[MD] Speed of Lighting, Roar of thunder...

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Krimel , the three body problem was solved long ago by Karl Sundman, the
n-body problem is the same as the three body
problem but then n(number) represents any other than 3body, so multiple
body's.

This proves that poincare's approach (chaos) was wrong, he failed.

i'm impressed with your impression on the subject, but,.....your
explanation/interpretation of the 3 body-problem
is not wat the three body problem is about.
The problem does not stand for the relative impossibility to predict the
relative positions at "a " moment in time,
but for this .
It seemed to be an impossibility to ,given the positions at a moment in time
,  backwards predict all previous occupied
positions, and furthermore predict all future positions derived from this
moment and positions.
this is not about relativity,but about the gravitational interaction on the
body's and it only appeared in the past to be a chaotic model, as poincare
was thinking.
it was not.
Karl Sundman solved the problem with pure mathematikal force

In the provided link you can read how Sundman solved the case,pay special
attention to the endsentence
proving the perfect concentric trajectory's of the body's/particles (same)
http://mcs.cankaya.edu.tr/ogrenciler/proje2009Guz/200322031CemMOGULTAY/rapor.pdf


Another example I like is pool. Billiard became something like the standard
metaphor of Newtonian mechanics; a game whose outcomes and relations were
perfectly describable in mathematical terms. Except it isn't. Mathematics
can be used to describe and predict the outcomes of certain aspects of the
game of pool but it cannot be all that helpful in predicting who will win a
game of pool. It does what math does. It describes outcomes in a perfect
world of Platonic ideals which no rough edges.

---Predicting the winner, this is the variable ,the human player, you cannot
predict his behaviour, the outcome of the game is derived from this entity


Pool is predictable if played by robots, the mathematikal model is
descibable.


greetzz, Adrie


2010/8/22 Krimel <Krimel at krimel.com>

> > [Krimel]
> > Poincare's three body problem is another example. You can determine the
> > position of either of a pair of orbiting objects like the moon orbiting
> the
> > earth with a high degree of precision but add a third body to the system
> and
> > prediction breaks down.
>
> [Craig]
> The moon orbits the earth & Apollo orbits the moon.  So you can determine
> the position of the moon & the earth relative to each other & the moon &
> Apollo relative to each other. So in what sense can't you determine the
> position of the earth & Apollo relative to each other?
>
> [Krimel]
> Obviously things like mass and relative distance are important. This is
> pretty easy to research if you are interested. I don't do Math but here's a
> Wiki on the n-body problem:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-body_problem
>
> There is one on the three body problem:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-body_problem
>
> Here is one on Poincare that touch on the matter:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Poincar%C3%A9
>
> This quote from it goes straight to the matter at hand:
>
> "In his research on the three-body problem, Poincaré became the first
> person
> to discover a chaotic deterministic system which laid the foundations of
> modern chaos theory."
>
> Another example I like is pool. Billiard became something like the standard
> metaphor of Newtonian mechanics; a game whose outcomes and relations were
> perfectly describable in mathematical terms. Except it isn't. Mathematics
> can be used to describe and predict the outcomes of certain aspects of the
> game of pool but it cannot be all that helpful in predicting who will win a
> game of pool. It does what math does. It describes outcomes in a perfect
> world of Platonic ideals which no rough edges.
>
> The actual outcome of a game may be determine by things like volume of
> alcohol consumed, volume of the jukebox, the beauty of the cutie eyeing the
> players, a sudden itch during a crucial shot. In fact the number of factors
> that influence the outcome of any particular game are infinite. Completely
> deterministic at every level but impossible to predict.
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser