Chaos theory

[Anomalocaris]

How many of you believe in the probability of Chaos theory? In case you didn't know, Chaos Theory is basically the theory that very small events can have drastic changes on much larger events that will take place in the far future. So for example if a particular butterfly in brazil flaps its wings right now, it may cause a hurricane 3 years from now that is suppose to go to Georgia get sent off course to New York. Or if you skip taking a shower today then the patriots will lose the superbowl 5 years from now. So go ahead, whats your thoughts?

What is "probability of Chaos Theory"?

---

Chaotic systems are still totally deterministic

Says who?

I think for this assertion to be true, you'd have to be able to determine whether events at the QM level can properly be variable given a single time.

No true. There is no absolute chaos, and no absolute determinism in macroscopic universe. One could quantify the degree of precision required of initial measurement in order to have a specific level of confidence (degree of determinedness or chaos) in outcome at a specified time in the future.

For most practical problems, determinism for the purposes of forecast requires macroscopic degrees of accuracy in initial measurement, far from the the level that requires QM.

Take for example the orbit of planets in solar system. The problem is ultimately chaotic. It is not possible, in principle, to predict the location of each planet to such a precision as to know whether the planet would on a specific day be on the same side or the opposite side of the sun from the earth two billion years into the future, because our current measurement of the location of each planet today has enough uncertainties such that if the planet is located on one side of the error bar of our positional mesurement today, it would end up on the opposite side of the sun a billion years from now compared to if the planet today is indeed located on the other side of the error bar of our positional measurement.

How big is the error bar? Several kilometers. Not several nanometers.

If we can refine our measurement by several kilometers, and the orbital position of the planet would go from chaotic over two billion years to being deterministic over two billion years.

[LastPoet]

Chaos theory is quite simple to understand by going trough the Math. It presents itself alot in our understanding of the universe. Try to calcualte the orbits of 3 or more equal mass objects. The result is a dynamic chaos. Wanna know more? Listen to to Benoit:

[FreeTony]

Can anyone else come up with an example of small change resulting in larger results?

For this experiment you will need: a willing friend, two large fridge comparments and 2 ropes.

In the first fridge compartment you will stand on a block of ice with a noose around your neck, attached to the ceiling. Your friend will do the same in compartment 2.

Compartment 1 is set to +2 degrees and compartment 2 to -2 degrees.

You will find a significant difference in outcome, despite a 1.5% difference in temperature.

(Do not try this at home)

[Anomalocaris]

Can anyone else come up with an example of small change resulting in larger results?

Take Pluto. Start with a position in its orbit, run a numerical simulation of its orbital position 100 million years into the future. Move the starting position by 1km relative to the sun and other planets and run the same simulation for the same 100 million years. Pluto will be on the opposite sides of the sun, 9 billion kms apart, at the conclusion of these two simulations. That's without exploring the uncertainities in the initial positions of all the other objects in Solar system.

---

Can anyone else come up with an example of small change resulting in larger results?

For this experiment you will need: a willing friend, two large fridge comparments and 2 ropes.

In the first fridge compartment you will stand on a block of ice with a noose around your neck, attached to the ceiling. Your friend will do the same in compartment 2.

Compartment 1 is set to +2 degrees and compartment 2 to -2 degrees.

You will find a significant difference in outcome, despite a 1.5% difference in temperature.

(Do not try this at home)

Not if the nooses are of the same length and you are taller than your friend by the amount equal to the thickness of the ice.

It would also be convergent if both compartments are under high pressure, exactly what outcome it comverges upon depending on exactly how are high the pressure.

So degree of convergence or divergence of outcome also depends on accuracy of measurment of the length of the noose and heights of you and your friend, whether you or your friend is of the same state of aliveness before hand, in addition to the temperature, as well as pressure, in the compartments.

[Rhizomorph13]

Considering the noose experiment, that is a whole lot of things brought into play to obtain an effect. Same with the "moving pluto" example. I think this question is one of small stimulus causing a huge effect. I still say, not likely, the universe seems to follow rules that prevent such large effects being caused by small stimuli. I could imagine some causal chain that might result in some catastrophe like some Final Destination death scene, but I think those mostly don't happen, and they really are a buildup of many small actions rather than one action causing the huge effect.

[FreeTony]

Considering the noose experiment, that is a whole lot of things brought into play to obtain an effect. Same with the "moving pluto" example. I think this question is one of small stimulus causing a huge effect. I still say, not likely, the universe seems to follow rules that prevent such large effects being caused by small stimuli. I could imagine some causal chain that might result in some catastrophe like some Final Destination death scene, but I think those mostly don't happen, and they really are a buildup of many small actions rather than one action causing the huge effect.

When someone says a butterfly can cause a hurricane, it doesn't mean that the flapping has solely caused the hurricane. Hurricanes are ultimately caused by differntial heating of the atmosphere by the Sun.

It is more that the pattern of hurricanes/the exact location and timing of a particular hurriance could potentially be influenced.

The point of the noose experiment was that the two scenarios were identical, except for a 1.5% difference in temperature.

[Anomalocaris]

Considering the noose experiment, that is a whole lot of things brought into play to obtain an effect. Same with the "moving pluto" example. I think this question is one of small stimulus causing a huge effect. I still say, not likely, the universe seems to follow rules that prevent such large effects being caused by small stimuli. I could imagine some causal chain that might result in some catastrophe like some Final Destination death scene, but I think those mostly don't happen, and they really are a buildup of many small actions rather than one action causing the huge effect.

Can you cite a few examples of universe following any rules which prevents large effects from small stimuli?

---

From what I've seen, things tend toward the average of forces around them, so I don't believe that small changes can result in huge results. I would point out the effects of a small stone on a lake; at no point has anyone ever dropped a pebble in a lake and suddenly there was a giant wave on the other side of that lake.

What if you drop a small pebble atop a unstable cornice of accummulated snow above a steep embankment next to the lake, the pebble triggers an avalanch, which pounds into the lake, and there is a giant wave on the other side.



The more you close off a system, the more the changes to the system become restricted by what you bring into and out of the system. You probably imagined a closed lake with nothing interacting with it except a pebble dropped into it. Obviously the total amount of energy that is available to cause any reaction in the lake is that which is carried by the pebble, so no giant wave would appear out of ether where there is no available energy to power it.

But the more a system have room to interact with other elements around it besides what you would bring into and out of it, the more room is there for your stimulus to trigger a much larger input or outtake from the system than you intend. As a result the system can behave disproportionately violently compare to the small amount of initial stimuli.

[ShaMan]

[bennyboy]

Can anyone else come up with an example of small change resulting in larger results?

#1. Human existence, starting with human reproduction.

The specific genetic makeup of an organism that lives maybe 80 years and has the intelligence to interact to and mold its environment is hanging on a nano-trigger. The fluid dynamics of the semen, including the pulse strength of the vein in the penis, the specific timings of the vagina's secretions and movements, etc, are so hopelessly complex that you could NEVER fully encapsulate the "initial conditions." At best, you can make statistical predictions, like given the parent's DNA, the offspring will have x% of scoring over 140 on IQ tests, and pretend that you have therefore imposed your will on chaos. But that's an illusion.

And that's just the moment of conception that determines the DNA. It doesn't even include things like significant events, the effect of gravity of the moon (and maybe of other planets in orbit) etc. etc. Nor does it include all the possible actions of 7 billion other humans, and their affect on our sample individual's beliefs and behaviors. Nor does it include the chance that the person will be "special" and develop a new technology: cold fusion, maybe, or a device that allow men to understand what women are talking about.

Is the universe ultimately deterministic, in the sense that the universe is a purely physicalist system with only one outcome t2 arising from any given state at time t1? A big-M MAYBE. Is all this deterministic in the sense that we can make meaningful predictions about how a fetus will develop, and what kind of life it will have when it graduates high school. No.

#2. Failed RAM
The failure of RAM is random as far as we can determine, and unpredictable. But the failure of just one nano-transistor could in theory change someone's life. In the case of a military system, it could involve the death of people who would not otherwise have died.

[Rhizomorph13]

---

[quote='Rhizomorph13' pid='708198' dateline='1405366154']
Considering the noose experiment, that is a whole lot of things brought into play to obtain an effect. Same with the "moving pluto" example. I think this question is one of small stimulus causing a huge effect. I still say, not likely, the universe seems to follow rules that prevent such large effects being caused by small stimuli. I could imagine some causal chain that might result in some catastrophe like some Final Destination death scene, but I think those mostly don't happen, and they really are a buildup of many small actions rather than one action causing the huge effect.

---