Stephen Wolfram - What is Complexity in the Cosmos?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Our universe began with a swirling, seething plasma-everything, everywhere, all the same. Today we have galaxies, stars, planets, people. How did such structure come about?
Click here to watch more interviews with Stephen Wolfram bit.ly/1GStsOr
Click here to watch more interviews on complexity bit.ly/2oxPZMX
Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth bit.ly/1LUPlQS
For all of our video interviews please visit us at www.closertotruth.com
I have no idea what he's talking about but I liked the video because it makes me feel smart
It seems to me that what professor Wolfram is saying here is the single most powerful argument against the ideas of Stephen Meyer et al. I absolutely love the idea of intelligent design, but this discussion indicates that complexity easily arises in the most unexpected and extraordinary ways from simplicity.
This guy had a physics phd at 20 let that sink in for one second...?
He's worked with the smartest physicists of our time.
Richard Feynman wrote his recommendation letters.
@@skj983 Dear god some people are just so many levels above everyone else...
Wow!
...George Costanza really progressed after working for the Yankees...
It is fractals all the way down, an organizing principle that includes reiteration. No behavior can be described until we reach a scale where the information about the behavior emerges.
Close, very close
How exactly do you measure complexity, and how do you define a system? Wolfram says that there is an upper limit for complexity in all systems. So it would have been interesting to know.
Also, when he talks about purpose, isn't that just a different name for semiotics?
The upper limit is Turing universality….meaning that once the system reaches the ability to be Turing universal (and shown by Wolfram to be incredibly easy and that most systems do) it is capable of doing all computations that can be computed. If all systems are Turing universal then they are all equivalent in terms of their complexity (they could be arbitrarily complicated)
The above is made obvious when you think on it like this: get some Turing machine that simulates some other system…if that system is Turing universal than it can simulate something else and therefor A can simulate C, by emulating B….a D and E and so on and thus all these systems have the same complexity level: Turing universality and that encompasses all possible computable systems.
Double pendulum is quite simple and its movement so complex that it’s unpredictable. What am I missing?
Complexity is simplicity you're looking too closely at to understand. There is a natural order to the multiverse which allows inquisitive souls to study at any level their consciousness is capable of and inclined to, and their experience enables them to see.
Love this
Do simple rules of nature include causation for space-time and quantum field mechanics?
Objetos de naturaleza son más complejos que los creados por humanos.
¿Por qué? Naturaleza sigue reglas. ¿Cuáles? ¿Las nuestras? No necesariamente, tenemos que pensar en todos los tipos de reglas. Computación nos puede ayudar. Un programa simple (regla simple) puede crear un patrón de gran complejidad.
Procedural generation. You can start off with some very simple rules, some very simple algorithms, and generate a lot of complexity, patterns, and ultimately "stuff" that basically wasn't there before.
Deathbrewer you might want to have a look, it's a game about a procedurally generated universe. It's also extensively moddable ltheory.com
Time is the great multiplier of any process, and nature has had time.
Why do we put athletes on pedestals when this guy exists
Is there mathematical description for simple rules of nature developing into complex patterns?
A purpose of complexity in classic universe to create variety under the order of quantum mechanics?
Human beings tend to simplify everything because we cannot manage complexity.
You cannot be brave with no knowledge, never find your values, with money , my books, are part of my minds .
"... somehow we haven't managed to capture the secret that nature seems to have that lets it, apparently quite effortlessly, create all the kind of complexity that we see ..." Consider two approximations:
(muon mass)/(electron mass) = 206.7683 and
exp (pi * squareroot(72/25)) - (muon mass)/(electron mass) = -.0288 approximately.
Are the two preceding approximations clues to understanding quantum information in terms of Fredkin-Wolfram information? Google "wolfram fredkin milgrom".
David Brown No, the word you are looking for is not “clues” but numerology
@@TheBigWazowski Per Wikipedia, "Numerology is any belief in the divine or mystical relationship between a number and one or more |coinciding events." I suggest that the evidence supports KL-pology and dark-matter-compensation-constant = (3.9±.5) * 10^-5."
Pipino, Giuseppe. "Evidences for Varying Speed of Light with Time." Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology 5, no. 2 (2019).
riofriospacetime.blogspot.com
One rule is don't touch your clothes when there is mic on.
Is DNA a simple rule that brings complexity?
While one probably wouldn't call DNA "simple", the instructions it contains tend to be very simple if compared to the complexity of final product. For example with respect to the human brain, it is not like the DNA contains some elaborate blueprint of the brain, but rather information about "the right ingredients at the right time". In conclusion, it seems like the idea of great complexity emerging from relatively simple rules also holds true here.
Great discussion.I can answer 10:03 question. If I may, I would sure like to talk to Stephen; I think he may be interested in what I have uncovered.
I'm an economics teacher and as an amateur have taken it on to study the 'emergent' fractal for insight into our reality, as the economic theory I teach uncannily pointed me to it. So far I have shown fractal geometry matches economic theory and have concluded the market is a fractal - this also points to a theory of knowledge. Through this work I was drawn to field of physics, as the fractal was a very strange thing when in isolation; it shares behaviour that is only be described as quantum mechanics is described. The fractal points to a reality of duality, at all scales, including wave and particle.With it I can reason entanglement. Simultaneously the fractal demonstrates accelerated expansion just as the universe - it does Hubble expansion and accelerated 'inflation' expansion, and it matches the way galaxies are distributed in the universe. It also behaves as light, with a constant speed and wave particle propagation. Everything points to a fractal geometry and it is inextricably linked to evolution too.
I am slowly writing and presenting my work - I'm not a born writer, but nobody at a professional level has shown any interest, and that to me is the most amazing thing about the fractal.
I figure I write my findings down and wait for some 'expert' to find it for themselves, then we can talk hopefully. Anyway, nice talk. If you are interested I have presented on my RUclips channel ruclips.net/video/NoTEwZ-pTtk/видео.html (Inverted) Fractal Demonstrating Micro Quantum and Macro Astronomical Observations and Conjectures
Heya Blair, interesting notion. Have you read "complexity" by Mitchell Waldrop? I'd recommend that, seeing your associative thinking skills. I'll look at your video's. Good luck writing your ideas down clearly.
Interesting that he is asked about 'meaning' and then starts talking about 'purpose', as if the two were exact analogues. He doesn't mention 'meaning' at all in his answer to a question about meaning. Very revealing of the way he views the world.
Does "meaning" imply "purpose"? And does "purpose" mean "intelligent design"?
@@abderrahimaourir That's exactly the point, Abderrahim.
¿Propósito? Contra el diseño inteligente.
If the universe began with the singularity, then the singularity had to possess, within itself, the potential to become everything that can be. To me, this points to some immaterial, omniscient, omnipotent cause of the singularity.
What good is this as science if, as a given, it has no predictive power?
It is whether or not a realm is computationally reducible. Some subsets are. Most are not.
i mean, current physics has no predictive power either. It's all in principle approximation.
@from another post of mine....
"Entropy is why sand castles don't form on the wind."
If there is complexity for the wind and sand to blow up against and thru, then shapes like sand castles could form.
There is complexity because at the beginning there was asymmetry and observed-by-physics 'laws" (sticky mass, gravity, etc).
Humans are one such complexity that wind and sand have blow up against /thru. ...Et voila, sand castles created by the universe's root principles.
Defining anything the universe has built as special is in our heads.
E.g cloud shapes in the sky (things created by the principles of the universe).
We go "look, that one looks like mommy kissing Santa Claus." But that specialness is in our heads.
What if you exclude entropy from the beach?
L IS CONFORMAL
So complexity is simple...
Wolfram is close to the truth, He is very close.
Until he accepts there is a creator he will be guessing
@@imranchaudhry7805 He is not interested in a creator but rather in what he created.
No amount of information can completely describe a tree. The best description of the tree is the tree itself. The inside of a seed is far greater than the outside. Inside of the seed is an entire forest.
Science seeks predictable reproduceable data that can be used in computation and formulas where our minds can comprehend. A tree is not an answer it's a problem to be solved.
University thinking is complicated we eliminate the simplicity of our Creators way of Creation.
We are coming into a aha
Moment. MBraithwaite
Yorkshire Viking
what does i mean he has searched in the uiverse of computations exactly?
He writes "all" the programs that can be written, or as many as is feasible, then sees what they do.
interview daniel schmachtenberger
Meaning; drive.google.com/file/d/1-_wx5qiYHlSwajv1InMSrB42ahVC1a1y/view?usp=sharing
Wolfram is working on the assumption that complexity is informational entropy. Truth is complexity is much more subtle concept. There is no formal definition of complexity which captures all its aspects.
I think complexity can be both entropy and Truth. It then becomes a question of how simple is too simple? How well can we strike a balance between too much noise and too little?
actually...it's been recently shown mathematically, that complexity on a fundemental level is comutational and acts exactly like entropy. Check out 3 part lecture : Leonard Susskind - Complexity and Gravity
@@NightmareCourtPictures The idea is not new. It goes back to Black Hole entropy.
@@danzigvssartre it's definitely new. Entropy is not new. But thinking about Computational complexity acting like entropy is definitely a new concept.
@@NightmareCourtPictures It's basically Kolmogorov entropy/complexity and the idea is over 50 years old. It is a strict measure of complexity, that fails to capture the complexity that exists in complex living systems.
Meaning is the operation of exchanging truth for value.
If we are describing behaviors that are material expressions form another realm, it may be no different than describing the relationship of the pixels on the monitor.
There are three regions to reality.
1, the non-computable region. Consciousness lives here.
2, the infinite fractal boundary (scale relativity). The number of dimensions depends on the scale, beauty lives here.
3, everything outside the set. Self referential noise, all meaning is lost.
The Big Bang may be a phase transition of spacetime.
Information is a difference that makes a difference. Truth is information that doesn't change and self referential noise is a difference that doesn't make a difference.
Truth as a time coordinate; truth lives in the past, the future is uncertain.
Truth as a scale coordinate; truth lives in the macro world, the micro world is uncertain.
Truth lives in the macro past and uncertainty lives in the micro future.
Watch your Ps and Qs(secret knowledge) should be kept secret.
MBraithwaite zYorkshire Viking
Wolfram appears to be demoting Maths but we can't understand the rules of Nature without Maths
You misunderstood what he was saying.
Welldone you have broken millions of years of copying
And thereby the copy is the Creation.Go back to the Archaic records and challenge Moses,s interpretation!
MBraithwaite Yorkshire
Viking
everything goes to the simple only, - Angels control this world, so it exists.
omg your audio :(
I’m sorry. Is wolfram saying the universe is a glorified MMORPG? 😂
Here is a way to reduce the complexity ... put Wolfram's microphone in a place that actually picks up his voice vs. his jacket rubbing against the microphone.
It took 14 minutes to name drop his software. Clearly clever guy though.
Scary English teeth.
We know your IQ.