7 ms·

I just learned that Stephen Wolfram himself is a bit of a crank apparently. https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbC

I just learned that Stephen Wolfram himself is a bit of a crank apparently. https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF

lutusp 3mo ago
The linked video is a must-see -- it's one of those rare video essays that shed more light than heat.
Maro 3mo ago
This is well known, old news. I would not call him a crank, he's just an "independent physicist". He is a very successful and wealthy businessman thanks to Mathematica, with $100Ms of wealth presumably, and he choses to do physics in his own way, pursuing subjects that he finds interesting, in ways he finds interesting. And he writes about his work and himself in grandiose ways, usually comparing himself to Newton and Einstein. Nothing major has come out of his research, other then one of his co-workers proving that one of the simple CAs is Turing complete. Most academic physicists ignore him, but that's fine. Personally, I think we need more people like Wolfram who are doing totally independent research, with their own funds. Statistically, something unexpectedly good could come out of it! His latest research subject is Ruliology: https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2026/01/what-is-ruliology/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2026/01/what-is-ruliolog...
- zozbot234 3mo ago
  > I would not call him a crank > And he writes about his work and himself in grandiose ways, usually comparing himself to Newton and Einstein ... Nothing major has come out of his research okay
  - geertj 3mo ago
    The word ‘crank’ is a dismissive insult. Wolfram is definitely eccentric, probably hard to work with, but also undoubtedly smart. What good does it do to dismiss him? He’s doing nothing wrong spending his own money the way he wants to. And who knows something will come out of this. Similar to GP I’d like to see more of this.
    - UltraSane 3mo ago
      A crank is a real pattern of behavior where a person tries to prove things they don't have enough knowledge and intelligence to even understand correctly.
    - Qem 3mo ago
      > He’s doing nothing wrong spending his own money the way he wants to. Except stealing credit for work done by his employees. Read about his lawsuit against Matthew Cook.
  - ACS_Solver 3mo ago
    Wolfram is definitely not a crank. Cranks do not understand scientific methods and also have a minimal understanding of whatever field they're trying to be active in. Like trying to push physics theories while demonstrably failing to understand high school level calculus. Cranks are also conspiracy theorists who inevitably believe knowledge like theirs is being suppressed. Wolfram does display a similar ego to cranks. He tends to place his cellular automata at the same tier of importance as general relativity or wave-particle duality. But unlike cranks, he doesn't say that Einstein, Feynman and other greats are wrong, he doesn't "prove" his theories by math-looking babble that is definitely not math. He loves cellular automata and so much of what he writes is more like philosophy of science than science. He will model certain processes as an automaton and then he jumps from that to every natural process being a cellular automaton. Eccentric, definitely, and most of his physics research isn't accepted but he's several orders above the level of crank.
themafia 3mo ago
It's easy to find Wolfram tedious but I've not seem him be particularly disruptive to other efforts nor did his crankery lead to his current success. He's on the same level with Eric Weinstein. Your best bet is to ignore them.
- mr_mitm 3mo ago
  I'd like to push back on that comparison. At least unlike Weinstein, Wolfram produced a genuinely impressive and useful piece of software, which empowers scientists and students worldwide. While his physics work is a little questionable and not too interesting, he doesn't seem to care too much what other people think. He'd never latch on to some podcast bro to give his ideas a wider reach. All Weinstein does is drop big names left and right and whine about how Big String Theory has taken over modern physics and suppresses free thinkers.
  - themafia 3mo ago
    That's fair. What I was trying to get at is that Weinstein is also independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field. There may be small parts of truth in his critique of the field but GU is just so completely batty and ignorant it's worth discounting his analysis here entirely. I find greater fault in the pushing of his "Intellectual Dark Web" pseudo-cult. So I would agree he's actually a contemptible character but for slightly different reasons.
    - HSO 3mo ago
      > independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field what field?
      - tessellated 3mo ago
        Talking Bullshyt. See: https://anathem.fandom.com/wiki/Bulshytt https://anathem.fandom.com/wiki/Bulshytt
      - themafia 3mo ago
UltraSane 3mo ago
Wolfram is too smart to be a true crank, but his ego is even bigger than his IQ and he thinks he should rank up there with Newton and Einstein.
- jmcqk6 3mo ago
  yeah he's not a crank, just an asshole. Taking credit for work did by his employees, to the point of suing them. The only significant discovery to come out of his CA work was completed by an employee, who wolfram sued when he published a paper and gave a talk on it.

I just learned that Stephen Wolfram himself is a bit of a crank apparently. https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF

lutusp 3mo ago

The linked video is a must-see -- it's one of those rare video essays that shed more light than heat.

Maro 3mo ago

This is well known, old news. I would not call him a crank, he's just an "independent physicist". He is a very successful and wealthy businessman thanks to Mathematica, with $100Ms of wealth presumably, and he choses to do physics in his own way, pursuing subjects that he finds interesting, in ways he finds interesting. And he writes about his work and himself in grandiose ways, usually comparing himself to Newton and Einstein. Nothing major has come out of his research, other then one of his co-workers proving that one of the simple CAs is Turing complete. Most academic physicists ignore him, but that's fine. Personally, I think we need more people like Wolfram who are doing totally independent research, with their own funds. Statistically, something unexpectedly good could come out of it! His latest research subject is Ruliology: https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2026/01/what-is-ruliology/ https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2026/01/what-is-ruliolog...

zozbot234 3mo ago
> I would not call him a crank > And he writes about his work and himself in grandiose ways, usually comparing himself to Newton and Einstein ... Nothing major has come out of his research okay
- geertj 3mo ago
  The word ‘crank’ is a dismissive insult. Wolfram is definitely eccentric, probably hard to work with, but also undoubtedly smart. What good does it do to dismiss him? He’s doing nothing wrong spending his own money the way he wants to. And who knows something will come out of this. Similar to GP I’d like to see more of this.
  - UltraSane 3mo ago
    A crank is a real pattern of behavior where a person tries to prove things they don't have enough knowledge and intelligence to even understand correctly.
  - Qem 3mo ago
    > He’s doing nothing wrong spending his own money the way he wants to. Except stealing credit for work done by his employees. Read about his lawsuit against Matthew Cook.
- ACS_Solver 3mo ago
  Wolfram is definitely not a crank. Cranks do not understand scientific methods and also have a minimal understanding of whatever field they're trying to be active in. Like trying to push physics theories while demonstrably failing to understand high school level calculus. Cranks are also conspiracy theorists who inevitably believe knowledge like theirs is being suppressed. Wolfram does display a similar ego to cranks. He tends to place his cellular automata at the same tier of importance as general relativity or wave-particle duality. But unlike cranks, he doesn't say that Einstein, Feynman and other greats are wrong, he doesn't "prove" his theories by math-looking babble that is definitely not math. He loves cellular automata and so much of what he writes is more like philosophy of science than science. He will model certain processes as an automaton and then he jumps from that to every natural process being a cellular automaton. Eccentric, definitely, and most of his physics research isn't accepted but he's several orders above the level of crank.

themafia 3mo ago

It's easy to find Wolfram tedious but I've not seem him be particularly disruptive to other efforts nor did his crankery lead to his current success. He's on the same level with Eric Weinstein. Your best bet is to ignore them.

mr_mitm 3mo ago
I'd like to push back on that comparison. At least unlike Weinstein, Wolfram produced a genuinely impressive and useful piece of software, which empowers scientists and students worldwide. While his physics work is a little questionable and not too interesting, he doesn't seem to care too much what other people think. He'd never latch on to some podcast bro to give his ideas a wider reach. All Weinstein does is drop big names left and right and whine about how Big String Theory has taken over modern physics and suppresses free thinkers.
- themafia 3mo ago
  That's fair. What I was trying to get at is that Weinstein is also independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field. There may be small parts of truth in his critique of the field but GU is just so completely batty and ignorant it's worth discounting his analysis here entirely. I find greater fault in the pushing of his "Intellectual Dark Web" pseudo-cult. So I would agree he's actually a contemptible character but for slightly different reasons.
  - HSO 3mo ago
    > independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field what field?
    - tessellated 3mo ago
      Talking Bullshyt. See: https://anathem.fandom.com/wiki/Bulshytt https://anathem.fandom.com/wiki/Bulshytt
    - themafia 3mo ago

UltraSane 3mo ago

Wolfram is too smart to be a true crank, but his ego is even bigger than his IQ and he thinks he should rank up there with Newton and Einstein.

jmcqk6 3mo ago
yeah he's not a crank, just an asshole. Taking credit for work did by his employees, to the point of suing them. The only significant discovery to come out of his CA work was completed by an employee, who wolfram sued when he published a paper and gave a talk on it.