Hacker News Reader

Comment by dev1ycan | Hacker News Reader

You can't take this back, this literally just discredited the only nobel that actually mattered, great job discrediting the nobel.

View on HN

Two of my research advisers whose dissertations in PhD Physics had Hopfield as their primary reference. I'm also a PhD candidate working on one right now (no longer my primary reference because of all the developments) but I can trace several of my main references back to them.

This is an appropriate application of this prize considering the adage that there are now three pillars to science, the third being simulation (after theory and experiment).

Also, many of the underlying theories in machine learning display deep analogy with physical laws we are already familiar with, e.g., thermodynamics.

Machine learning is much bigger than chatbots.

Hey!

>the adage that there are now three pillars to science, the third being simulation (after theory and experiment)

Any specific place I could learn more about this? (aside from Google obv.)

I do simulation for a living, so that is mega-interesting to me.

I heard it from a professor who was a researcher in magnetohydrodynamics, studying flows on and under the surface of the sun. I don't know where to read more unfortunately, I'm not sure where it'sbeen fleshed out as an ideology.

Finance, biology, CS, anything that uses vaguely statistical models and principles is fair game now?

I don’t hate physics, but if you stretch terms like that they tend to lose meaning.

I am having trouble coming up with more examples of "methods which revolutionized the practice of statistics", can you think of any?

Is statistical mechanics not a physics discipline?

What Nobel-worthy physical, chemical, or biological process has been solved/discovered in silico?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com