Rating: 
Summary: My two cents
Review: Mine will be slightly redundant, but I finally finished this thing, and I am going to review it for those of you who haven't.If you are new to the scene, possibly a lay mathematician or physicist, or maybe were intrigued by some of the popular books out there, don't buy this book because you will only poison the well. Besides the sheer enormity of it will require a special call to the sanitation department. I would also highly recommend the AMS Notices review - it presented both the pros and cons quite succinctly. The pros are that it is a wonderful collection and exploration of cellular automata (CA) and that it tries to model different physical processes by these CA's and their rules. This, however, is how it graduates to fringe science. Any trained scientist and mathematician will agree that there are more things that we don't know than we do. There are more differential equations we can't solve exactly than we can. These tell us about quantum interactions, solutions to Einstein's field equations, the flow of a viscous fluid, ... it goes on. Add some electrons to our celebrated quantum theory or planets to the solar system and we have problems. What Wolfram does is he claims that lifelong attempts to reconcile these complications are useless. Rather, he alone, while sequestered somewhere, away from scientific scrutiny, from the demands of mathematical rigor by peer review, has solved everything. Some of the problems that he has with the current way of doing business aren't unreasonable - but they are certainly not any more valid than others. A New Kind of Science is hubris and arrogance. It lacks any references to any body of work outside of his own (you would think day one for Wolfram started with him inventing the integers so he may have Z^d to play on); the technical notes are cast entirely in the language of Mathematica (Wolfram Research's most well-know software) which makes it difficult to read; it was obviously not edited by a third person; it claims to have solved many general problems, but does not offer proof and, the most troubling, it is mathematically inconsistent. Bottom line: if you are interested in CA, buy a book on CA. If you are interested in dynamical systems, complexity, markets, theoretical biology, gravity,... consult many of the well written, well received, and humble accounts by people that have either researched for a general audience or have published since they were twenty in a field. Self-proclaimed polymaths with no recent work are not the place to look. PS: If really is a comprehensive study of CA. It is very well done, and is probably the most complete. Just because a CA looks like a cloud doesn't mean that it describes it.
Rating:
Summary: 1,192 pages without anything "new"
Review: Peer reviewed research has been published about cellular automata for years. This book presents nothing new on the topic. Worse yet, Wolfram fails to mention the previous research by hundreds of scientists. Wolfram leads the reader to believe he is the first and only person to experiment with cellular automata and document their potential to produce complex results from simple algorithms. This book is written in an annoying 1st person style that Wolfram continually uses to pat himself on the back. Every page contains several paragraphs structured around the word "but". No conclusions are drawn other than to note that his cellular automata produce intersting pictures. This leads one to think Wolfram wrote the book tucked away in his office while pouring over computer simulation after simulation with little to no editorial suggestions from anyone other than his company's yes-men. I should have taken the advice of the numerous negative reviews and not wasted my money on it. After reading it, there's no way I want to keep this book for future reference. I hope I can get a few dollars for it on eBay. The bottom line is there are plenty of other books available covering the topic of cellular automata that are more concise, appropriately explain previous advances in the topic and don't contain a nauseating amount of arrogance.
Rating: 
Summary: Oulipo, anyone?
Review: There's a French group of experimental writers called "Oulipo." Among the many ideas they have for gaining creativity by constraining the writing process is to try to use the same word repetitively in a story or poem. For instance, try to write a story using the word "black" in every sentence. Wolfram has unwittingly managed to accomplish an Oulipo feat with this book. He repeats the phrase "new kind of science" on nearly every page of this massive tome, like some sort of mantra. It stands out after a while, and I actually started to laugh every time I read it. The author desperately needed an editor to give this book a bit of tightening, but from the backstory I've read about its creation, his ego wouldn't allow it. This should tell you, prospective reader, what sort of writing you're in for. Other reviewers have sufficiently covered the main problems with this book, mainly that he gives pretty interesting examples of cellular automata behavior, then makes a huge extrapolatory jump to other fields without any illustration of a link between them. Also, the idea of emergent phenomena isn't new or unique to Wolfram, but he makes it sound like no one else ever thought of these things before. This book isn't worth your $... Have a look through it at the bookstore to see the highly detailed (and somewhat repetitive) diagrams, then move on. With the amount of shelfspace this book takes up, you can surely find three more interesting books to fill the same area. Oh, and while you're in the bookstore, open to any page and see if you can find the phrase "new kind of science." I'll bet you find it on the first try.
Rating:
Summary: Not the simplest answer for life, and the universe, etc.
Review: I am surprised that in reading these reviews I have seen no references to Douglas Adams, and his very simple answer, 42. Perhaps I missed them. The idea that the universe's complexity could have emerged from repeated application of simple rules is not a new one, but it may be new to many readers. If it is new to you, this book is probably an acceptable introduction (although one might want to progress from here to the original, but older works of Alan Turing, Konrad Zuse, or even Rodney Brooks). Unfortunately, as with Adams's answer (which is meaningless without the right question), the real work is yet to be done. The power of a new method for modeling the observable comes from its ability to predict the unintuitive. Or better yet, work backwards from a desired prediction to the conditions that should give rise to its fulfillment. For example, if you want a cannon ball to hit a particular point on the ground, you can apply the predictive power of Newtonian mechanics to determine the angle at which the cannon should be aimed, the amount of force that should be applied to launch the cannonball, etc. and achieve your desired results. Although the author compares his work favorably to Newton's (also exceptionally arrogant, by the way), "A new kind of science" offers none of the pragmatic value of work by even lesser mortals. Perhaps that will be the topic of Wolfram's next book?
Rating: 
Summary: Would some PLEASE write a REAL review?
Review: If you wish to dispute his claim, write a paper and submit it to the scientific publication of your choice. Some of you people sound like a bunch of Flat-Earthers shaking your fist at Columbus. The "Eton Narcissist?" Since when does one resort to name-calling in order to properly review a book? If you want to extol his virtues? "The Hand of God?" Please. Did he pay you for that? He should. I read about this book in Discover magazine, and being highly curious and a total layperson, I came here to check it out. Based on the article itself, I do believe I'm going to going to read this book.
Rating:
Summary: shows the dangers of solitude and obsession
Review: Wolfram devoted 10 years to this book, but you get the feeling that it wasn't time spent getting feedback from other people. It has a solitary, obsessed quality about it. It just seems like a book that has gone off the rails - ten years of playing with CA in mathematica, becoming convinced that he had discovered something fundamental in the patterns. Now it may well turn out that all the nay-sayers are ignorant, and that Wolfram really has discovered "a new kind of science". The problem is that scientists already use CA and similar modeling techniques in fields like computational biology and weather forecasting. A lot of people, myself included, have already suspected that the universe is a giant CA machine that is computationally irreducable, and I only have a BA in computer science. Ten years would have been better spent solving a specific problem using CA, such as predicting when the next hurricane will hit Florida, etc. I will give the book 3 stars just for the sheer amount of effort he put into it -- and because it is such a strange and unique work. Also, it shows the dangers of solitude and obsession with a particular idea. And, on second thought, the guy who solved the Fibonacci problem spent about 14 years working on it by himself. So, society does have a need for a couple of obsessed solitary mathematicians.
Rating:
Summary: UNscientific
Review: Although Wolfram's "discoveries" are interesting, they are not as scientifically rigorous as he makes them seem. In the book, Wolfram comments on some cellular automata's tendencies towards complexity and randomness in their behavior. But he never defines his usage of the words "complex" and "random" and "simple." These important terms, used many many times in his book, should have been very clearly defined. It is supposed to be "a new kind of science," after all, and science must be rigorous and clear in its results. Wolfram barely gives the reader any idea of what he means by "simple machines can create complex behavior." Wolfram is rigorous in that he tested an amazingly wide range of cellular automata types, but he is not rigorous in his study of any particular cellular automata. He never really even attempts to explain any of the complex behavior. The book would have been much stronger if he had presented a more balanced view, if he had given more concrete evidence and proof that certain cellular automata are really "complex." Pages after pages of apparently complex behavior doesn't do it for me. I need more hard evidence than that, before I can even consider believing the potential implications and applications of Wolfram's discoveries. Maybe Wolfram did have a definition of "complexity" in mind, but he didn't make it very clear, and as a result I was not able to find his "discoveries" all that powerful, nor take their "implications" too seriously. And maybe he did make attempts to find reasons for the complexity of cellular automata (I have no background in cellular automata so I wouldn't know). But he didn't include very much in the book. Furthermore, Wolfram seemed to be way too full of himself in his book. Every other page, he cannot help but repeat how "important" these discoveries are going to be. He cannot help but brag and try to convince the reader that he's a genius. Let your work speak for itself. I found the book hard to read at times because it was so repetitive with Wolfram's self-praising blabber. Wolfram probably also jumped far too ahead of himself with the hundreds of applications and implications that he proposes. He should have focused on showing more evidence that his ideas are true and valid before talking about how important they are. But I guess someone who got his PhD at age 20 is inevitably bound to become stuck up like that.
Rating:
Summary: Selling pretty pictures
Review: I can't muster the beautiful sarcasm of other reviewers, but it is true that Wolfram must believe he is either God or a used car salesman. It is amazing that anyone takes this book seriously. Reads like propaganda for a hostile takeover of science from a CEO. Some of it may be good (the things I don't know anything about and can't judge) but the biology section is vacuous. As far as I can tell, this is a big book about why the author thought of everything before anyone else.
Rating: 
Summary: A masterpiece of clarity
Review: "Science": 1. Possession of knowledge as distinguished from ignorance and misunderstanding; 2. Systemitized knowledge as an object of study; 3a. knowledge covering general truths 3b. covering the physical world and its phenomena; 4. A system or method based, or purporting to be based on scientivic principle.
I came to open this tome (1200 pages) in boredom and the certain conviction that "New Science" had to be a pretentious over reach. I write this in the awe-full knowledge that the title is modest. The apostle Paul wrote;-(Corinthians 13) about having the gift of prophesy, understanding all mysteries but failing to love. Dr. Wolfram clearly has it all! His grasp of the Mystery is sure and loving and without pretense. He shows us the details of 20 years effort, how it fits, and where he suspects the path leads. There is never a recourse to the indecipherable nor footnotes to the classics......they aren't needed.
Rating:
Summary: THE PCE
Review: The Principle of Computational Equivalence is the most important discovery in the history of the universe. It is no less than the hand of God, and Stephen Wolfram has discovered it. Every other theory developed by human intelligence is a mere engineering exercise by comparison. Dispute the proof of the PCE, perhaps. But dispute the incredibly profound implications that follow if the PCE turns out to be true and you are not only hideously irrational but also laughably wrong. There is really nothing more to say.
| 
