A New Kind of Science (2002)"The central theme of the book is easily stated. It is that many simple rules can lead to complex behavior. The example that is used repeatedly to illustrate this theme is a favorite toy of complexity theorists known as the cellular automaton, so I will have to say a bit about what cellular automata are. Let us suppose for a moment that all religion is a wholly human creation with no basis in reality. Given the seeming complexity of the world around us, it is hardly surprising that early man should have been pantheistic, believing that the myriad wonders around him must have been driven by a corresponding plethora of powers. But monotheism proposes a more radical hypothesis, that there is a single Creator and/or Creation moment, a moment of surpassing simplicity as regards our universe. In fact, the King James version of the Bible renders this moment in a way that is especially germane to Mr. Wolfram's theory: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.So the Creation of the Universe begins with a word, The Word. And all the complexity around us is a function of one being and a few simple commands: 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.Now, even if this is all merest metaphor, it is the most powerful and enduring metaphor of our species, and so, though reason may have long since killed off God, rationalism/science has never slackened in its quest for the unified theories and even the moments of simplicity that will explain the Universe. Thus, Darwinism derives its power not from any basis in observable science but from the idea that all life can be traced back to one organism. Thus, even as he made the laws of physics seem more complicated, Einstein believed that there must be a simple Unified Theory that would explain all: "God does not play dice with the Universe." And today his successors seek a "God particle" that will help them understand the single moment of Creation. All of them depend on the idea that complexity comes not from complexity but from simplicity. And the hidden promise here is that, while we could probably not master forces of sufficiently great complexity, we could one day master a few simple forces, or better yet just one simple idea. We might become Creators ourselves. The quest for God then has become a quest to become God ourselves. Stephen Wolfram's "New Kind of Science", to the extent I could understand it, likewise proceeds from a faith that simplicity will be found to render complexity. In fact, carried to its logical conclusion, his theory can be understood to imply that by writing a few simple computer commands one could duplicate even something as complex as the Universe. There are obviously many problems with an idea this grandiose and many people who understand what he's talking about far better than I ever will have done a rather thorough job pointing them out. But that doesn't stop his book from being immensely appealing. It has a number of things going for it, some which we don't think about where scientific literature is concerned: (1) It's huge. It's just a big book. One feels it must be important just because of its heft. (2) The thesis is audacious enough and stated so unequivocally as to justify its bigness. The author is after big game here and has brought a big gun. (3) It's lovely. Not only does Mr. Wolfram write with a general public readership in mind but the book is also lavishly illustrated. It's a book that wants to be read. (4) By referring to that ancient metaphor, of simplicity and a moment of Creation, and by his implied promise, that men can be as gods, Mr. Wolfram is savvily tapping into those powerful and time-tested understandings and motivations that have driven mankind for millennia now. I've no idea whether the specific case that he makes is correct--cellular automata are Greek to me--but the general case is what we all of us want to believe, that life is really pretty simple if you trace it back to the start, that someone did in fact start it in motion, and that therefore life has a scheme it's following, some rules, a purpose. What he's really saying is that: "In the beginning was the Word..." That's powerful stuff. (Reviewed:) Grade: (A+) Tweet Websites:-Stephen Wolfram: Official Web Site -AUDIO INTERVIEW: with Stephen Wolfram (Science Friday, July 5, 2002, NPR) -AUDIO INTERVIEW: with Stephen Wolfram (Diane Rehm, September 16, 2002, NPR) -INTERVIEW: QUESTIONS FOR STEPHEN WOLFRAM: Complexity Made Simple (LOCH ADAMSON, 7/07/02, NY Times Magazine) -INTERVIEW: Is this man bigger than Newton and Darwin?: British physicist Stephen Wolfram tells Graham Farmelo why his new book, already number one on Amazon.com, will revolutionise science (Daily Telegraph, 15/05/2002) -Stephen Wolfram - New Kind of Science: Alternative Views -PROFILE: Did This Man Just Rewrite Science? (DENNIS OVERBYE, 6/11/02, NY Times) -PROFILE: A Man Who Would Shake Up Science (EDWARD ROTHSTEIN, May 11, 2002, NY Times) -PROFILE: The Man Who Cracked The Code to Everything ...: ... But first it cracked him. The inside story of how Stephen Wolfram went from boy genius to recluse to science renegade. (Steven Levy, June 2002, Wired) -PROFILE: God, Stephen Wolfram, and Everything Else (Michael S. Malone, 11.27.00, Forbes ASAP) -PROFILE: Transcending Equations (JIM HOLT, December 9, 2001, NY Times Magazine) -PROFILE: Physicist: Programs run the universe (Stephen Shankland, November 21, 2002, ZDNet News) -ESSAY: Reflections on Stephen Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science" (Ray Kurzweil, KurzweilAI.net) -ESSAY : Kurzweil on Wolfram: The noted scientist finds plenty to mull and admire in A New Kind of Science but says it's "only partly correct" (Raymond Kurzweil, MAY 17, 2002, Business Week) -ESSAY: What's So New in a Newfangled Science? (GEORGE JOHNSON, 6/16/02, NY Times) -ESSAY: Blinded by Science: Explaining the media's obsession with Stephen Wolfram's A New Kind of Science. (Jordan Ellenberg, July 2, 2002, Slate) -ESSAY: The Physicist and the Abalone Diver: The difference between the creators of two new theories of science reveals the social nature of the scientific process (Michael Shermer, October 2002, Scientific American) -ESSAY: STEPHEN WOLFRAM AND CELLULAR AUTOMATA REVISITED (Brian Grainger) -ESSAY: Stephen Wolfram's Simple Science: Will his radical idea -- that all phenomena are programmed by basic rules -- revolutionizewhat's taught in classrooms and practiced in labs? (Michael Arndt, MAY 17, 2002, Business Week) -ESSAY: Is Science Unveiling Rules of Design?: Stephen Wolfram and Cellular Automata (The evolution of Truth) -ESSAY: Universality and Complexity in Cellular Automata -Understanding “A New Kind of Science” by Stephen Wolfram (SOFTWARE BY CHARLES PLATT) -ARCHIVES: "stephen wolfram" (Find Articles) -REVIEW ARCHIVE: A Collection of Reviews of ANKOS and Links to Related Work (W. Edwin Clark, eclark@math.usf.edu) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (George Johnson, NY Times Book Review) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Michael J. Behe, First Things) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (John Derbyshire, National Review) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (David Appell, Salon) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Greg Egan) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Steven Weinberg, NY Review of Books) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Chris Lavers, The Guardian) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Philip Ball, The Observer) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Keay Davidson, SF Chronicle) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science ( -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science ( -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science ( -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Margaret Werthheim, LA Weekly) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Brian Hayes, American Scientist) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (Ben Goertzel, EXTROPY: Journal of Transhumanist Solutions) -REVIEW: of A New Kind of Science (AzTex, kuro5hin.org) Book-related and General Links: |
Copyright 1998-2015 Orrin Judd