likeliness. Without a rigorous definition (which neither have), one cannot use it as a reliable predictor of eventual success or failure.

Silly and simple are context specific, and there are often cultural and other subjective aspects in the assessments.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
14K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K