Reply to Re: Nonesensical ramblings
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Well, for the waveforms, I've only ever studied them (briefly!) as a probability function. If this means that they are random, I'm hesitant to give an emphatic yes, as larger systems tend to become seemingly ordered. Since the probabilities can be know, limited by Heisenberg, you can slightly narrow down the possibilities. How much is beyond the scope of my studies.
Another problem for trying to make predictions using cause-effect simulations are vacuum particles, ie, virtual particles, as in uncommon situations they have a tendency to interact with regular matter, and we don't really understand vacuum energy yet. Sure, you could exclude those theorized interactions, but you couldn't be certain. Basically the pop into existence, then annihilate each other completely without releasing energy. Unless they don't.
Complexity, and time are also huge problems. First off, we don't know why things move. We also don't know why there is time. We have evidence that we experience time in discrete quanta, but we have no idea how to merge this with the idea of momentum. Complexity comes into play with the problem that inter-particle interactions increase much faster than the factorial of the number of things you are simulating. factorial(x) is 1 force. We have more than that. You can always find ways to approximate these calculations, but the defining characteristic of entropy is the idea that small changes have large consequences. These small changes are lost in approximations.
Randomness in itself is a utterly fascinating subject, but it's too large for this margin to contain.
Oh, and just as an interesting side fact, did you know that temperature is only defined at an equilibrium. As in, inside a fire, or over *any* heat gradient, there is no temperature, per say? There are particle velocities. It's an interesting disticntion, and if I was more awake, I'd tie it into the above, but I am sleepy.
Another problem for trying to make predictions using cause-effect simulations are vacuum particles, ie, virtual particles, as in uncommon situations they have a tendency to interact with regular matter, and we don't really understand vacuum energy yet. Sure, you could exclude those theorized interactions, but you couldn't be certain. Basically the pop into existence, then annihilate each other completely without releasing energy. Unless they don't.
Complexity, and time are also huge problems. First off, we don't know why things move. We also don't know why there is time. We have evidence that we experience time in discrete quanta, but we have no idea how to merge this with the idea of momentum. Complexity comes into play with the problem that inter-particle interactions increase much faster than the factorial of the number of things you are simulating. factorial(x) is 1 force. We have more than that. You can always find ways to approximate these calculations, but the defining characteristic of entropy is the idea that small changes have large consequences. These small changes are lost in approximations.
Randomness in itself is a utterly fascinating subject, but it's too large for this margin to contain.
Oh, and just as an interesting side fact, did you know that temperature is only defined at an equilibrium. As in, inside a fire, or over *any* heat gradient, there is no temperature, per say? There are particle velocities. It's an interesting disticntion, and if I was more awake, I'd tie it into the above, but I am sleepy.
