Although it’s tempting to think of Wolfram|Alpha as a place to look up facts, that’s only part of the story. The thing that truly sets Wolfram|Alpha apart is that it is able to do sophisticated computations for you, both pure computations involving numbers or formulas you enter, and computations applied automatically to data called up from its repositories.
Why does computation matter? Because computation is what turns generic information into specific answers.
To give an amusing example, every school child has at one time or another written a report on the moon, and they probably included the wrong figure for how far the moon is from the earth. Why wrong? Because the distance from the earth to the moon is not constant: it changes by as much as a mile a minute. If you ask Wolfram|Alpha the distance to the moon, it tells you not only the conventionally quoted average distance, but also the actual distance right now, which can at times be well over ten thousand miles off the average. The actual distance is a figure that can be arrived at only by computation based on the moon’s known orbital parameters. It’s rocket science, if you will.
For a more down-to-earth example, consider the number of calories in a recipe. The underlying data are the calories per gram of each of the ingredients. But turning that generic information into the actual total calories for a specific recipe requires computation, first unit conversions (cups of flour into grams of flour, “one egg” into the default weight of a standard egg, etc.), then computation to multiply out the calories per ingredient and add them up. It may not be rocket science, but it sure is nice to have someone do the grunt work for you.
Each such computation requires a specific algorithm, and each of those algorithms has to be explicitly created. Of course many can be reused: units conversion or orbital mechanics, once implemented, can cover any unit or any planet. But nevertheless, enabling Wolfram|Alpha to do real, serious computations, covering a wide range of subject matters, required implementing literally tens of thousands of algorithms. Some are as simple as the quadratic formula; others are among the most sophisticated intellectual endeavors of our time.
The secret weapon that has allowed us, and no one else, to assemble such a vast library of algorithms, in such a diverse range of fields, is Mathematica.
Mathematica is familiar to scientists and engineers as the most powerful, most general tool for scientific computation, a role it has played since Version 1 was released in 1988.
Advanced Mathematica users appreciate that, aside from being an extremely powerful tool for one-off calculations, Mathematica is also a remarkably efficient programming language in which to implement complex algorithms.
The Mathematica symbolic language allows the user to express complex computational processes in a fluid, intuitive way, without having to worry about the ugly details of data structures, memory allocation, or confusing and inconsistent subroutine libraries. It is a language that feels very comfortable to subject-matter experts: people who know chemistry or economics, but not programming.
Mathematica’s language is uniquely powerful in its ability to represent data of all kinds using arbitrarily structured symbolic expressions. Mathematica programs are not restricted to working with a limited set of data types, such as arrays or strings: creating expressions that represent the logical structure of non-numerical data, or even expressions that represent other programs, is possible more easily, uniformly, and deeply than anywhere else.
The fundamentally symbolic nature of the Mathematica language allows an unprecedented degree of interoperability between different parts of the system, and between different algorithms and data sources.
As a result, the five million lines of Mathematica code that make up Wolfram|Alpha are equivalent to many tens of millions of lines of code in a lower-level language like C, Java, or Python.
Mathematica is a very tall starting point from which to begin building Wolfram|Alpha (or anything else, for that matter). While Wolfram|Alpha contains tens of thousands of original algorithms, it also makes use of a comparable number already built into Mathematica.
The algorithms built into Mathematica include some of the most sophisticated ever developed, and they cover not just mathematical computation, but the whole spectrum of logical, numerical, graphical, symbolic, and other computation.
What can you do with such a wealth of algorithms?
For example, if you give Wolfram|Alpha a mathematical formula, a polynomial say, or something involving sines and cosines, it will give you back a number of useful results: a graph of the function, a list of its zeros, factored and expanded forms, and more.
And it will give you the derivative and integral of the function you entered. Now, computing the derivative of an arbitrary function is a straightforward process, but computing integrals can be among the most difficult problems in mathematics.
The general symbolic integration algorithm in Mathematica alone represents hundreds of man-years of development work by the world’s top experts in automated integration. Wolfram|Alpha shares this algorithm, and as a result there is literally no place on earth where you can get more functions integrated than in Wolfram|Alpha (except, of course, our own older service, integrals.com, or Mathematica itself).
On top of this world-class algorithm, Wolfram|Alpha adds a very nice touch: a “Show steps” button that gives you a step-by-step explanation of how to arrive at the answer. This enhancement, like the underlying integration algorithm, is written in Mathematica language code, and it’s frankly hard to think of any other way it could have been done, given reasonable time and resources.
This is the essence of what has made Wolfram|Alpha possible. It’s not so much that it would have been impossible to do without Mathematica, but that it would have been impractically difficult. In fact, the easiest way to create Wolfram|Alpha without Mathematica would have been to write Mathematica first, then use it. Which is precisely what we have spent the past 23 years doing.
Wolfram|Alpha is in a sense the “killer app” for Mathematica. It is a chance for Mathematica to show off the astonishing range of things it is capable of doing when it is deployed, not against a specific problem, but against all problems.
I’m really exited about this project. Really, Mathematica is great, and Alpha will be the biggest demonstration of its power. Maybe our knowledge of Mathematica will be more valuable in our CV in the future? I hope so.
In the meantime, you can join us in this Facebook group dedicated to Wolfram | Alpha:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=55046613842
See you soon!
“As a result, the five million lines of Mathematica code that make up Wolfram|Alpha are equivalent to many tens of millions of lines of code in a lower-level language like C, Java, or Python.”
Python is NOT a low-level language IMHO
Otherwise, Theo, it is a great article!
@ace.
The term was relative not absolute, ie “lower level” not “low level@.
Here Here !!! Python is our friend ! But I still can’t hardly wait to give this baby a spin! Thank you for all the effort Mr Wolfram and associates.
Lower not low!
Python is definitely a *lower* level language than Mathematica. It’s easy to show that when writing code to something actually useful - Mathematica code is pretty much always more compact.
Can’t wait. I can see this being a revolution in the way that the internet is used. I think that this is the Google of the 21st Century (Yes, Google was the 20th).
I would not be surprised if this is the biggest advance in computer programming and use since Woz finished the first Apple personal computer.
Google is the Google of the 21st century. Believe it when you see it.
Great, but you discriminate against small countries by not allowing us to buy Mathematica online. It’s B/S and pretty nasty. I’ve never pirated software so feel enormously negative about the company.
Hi Tim -
We are currently working on expanding our online store’s sales regions, but you should contact customer service about buying Mathematica directly from our operators or resellers.
Eagerly waiting for the public release. I just hope that this lives up to the hype and truly proves to be a knowledge engine as opposed to a mere full text document search. I really think that full text search has been around for way long time and what google has is a well tuned search engine with a good user base. But they haven’t taken the world forward in search space yet, and I hope Alpha will.
Alpha probably won’t since it isn’t aimed at doing searching
While exceptionally useful for many, I’m sure Alpha is going to be the bane of math and physics teachers everywhere. Students might get all the assignments right using the computational engine, but fail the exams because they didn’t understand how to derive the answers themselves (seeing the derivation and doing it yourself are worlds apart on a cognitive level). Just food for thought…
Those who don’t want to understand how to derive the answers themselves don’t need Alpha for that. Perhaps their number will increase somewhat, perhaps school assignments will change. I think the application will have a positive impact for all.
Instructors can certainly allow students to reserve their right to Fail. It is not the College Professors responsibility to ensure that the student does his homework, the professors responsibility is to teach the process so that the student can replicate the results. If the student cuts corners, then the student is simply failing himself, and well there is always need for ditch diggers.
This is hype. Unnecessary for the real thing. Suggests a dud.
I’m very skeptical about it. Yes, it looks very cool at first, but it seems to be very limited. There are still many “what if..” questions.
At the end, I think it’s impossible [at this time] to answer all questions. In your 100% exact mathematical calculations you’re still using information from inaccurate sciences (you have to).
What would be the answer to the questions like “does God exist?”, “Why do we live?” and so on? Can you calculate it?
Don’t you prefer to answer such yourself?
No, I thought of the real AI..
Can the phrase “Does God exist?” be calculated? No. So why would you ask Alpha it?
Do you stare at your TI calculator and shake it in anger because it can’t tell you the meaning of life?
Try reading this … Why Believe in God?
http://www.watchtower.org/e/20031201/article_01.htm
Religion doesn’t give you peace of mind, it gives you a nervous breakdown. Religion is for weak minded individuals who don’t have brains enough to be able to come to a rational answer on their own. If a religious nut doesn’t know they answer to a question they end it with this phrase “It must be God’s Will…” What a cop out.
Since i read about this search engine, i’m so excited and visit often to give a shot. Its already MAY, not sure when i’ll be able to quench my thirst to try it.
Good luck, best wishes and hope to try soon.
here’s hoping john connor is sending the robot *now*.
I have seen Wolfram’s demo at Harvard, and although i was impressed with what it can do in terms of computations and using live feeds to compute some answers.I believe that a lot of people would soon stop using it because it is a specialised engine for higher education and above.The masses would go back to Goggle and Wikipedia.I really hope that WolframAlpha survives for the sake of students.
I am one of the masses. I use scroogle. Google is a dud. I can’t wait for Alpha Wolfram’s, because it will be exciting to use something that actually can compute and answer questions. My dream was to study physics in USSR, before the wall came down. I never had the money for it, but I steadly continue to study math on my own and perhaps with Wolphram I will be able to get more advanced learning in Math. Who knows.
any ways, the dream to learn and to excel in math and physics will be a reality before I die. I am sure. I will use Wolphram for that.
Not all the masses are dumb. There are many of us that were never able to fulfill our dreams yet.
Don’t be so arrogant!
Gentlemen: a fabulous (in the modern sense) achievement. I see it as marking a turning point in man’s intellectual evolution. If only it could be embodied in our education system we’d see a very different output of trained minds in a decade or or so.
I wonder what Ray Kurzweil thinks of the project?
Ken
I am eagerly waiting for the release…..
I think you should also consider making Wolfram|Alpha opensource and a platform where someone can write a new algorithm.This may have that “exponential explosion” effect.
I do not believe in Mathematics (it^s all mighty) for we live in a heavily mixed world where conventional truth (comfort, safety) neighbour the pure reason. That^s why I wait to test Your prog..how it is possible to describe modern scholar tools- how vaild are those or not. Still we do not have (I believe untill Alpha) solid instrument to rank the existing analytic (incl/PC) instruments..some outer dot for comparison & vizualisation. Your stressing of computation methods I believe allows You to systematize & depict Human environment..in concrete & multiconnected figures…It^s I believe fantastically useful still not done work// ID Igor Moscow
When you watch the Sci-Fi movies and see the characters verbally ask the computer a range of questions and the computer answer back with useful information, it was always fantasy.
This may be the first step towards making that fantasy a reality.
Just need to perfect the voice recognition and speech synthesis interface to Wolfram:Alpha
The power of Wolfram|Alpha ability on demonstrating step by step mathematics procedures is both a blessing and a curse to mathematics education. For the self initiative students, it’s the best online tutor ever. But others might find it the easiest way to dispose of their homework.
Hi,
Sounds fantastic. Did the team ever consider leveraging or using an existing server platform or cloud complex to meet the demand that will obviously flood the service? Will you run it entirely on your own server farm?
How much of the system will be available via APIs for unique applications or submissions for consideration? For example, running it against a custom database that is publicly available on another site?
If these questions are available somewhere else on your site, let me know.
RS Love
Palo Alto, CA
Man! We are in may!!! The site should be launched!!! I want try it!! At least give us another date, baby.
Cya.
This has every potential of being the best that computer science has to offer. Used in the wrong way though, it has the potential of being the worst too…..imagine someone wanting to design a nuclear bomb or an economist wanting to come up with a formula like the one to measure cdo’s that bought down wall-street…this has the potential to make computing those complex calculations a joke…
I am all sympathy, respect and expectations. My high school was quite good, 1,200 years old, but all my life I have been discovering this and that, wondering, why did they not tell us about that? To a big amount, the work of learning of pupils and our daily office work consist of “intelligent secretary work”, things we have to do to come to the “real work”. This “intelligent secretary work” which we use to delegate to staff people (or doing ourselves, losing so much time), soon will be delegated to W|A. So pupils will be able to learn more in less time, and we all will be learning and working faster & better. This “general secretary” will increase our intelligence and efficacy (and joy concentrating on the “real work”) tremendously, I am sure. Thank you all who work on that fascinating project.
I think it’s a way to harness and direct an infinite number of monkeys with typewriters to produce Shakespeare in a finite time.
ever the skeptic, I await the chance to ask yet another machine to further my grasp upon the riddles of our unverse. If it can help us find the higgs partcle, the edge of the universe, the source of dark matter, a habitable exoplanet, a more efficient method of energy distribution, an improved mode of locomotion, a method of erradicating pestilence, an explanaion of cognition, or even a better way to make bread, etc.etc.THEN, as a tool, it will of been a gift to mankind. Till then, the tools at hand are all we have got. I hope, a mathmatica enhanced search engine rocks this world. The timing seems right as the other search engines are now honing parameters to increase the index of responses that are the correct answer not just an answer. I hope I can ask it the right questions, cause it is gonna need some darn good math to give me the correct one, let’s get started now: what is the ratio of up quarks to charm quarks on the planet? is there any correlation of this ratio to any of the quarkonim ratios on any other celestial object in the solar system?……you know by now of course that at best, google is nowhere near AN answer, and the correct answer will require an enormous effort of mixed computations and refined recursive searches. “How close is you all gonna be?/?”
I wonder if there will be a web services interface, or some alternate structured return.
Using the moon example, if I had a web page that included the distance to the moon, I could make it dynamic.
Also, to collect data on disparite relationships automatically. Things like the closest inverse correllation to the 3-day MA of the barometric pressure in Walla Walla, Washington.
Or the price of gold vs the number of articles that mention gold.
I think this is an excellent point. This has the potential to be the most powerful tool ever for web sites. I hope Wolfram decides to crack the gates for website developers.
I can’t wait for the launch of this awesome product.
Good morning from The Netherlands.
Although I’m not well up in mathematica,I do hope being able to try this new computer search-
program very soon.
Good luck!
Hy EO,
Is all this&that to say you,re not ontime with the proyect launch?,
Honesty is something i hope this alpha wolf(there is another language from the heart) should not lack of.
Regards
Excited to see this in action.
Will you also incorporate demographical data? It would not only be cool, but also very usefull to easily find answers on questions like:
- How many inhabitants does e.g. Italy have?
- How many are born between year x and year y?
- What’s the average income of a certain region etc..
I hope you will take “do not evil” policy for this project.
And i really hope that we will get search engine with only voluble and useful data : )
If the production site actually shows steps and values for orbital calculation, I’ll be impressed. If it’ll allow me to run simple Mathematica expressions without buying the hideously expensive suite, I’ll be doubly impressed. I don’t think this will be a Google killer, at least not for me, since I want to find documents with Google, enthused nonetheless.
While Wolfram Alpha may eventually become useful, you probably need to solve the branding problem a bit. Stephen Wolfram, for all his talent, comes across as incredibly self-absorbed, and egotistical. Couldn’t he have chosen a name for this technology that does not have to include his name ?
A great blog post… what I find very interesting is the comment that, to build Wolfram Alpha from scratch, the most sensible thing would be to build Mathematica from scratch first. What an interesting idea…
It sounds like the project has a pretty mature foundation, which is great. Can’t wait to try it!
I wonder if there will be an option to view/download the answer/result in Mathematica notebook (player) format with manupilate[]-functionality added. That would be really interesting because then you can basically generate an “analytical application” on the fly.
Good luck to you all! I can’t wait to use this new search engine! Hope it’s the biggest success ever…
Natural language interfaces are notoriously aweful. I think it is bound to disappoint even modest expectations.
There is an awful lot of criticism amongst these comments. But in view of the vast amount of time, work , intellectual thought and doubtless many headaches that has gone into the project let us wait and see if this is the “Final solution” ;-}
Looking forward it
I find it fitting that you (Wolfram) are a big fan of Leibniz, since I think we’re a world of Candides about to face a rude awaking.
Curious to know of any government or military interests and investments in your project. Like the transhumanist conclusions driven by Ray Kurzweil’s desperate technological optimism (N.B. Kurzweil’s contribution to the Joint Operating Environment, USJFCOM), these data handling techniques find fertile ground in the garden of the megamachine. It’s a simple matter of applicability. In an act of humanness, you assert that you’re personally against cleaning and organizing data about the public, presumably fearing its harmful application. Your refrain betrays a frustrating truth about our role as humans in technological progress, an echo that’s become frighteningly faint as it reverberates through history. We could discuss cases endlessly, but here we need only examine one prominent antecedent to make the point.
Something led us to create the atomic bomb, and the terrible product of the Manhattan Project and its threat of annihilation reformulated our consciousness permanently. You may share deep existential worries with the rest of humanity. Or less generously, perhaps questions about the bomb in this era seem quaint to you. Either way, as a practitioner of rational methodology and a curator of information (?), you probably find occasion to examine some of these quandaries and gently prod at the thorny issues, however tentatively, when the philosophical mood strikes. In the end, you probably rest your faith on the neutrality of technology, as if we control its development and destiny.
How well has nuclear technology served us? Where’s the evidence that we’re truly the agents of technological development?
A preponderance of evidence points to nuclear technology as distinctly detrimental to our long-term viability. Any interpreted benefits are secondary at best. Nuclear power too inflicts suffering on a global scale, but of course, we’re helpless to condemn a whole technology based on minor glitches like radioactive materials entering groundwater. Doctrinaires of the Cold War could even argue that nuclear technology serves as a safeguard, a deterrent that could eventually relegate war to historical artifact.
If this is so, and if we are the agents driving these innovations, why do we feel so helpless?
Consider our global climate concerns. Or global depression. Pandemics. I’m not religious, nor am I sensationalist by nature. But these wicked problems tend to take on biblical significance. These problems all trace back to technique and our blind adherence to its propagation.
As an individual and as an institution, you strive for truth and objectivity in all your efforts. I actually believe that. I’m not talking about evil intent or a conspiracy. You can’t see the true nature of your work, however, because you’re blinded by hubris and a strange luminescence emanating from a force you willfully interpret as progress.
If it can be done, it will be done. History bears it out. The train of progress hurls forward to its ineluctable, confounding and ever-retreating ends while we compulsively shovel feedstock into the furnace. You represent only one functionary; technique provides the motive force: man is powerless to question or resist, though each man has volition. Arendt’s “Banality of Evil” comes to mind.
As for Wolfram|Alpha standing up as another manifestation of these pernicious problems, I imagine the technology will further isolate us from our own reasoning. I’m talking about the incomprehensibility of the machine’s reasoning process due to complexity. Even to you. We can untie the complexity, given enough time, but that’s the machine’s domain and some degrees of complexity are clearly beyond our scale. This poses grave dangers, especially in a context where nobody really understands future applications of this technology.
On a mundane level, I find it silly that you’ve contrived to access all this data from a single, context-less text box. You’ve been hoodwinked by the Google aesthetic.
Machines do one thing very well: consume, process and deliver data. Humans can actively feed data into this pipeline and listen at the other end or position machines to operate the works automatically. Classify all other functions and behaviors as emergent properties. Our monkey brains marvel at the machine because of its speed, and by instinctive association we construct illusions of its intelligence. I find it depressing that we fall for the gag. Even more distressingly, we modify our own thought patterns to conform for processing.
This subject is more than machines, technology, methods. It’s a way of thinking about the world, modeling our understanding of reality. Any endeavor to apply this thinking to subjects whose nature transcends or subverts it will suffer a starvation of imagination. It’s these subjects, the ones unapproachable by technique, that have gotten short shrift in our modern world. We go irresponsibly forward.
I’m limiting the scope of this discussion to technology, but the the range spans all domains including governance, commerce, war, propaganda, education: corporations, intellectual property, ecocide. I urge you to explore this subject wholly and with the entirety of your abilities. Question your modes of inquiry and how to leverage your creative faculties to direct that inquiry. The rest of the process — research, integration, experimentation/testing — can track to the scientific method if you like.
Why beeing anxoius?
It ist just another tool to enhance our intelligence.
Every common language has a greater impact on our thinking. Who controls language, controls the minds. People first learn language by their parents, so they can not choose. Our languages are also very complex, and only few specialist know about that (linguistics). So we must be anxous of languages? Because the makers of the atomic bomb used language?
We have just to make sure, that such a powerfull tool is not controled by a few but by the mass, as a language is (or should be).
But what is new? In science, most people does not understand what is behind, sometimes even not the specialists, who just use scientific methods that are created by others, on the other hand science is influenced by interests lobbies and politics.
This engine may just be another of many steps in the technical and scientific evolution of mankind.
And what is, if WA gives answers, that doesn’t match to the mainstream science? So it could give a chance to alternative or new solutions.
yawn
expectations。I want to know that if Wolfram|Alpha support chinese language?
I would tamp down the talk about this competing with Google. Unless I’m mistaken, wolfram won’t be crawling the web, and it’s data will be screened by ‘experts’, so it is apples to oranges. Manage expectations better to avoid the hype hangover.
Absolutely agree with the comment about the “replacing or displacing Google” talk. Does anyone here remember Cuil? They were being positioning fairly or unfairly as the next Google. Nobody cares.
Perception is reality. I would hope Wolfram’s team is positioning their new service as a tool for exploring the mathematical nature of human knowledge and inquiry. Anyway, let’s hope expectations are reasonable on all accounts.
Good Luck, guys!
I’m really very curious about your new Search Engine, hoping it will be better then…
I’ve just written a blog post about Wolfram Alpha in which I wonder about the possibilities this new platform could provide to open government advocates. Could you give us a clue into whether campaign and political data will be included in the computations Wolfram Alpha can make? Particularly, will it be able to make calculations on such things as political donations and roll call votes in Congress?
So that must be what the Dvinci m stands for. Divine mathematics. Very simple. Excellent
Could this be used to help doctors diagnose, more quickly, diseases / syndromes in general, I wonder.
I had that exact same thought. This would be pretty ideal as an aid to practitioners as well as patients since it can be tremendously difficult to pigeonhole/catagorize symptoms.
just call it alpha
or
Alpha Omega
or
AO
or
WA
wolframalpha is too long
All about doing something well, and doing it fast. Google still has no real competition in terms of the internet. Computing analytic integrals in another story. Mathematica is excellent for this. dont hold your breath…
Every once in a while, a new innovation appears. It revolutionalizes the way we do things and, as the dust settles, it becomes a basic necessity - the light bulb, radio, television and a host of similar items.
When I sat in front of an IBM Mainframe SYS34 in 1982, I realized a revolution was taking place in the way we worked in Office. My first desktop in 1988 had a 10mb Hard Disc, 640kb of RAM (upgradable to 1mb) and it also had a B:\ drive. No Mouse. Except for a few visionaries like Arthur C. Clarke and his ilk, who would have dreamt of our being on the threshold of another innovation in communicating computing.
Keep reaching for the stars WOLFRAMALPHA - I will check their names, distance and ask you for reasons why you picked that particular star when you come online. Keep up the good work!
REGGIE
No offense, but who the hell came up with that name? Talking about it is as inconvenient as when we had to say “the man formerly known as prince”. You might have some smart programmers and scientists involved, but your marketing stinks.
It is imperative that you fact-check constantly the highest-ranking results for accuracy. Particularly in regard to politics and the “soft” sciences where so much is open to interpretation.
WA plans on being the next Google and if it is successful in this objective it will become a ubiquitous resource and thus the answers it provides will carry a great deal of credibility. Oft-asked questions will begin to shape public perception as to what is the answer.
Perhaps the potential Achilles’ Heel is a drift toward propaganda.
Say someone queries thusly: “Who is to blame for the Middle East conflict?”
Or “Is homosexuality genetic?”
Or “Is there such a thing as god?”
Or “Best Dutch artists 1700-1800″
Or “the numeric value of Heisenberg’s relation”
… and so on.
If WA is seeking to provide the “answer” and not a selection of results, such inputs will throw a monkey-wrench into your machine methinks
You should shorten the name to WA
and returned answers should be called WAWAs: Wolfram-Alpha Workable Answer
… that’ll be $1 million please