/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11605024]

Is Stephen Wolfram a crackpot?

[Anonymous No.11605034]

What is with scientists doing anything but actual experiments

[Anonymous No.11605043]

>>11605024
he is indeed a crockpad.

[Anonymous No.11606441]

http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/

[Anonymous No.11606518]

>>11605024
if your results are being presented with hype videos and books instead of papers and talks critiqued by experts in the field, its you're almost certainly a crackpot. even companies that hype the shit out of their work like deepmind publish papers for their big results

[Anonymous No.11606851]

Friendly reminder that the guy wrote three books on particle physics at 14 and earned his doctorate at age 20 under the supervision of Richard Feynman.

[Anonymous No.11606855]

>>11606851
so?
praising geniuses for their accomplishments is like praising birds for flying

[Anonymous No.11606911]

>>11606855
Im gonna get this post framed

What a beutiful line

[Anonymous No.11606930]

>>11606855
Huh? Who said anything about praising? I'd hope we can agree that there's some middle ground between that and labeling someone a crackpot.

[Anonymous No.11606994]

>>11605024
If you aren't smart enough to check his work to figure it out on your wtf do you care? This fucking board, you faggots are joke. Stop looking for someone's dick to suck and do your own research you fucking hacks

[Anonymous No.11607041]

>>11605024
I wish I was him, with all the wealth, intelligence and ingenuity to pioneer science in whichever damn way I please. Computers are so powerful bros, their limits end where our imagination ends.

[Anonymous No.11607082]

>>11606851
So what? He's still a crazy-ass crackpot now. Mostly seems to be about stroking his own bulbous ego.

[Anonymous No.11607151]

>>11605034

This

[Anonymous No.11607204]

>>11605043
>crockpad
based

[Anonymous No.11607282]

>>11607082
Cool baseless and infantile accusations bro.

[Anonymous No.11607406]

i think Wolfram was lurking on here a few months ago when Gary was shilling all day and needed to beat him. it’s like wolfram has gone full Optimum Theory

[Anonymous No.11607856]

>>11607406

This. Sort of. Wolfram was active on Twitter but low profile. Tweet a week-ish. Only a few replies per tweet. Gary tweeted Optimum Theory at Wolfram asking for his opinion of it. Wolfram doesn't reply even though Gary's tweets got nearly as many Likes as Wolframs OP tweet... immediately after, Wolfram goes into dark mode on Twitter for months and first post back is to say that an unexpected discovery kicked his ass into high gear. Next is history.

Same shit happened to Weinstein. Weinstein was a casual on Twitter until Gary tweeted Optimum Theory at him a few months ago. Now Weinstein is breakneck.

Don't bother checking Gary's twitter profile for this since he wipes all his social media every so often, for whatever reason. This is all from my recollection and I am sure there is record of it somewhere.

Not saying this is definitely what happened, but the Optimum Automaton is like to physics modeling what the iphone was to cellular or tesla is to auto... anyone who does work in that field would be sweating a bit if they saw it. >>11607406

[Anonymous No.11607890]

>>11607856

Th monks spend months placing the sand by hand. As soon as the design is perfect they wipe it. Their work is for the moment, and the moment is all that exists.

[Anonymous No.11608156]

>>11605024
Does he base his ideas on Einsteinian physics? If so, yes of course he's a crackpot. If not, then maybe but most likely not.

[Anonymous No.11608244]

>>11608156

Wolfram is not a crackpot. He's a scientist capitalist. Hes the essentially BLOOMBERG of science, and wholely shit never did I realize there was a better decription until I just wrote it

[Anonymous No.11608304]

>>11608244
Wolfram is just a metal, bro.