Wolfram’s massive book was panned by academics for being derivative of other work and yet stingy with attribution. “He insinuates that he is largely responsible for basic ideas that have been central dogma in complex systems theory for 20 years,” a fellow researcher told the Times Higher Education in 2002.Wolfram’s self-aggrandizement is especially vexing because it seems unnecessary. His achievements speak for themselves—if only he’d let them. Mathematica was a success almost as soon as it launched. Users were hungry for it; at universities, the program soon became as ubiquitous as Microsoft Word.

(I’m happy to have made at least one contribution to Beatrice’s life: introducing her to her husband, now of 26 years, Terry Sejnowski, one of the founders of modern computational neuroscience.)

If we were observers who routinely traced  every motion of every molecule, we would say, what do you mean that there's randomness in  what's going on? There's no randomness. I can see what every individual molecule does. So  in a sense, that's an example of a place where being an observer of the kind we are is the  thing that causes us to perceive laws of the kind we perceive.

The physicistsStephen Wolfram and Brosl Hasslacher introduced me, in the early1980s, to chaos theory and nonlinear systems. In the 1990s, I learnedabout complex systems from conversations with Danny Hillis, the bi-ologist Stuart Kauffman, the Nobel-laureate physicist Murray Gell-Mann, and others. Most recently, Hasslacher and the electrical engineerand device physicist Mark Reed have been giving me insight into the in-credible possibilities of molecular electronics.

wyszukiwarek takich jak WolframAlpha