This is very similar to Doug Lenat's work on Automated Mathematician & later on Eurisko, and later Ken Haase's follow up work on representation languages.<p><a href="http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA155378" rel="nofollow">http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=ht...</a><p>There were severe sticking points around the cultivation of an idea of "interesting" properties and the performance issues around evaluating a combinatoric space of possible manipulations. There hasn't been serious work along those lines since the early 90s or so.<p>It's annoying because especially Haase's work has some very practical insights, but Wolfram seems to be loathe to ever admit he's building off of someone else's work.
Can some bored billionaire please throw $100M at this project?<p>Talk about revolutionary, true automated pure math would be a human milestone on par with very few developments in history.
I find it odd that Wolfram talks about all the thousands of things that will need to be 'built in' to Mathematica for this project to work -- shouldn't you be able to implement these things in the language itself?
Very cool - I'm working on a related project: <a href="https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/project/details/google/gsoc2014/jaanaltosaar/5741031244955648" rel="nofollow">https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/project/details/google/g...</a><p>I'll put up a blog post soon on this!
some related and well-reasoned, well-written essays:<p><a href="http://monasandnomos.org/2012/12/05/the-idea-of-a-characteristica-universalis-between-leibniz-and-russell-and-its-relevancy-today/" rel="nofollow">http://monasandnomos.org/2012/12/05/the-idea-of-a-characteri...</a><p><a href="http://vanemden.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/flowcharts-the-once-and-future-programming-language/" rel="nofollow">http://vanemden.wordpress.com/2012/04/08/flowcharts-the-once...</a>