Comment by cjfd
3 days ago
Well, one can love playing chess and that is all fine and good and so on but if someone says that chess is the fundamental theory of the universe, how much sense does that make? There might even even be truth in that statement, who could possibly know? All we can be quite certain about is that to actually demonstrate the hypothetical truth of the statement 'chess is the fundamental theory of the universe' some number, presumably larger than 5, of nobel price level of physics discoveries need to take place.
You are making an unscientific criticism.
Wolfram's claim is that Cellukar Automata can provide as good or better mathematical model of the universe than current current theories, by commonly appreciated metrics such as "pasimony of theory" (Occam's Razor). He's not making claims about metaphysical truth.
Well, the question 'is this Wolfram guy doing science' is as such not a scientific question. And the answer is a resounding 'no'.