[FRIAM] The fundamental theory of physics

[thompnickson2 at gmail.com]

Marcus, 

 

Thanks for sending the Feynman letter. 

 

Having started my day cursing the Feynman Cult, I am, on the basis of that
letter alone, prepared to join it. 

 

Cranky Nick 

 

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

 <mailto:ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/>
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

 

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 12:08 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fundamental theory of physics

 

Ha, probably the best move Stephen Wolfram ever made was become alienated
from the complexity club.  Had he been toiling in relative obscurity, he
would have never created Mathematica, and he'd be sort-of-famous but not
rich.

 



  _____  

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com> >
on behalf of Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net> >
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 11:31 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com
<mailto:friam at redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fundamental theory of physics 

 

Compared to Sabine Hossenfelder I prefer the approach from Stephen Wolfram.
I must admit I don't like the book from Sabine ("Lost in math") at all. She
only argues we have not made a breakthrough for decades which is rather
obvious. Stephen at least tries to make such a breakthrough. Sabine does
not.

 

What I like about Stephen's approach is that he really tries to find the
fundamental theory of physics, no matter how hard it may be or how many
iterations it requires. There is boldness in his "Let's go & find the
fundamental theory!" approach. I like his boldness, optimism and
perseverance.

 

-J.

 

 

-------- Original message --------

From: Pieter Steenekamp <pieters at randcontrols.co.za
<mailto:pieters at randcontrols.co.za> > 

Date: 4/16/20 06:32 (GMT+01:00) 

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com
<mailto:friam at redfish.com> > 

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The fundamental theory of physics 

 

I need to study it more to give my opinion on it, but some general comments:


a) I expect the mainstream physics community will  reject it. As a start  I
noticed Sabine Hossenfelder retweeted a "bullshit"-tweet about it. 

b) I'm a big fan of Stephen Wolfram and in general have confidence in his
work. But, of course, good people also make honest mistakes.

 

 

On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 20:37, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net
<mailto:jofr at cas-group.net> > wrote:

What do you think of Stephen Wolfram's latest findings? It is always
interesting to see what he is doing IMHO

https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2020/04/finally-we-may-have-a-path-to-th
e-fundamental-theory-of-physics-and-its-beautiful/

 

-J.

 

 

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ...
.... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
<http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200416/af3d0084/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 194131 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200416/af3d0084/attachment-0001.png>