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

Mon Aug 23 01:03:38 PDT 2010

Well, Krimel.
there was no chaos arising in the n-body problem, but it appeared to be so
in a very persistant way.
Sundman found the mathematikal pattern within the 3 body problem, it seized
to be a problem then.

But a relative simple deterministic system cannot be used to explain the
problem, because the problem is truly incredible difficult
and it becomes a shitload more difficult in the n-body problem, and
especially if one's projecting it into quantum physiks.
almost impossible to solve , looking like chaos , but it is not really.
It is stuff for nobelprize winners, Krimel.Not really for us. incredibly
interesting.

But this is important to us, there is no chaos in it,....its patterned,
predictable.

Try to see the problem as this, You are watching the ocean, the waves, 1
wave, try to predict now , derived from this 1 wave
observation, all other waves in the various oceans, in the future, as well
as back in time. Sundman did just that.

1 wave represents all other waves in behaviour , if not we would have square
waves, octogonal waves , flat waves,....see?
so you cannot observe 1 wave only, as you are observing a representative of
all other waves in behaviour.

The word game you mention,...right , sentences and combinations , its an
enigma-projection, only looking like chaos , enigma wan not about chaos, it
appeared to be so.

And yes , i like your examples,and the links .
proceed.

2010/8/23 Krimel <Krimel at krimel.com>

> Adrie,
> Glad you liked the examples.
>
> I don't do math so I never expected my explanation of the problem to do it
> justice. But do you think my interpretation of it is an example of chaos
> arising from a relatively simple deterministic system is incorrect?
>
> Here is another simple example you might like. If you have a language with
> as few as two words in it; you can use it to generate an infinite number of
> sentences.
> Krimel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ADRIE KINTZIGER [mailto:parser666 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 6:07 PM
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> Subject: Re: [MD] Speed of Lighting, Roar of thunder...
>
> 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<http://mcs.cankaya.edu.tr/ogrenciler/proje2009Guz/200322031CemMOGULTAY/rapor%0A.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
> 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
>
> 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