Thread replies: 19
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Anonymous
New Mathematic Theory 2016-06-30 08:04:52 Post No. 8173439
[Report] Image search: [Google]
New Mathematic Theory 2016-06-30 08:04:52 Post No. 8173439
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Alright anons, so right now there aren't a lot of good boards on /sci/. There's a good couple, but other than that this whole place is just nope. I've come to fix that.
As of late, something has been on my mind, but I haven't been able to put it into words. Perhaps until now. I'm just going to cut to the chase.
The reverse butterfly affect.
Let's take a look at the butterfly effect. We observe a butterfly in Beijing. Every time it's wings flap, what the weather will be in New York changes. And, this may be true. It's the strangest phenomena, known as the butterfly affect in chaos theory. The absolute smallest differences can throw an entire operation off or change the affect of an event, making the outcome different from another identical event. Chaos theory is a field of physics which focuses on nonlinear equations and probability, and it's this field that applies to things like guessing the weather. Most physical phenomena are measurable and predictable, however not all phenomena can be linearly guessed. Chaos theory not only focused on observing unstable phenomena, but also in predicting the future. Where would a double suspended pendulum be if we dropped it from a certain angle? We can't really know as inputs need to be filled out.
Now, the normal butterfly affect and chaos theory focus on predicting the future.
What I'm thinking of focuses on reading the past.
Let's observe the Big Bang theory. We all know what it is, so I won't go in depth explaining it. However, when we look at how one would go about developing it, you basically just look at the patterns of stellar and galactic movement and reverse it. When we do this, all we can understand is that everything was once wrapped up really tight in a ball.
[Pretyped, way over character limit, will continue.]
>>
>>8173439 cont.
However, the difference between studying the Big Bang hypothesis and my idea for the reverse butterfly affect focuses on nonlinear equations. The reason we can't really formulate the nonlinear equations in chaos theory mathematics is because there are open inputs that still need to be filled. However that's just about predicting the future. There's no need to (mathematically) predict the past, as it's already happened. This would mean that the inputs for said nonlinear equations would already be filled! If the inputs, which would otherwise be unguessable, be filled, we'd be able to reverse the nonlinear equation and be able to see exactly what caused an event.
Now, this is utterly useless if you want to apply it to what ordinary chaos theoretical physics focuses on. However, there are other areas this could be used.
We could use this method in the biochemistry field and take what's left of broken down matter and reassemble the genome of long extinct creatures (Jurassic park anyone?), or use it in the Naval or AirForce to be used as kind of a reverse tracking method (allowing someone to test an area of air or water and see if an enemy craft has previously trespassed). It could be used in detective work and allow us to open the gates for computer ran law enforcement or allow us to read the unclear history of other planets. All it would take is the help of some computers.
So, what now? What do you guys think? Where can we improve upon this theory? Help me out with this guys, I want today to be the day 4chan made a huge ass contribution to the scientific community. Discuss.
>>
You don't understand non-linear equations, you don't understand Chaos theory and surely you don't understand how mathematics work. Your idea is laughable to say the least. Delete this post, you're making a fool of yourself.
>>
>>8173471
Fuck you too anon.
Can you at least nitpick instead of just give up? I'm looking for input here. I'm not the average faggot who'll just shut out constructive criticism. I'm looking for exactly why the whole concept sucks and deserves removal from these boards, as you put it.
>>
>>8173477
Chaos theory explains that small differences in the initial orbit of points lead to chaotic movements, but also that within certain intervals such orbits are bounded (attractors). Also, I'm not sure if by "inputs of non-linear equations" you're talking about Cauchy problems, but even then what you're describing is i) not clear and ii) seems very hard to structure in a consistent way. Non-linear equation and non-liner algebra in genera is a mess, you must explain yourself in a more mathematical way.
>>
>>8173471
This is the reason why /sci/ is shit. The absolute bare ass minimum you could do is entertain the idea for a second and engage in a small amount of conversation with op about what he posted, but no, Telling op that his idea is shit is #1 priority on the list of things to do. Fuck off this board if you think this is how we should be doing things.
>>
>>8173483
I mean, what is your background in mathematics? If you have a good one, you'd understand yourself why what you're asking is weird. I'm not a physicist, but speaking from a strictly algebraic and analytical point of view, your idea seems odd.
>>
>>8173485
You're correct, that was #1 priority. However I'm now trying to understand what he's on about, that was #2 priority.
>>
>>8173485
how many people do you think saw his post and skipped it or read it and decided not to comment
that is literally 1 person who commented saying it was shit without critiquing it
>>
>>8173439
>There's no need to (mathematically) predict the past, as it's already happened.
This is true, as modern mathematics and chaos theory is being used to correlate future events, there is no need to "predict" the past, as you say.
>This would mean that the inputs for said nonlinear equations would already be filled!
Dealing with future events means that there is always some degree of mathematical uncertainty, but if you used past information then there would be some sort of dimensional triangularity which could keep the chaos from seeping in.
>If the inputs, which would otherwise be unguessable, be filled, we'd be able to reverse the nonlinear equation and be able to see exactly what caused an event.
I think this is the most important part of the reverse butterfly affect, if it truly allows this reversal to happen then this anon's theory could go down as one of the historic discoveries in the field of mathematics, just like with Xeno's paradox.
>>
OP back, what the fuck happened here. Didn't mean for this to turn slightly into a battleground.
Just to broadly answer to all posters, I suck complete ass at mathematics and my understanding of Chaos theory is seriously just Wikipedia knowledge. I had an idea, but had no clue as to how to put it into words. The post I made is evidence of this, and I'll say it again: I suck at communicating ideas that I have no background explaining. This is indeed my idea, but really I know nothing of the base of it. I spent like three hours googling, "What's it called in physics/math when..." I am not the brightest bulb, but seriously, I think I've stumbled upon something. Is it possible that we could work together instead of tearing each other and I apart and put this theory into more proper wording? I've actually been rewriting out the theory based on input from you guys so far, and I thank you for any and all cooperation.
>>
>>8173503
>one of the historic discoveries in the field of mathematics, just like with Xeno's paradox.
wut
a paradox disproven by basic calculus is a historic discovery?
>>
>>
>>8173529
EAT A DICK. DIE IN THE STREET. GO ASK PEOPLE TO RATE YOUR FUCKING FACE ON /B/ INSTEAD. HALF THE "PEOPLE" HERE ARE JUST YOU REPLYING TO YOURSELF DUDE, FUCK OFF.
>>
>>8173440
>reverse the nonlinear equation
U wot m8.
You can't deduce causes from outcomes in general. Let's say you observe a piece of rock on the ground. Was it always there or have I put it there 5 minutes ago?
>>
>>8173439
>this may be true
not on this planet, no
>>
>>8173548
15 comments, 9 posters. Now 16 comments. I have made 3 previous, now 4 current replies to this thread. That leave 12 comments to 9 posters. (inb4 great, you can math) My point is if someone is samefagging it isn't me. Now please fucking contribute to this thread or get the fuck out of here. Nothing but negativity out of you. The most I can attribute in my theory development to you is the fact that you've been bumping my thread. Now please, I'm not one to cheat, stop endorsing my thread.
In the curious case that you've stumbled into the wrong forum board drunk (I know I have), here are the links to boards that you may find useful:
>>>/x/
>>>/b/
>>>/lgbt/
>>>/pol/
>>
>>8173587
you sure love penis
>>
>>8173553
>Was it always there or have I put it there 5 minutes ago?
THIS
Plus, OP is forgetting the bi flaw in classical mechanics.
Newton's math works fine forwards or backwards in time, but the universe itself doesn't work that way:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace%27s_demon#Thermodynamic_irreversibility
> Laplace's demon met its end with early 19th century developments of the concepts of irreversibility, entropy, and the second law of thermodynamics.
>In other words, Laplace's demon was based on the premise of reversibility and classical mechanics;
>however, Ulanowicz points out that many thermodynamic processes are irreversible, so that if thermodynamic quantities are taken to be purely physical then no such demon is possible
>as one could not reconstruct past positions and momenta from the current state.
You have similar problems here:
>>8173440
> use it in the Naval or AirForce to be used as kind of a reverse tracking method (allowing someone to test an area of air or water and see if an enemy craft has previously trespassed)
You'd have to detect what air eddies and currents are like now and compare them to how they would have been if no aircraft had "trespassed". But where does that knowledge come from?
And then there's the volume of computing power involved.
Take this idea to /g/ and ask them how much CPU power would be involved.
And instead of hand-waving the math away, read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-body_problem
OP, I'm sorry the other Anons were mean to you, but not only was you idea a flop, you took way to long to introduce it.
Thread posts: 19
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1