Is the Butterfly Effect Consistent with Deterministic Chaos Theory?

Click For Summary
The discussion explores the Butterfly Effect's role within deterministic chaos theory, particularly in relation to weather systems and planetary orbits. It emphasizes that while small changes can lead to significant outcomes, predicting these changes in complex systems like the atmosphere remains challenging. The Butterfly Effect is illustrated through hypothetical models, such as simulating Earth with minor alterations, demonstrating potential drastic changes over time. Despite its theoretical applications, practical predictions, especially in meteorology, are often unreliable due to the chaotic nature of these systems. The conversation also touches on concepts like spontaneous symmetry breaking and its implications for causality in chaotic systems.
Loren Booda
Messages
3,108
Reaction score
4
How much influence does the Butterfly Effect have in our proximity? Even the Sun's planetary orbits, over billions of years, having experienced myriad nonlinear small interactions (here the "butterflies"), have seemingly resulted in very few chaotic catastrophic outcomes (hence "effects").
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Butterfly effect comes into play in many fluid systems that involve turbulence. A good example is atmosphere. Even our best supercomputers, fed by high-resolution infrared imaging satellites, can't predict hurricane tracks with any certainty beyond 3-5 days. Atmosphere is inherently chaotic to some degree.
 
Yes, the Butterfly Effect is used to describe chaotic systems. Orbital mechanics is not an area strong in chaos; most of its systems are negatively reinforcing (for example, a planet drifting out of place tends to be nudged back into place.)

Weather is the poster-child for chaos.
 
Well from what i have learned about this, the so called "Butterfly Effect" talks about how a small change in a system can lead to a gigantic or significat change with time. Now to observe a change in a system you would have had to already have run it before. Let's say you have a model of Earth enclosed so that no outside force or thing could effect it. Now let's run the simulation. You will see that if you don't change anything in it, the same thing will always happen. Now let's say you put a fan in it. the fan is not noticably strong in any sense. If the fan has a big enough impact you could end up with an Earth that is completely changed, maybe there would be more huricanes, or less or anything really. So since we can not change the past I don't know how this "effect" can be felt if we haven't changed anything. Now as for knowing the Future, this could work. Once we figure out how to do that
 
FoxCommander said:
Well from what i have learned about this, the so called "Butterfly Effect" talks about how a small change in a system can lead to a gigantic or significat change with time. Now to observe a change in a system you would have had to already have run it before. Let's say you have a model of Earth enclosed so that no outside force or thing could effect it. Now let's run the simulation. You will see that if you don't change anything in it, the same thing will always happen. Now let's say you put a fan in it. the fan is not noticably strong in any sense. If the fan has a big enough impact you could end up with an Earth that is completely changed, maybe there would be more huricanes, or less or anything really. So since we can not change the past I don't know how this "effect" can be felt if we haven't changed anything. Now as for knowing the Future, this could work. Once we figure out how to do that

It can certainly be demonstrated in a lab setting. Try balancing a golfball on top of a beachball a hundred times. Plot which way it rolls off.

It is however, notoriously difficult to apply to something as astoundingly complex as Earths' weather.
 
DaveC426913 said:
It can certainly be demonstrated in a lab setting. Try balancing a golfball on top of a beachball a hundred times. Plot which way it rolls off.

"Spontaneous symmetry breaking", anyone?
 
Archosaur said:
"Spontaneous symmetry breaking", anyone?

Higgs mechanism?
 
Archosaur said:
"Spontaneous symmetry breaking", anyone?

Is this consistent with a deterministic chaos theory? Doesn't "spontaneous" imply acausal?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
29K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K