Why are no two snowflakes the same?

  • Thread starter Thread starter full-time-climb
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of why no two snowflakes are the same, exploring the implications of similarity, identity, and the nature of creation. Participants engage with the concept from philosophical, probabilistic, and scientific perspectives, examining the definitions of sameness and uniqueness in the context of snowflakes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the certainty of the claim that no two snowflakes are the same, suggesting it may depend on how 'the same' is defined.
  • One participant proposes that the uniqueness of snowflakes can be understood through the lens of probability, likening it to the improbability of flipping a coin and getting the same sequence multiple times.
  • Another participant introduces the idea of parallel universes and how differences in seemingly identical entities could affect their classification as 'the same.'
  • There are philosophical musings on the concept of a creator and whether creation implies uniqueness, with some arguing that everything is a unique creation.
  • Participants discuss the implications of energy in the context of creation, with one suggesting that energy (E) is a fundamental aspect of existence rather than a creator.
  • One participant humorously reflects on the appropriateness of discussing snowflakes in a hypothetical scenario involving danger, indicating a playful approach to the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the uniqueness of snowflakes, with no consensus reached on the definitions of sameness or the implications of creation. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about identity, similarity, and the nature of existence, which are not fully explored or defined, leading to ambiguity in the arguments presented.

full-time-climb
Messages
34
Reaction score
1
This question may not be as simple as it first appears. Or it may be. Thoughts? Hints to follow if required.

John
 
Biology news on Phys.org
How can you be sure there are no two snowflakes the same?
 
beautiful question though. One of those true, basic, sensing, when you're a child, questions.
 


Originally posted by Guybrush Threepwood
How can you be sure there are no two snowflakes the same?

Because you define 'the same' in some convenient fashion like, two entities are 'the same' if and only if they are the same entity (maybe at different times).

The question is, after all, really:
"Why are no two [distinct] snowflakes the same?"

Snowflakes can be very similar to each other, so similar, in fact, that calling them alike would be fair. They can certainly be similar enough that you would not be able to distinguish two photographs of one of them from one photograph of each.
 
.. and sadly presumptious rationalism can destroy all the fun :smile:

Cause what we cannot talk about we must pass over in silence..
 
OK, how about congruent for all of you who don't like "the same".

I don't think you can say with metaphorical certitude that no two are congruent. I think it is a matter of probability. Each time a water molecule is added, it has different ways to fit in. It would be like flipping a coin some very large number of times, and getting the exact same sequence. Make the number of flips high enough, and the odds become very low - perhaps so low that a very large number of trials has a negligible chance of producing two duplicate sequences.

How many molecules in a snowflake? How many ways are there for a molecule to be added to the structure? How does symmetry effect the probability? How many snowflakes have there been?

Njorl
 
I have lost two friends over conversations on this idea and an argument that followed and went something like this. But MY thoughts are that if you have parallel universes where almost everything but a speck is identical, you cannot call two John's the same even if they are the same in every aspect in universes the same in every aspect except for the little speck of difference somewhere far far away from the Johns and won't bother them during their lives. Because I want to be right when I say "John lives in a universe where a certain speck far far away from John is attacking people at a very specific location." If this can't be true, then damn John and his alter ego and his ARGGH damn John. Hey, your name is John! Then if you have Johns that are different, you are going to decide on whether or not to call them the same for practical reasons. Hug John because he's wearing a fez? You'll have to examine the Johns for fezzes, if one has a fez and the other doesn't, you're going to have to call them two different things when considering hugging. Snowflakes ARE the same? I think I'm missing something.
 
Great replies, I love this site!
Snow flakes are a great example of the creator creating. Every single thing you see is a "one of". Each is its own creation. For two things to be the same they would have to be the same thing. Any two things contain their own "matter". The world is full of similarities but no two items are the same.
The snow flake is a great example of this.

John
 
what creator?

:wink:
 
  • #10
the one who creates...
 
  • #11
is there such a thing as creation?
 
  • #12
Creator...Good question. Was going to take the day to reply but then it hit me...

The "E" in E=MC^2

John
 
  • #13
that would be energy (IMO)
 
  • #14
NO opinion required...it is energy...

So E being the creator, means that everything is the creator...basically removing the concept of creator from that use of the word...
 
  • #15
okay you take a gallon of snow and after you analyze/make a diagram every individual snowflake then ask why none are the same
 
  • #16
When I think about asking if two snowflakes can be the same I usually try to guess the chances of the person I'm talking to killing me. Hypothermia wonderland is not the best time to ask such questions as Why are no two snowflakes the same?
 
  • #17
E being the creator don't make since. Since everything comes from E then there was no creation. Merely just converting and making the converter everything. So E is the converter. Makes perfect sense. Since we weren't created just converted like the houses we live in converted from trees. Our bodies converted by the food we eat. blah blah blah eh.
 
  • #18
Here's a big number...The amount of "E" required to produce the mass of the universe.
Dang

John
 
  • #19
Depends on the scales you use. Before the universe (leaving out the fact that we probably can't apply logic to this period), there are no defined reference frames, so in comparison to an boundless sea of possibility and impossibility, I would think it pretty infinitessimal.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
9K