Klik op een omslag om naar Google Boeken te gaan.
|
Bezig met laden... A New Kind of Science (origineel 2002; editie 2002)door Stephen Wolfram
Informatie over het werkA New Kind of Science door Stephen Wolfram (2002)
   Geen Bezig met laden...
 Meld je aan bij LibraryThing om erachter te komen of je dit boek goed zult vinden. Op dit moment geen Discussie gesprekken over dit boek.  bennylope | Feb 24, 2022 |  KENNERLYDAN | Jul 11, 2021 |   ) Razinha | May 23, 2017 |  ) Baku-X | Jan 10, 2017 | amelish | Sep 12, 2013 |
 "I would guess that most physicists would insist on a more traditional and rigorous treatment of the ideas in A New Kind of Science before they will take them seriously. Pictures of cellular automata are all well and good. This book has 1000 of them, and they certainly serve to illustrate that a cellular automaton can create baffling complexity starting from very little. I am not yet convinced that they tell us much of anything about science."  "In ANKS Wolfram says that '…the core of this book can be viewed as introducing a major generalization of mathematics' (p. 7). In this he is entirely mistaken, but there are at least two ways in which he has benefited mathematics: he has helped to popularize a relatively little-known mathematical area (CA theory), and he has unwittingly provided several highly instructive examples of the pitfalls of trying to dispense with mathematical rigor." "Ultimately, I do not believe that Wolfram's book represents a new kind of science, or that future generations will believe it does. His book would be more pleasant to read if he were more modest: there's a reason why bragging is generally frowned upon (regardless of whether one's achievements are worthy of it). However, I don't want to seem too critical. Despite its flaws, I really enjoyed the book, and found it fascinating and thought-provoking." "In my opinion, the readership interested in CA and the like will find this enjoyable, those in modelling will see this as relevant though naive while the mathematicians (logic) and theoretical computer scientists may find parts of this work interesting but incomplete." Onderscheidingen
Verwijzingen naar dit werk in externe bronnen.
|
Actuele discussiesGeenPopulaire omslagen
 Google Books — Bezig met laden...GenresDewey Decimale Classificatie (DDC)500Natural sciences and mathematics General Science General ScienceLC-classificatieWaarderingGemiddelde: (3.15)
Ben jij dit?Word een LibraryThing Auteur. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
)
1
If Stephen Wolfram worked on this tome for about a decade, I hate to see what he cut it down from.
Even for a book written so as to be approachable by non-technical lay readers, this book is excessively repetitive, and verbose, and repetitive. 200 pages in and I've yet to read anything that I could identify as shockingly new or usefully foundational; nothing that I hadn't been exposed to by authors whose own books or articles significantly predate A New Kind of Science.
It is, so far, excellent marketing material.
----------
The chapter on fundamental physics was interesting, at least for a non-physicist. However there is little else in the book than does not seem obvious from reading other authors who write better and bloviate less. (