# The Butterfly Effect - Farse?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [February 10, 2006, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814 "2006-02-10T04:18:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jawdirk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df705f/32.png) [@jawdirk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jawdirk)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2006, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814/41 "2006-02-13T22:46:34Z")

</div>

> [@Exapno Mapcase](#):
>
> … 🙂

Oh great, **Exapno Mapcase**. Now they know there’s a happy ending :rolleyes: 😉 .

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2006, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814/42 "2006-02-14T00:24:27Z")

</div>

> [@jawdirk](#):
>
> Oh great, **Exapno Mapcase**. Now they know there’s a happy ending :rolleyes: 😉 .

Hey, with most sf I read these days I’m very happy when I come to an ending! 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![flex727](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/258eb7/32.png) [@flex727](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flex727)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2006, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814/43 "2006-02-14T00:52:53Z")

</div>

> [@Exapno Mapcase](#):
>
> That’s a conventional interpretation, but I’ve always been dissatisfied with it.

Your explanation certainly makes sense to me. I think I now have something to add to the epiphany post over in Cafe Society. 😛

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2006, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814/44 "2006-02-14T02:27:45Z")

</div>

> [@Chronos](#):
>
> In a chaotic system, by contrast, you might start off with 20 significant figures, but only have 1 significant figure in your output, or none at all, if the physically possible range of outcomes is large enough. There _can_ sometimes be emergent patterns, but there doesn’t need to be, and if such patterns exist, they’ll apply to the statistical bulk, not to the individual elements.

The significant figures explanation is a reasonably good introductory analogy to get a sense of why chaotic systems are unpredictable even though governed by deterministic principles, but it may suggests to some that a greater refinement in accuracy of measurement or action would reduce the disorder; in truth, chaotic systems have an inherent, and indeed calculable level of unpredictabilty, at least within certain bounds. (How’s that for an overqualified explanation?) Fractal patterns in nature are an example of patterns rising from what is nominally a chaotic system by the assertion of deterministic physical principles.

It’s really hard, though, to wrap your mind around the idea that you can calculate out your problem to the nth degree but only predict the result to a finite level of refinement, regardless of how accurately you measure your inputs. I’m still trying to build up the courage to wade through Wolfram’s magnum opus, [A New Kind of Science](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1579550088).

Stranger

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-butterfly-effect-farse/343814.md?page=2)