- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
An equation that can predict the precise state of the universe as a function of time?
Posted on 3/20/22 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 3/20/22 at 3:50 pm
What could be the ramifications of such an equation?
15
Posted on 3/20/22 at 3:51 pm to UndercoverBryologist
Put down the bong and watch the tournament
This post was edited on 3/20/22 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 3/20/22 at 3:52 pm to UndercoverBryologist
x=350
Posted on 3/20/22 at 3:53 pm to GetCocky11
Goes like this...
Zzzzz+zzzz= zzzzzzzzz
Zzzzz+zzzz= zzzzzzzzz
Posted on 3/20/22 at 3:54 pm to Cosmo
quote:
Put down the bong and watch the tournament
Well, such an equation would render watching the tournament as unnecessary.
Just plug in “April 4, 2022” into the equation and see the result.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:03 pm to UndercoverBryologist
that doesn't even make sense.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:05 pm to UndercoverBryologist
E = Tree Fiddy Squardt
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:06 pm to UndercoverBryologist
I would think the memory and compute resources required to calculate the equation wouldn't fit inside the universe it models.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:08 pm to UndercoverBryologist
What do you mean by precise?
The ramifications of the double slit experiment basically show we don't live in a deterministic universe, at least not at quantum scales. We still haven't completely grappled with the ramifications of that. So, the equation you are talking about can't exist outside of giving probabilities of a certain configuration, and the best model we have at these length scales is Schrodinger's equation.
For the macro scale, the Einstein Field Equations associated with general relativity is the broadest and best model we currently have, although obviously it fails at quantum scales and doesn't have a great physical justification for the terms in it we use to model the acceleration of the expanding universe.
The ramifications of the double slit experiment basically show we don't live in a deterministic universe, at least not at quantum scales. We still haven't completely grappled with the ramifications of that. So, the equation you are talking about can't exist outside of giving probabilities of a certain configuration, and the best model we have at these length scales is Schrodinger's equation.
For the macro scale, the Einstein Field Equations associated with general relativity is the broadest and best model we currently have, although obviously it fails at quantum scales and doesn't have a great physical justification for the terms in it we use to model the acceleration of the expanding universe.
This post was edited on 3/20/22 at 4:12 pm
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:09 pm to UndercoverBryologist
The universe is not deterministic. It's stochastic.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:10 pm to TigerstuckinMS
I like turtles
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:10 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I would think the memory and compute resources required to calculate the equation wouldn't fit inside the universe it models.
Data compression and matrices operations could cut down on the raw computational necessities.
But as soon as you start rounding digits in your initial conditions, your models become prone to chaotic variations.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:11 pm to supadave3
quote:
I like turtles
It's turtles all the way down.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:12 pm to UndercoverBryologist
frick you,,its Sunday
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:13 pm to Ross
quote:
What do you mean by precise?
The ramifications of the double slit experiment basically show we don't live in a deterministic universe, at least not at quantum scales. We still haven't completely grappled with the ramifications of that. So, the equation you are talking about can't exist outside of giving probabilities of a certain configuration.
For the macro scale, the Einstein Field Equations associated with general relativity is the broadest and best model we currently have, although obviously it fails at quantum scales and doesn't have a great physical justification for the terms in it we use to model the acceleration of the expanding universe.
Yes, but quantum mechanics itself has to be incomplete because it doesn’t completely jive with the Einstein Field Equations.
So, for the purpose of discussion, assume the universe will ultimately prove to be deterministic, and that quantum mechanics was just an approximation.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:14 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
But as soon as you start rounding digits in your initial conditions, your models become prone to chaotic variations.
it's not a chaos theory thing, because while chaos theory is relevant when discussing nonlinear differential equations that are present everywhere in mechanics, it doesn't grapple with the more fundamental issue that the governing equations aren't totally deterministic and these hypothetical differential equations are.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:20 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Yes, but quantum mechanics itself has to be incomplete because it doesn’t completely jive with the Einstein Field Equations.
So, for the purpose of discussion, assume the universe will ultimately prove to be deterministic, and that quantum mechanics was just an approximation.
well, I think the ramifications are that we can be done with all physical inquiry and move onto the philosophy of "do these equations represent a model of reality, or reality itself"
this question is very relevant when discussing things like free will, which determinists usually claim does not really exist because then consciousness would have to exist outside of the cause->effect paradigm. If these equations are just a model of reality instead of reality itself, then determinism can be a little looser in its constraints and humans can have agency in a system that follows known and quantified physical laws.
But, I don't see how any interpretation of the double slit experiment can follow through with the idea of a deterministic universe. It really isn't; the fabric of this universe is stochastic.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:25 pm to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
An equation that can predict the precise state of the universe as a function of time?
Your premise is way too broad. An infinite number of things is happening in the universe in any given moment. You don't just need to know the When, you need to know the Where and probably the Who/What. And that's just you're starting point.
You're going to need other relevant data points. Like the only reason I'm on TD responding to this post is because my wife had to work today. And why am I responding at this precise moment rather than sooner, or later, or never? I had several projects I was working on today that it really was uncertain how much time I would need to devote to them until I actually did them.
I'm not sure you could have predicted the outcome of when I'd finish those other projects with the level of precision you're talking about to say that I would write this response at 4:25pm on March 20, 2022.
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:28 pm to UndercoverBryologist
f(x)=icup
Posted on 3/20/22 at 4:28 pm to TigerinATL
Bet he didn't know "Ross" was in the audience
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News