TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Exploring Rulial Space: The Case of Turing Machines

20 点作者 bobm_kite9将近 5 年前

6 条评论

lacker将近 5 年前
I feel like this is the start of an interesting conversation, which gets distracted by a thousand aesthetically pleasing yet irrelevant graphs.<p>The interesting idea is, what if we modeled the physical world as operating by all rules at once, and the part that we are able to observe is only the part of it that operates according to our physics?<p>This makes me think of a model kind of like Borges&#x27;s library, but with a datacenter. Let&#x27;s say you had an infinite number of computers, running every possible computer program. Would this model contain our physical universe?<p>If the Turing hypothesis is correct, yes. That means there is some program whose results are equivalent to our physical universe, and so somewhere in this infinite datacenter exists a copy of our universe.<p>Is this a useful model? I don&#x27;t think it is, no. The question of finding the rules of physics has just changed into an equally difficult question of finding out which computer in the infinite datacenter is running our universe.<p>But I think the &quot;infinite datacenter&quot; model is equivalent to Wolfram&#x27;s &quot;rulial space&quot;. You can make a thousand pretty charts of what the infinite datacenter looks like. CPU usage, network traffic, yeah all of those probably could be graphed. But that doesn&#x27;t really make the model useful.
Smaug123将近 5 年前
I confess that while I was very interested in Wolfram&#x27;s project when it came out, I was unable to find any actual content in this extremely long article (despite reading the whole thing a couple of days ago). Would someone be able to summarise in a couple of lines what the article actually says? I know it&#x27;s meant to be an &quot;exploration&quot; without necessarily having a goal, but even then I was hoping for more of a conclusion than the best I was able to derive, &quot;if you consider an evolution graph obtained by applying all possible rules at every point, you get some pretty pictures, and you can think of that as a space all on its own, which might be interesting&quot;.
评论 #23507229 未加载
nil-sec将近 5 年前
It’s an interesting description of the space of computation and I quite enjoyed this article even though, as many, I have issues with the way wolfram participates in science. Certainly what he is describing can be a way to view the universe but that is somewhat trivial. It is not surprising that you get something like the universe when you start considering universal computation. The fact that we can write down e.g. equations of motion means there is a Turing machine that computes it. The real test is whether this perspective is useful in the sense that we can predict properties of the universe with it. That test is still out and until it’s addressed there is no way to evaluate or criticize this model. It’s too flexible to be useful at this point.
plutonorm将近 5 年前
This is fab. It mirrors and takes far far further ideas I have been noodling around with for a while. I will be reading and rereading this for a while.
评论 #23509392 未加载
评论 #23510145 未加载
webmaven将近 5 年前
I&#x27;ve been trying to grok where Wolfram is heading with this approach, and I just had a minor epiphany, probably brought on by binge-watching Devs: All of the rules he&#x27;s constructing and using seem to be deterministic.
Ice_cream_suit将近 5 年前
Interesting.<p>Not quite Crank Territory, but like most Wolfram&#x27;s activities, it dances between possible brilliance and CT.<p>Note:<p>Crank Territory: That appellation does apply to his much laughed at previous effort &quot;A New Kind of Science&quot;.