Is it possible for a powerful enough supercomputer to plot the

No.

>>8508682
No because it would have the plot the movement of all of the atoms inside itself that are plotting the movement of atoms elsewhere.

And then it would have to plot the atoms in itself that are plotting the movement of all the atoms inside of it that are plotting the movement of atoms elsewhere.

Then it would have to plot those atom's movement, using some other atoms.

And so on, infinitely.

>>8508719
It does not have to do that, it would start at t=0 and move back, not plot in real time.

>>8508682
Laplace Demon.

>>8508725
t.Brainlet

wouldn't this violate the uncertainty principle

>>8508682
No, you cannot know the position and "velocity" of a subatomic particle at any one instant.

If you did, it would be theoretically possible to backtrack through the rest of time, and predict forwards in time the exact events of everything. Essentially if you did know both the position and the "velocity" of every particle ever you could potentially know "everything".

>>8510303
>If you did, it would be theoretically possible to backtrack through the rest of time, and predict forwards in time the exact events of everything

But that's wrong, you fucking brainlet.

>>8508682
>5 million other persons

You mean 6 million poles

>>8508682
Possibly, if we can work beyond 3 dimensions skipping mass and velocity, then it becomes instant, if that is not possible, then no. I believe it is possible but the simple monkey brains we are limited by wont allow it.