What is Digg?Sponsored by truTV
58 Comments
- mrallen86, on 04/17/2008, -7/+49His death is expected to cause a massive tsunami in Japan sometime within the next month.
- Shakermaker, on 04/17/2008, -1/+33Ugh - every single comment the EXACT same joke.
"I farted - he died" - "I whistled - he died", or "This is chaotic" (or some derivative)
Get some new material people. - reflex768, on 04/17/2008, -3/+20Very sad. He was a titan. The beauty of the ''butterfly effect'' alone has gotten vast numbers of students interested in mathematics.
- talonstriker, on 04/17/2008, -0/+12Looks like Lorenz isn't the only one who is going to be buried.
----
Would someone familiar with chaos theory explain what this means (FTA): "By showing that certain deterministic systems have formal predictability limits, Lorenz put the last nail in the coffin of the Cartesian universe" - bosssmiley, on 04/17/2008, -1/+11The Cartesian view of the universe was that it was ultimately predictable and knowable (given sufficient data). Chaos theory said that this wasn't so; the same preconditions could lead to multiple possible outcomes.
(Jurassic Park - it ain't just about dinosaurs) - jimT, on 04/17/2008, -1/+10I'm trying to put it in layman's terms so bear with me.
A deterministic system is, for example an equation, a system in which the output is easily and certainly predicted by it's input. E.G. X+1 = Y you know for sure that if X is 1, Y will be 2. What Lorenz found is that the this predictability has limits, which means that for some equations (evidently not the simple one used in the previous example) mathematicians cannot predict the result.
The discovery was made when simulating complex meteorological systems that a very minimal change in the input was giving large changes in the output.
This was very "annoying" to the classic Cartesian mathematicians because they were used to this predictability of results.
At least I tried, If you can do better, just reply. - toxicityj, on 04/17/2008, -3/+11Ian Malcom weeps for this great loss.
- abuelos84, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Basically he proved that reality is not a machine, or at least not like a clockwork one, more like a bag full of bees...
- ahoyhoy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4I think all Ashton Kutcher fans would agree with you.
That's right, both of them. - JahRage, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Bet he never saw it coming.
- kylemacr, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3No no no people! Careful! Chaos says that things ARE deterministic... chaotic systems ARE 100% deterministic, we just don't have the means to determine them, because in order to do so, we would have to measure initial conditions to infinite precision (100%). We can never do that, so therefore we can never predict chaotic systems with 100% accuracy.
So in summary, Chaos is a misnomer, as Lorenz himself alludes to i his book. (The name wasn't his idea) - Lovok, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Henri Poincaré, in his 1903 book Science and method :
If we knew exactly the laws of nature and the situation of the universe at the initial moment, we could predict exactly the situation of that same universe at a succeeding moment. but even if it were the case that the natural laws had no longer any secret for us, we could still only know the initial situation approximately. If that enabled us to predict the succeeding situation with the same approximation, that is all we require, and we should say that the phenomenon had been predicted, that it is governed by laws. But it is not always so; it may happen that small differences in the initial conditions produce very great ones in the final phenomena. A small error in the former will produce an enormous error in the latter. Prediction becomes impossible, and we have the fortuitous phenomenon. - MrFisty, on 04/17/2008, -4/+7"Dead at 90" sounds a bit extreme. Usually it's "Dead at 27" or "Passed away aged 90". I think once you reach 90, you're personal slogan becomes "Every day is a bonus" so it's probably not such a shock.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2well.... not exactly.
the *same* preconditions lead to the same outcomes (unless you are taking quantum mechanics into account, which is not what Lorenz's work was about)
But the major result of Lorenz is that for certain systems, very small perturbations of the initial conditions will lead to exponentially diverging outcomes. In the real world, where any measurement will necessarily has some amount of error (no instrument, or computer, with *infinite* precision is possible), this means that, although the system may be predictable for some finite time (ie the predictions fall within some finite error bound), the outcome error rapidly overwhelms any useful predictions as time continues to infinity. This is true even for a deterministic universe. - alphgeek, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3I was always strangely attracted to Lorenz.
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2yes. Thank you. (although jimT got it right too. props to him.)
"Chaos Theory" is one of the most misunderstood and misused mathematical terms. It is *not* to be confused with Heisenburg uncertainty or the non-deterministic nature of quantum mechanics, as it so often is.
The simplest way I've heard it defined is thusly:
For certain systems (and, in fact, "most" systems), initial observation errors diverge exponentially in outcome error, rapidly overwhelming any useful predictions as time goes to infinity.
Any real world observations necessarily incorporate *some* error, as no instrument (at least, that we know of, or know how to deal with) has infinite precision; not to mention that any computational system that we could use to simulate such a system and "evolve" such observations has only finite accuracy (machine precision is limited by memory) - psibladeZX, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Deterministic systems are systems of differential equations, and he explained (proof) that they had predictable limits using the Euclidean metric. Take a class on Real Analysis, they explain this.
- BobOrleans, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZtZ8QwL9kI
- drdanb77, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Tiny little actions come together causing devastating effect. Everything from "Butterfly Marketing" on the internet to FDA regulation of drugs has been affected by chaos theory. Moral to the story: Never be afraid to put in your two cents.
- richardtallent, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2So, did they catch the butterfly responsible for this?
- davidbond, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I came to post exactly the same response - a respectful tribute to the man whose theories explain how difficult things can be to predict.
- steger, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Must go faster.
- thenewsgeek, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Brilliant guy who will be missed in the realms of math, science, and imagination...
But at least he got some recognition. There are some amazing figures out there who died before their ideas ever had a chance to become popular. Consider Hugh Everett's thoughts on parallel universes and how they conflicted with the hypotheses of Niels Bohr.
Everett gets an extra thumbs-up because his son went on to front The Eels. :) - pedaws, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1R.I.P. of 3.14159
- abuelos84, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2RIP
- tokyostory, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1No! We need more cool-sounding theories to make ***** movies with Ashton Kutcher! Tell me this isn't real...
- idiggitall, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1"No, I'm simply saying that life, uh... finds a way."
- inactive, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1alphgeek had a pretty good one up there, sadly buried under 2 lamers:
"I was always strangely attracted to Lorenz." - KragTheDigger, on 04/17/2008, -5/+6dugg for the greater good of math geekdom. And because he was a genius.
- Jonmad17, on 04/17/2008, -4/+4One of the brightest men this generation. And he was born in my hometown.
- RyomaNagare, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2In other news, 5.369.828.122 butterflies were discovered flapping their wings in a furious unison, scientist are puzzled at what consequences this strange activity might have,
- liuite, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1my desk is the perfect example of random chaos
- DatoeDakari, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Now now, where would Professor Chaos be without General Disarray?
- badenglishihave, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Digg this comment up if you didn't understand that the joke was about the chaos theory, bury if you did know and it just wasn't funny.
- BoneheadFarker, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1It means the writer was trying to be funny and failed...
- abuelos84, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1finally a call to sanity... you diserve a digg, here, take...
- coldfire201, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Chaos theory is so naturally amazing, this is quite a loss.
- nursethalia, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0Ian Malcolm weeps emo tears.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1This guy wasn't so smart, we've had the scientific explanation of "***** happens" for years.
- sakuraz, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1LOLenz
- itsmattgw, on 04/17/2008, -3/+0so sad. i can't help but think if i hadn't stepped on that beetle he might still be alive today.
- kinerry, on 04/17/2008, -6/+2His death eventually causes world war 4
- psibladeZX, on 04/17/2008, -4/+0Ah yes... the Lorenz Curve? Am I right?
- bosssmiley, on 04/17/2008, -6/+1To the trolls: yer doing it wrong! What you mean is:
"A butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil and, half a world away..."
Ave atque vale Edward Lorenz. - sUGArDawg, on 04/17/2008, -9/+4Professor Chaos?
- slapded, on 04/17/2008, -9/+4I lol'd
- sponeil, on 04/17/2008, -8/+2It was probably something he ate (a few years back).
- Zarokima, on 04/17/2008, -8/+2That's just not punny.
-
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
