The lovely thing about Stephen is, that when he says "We should probably wrap up soon", usually, that means that the discussion will continue at least an hour more. I like that kind of resolve to refute time constraints. I like these discussions a lot, although at a very high level, since they go over the same things, each iteration clarifies the more esoteric ideas.
Totally agree and feel like you but on top of that, there is also something special and pleasant about Stephen way of talking that it never gets you tired of listening to.
"although at a very high level, since they go over the same things, each iteration clarifies the more esoteric ideas." Oh my god, you should know that your idea inspired me.
It’s always a pleasure to listen to Stephen and Jonathan in deep discussion! 😌💭 Jonathan is especially impressive in his fusion of analytical and creative thinking!
@Mike Fuller I tried to function as a potentiator in our conversation, i.e. a conduit through which Jonathan could freely elaborate on his original perspective! I’m still so pleased he agreed to appear with me, and I hope he’ll agree to a “part 2” 😇💭
When the old wolf and the young wolf get together I think there is hope the Wolfram Model will be able to explain the Standard Model and give us the way to build Warp Drives !!!! It usually takes me two or three viewings to understand them but still I think the Wolfram model has so much more discoveries ahead !!! Thank you so much to both men for moving us closer to understanding and discovery!!!
People. How can anyone take you seriously if you don't seem to be able to provide the audio of the video in at least perfect, but better in ultra-perfect quality?
I suspect the word Jonathan was looking for, describing the ""code as data" paradigm, is homoiconicity. This (roughly) means that code in a language is represented using data structures, which can be interpreted using the language. Clojure, for example, is homoiconic.
I'm worried about Stephen here. He doesn't look at ease/looks sad. Does anyone else notice this? Is the dynamic between Stephen and Jonathan ok? Really hope so. As for this session, it's so great as an observer that Stephen disentangles everything Jonathan says. Without this, I'd be even more lost. Anyway, thank you gentlemen. You are both absolutely incredible and the fact you are sharing your work on UA-cam is a beautiful and generous gift to society.
Read Gorard's twitter comments from today about his relationship with SW - - seems like it's dead. What a pity, SW must really be a difficult person...
@@lavenderlime9017 Why assume it's Wolfram? Anyway, how very, very sad. For the two involved, emotions are probably high and thus they will be unable to view it as a bad thing... but to outsiders its a waste and very regrettable.
Stephen said in another video, maybe also in this video, that the morphism in category theory isn't applicable to computational irreducibility because if there is a morphism from A to B and another from B to C, then one can only jump directly with a third morphism from A to C if there is computational reducibility. But maybe that's useful! As a filter for computational reducibility.
Surface(cos(u/2)cos(v/2),cos(u/2)sin (v/2),sin(u)/2) 0>u>4π 0>v>2π A single sided closed surface. It is all so connected that there is no way to even prove that it's single sided. It is inderterminability itself.
Attribution. The mapping of paths curves relations onto what we understand as aspects, attributes, characters of things. Describing is this. Things are things in themselves as we define things because of densities of energies attributes paths but we experience them, as we interact with them , as they map onto our needs agency and perception. But the best way the simplest way, the path of least action way, imho, of describing the process which is the largest scale blatantly manifesting physical universe is Surface(cos(u/2)cos(v/2),cos(u/2)sin (v/2),sin(u)/2) 0>u>4π 0>v>2π "Shirley's Surface" Mr Seguin and I discussed it but I have not figured out how to prove single sided without rotation but it is literally indeterminable because it is single sided. There are no relations. The path of least action, minimal energy, single sided closed surface. Which describes the fundamental energy flow of the universe as described by gravity, which is low density flows to high. Gravity is the innate fundamental concentration of energy. Mass is concentrated energy. And gravity aggregates mass, thus aggregates energy. This is the flow, the curve, from least to most. Persistence is generally the maintenance of a state, the maintenance of an orbit. Notice that the above shape requires 4π, 2 full rotations. Electron half spin. This manifold maintains conservation at all points at all moments. The chain and the anti chain simultaneously at all points An electron on this side is the inverse on the other side, a positron. One orbit here as an electron, 3 dimensions of divergence, and simultaneously it is also 3 dimensions of convergence, the interior to the electrons exterior. A photon is in contact with all points of both surfaces at all moments. It's an electron and a positron conjoined as a sphere expanding at c. The exterior surface divergent continually and the interior always convergent yet both of these are the two sides of a single membrane. The thing and it's inverse. What is the Hopf fibration of the above single sided closed surface I wonder?
@@matterasmachine It's a joke...lol But lets be honest you probably think you should be the god emperor of the world, which actually makes you the one that is crazy.
@@matterasmachine You aren't fooling anyone but yourself you know. it's crazy to me because your theory is very similar to Wolfram's, but Wolframs is an actual working model...you don't have anything but abstractions. I'll repeat...Wolfram HAS A MODEL...you do not. I can't imagine being as delusional as you are right now...
If anyone’s curious about Jonathan’s philosophical perspectives on multicomputation and fundamental ontology, I’ve just published our conversation here: m.ua-cam.com/video/LjlnZxUd8h4/v-deo.html
@Wolfram. Please. I know I'm undisciplined and unschooled but that surface. The group of all groups. All possibilities in its singularity. The mesh is wrong though. The entire bottom is one, singular. A whole surface, 2π 2π. The upper section is the entire density gradient. The bottom is one The top is 1/2 1/4 1/8, 1/16..... The gravity gradient. Another whole surface describing all the other densities, and yet the singular, at the same time. 4π
The circle and it's inversion..... The calculation and its inverse. The inside of event horizon is the antimatter side of universe. Point for point they map onto each other. The apparent two sides of a single sided universe. The node of Shirley's Surface is where all paths converge. Event horizon but not a singularity in truth as there is no outside. A single sided surface. Surface(cos(u/2)cos(v/2),cos(u/2)sin (v/2),sin(u)/2) 0>u>4π 0>v>2π
Do you want a coordinate in our parent universe? The big bang is coterminous with everywhere that was for the universe, and still is. This whole thing is that same explosion. In our universe, there's nowhere it wasn't. "Where's" are within it. There's no "where" outside of it unless this thing is the product of some process in some kind of parent universe, or some such. We may never be able to answer that sort of "where" question. It likely doesn't have any real salient meaning at all. Moreover, this ostensible spatiality may be a mere emergent condensate of a higher dimensional dynamis. Consider for example the holographic principle. Ostensible 3d-ality may be an emergent facade altogether. "Location" from a higher-dim perspective may drop away as an overly primitive frame to even think about such a question in a meaningful way.
The Endomorphism simultaneously contains an enters into the isomorphic monoidal quantum field, together cuffing mass as an automophic structure. N QFT GR S Matrix. N•𝙓(𝙎 z 𝙍𝙁𝙦𝙩(𝙜𝙪 )𝙕( 𝙐𝙂)𝙏𝙌𝙛𝙧 z 𝙎)𝙔•И
The lovely thing about Stephen is, that when he says "We should probably wrap up soon", usually, that means that the discussion will continue at least an hour more. I like that kind of resolve to refute time constraints. I like these discussions a lot, although at a very high level, since they go over the same things, each iteration clarifies the more esoteric ideas.
Classic Wolfram. ^.^
Totally agree and feel like you but on top of that, there is also something special and pleasant about Stephen way of talking that it never gets you tired of listening to.
"although at a very high level, since they go over the same things, each iteration clarifies the more esoteric ideas." Oh my god, you should know that your idea inspired me.
@@Nhannguyen-jn2ow Glad you got inspired. Go forth and do great things! Human beings are awesome!
It’s always a pleasure to listen to Stephen and Jonathan in deep discussion! 😌💭 Jonathan is especially impressive in his fusion of analytical and creative thinking!
Agreed!
Glad you’re listening to this!
@@TheMeaningCode ☺️ Also studying it… lovely synergies are emerging…
@Mike Fuller I tried to function as a potentiator in our conversation, i.e. a conduit through which Jonathan could freely elaborate on his original perspective! I’m still so pleased he agreed to appear with me, and I hope he’ll agree to a “part 2” 😇💭
@Mike Fuller A genuine genius!
I've been waiting for this moment for months!!!
Its Great see Jonathan again and to get updated with his research.
Pity about the poor sound. Jonathan is too loud and clipping. Stephen’s mic appears to be off and we hear him via Jonathan’s mic.
@Wolfram 🤘🖖. Wonderful to see you both together again. And it feels like Jon you've really had time to settle into your understanding
Marvelous to see Jonathan and Stephen talking about CT
I can't wait for Jonathan's forthcoming book.
Love these conversations between Stephen and Jonathan, thank you for sharing :)
When the old wolf and the young wolf get together I think there is hope the Wolfram Model will be able to explain the Standard Model and give us the way to build Warp Drives !!!! It usually takes me two or three viewings to understand them but still I think the Wolfram model has so much more discoveries ahead !!! Thank you so much to both men for moving us closer to understanding and discovery!!!
People. How can anyone take you seriously if
you don't seem to be able to provide the
audio of the video in at least perfect,
but better in ultra-perfect quality?
Rule 30 shows the difference between chaos and regularity, we live in the transition of the boundary.
I suspect the word Jonathan was looking for, describing the ""code as data" paradigm, is homoiconicity.
This (roughly) means that code in a language is represented using data structures, which can be interpreted using the language. Clojure, for example, is homoiconic.
I'm worried about Stephen here. He doesn't look at ease/looks sad. Does anyone else notice this? Is the dynamic between Stephen and Jonathan ok? Really hope so.
As for this session, it's so great as an observer that Stephen disentangles everything Jonathan says. Without this, I'd be even more lost.
Anyway, thank you gentlemen. You are both absolutely incredible and the fact you are sharing your work on UA-cam is a beautiful and generous gift to society.
Read Gorard's twitter comments from today about his relationship with SW - - seems like it's dead. What a pity, SW must really be a difficult person...
@@lavenderlime9017 Why assume it's Wolfram? Anyway, how very, very sad. For the two involved, emotions are probably high and thus they will be unable to view it as a bad thing... but to outsiders its a waste and very regrettable.
I've noticed that Stephen respects Jonathan as a very smart man. That's a pretty good position in life.
missed these two
2:40:00 Jonathan's comment on the "illumination of all computational structures" is a perfect cosplay of Stephen describing things 😂.
Stephen said in another video, maybe also in this video, that the morphism in category theory isn't applicable to computational irreducibility because if there is a morphism from A to B and another from B to C, then one can only jump directly with a third morphism from A to C if there is computational reducibility. But maybe that's useful! As a filter for computational reducibility.
Surface(cos(u/2)cos(v/2),cos(u/2)sin (v/2),sin(u)/2) 0>u>4π 0>v>2π
A single sided closed surface. It is all so connected that there is no way to even prove that it's single sided.
It is inderterminability itself.
When we consider "all possible interactions" doesn't it make sense that there will be a restriction of the subsets that are mutually consistent?
ABSOLUTELY GOLD
OMG yes thank the ancestor simulators for granting us this content!!!
3:00:08 - “Part time Wizard.” Totally made my day. ☮️ 🧙♀️ ❤️ ^.^
Attribution.
The mapping of paths curves relations onto what we understand as aspects, attributes, characters of things. Describing is this.
Things are things in themselves as we define things because of densities of energies attributes paths but we experience them, as we interact with them , as they map onto our needs agency and perception.
But the best way the simplest way, the path of least action way, imho, of describing the process which is the largest scale blatantly manifesting physical universe is
Surface(cos(u/2)cos(v/2),cos(u/2)sin (v/2),sin(u)/2) 0>u>4π 0>v>2π
"Shirley's Surface"
Mr Seguin and I discussed it but I have not figured out how to prove single sided without rotation but it is literally indeterminable because it is single sided.
There are no relations.
The path of least action, minimal energy, single sided closed surface. Which describes the fundamental energy flow of the universe as described by gravity, which is low density flows to high. Gravity is the innate fundamental concentration of energy. Mass is concentrated energy. And gravity aggregates mass, thus aggregates energy. This is the flow, the curve, from least to most. Persistence is generally the maintenance of a state, the maintenance of an orbit.
Notice that the above shape requires 4π, 2 full rotations. Electron half spin.
This manifold maintains conservation at all points at all moments. The chain and the anti chain simultaneously at all points
An electron on this side is the inverse on the other side, a positron. One orbit here as an electron, 3 dimensions of divergence, and simultaneously it is also 3 dimensions of convergence, the interior to the electrons exterior.
A photon is in contact with all points of both surfaces at all moments. It's an electron and a positron conjoined as a sphere expanding at c. The exterior surface divergent continually and the interior always convergent yet both of these are the two sides of a single membrane.
The thing and it's inverse.
What is the Hopf fibration of the above single sided closed surface I wonder?
How about introducing the notions of synonyms, antonyms and homonyms to fine tune the semantic notion?
"It's just a Turing Machine, it's all good!" - Subtitle of NKS.
Just amazing.
I am working on making them guests in Berlin... hopefully it will be possible...
Anything come of it?
FANTASTIC !!! yeah. 😀
The two god emperors of the new world
you are crazy
@@matterasmachine It's a joke...lol
But lets be honest you probably think you should be the god emperor of the world, which actually makes you the one that is crazy.
@@NightmareCourtPictures I don’t think anything. I just want to show a working model and not abstractions.
@@matterasmachine You aren't fooling anyone but yourself you know. it's crazy to me because your theory is very similar to Wolfram's, but Wolframs is an actual working model...you don't have anything but abstractions. I'll repeat...Wolfram HAS A MODEL...you do not.
I can't imagine being as delusional as you are right now...
Thanks I laughed out loud ;)
I know what Ill be doing for the next three hours. Thankyou
If anyone’s curious about Jonathan’s philosophical perspectives on multicomputation and fundamental ontology, I’ve just published our conversation here: m.ua-cam.com/video/LjlnZxUd8h4/v-deo.html
2:55:10 Multiverse of Madness
Could we please get some time steps for the uploads? @wolfram it would be very useful
Anyone else here hypothesize that most of us in the comments section of this video would be good friends irl? ...that we'd be very thankful to know?
I occasionally understood 3 consecutive words.
😂👌
😅
Every time you watch it, it grows to n+1 consecutive words.
I had to pause and look up terms a dozen times while watching it.
1:15:37 - Groovy. ^.^
@Wolfram. Please. I know I'm undisciplined and unschooled but that surface.
The group of all groups. All possibilities in its singularity.
The mesh is wrong though. The entire bottom is one, singular. A whole surface, 2π 2π.
The upper section is the entire density gradient.
The bottom is one
The top is 1/2 1/4 1/8, 1/16..... The gravity gradient. Another whole surface describing all the other densities, and yet the singular, at the same time. 4π
Rule 30 is the rule of the code.
The circle and it's inversion.....
The calculation and its inverse.
The inside of event horizon is the antimatter side of universe. Point for point they map onto each other. The apparent two sides of a single sided universe.
The node of Shirley's Surface is where all paths converge. Event horizon but not a singularity in truth as there is no outside.
A single sided surface.
Surface(cos(u/2)cos(v/2),cos(u/2)sin (v/2),sin(u)/2) 0>u>4π 0>v>2π
so everyone talk about category theory right now
My question is where is earth on these hypergraph ? Or previous question where is what we call big bang ?
Do you want a coordinate in our parent universe?
The big bang is coterminous with everywhere that was for the universe, and still is. This whole thing is that same explosion. In our universe, there's nowhere it wasn't.
"Where's" are within it. There's no "where" outside of it unless this thing is the product of some process in some kind of parent universe, or some such. We may never be able to answer that sort of "where" question. It likely doesn't have any real salient meaning at all.
Moreover, this ostensible spatiality may be a mere emergent condensate of a higher dimensional dynamis. Consider for example the holographic principle. Ostensible 3d-ality may be an emergent facade altogether. "Location" from a higher-dim perspective may drop away as an overly primitive frame to even think about such a question in a meaningful way.
Rule 30 is the rule.
Rule 30 is the code.
God is the infinity groupoid of our universe with infinite computational power... Lol
Lol basically, yes.
@@Self-Duality infinity groupoid is such a strange object. Seems intrinsically metaphysical by nature
@@eltyo340 Correct again! In fact… all of mathematics is intrinsically metaphysical 🥰💭
💓𝓓𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓻𝓸𝓬𝓱𝓻𝓸𝓷𝓸𝓵𝓸𝓰𝔂
The Endomorphism simultaneously contains an enters into the isomorphic monoidal quantum field, together cuffing mass as an automophic structure.
N QFT GR S Matrix.
N•𝙓(𝙎 z 𝙍𝙁𝙦𝙩(𝙜𝙪 )𝙕( 𝙐𝙂)𝙏𝙌𝙛𝙧 z 𝙎)𝙔•И
An automorphism is an isomorphism which is also an endomorphism :)
@@Self-Duality Hello 👋😁. Langlands to Langan.
Everything is Everything.
•X( z Ft(gA )Z( aG)Tf z )Y•
G is a subset of F as A is a subset of B if A is contained in B
G⊂F as A⊂B
•𝙓( z 𝙁𝙗(𝙜𝘼 )𝙕( 𝙖𝙂)𝘽𝙛 z )𝙔•
Yet 𝑰⊂𝐸
•X𝒆 ( z𝒊 ( 𝑬) Z𝑰 (𝒆 ) z𝒊 ) 𝒆Y•