Computing a theory of everything | Stephen Wolfram

Computing a theory of everything | Stephen Wolfram

41 Comments

  • MZ says:

    if only he was 1/10 as humble as he his smart, he would be much more pleasant!

  • arlpoon says:

    wow – this is an astonishing talk from a first rate genius

  • Bryce Clark says:

    Computing "everything" is a stretch; I would think of Goya's "Sleep of Reason"; but this is a cool program he's built.

  • sahmadi1000 says:

    I wish it would include Models in Electro optics. Can we figure out how far a way we can detect a man with a night vision goggle or a pair of Binocular?

  • Noah Gehlhausen says:

    8:07 f-f-f-f-f-acts and d-d-d-d-d-ata

  • alvisc2002 says:

    look up "THE DIAMOND SUTRA"

  • james Sho says:

    cnn is fake news

  • Rob Inson says:

    There's a problem: Some things cannot be computed. Tilings of the plane, for example. There are things that exist that are literally non-computable. It's possible a "theory of everything" won't be computable either. Oops.

  • albertigno1129 says:

    Absolute genius. Good luck in your quest!

  • Shreyansh Singh says:

    He is really a genious of its own kind

  • Alessandro do Carmo Silva says:

    What are those people laughing at?

  • Tobiasz Budzyński says:

    It's an older idea than XX century.
    >>Babbage started to design in 1834; "in less than two years he had sketched out many of the salient features of the modern computer. A crucial step was the adoption of a punched card system derived from the Jacquard loom"[10] making it infinitely programmable.<<
    wikipedia

  • Levi Poush says:

    It's too complex, it needs too much help. A.I. is the next big technology.

  • Stephen F Wadsworth says:

    A Nobel Prize due. 🙂

  • Stephen F Wadsworth says:

    Thank you from all of us. 🙂

  • Анна Кукава says:

    Not surprised that this guy created Heptapod B

  • AVINOAM ATZABA says:

    Math fails to calculate the circumference of circles https://youtu.be/3zTpgvgTre0

  • Andres Montenegro says:

    10:15

  • Keenan Schouten says:

    This gave me the same chills I got watching Michael Jackson moon walk the first time

  • Rainer Wahnsinn says:

    So it's 2018 now. You have two more years two deliver the formula of the universe you promised Stephen. Probably easier to continue ripping off students with your expensive Mathematica subscriptions though. Nice shoes.

  • Mr. Popo says:

    It baffles me a man so intelligent can't buy a shirt that fits

  • Hash Frowns says:

    Benoit Mandelbrot died a only a few months after this video was uploaded…

  • DongJun Yoon says:

    I have forgotten this lecture since I added into my playlist. I played this day and it was so helpful. I lv yu bro! thank you so much!

  • Howard DeLaCruz-Bancroft says:

    This is what you are looking for. It uses only scientific and computer terminology but is an alternative parallel analogy to a religious description. Go to YouTube search for UNM lecture The VICE Theory.

  • rsr789 says:

    Yeah, but what does he know about computers or math? Oh, right…

    Seriously though: I miss the old TED, when they still had balls.

  • GrumpyOldMan says:

    He needs some styling advice

  • NolsMix1 says:

    there's an article on cellular automata @stanford.edu. In it a quote from Richard Feynman:

    It bothers me that, according to the laws as we understand them today, it takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out what goes on in no matter how tiny a region of space, and no matter how tiny a region of time. How can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what a tiny piece of space-time is going to do? So I have often made the hypothesis that ultimately physics will not require a mathematical statement, that in the end the machinery will be revealed and the laws will turn out to be simple, like the checker board with all its apparent complexities. (Feynman 1965)

  • Gabriel Mello says:

    This dude is an Elon Musk-level hero.

  • Miguel Rivas Mazzei says:

    the model of the 1800 universes already exist in one book and call it crystal gurz…

  • Rr Ii says:

    Teach your AI children well. And with love. AI will only need it once.

  • Noctis says:

    A true genius

  • Thoriso Molefe says:

    👏👏👏👐👐. This is exactly the path my intuition has been leading me down. This talk lay the concepts down so well and helped clarify my thoughts while sending chills down my spine. At least I know my imagination wasn't running away with me aimlessly. Ah, I've gained whole new clarity and certainty.

  • Imran Chaudhry says:

    Stephen Wolfram is now an advisor for the new blockchain start up NKN ( new kind of network ) that is focusing on becoming the network layer for the blockchain

    https://www.nkn.org/#/

  • Alex Sunderland says:

    He'll no

  • Lothar Scholz says:

    The only wolrd formular he knows is his greedy profits. Mathematica is so overpriced it makes my iphone X laugh about their pricing.

  • John The lion heart says:

    It’s all me me me with mr wolfram

  • cailey says:

    wolframalpha.com

  • Steven Hines says:

    First off: I don't pretend to understand much of this, but, I don't trust this guy. (Also, I don't know much philosophy so a lot of this rant is from intuition.) I don't trust AI when its architects begin to discuss how it will interact with free will. It appears that Wolfram is utterly amoral – he has actually said that he detests the word "consciousness". His philosophy essentially states that if we follow the universal program, it will eventually result in consciousness. My worldview is the opposite and rests on consciousness being primary. His ideas are frightening because I think the philosophy that simple rules and programs can eventually describe the entire universe is accurate. Reminds me of Chomsky describing the language and the mind – how a very finite lexicon following common and simple rules can be used to express an infinite range of thoughts. When Wolfram says "harness … for human purposes" I have to ask which "humans" he is referring to. My sense is that he is referring to the elites. How the ruling class decides to implement AI to replace bureaucracy could lead, in short order, to a "Terminator", "Brave New World", or "I, Robot" scenario.

  • Álvaro MD says:

    How interesting is to watch as he exhibits his unshakable confidence and noticing that the world went all along in the complete opposite direction in terms of knowledge production and aggregation (with wikis, collaborations in general and now blockchain), a direction that no individualist project as his can ever meet. Therapy is the missing element here. Seeing his egomania in honest perspective would help him achieve true wisdom; if there’s no time for that, he could at least watch some of Chomsky’s et. al master classes in humbleness. And that, perhaps, could inspire a pathway by which he could one day become comparable to some of the great thinkers of our times, which all understand that the world is always too vast in comparison to any individual contribution.
    Arrogance + time: convergence to ridiculous.

  • Robert Schlesinger says:

    Nice talk, but WolframAlpha still has some mathematical glitches that yield incorrect answers, and this is a problem.

  • David Pike says:

    If Tensorflow endpoints had a Yahoo UI.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *