You are playing games, not me. Physicists have fruitlessly been doing a lot of this for years, but machines are a lot better at doing huge utterly worthless calculations.This last bit on computers taking over the meaningless calculations strongly reminds me of the end of a poem by Michel Houellebecq:“Alors s’établira le dialogue des machines.“Then shall the dialogue of machines settle in.I think Jeremiah is the appropriate comparison. By coming out with a headline like this, it makes it look like we should abandon fish oil. Nicole Halpern wrote: John Horgan wrote that “physics, which should serve as the bedrock of science, is in some respects the most troubled field of” science. What if the failure of string theory is a failure in the language we are using to describe it – maybe Nature is actually governed by a set of rules which more closely resembles a neural network? IS the snowflake position as far as I've been able to grasp. This is becoming an increasingly large industry, see for instance promotional pieces,For an idea of where this may be going, see.Taking all these developments together, it starts to become clear what the future of this field may look like, and it’s something even Horgan couldn’t have imagined. I think this is a point that should be clarified for the sake of good science.Weak emergence is noticing something interesting when we look at a larger scale.Unknown should do her/him-self a favor and grasp that living systems are impossible to research without biology. complains about my strong positions. Although I majored in literature in college, I took courses in physics and astronomy and gobbled up books on the mysteries of quantum mechanics and cosmology.For a lapsed Catholic like me, physics represented a kind of scientific theology, an empirical, rational way of probing the mysteries of existence.

I honestly don't know.Sabine wrote: It may be helpful if you distinguish strong emergence from weak emergence.Unknown wrote: Please explain how this ethical requirement appeared via human evolution during the Pleistocene.This thread began, in part, with my observation that "emergence" is simply a code word for "We don't know" and, as such, is misleading. Of course, these cyclic developments are superimposed. In the book, Horgan predicted:A few diehards dedicated to truth rather than practicality will practice physics in a nonempirical, ironic mode, plumbing the magical realm of superstrings and other esoterica and fret­ting about the meaning of quantum mechanics.

First Francis Fukuyama Education for doctorate programs should be more like physicians where they go to medical school for 4 years and then if they want to do research it should be another 3 years after this. "Emergent phenomena" often sounds like a pseudo-scientific term palmed off by scientists to disguise their bafflement.

The most baffling mysteries, e.g. I would never find satisfactory such a solution for physical theory. Nothing he can say can make up for such a ridiculous Thesis Statement. However, I think it is a total cop-out for physicists to use the anthropic principle to explain why the laws of physics are the way they are. This is an optimistic view based on the past history of science (the understanding of the principles of electromagnetiism led to many new technologies which in turn led to the discovery of deeper physical principles).

The idea that the laws of Nature upon becoming increasingly simpler suddenly erupts into complexity at a certain scale doesn’t seem right — to me it sounds like an idea or a set of assumptions, which are wrong.If this is the case then we don’t need AI to find the TOE — that would just confuse us and lead us astray — what we need is to reconsider the assumptions, which we have believed in so far, and then allow young people to write fewer meaningless papers and instead spend their time thinking.I read Horgan’s book some 20 years ago. If we replace "emergent phenomenon" with "magic" how do we know any less as a result of doing so?

@scientious, I'm assuming I'm one of the 3.It may be helpful if you distinguish strong emergence from weak emergence.Kurtz wrote: An individual has "feelings." Such diversity of research directions and interpretations could only have enriched physics and led to developments that we can only imagine. ".Kurtz wrote: So, to S.M., religion is an ad hom?Kurtz wrote: The quote I posted was by a scientist.