Functions that connect location to time how complicated/accurate do they get

  • Thread starter Thread starter Femme_physics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functions Time
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the complexity of modeling position as a function of time, particularly in real-world scenarios like jogging. A basic formula, P(t) = 40/3t^2, illustrates how simple equations can lead to varied interpretations. While theoretically, one can create functions to describe movement, achieving infinite accuracy is impossible due to the chaotic nature of motion. Chaotic influences can affect outcomes, making precise predictions challenging even with accurate initial conditions. Ultimately, while functions can approximate movement, they cannot capture every variable involved in real-world dynamics.
Femme_physics
Gold Member
Messages
2,548
Reaction score
1
So started up on calculus, I see there's a function that describe position with respect to time. P(t) = 40/3t^2

That seemingly simple formula provides all sorts of variation throughout it. I began to wonder, if any position with respect to time can be describe in a formula? I suppose that in the real world, things tend to be very complicated so these functions aren't very accurate. Let's say I'm trying to write a function to describe my position based on time as I jog in the park...isn't that in actuality impossible to do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you're asking if you can be infinitely accurate... then of course you're correct: its not possible.
If you're asking if it can be done for all intents and purposes... then of course it can.
 
Ah...just as I thought-- thanks :)
 
zhermes said:
If you're asking if you can be infinitely accurate... then of course you're correct: its not possible.
If you're asking if it can be done for all intents and purposes... then of course it can.

Actually, you are ignoring the existence of chaotic motion, which is a very common phenomenon - not just a theoretical scenario. In chaotic motion, knowing the initial conditions to more and more accuracy doesn't determine the outcome with increasing accuracy. There will be chaotic influences even in a jog round the park.
 
sophiecentaur said:
Actually, you are ignoring the existence of chaotic motion, which is a very common phenomenon - not just a theoretical scenario. In chaotic motion, knowing the initial conditions to more and more accuracy doesn't determine the outcome with increasing accuracy. There will be chaotic influences even in a jog round the park.

Aha! just as I suspected :)
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
Back
Top