Proof of Concept

21 Dec 2021 13:49 - 21 Dec 2021 13:52 #364819 by Shepherd
Replied by Shepherd on topic Proof of Concept

Chaos is order, but the players are at war. Peace is when all the orders coexist.

and I, for one, am completely lost as to what it is you are talking about anymore. At the risk of sounding rude, I daresay it might even bring into question whether the former statement sounded so sensible because you actually understood any part of what you were saying or purely on accident, fueled perhaps by the reader's own charity than it was by any profundity of the statement in question.

In a forest, all the 'players' have just the correct kind of relationship with one another that the forest survives. The numerous trees take what they need from the soil and the air, leaving room for animals to find homes in and around them. There are a great many 'players' behaving in a way that allows them all to coexist in a relatively stable state.

A lightning bolt strikes one tree and begins a forest fire. Suddenly, that tree is a danger for all the other trees, for it is the source of the fire. Quickly, the fire spreads through the forest, harming other trees and animals alike. No special actor has really been added into this scene (although you could make out the lightning bolt to be one, the fire continues as a result of the kind of system the tree is; if the lightning bolt had struck a tall rock, there would have been less of a problem). There is no malicious figure making the fire go after the trees or the animals. It is simply that the nature of the relationship between all the 'players' has changed, moving the system from an ordered state to a chaotic one.

I, for one, think it is very well put to say that order and chaos are really two different arrangements of the same 'players', the same basic parts. Order occurs when all the various systems are in a stable relationship with one another, and chaos occurs when that relationship becomes unstable. Chaos and order are kinds of relationships between 'players', they are not 'players' in of themselves.
Last edit: 21 Dec 2021 13:52 by Shepherd.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Vincent Causse

Please Log in to join the conversation.

21 Dec 2021 14:52 #364822 by Vincent Causse
Replied by Vincent Causse on topic Proof of Concept
About magic, i like Thor s explanation : Your ancestor's called it magic and you call it science. But of course there s always that part of our imagination that will create magic whish will never become anything else than what it is in Harry Potter s books! Now Chaos is a grand name, but i see it as a point of view, if we look at space with our naked eyes we may think that it is Chaos, well even with a telescope. But science has found out that the whole universe obey to the Force s rules ! Like Gravity, so everything interacts in good accord, nothing just end up disappearing, change orbits or leave one. Chaos is what we call, the states of things or actions that we do not understand.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

21 Dec 2021 20:26 #364829 by Gisteron
Replied by Gisteron on topic Proof of Concept

Vincent Causse wrote: Chaos is what we call, the states of things or actions that we do not understand.

Nothing says a rule-goverend system the rules of which we perfectly understand cannot also be chaotic, though. That's not what chaos means. Take your own example of gravity. We have only strictly deterministic theories of gravity so far, but even if we take them seriously at that they are still perfectly capable of governing chaotic systems. If one can specify exactly the mass density and mass flow density of a gravitationally closed system, one can predict and retrodict all of its history exactly. That is what makes it deterministic, all right. However, if the system is any different than its description, then not only will it eventually deviate noticeably from either the prediction or the retrodiction, but in fact that deviation in the past and future surpasses at one point or another any arbitrarily large limit. This is chaos. It has nothing to do with whether or not we understand the system on a fundamental level. Even toy systems that live only in an ideal world of spherical cows, designed from the ground up to obey well-defined and perfectly understood rules, can still easily be chaotic in that two trajectories arbitrarily close in one phase space location are arbitrarily far apart in another. So just because something is chaotic and we recognize it as such doesn't mean we don't understand it, even down to its most fundamental level.

Better to leave questions unanswered than answers unquestioned
The following user(s) said Thank You: Loudzoo, Rex, Vincent Causse

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: RexZero