>hurr chaos theory! universe is unknowable Newton was a dummy!!! if a butterfly flaps his wings anything could happen!
Everything I've read about this horseshit can be summed up as "it's too complicated to do all the calculations so we don't lol" and "ya we had a small margin for error initially but as time went on the error got bigger! we should've been more accurate I guess."
Are there any actual scientific proofs or arguments to be made against Newton's assertion that all physical interactions are predictable (aside from people screwing with it or outside-the-system variables affecting the interaction)? Like I get it, if there is a multiple-chain pendulum then even nanometer-sized differences in where the weight is released leads to drastically different paths later on. But it's not impossible to measure that.
t. someone who just finished reading Einstein for Dummies
Eli Russell
Quantum mechanics BTFO's determinism.
Chase Hall
I have an engineering background and I understand where most of this shit is coming from, and yes I am not that aware of theoretical stuff like this. But there's gotta be a better answer than "it's unknowable" i.e. turbulent flow in a closed system means it's "impossible" to know where a specific molecule is going to end up. Sure it'd be difficult but if you had every atom and it's momentum at the initiation of flow you'd be able to trace out flowpaths, atomic collisions etc and form a 100% accurate model. I get that it's not practical IRL but that doesn't mean you couldn't possibly trace it if you had correct and precise data from the beginning and knew all the rules of interactions of matter.
Logan Parker
I remember reading in some book that an event like the break in a game of billiards is so chaotic that the gravitational pull of an atom on the other side of the galaxy can significantly alter the outcome. I don't know if that's bullshit or not but if it's true it seems to predict some events you would have to have absolute omnipotence about every aspect of the entire universe.
Is that "impossible"? Maybe not under some definitions, but it certainly doesn't seem reasonable.
Jack White
Though it emphasises complexity this field still uses differential equations to describe them. Its not unknowable just that its hard work to do if for big natural systems and needs emoirhcal clarity.
Henry Robinson
t. never studied dynamical systems
Owen Carter
The unknowable thing is a popsci meme for people who know nothing about the subject or shallowly scan the intro on wikipedia etc. This post makes you sound abit naive op. People model complex systems all the time. its just that natural ones are the most complex and depends on scale.
Jackson Robinson
Depends how big the effect is and the margin for error you accept.
Brandon Sanders
Chaos theory never took into account modern quantumn advancements. Watch as it methodically gets btfo in a few years.
Nolan Morris
>I remember reading in some book that an event like the break in a game of billiards is so chaotic that the gravitational pull of an atom on the other side of the galaxy can significantly alter the outcome [Citation needed] Asking for citation because I'm legitimately curious about this
Lucas Thomas
Just because we cannot fully predict the outcome of one experiment doesn't mean that there are no laws that govern the way shit is gonna behave STATISTICALLY. Quantum mechanics is an example of that, you can never know the outcome of a single experiment, but you can calculate the hell out of the PROBABILITY of an outcome.. and if you can do enough experiments (which in the lab is done by probing a stream of photons mostly) the probability distribution is accurate to an incredible degree.
Ian Rogers
Does it though? The universe could still be deterministic even if its not possible to accurately predict quantum events with certainty.
Chase Kelly
Superdeterminism's still on the menu.
Landon Martin
>would have to have absolute omnipotence You mean omniscience FYI.
Jacob Edwards
Even if we neglect quantum uncertainty, chaos theory is simply the observation that some relatively simple phenomena are extremely sensitive to initial conditions. We're used to thinking "small changes at the start = small changes as the end". If you throw a ball upwards at 6000 meters/sec, it'll rise to height N. If you throw it at 6000.0001 meters/sec, N will only change by a few millimeters. There are some systems, weather is one and the double-pendulum is another >en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_pendulum where it's not so simple. If you do the calculations twice (or run an actual experiment twice) the results will diverge at some point. The more perfectly the initial conditions match, the longer before the divergence, but it will happen. Start a double-pendulum going. Replicate initial conditions as precisely as you can (or example, move the bars up against offset stops) You can't compute where the pendulum will be at an arbitrary time X in the future. With a normal, single, pendulum you can. Chaotic systems turn up surprisingly often. And don't say you can control everything perfectly. You can't. Even thermal motions of atoms or (as someone mentioned) things happening across the galaxy will mess you up. James Gleick wrote a popular (but accurate) book explaining the phenomena.
You can see the pendulum go wild at >youtube.com/watch?v=QXf95_EKS6E The 2nd swing is ALMOST like the first -- and then things go rapidly downhill into chaos.
Jordan Phillips
Since you are talking on the philosophical, pop science aspect of chaos, I'll let you know that you are fucking up in the philosophical, pop science aspect of chaos. Trying to control more variables is counterproductive.
Jayden Anderson
It still has applications for macroscopic systems tho
Ryan Brooks
Not being able to do statistics isn't "chaos." The point of chaos is that the relationships are highly nonlinear, and very small (and therefore difficult to measure) changes in the initial conditions can result in tremendously different outcomes.
Jose Scott
I honestly can't remember, it was like 15 years ago. I'm pretty sure it was some pop science book by Brian Greene or someone like that, but I can't find anything by googling it Umm yes, whoops
Charles Allen
The point of the theory is that unlike traditional models where when variables are nearly identical, the outcomes may be vastly different. Patterns emerge when you study the differences, and you can refine your models to reflect such changes. It's a nonlinear system. How is this difficult to understand?
Zachary Flores
why does the attractor only have 2 branches? why cant it be more?
Jack Fisher
Hey, welcome to sci. How are you enjoying your first time reading about science and math?
Newton said that the universe is deterministic. He said that GIVEN enough information, it would be possible to calculate/predict all past and future states of a system.
He didnt say that the relevant information is obtainable by humans or that it would be easy to discover.
Chaos theory IS deterministic, its just hard to predict.
Are there arguments to be made against it? No. No serious arguments. Determinism is logical and its what ever piece of evidence ever has concluded.
Some people may bring up quantum and such. Quantum is deterministic but we dont have the technology to understand its deterministic equations so we came up with statistical methods to approximate the system. In the future, we will be able to deterministically measure subatomic particles.
Yes that’s true however the uncertainty principle is not the same as the observer effect — it’s an intrinsic property of the universe
As far as we can ever know, the universe isn’t deterministic. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t necessarily but for all intents and purposes it is
Connor White
>Quantum is deterministic Prove it
Justin Parker
It's not really clear what you're asking about. If you're wondering whether it's possible to actually compute accurately the outcome of any macroscopic phenomenon from first principles, then no, it's impossible. There are so many interactions in a single glass of water you wouldn't be able to solve the whole thing even if you ran a supercomputer from now to the heat death of the universe.
Every numerical result is a simplification.
Nathan Scott
OP here, had a good chunk of time to think about it, I guess I get it now.
"Chaos Theory" isn't an attack on Newtonian physics or the predictability of the world, it's just a trait of physics that justifies any odd results from a physics experiment. It's like a cop out sort of answer to be used if someone says "hurr dis dubble pinjoolum doesn't follow newtonian rules!!". it's not a replacement for Newton, it's an addition to Newton's physics that strengthens it.
I guess to answer my own question, we'd need to find if tiny adjustments the size of a planck length (or hypothetically less) affect the results of a series of physical interactions. It'll be a very long time until that's possible but until then we just need to keep honing in our instruments to make more precise measurements.
Christopher Campbell
Yes, and all this was addressed by Poincare so stop pretending to have finished studying Chaos when you just read some pop-sci explanation of it.
Jordan Clark
How about you open a fucking book you retard.
Kayden Walker
While this isn't really true for a glass of water, this is the gist of it.
Brayden Green
>we don't know how to create true randomness >therefore it isn't possible
okay then
Anthony Phillips
>I have an engineering background >and form a 100% accurate model There's no such a thing as a 100% accurate model, you would know that if you were a decent engineer.
Leo Ward
Who are you quoting?
Grayson Cooper
OP deliberately misunderstanding things just cause he wants to be angry about something again lol
Christian Hill
You can still characterize deterministic chaos. Look up Ergodic Theory.
Jeremiah Cruz
This. I'm not too willing to accept an argument against quantum mechanics based on classical mechanics. Flow paths don't mean much to quantum objects.
Evan Diaz
even if physics is fully deterministic freewill still exists
not every attractor are that simple, and that doesn't even consider quantum mechanics
Easton Sanchez
>>hurr chaos theory! universe is unknowable Newton was a dummy!!! if a butterfly flaps his wings anything could happen! The mechanical energy propagated from the butterfly flaps are insignificant but the electro-magnetic waves propagated from the butterfly to my eyesight may cause me to do something greater such as trying to build an aircraft inspired by the flapping of the butterfly wings or a butterfly costume.
Jaxon Clark
main problem with "chaos theory" is it's name. deterministic chaos ; ^) just because you don't fully understand (yet), doesn't mean it's non-deterministic
Asher Ramirez
kys
Chase Stewart
Only useful and correct post in the thread.
Some models have been proven to not have a closed form. However, even with a chaotic system, the exact same parameters will give the exact same results every v single time.
