Most of this post seems like maybe a good intro to lambda calculus, but also endless pointless visualization of nesting depth, which makes me wonder what the point of the post is. The probably invented term "ruliology" is not even explained anywhere, and I am not going to jump through all the other posts tagged with that word, to maybe somewhere find a definition of it.
The post would have benefited from explaining what will be found clearly in an initial paragraph, instead of endlessly meandering. As it is now, it feels like wanting to find anything spectacular, but actually finding nothing. Well, except for made up term "ruliology" that is not defined.
willvarfar•1h ago
Wolfram has named his concept of the 'the universe is a program' the 'ruliad' and calls the study of it 'ruliology'. He has been using these terms and explaining them - in his long rambling way - for the last few years.
bubblyworld•1h ago
I really liked this. It's a nice meander through the basics of lambda calculus. It's striking to me how much insight you can get by visualising stuff, even if it's not a great visualisation and you're doing something super abstract. Perhaps a lesson to take into my own programbles...
tromp•33m ago
Wolfram's exploration of longest lifetimes of lambda terms of a given size is carried out more systematically in my functional busy beaver https://oeis.org/A333479
zelphirkalt•1h ago
The post would have benefited from explaining what will be found clearly in an initial paragraph, instead of endlessly meandering. As it is now, it feels like wanting to find anything spectacular, but actually finding nothing. Well, except for made up term "ruliology" that is not defined.
willvarfar•1h ago