Jurassic Park: Wrong About Chaos

[@tonywalter7674]

"See, I'm now sitting here by myself. Talking to myself. That's Chaos Theory." Wouldn't this be a valid statement in the context of a human life? Two twin brothers, even though their "starting position" in life are marginally similar can take two completely different paths and end up doing different things.

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

That statement is quite probably true about life, but it isn't fair to bring chaos theory into the mix, i.e. it is not fair to say that it is an implication of chaos theory. Chaos theory is interesting because it tells us about situations that get really wild even though we know all the rules governing the system. We don't have any physical models that would qualify as knowing "all the rules" that govern life and the universe. And the models we do know that work well are very heavily probabilistic as opposed to deterministic, by which I mean they allow for a ton of uncertainty right at the get go.

[@foobargorch]

It's not even meta chaos theory, regardless of the starting conditions of the scene, if you apply the writers to the situation, it always ends up at chaos theory. How ironic!

[@sensualarmpit3512]

It was just a self aware joke.

[@paradoxicalocus3761]

Sensual Armpit Everything's really just a cosmic joke, haha! We surf the crest of chaos and order!

[@ghostoperationswithcheukgu9844]

@@GoldPlatedGoof someone break the chain....

[@dras36adk]

Great video, greater hair

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Why thank you 😀

[@aadityamishra7132]

This is one of the few channels which shows science accurately and has something in it for all. This video is a nice way to educate masses about the meaning of the pop-sci. concepts, wrongly shown in many sci-fi movies and science videos. Keep up the good work and best of luck.

[@IdentityDM]

To be fair: Even without Dennis Nedry's intervention, the park was doomed to fail. The Raptor eggs were the proof of the failure to predict. They were in a system where it wasn't they didn't have 100% accuracy, it's they weren't even close to 100%. I will say the book does a far better job at explaining chaos.

[@danielvoneuw4824]

So, you look majestic. Didn't know if you had realized it, figured I'd give you a heads up.

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Haha thanks!

[@Inertia888]

I keep hearing "Hall of the Mountain King" in all these videos. cool. I love that song:)

[@WadWizard]

I think the solar system example is actually chaotic, its just on a scale much larger than us and the time we have perceived, the way i understand it its actually very similar to the example with the magnets, if we tried different starting points for things we would wind up with a very different outcome.

[@haniyasu8236]

True. I mean... given slightly different initial conditions for the solar system, it would definitely be different by now. However, it is waay less chaotic than you'd think, and in addition, there are some aspects of it that despite the complex nature of all the ridiculous gravity things going on still manage to become regular. In particular, look at how numerous moons (and *almost* some planets) actually end up in a situation where they only have one side facing the thing they're orbiting. In this instance, there are a large number of very different situations that all converge on very similar outcomes. Another example is how orbits of both moons and planets fall in to resonances where their orbits happen to fall into simple ratios to each other despite the complex nature of gravity and the solar system.

[@kentonfugate8370]

I think u r both right.... Which leads me to think math is more of a human construct,and with good use of language and as argument skills u can make most things true or false:))

[@richard_darwin]

Predeterminism ftw heck you chaos theory is wrong

[@forloop7713]

The stabillity of the solar system is actually a open question, it could turn chaotic, but we know it won't happen for the next few hundred years at least, we can't make better prediction because we can't measure all the orbits percisely enough

[@WadWizard]

But how chaotic is any system with rules to one living inside it, this is the only outcome we know so of course we can make it seem reasonable and predict it up to a certain point. Like a movie or book you can probably form a somewhat accurate prediction of how things will go the further you get, but on the whole the author could have writen any book they wanted, the film could technically have been anything, but all the possibilities only matter before its made(assuming they stuck to some semblance of a plot structure and didnt just throw random things together, but even then patterns would likely emerge). the future of the universe probably isnt going to change drastically in an instant unpredictably because of action and reaction, things tend to be a smooth line from now to... now, but from a detatched perspective theres a lot of possible outcomes. Im not trying to make some philosophical statement, i dont consider this as a complete metaphor, the metaphor is more the observers perspective, as an inside observer you cant really know whats going to happen, but from the context of the events leading up to it you probably have a good guess, but if you were say running a universe simulation on a computer and changed the starting conditions things would be... similar, but very different at the same time, the rules are the same after all, they are what holds everything together, but due to their complex nature everything would still bevery different, solar systems would probably have the same structures, but everything would be made of different atoms.

[@NeverenCH]

Great video :) But the music was really distracting in some parts :P

[@jdbarrera]

NeverenCH wasn't able to finish it. Horrible music. Can't concentrate on what he saying.

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Thanks for the feedback. I will work on making the music less distracting. The selection of royalty free music that you can use without consequence in a KZbin video is unfortunately both very limited and sometimes of questionable quality... still, I should probably work on the volume levels and fit with the content. Also, is that Flash in your thumbnail? Funky Buddha: all the links on where to find the music are in the description.

[@NeverenCH]

I hear ya. I think just turning the volume down a notch would fix the issue.

[@gagarine42]

Very nice video. But yes remove the music for most part :). You can use it at the beginning/end of each part

[@douwejan]

for me I love it. but for others maybe upload the same video with out the music just the talking bit. everyone's a winner.!!

[@JaySmith91]

Sub'd! This looks to be the beginning of something great!

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

That really means a lot to me. Thanks for the sub.

[@benjaminlevin9959]

Ditto, hope to see more of this!

[@arkadianriver]

Has been for me! If only my old college professors had this much genuine excitement and clarity.

[@tjhoz4]

Great video! I really enjoyed the concise explanations and relevant examples... you're a very good STEM communicator =).

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Thank you for watching!

[@Ykulvaarlck]

GoldPlatedGoof also you might want to lower the volume a little for whatever music you put on

[@sc0608023]

Somehow that magnet diagram made me half-understand why light behaves like particles and waves at the same time ;D It seems a photon travels through all possible routes all at once. The routes combined and it looks like waves. And that profound double-slit phenomena could be explained by a photon travels through both slits at the same time and somehow INTERACTS WITH ITSELF thus produce interference?! WTF?!

[@WestCoastWheelman]

Maybe I'm retarded but I think the implications are so much deeper. If there was ever a mathematical way to settle the free will vs determinism debate, it's in chaos. Life and how the human mind works is undoubtedly a chaotic system, with virtually irreducible complexity on top of that. Free will is just a description of whatever happens in your brain when you understand yourself enough to change and go off your deterministic path. It's what happens when matter is arranged in a way that understands itself and has agency over it's own fate. Not everyone has free will, but it's definitely real.

[@abrams5819]

I actually like the music selection, and you do a good job in using it to change the peace of the video, but maybe just adjust the levels a bit so it doesn't get distracting for some people. Unfortunately most people now days only like easy listening, so sad :(

[@codependent864]

exactly my thoughts as well

[@aaro1268]

If I recall, Jurassic Park was based on a novel by Michael Crichton. Chaos theory was used as a motif in the novel to develop themes about the inevitability of failure and the innate fallibility of humanity. Though the mathematics was misapplied, just as Dan Brown takes creative license on history, the novel is quite a good read.

[@GibusWearingMann]

8:36 is my favorite moment of all your videos so far, and one of my favorite videos on Math KZbin in general. edit: Although, I think my favorite video is "Mind Bending Strategy".

[@Kracklezz]

hey man, wanted to let you know that this was informative and well made, i liked it a lot.

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Thank you so much. I will keep striving to produce good and informative content.

[@MarioUcomics]

I don't think the point of Jurassic park wasn't that a complicated systems was too unpredictable, more that John Hammond had no idea what he was getting himself into. In the novel, The author does understand that something that seems complicated does have rules and order since in each chapter, he slowly shows a simple pattern turn into a fractal with a pattern. I think a better example in the movie was that the Jurassic park scientist over looked that effect of introducing frog DNA into the dinosaur would cause an effect of changing the females to males. This observation in nature was already there but illustrated that Dr Wu and Hammond were too blind to the small changes they introduced into their system and really were not in complete control as they though. The dinner scene explained this better in that they were creating a situation without full understand what they had and how some of the small changes they introduced to the Eco system changed the outcome they thought they knew. Hence they were never in complete control

[@perldition]

This didn't really take anything away from your narrative in my eyes and I really enjoyed this video, but I thought it'd be interesting to note that it's pretty easy to make a coin toss land whichever way you want by tossing in a way that just makes it wobble around a single axis without ever changing which way is facing up and which one is facing down.

Poincaré has proved already that (3+n)-body problem is chaotic... (concerning your speech about the solar system)

[@mrwensveen]

They should have used Murphy's Law instead of Chaos Theory in Jurassic Park, because that's what it was. Not quite as sexy, though.

[@lyndonjones1053]

Great video, I always find it incredible the breadth of topics fractals just turn up and show their crazy infinite selves.

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

I know! the fact that simple systems can result in complicated and chaotic messes, is the reason things like clouds, trees, biological creatures can be vastly complicated. If you haven't seen it I highly recommend this documentary: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gpyZgohvad10mJo it is old, but it features a lot of people that were instrumental in discovering fractal related concepts.

[@alohasnackbar2530]

the fucking cats man you're killing me

[@lorihooker4279]

Richard and I share your videos on face book. Many thousands more can see. You have an amazing way of teaching. Thank you for another fantastic video. Keep up the super work.

[@rogeliomoisescastaneda7396]

Great video, thanks. I just want to comment about the solar system example. If you consider the 3-body problem, in general, gravitational systems are chaotic, however what we actually see in the solar system is a long-term stable state.

[@vatsalparmar317]

Very nice i love your videos . Although i dont have even half the knowledge that you have about mathematics and stuff but the things that you explain in your videos make sense to me . Its because of the examples that are very much related to our day to day life like flipping a coin or the pool table example . It makes understanding a lot easier . Very nice video .

[@HarrysBigIdea]

Great video, very interesting.

[@legendarylitening]

YOUR VISUAL EXAMPLES ARE FUCKING AWESOME

[@alcarney]

Great video! :) You've got me thinking now, since we need two conditions to define chaos - sensitivity and mixing. Is it possible to have a system with mixing that is not sensitive? 🤔

[@Reidemeistermoves]

this channel is so underrated

[@awkweird_panda]

Thanku for sharing this JESUS. AMEN

[@shetheyandkindagay]

AMENALLUJAH

[@niki3352]

I mostly agree with what you say in the video, but there's one point I dont quite get / agree with. You said that the solar system is a complicated system with many forces involved, but yet simple and predictable behaviour, but isn't that because most of these forces are basically 0 compared to the most powerful forces in the solar system?

[@migueldemartin3460]

Thank you. Great job. Way over due, like, 24 years overdue.....wow it's been that long

[@TheEpicGene15]

Man i love this channel

[@OptimusPhillip]

Rereading the Jurassic Park novel, Malcolm's description of chaos theory seems superficially more accurate, but still has the same fundamental flaws. Basically, there's one line where he says "Chaos isn't randomness. Chaotic systems have defined rules." And then he basically makes all the same arguments about how "There was never any hope of controlling a system this complex." They also butcher math in at least one other way. Malcolm refers to fractals at one point, claiming that the inherent self-similarity of fractals is reflected in the course of human lives: a typical day follows the pattern of a typical week, a typical year, all the way up to an entire life. Except fractals aren't inherently self-similar, even in the example he gives of a craggly mountain. So the base premise he's extrapolating from is fundamentally flawed, casting doubt on his conclusion. It's kind of unfortunate, Michael Crichton was so good about researching paleontology and genetics, but when it came to his mathematics, he basically just wrote the message he wanted to convey, and then took superficial examples of mathematical ideas and pasted them on top, thinking that would make a good metaphor.

[@aschalewshiferaw4264]

Wow! Very nice lecture. Thank you!

[@vulcanus7127]

Thank you for this video, I got into an argument with a group insisting that chaos theory was about predicting and changing the future, i.e., being the butterfly. (Junk like bumping a rock to intentionally cause the downfall of an empire) You pretty much backed up my stance point for point. Honestly they were so insistent on their stance I had an existential moment akin to that feeling when someone is gaslighting you. Thanks for grounding me back in reality

[@calebrobinson6406]

Pleasure to watch!

[@siphonophone]

Fantastic explanation!

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Thanks!

[@lonewolf115]

Very nice explanation of the chaos theory! Also of interest: South Park season 7 episode 1 (one of the top episodes in my opinion) has already, in the same spirit, made fun of the idiocy in Jeff Goldblum's character. *PEACE*

[@jasonforbes330]

Dude your hair level is at 'Hansom Spanish knight' HOW DO YOU DO THAT! also thanks for the multiple examples/analogies, your videos are so good at explaining math to the normal people over here. Cheers

[@Athenas_Realm_System]

So if I understand this correctly an example of a chaotic system in computer would be cryptography (Encryption, Hashes, and Pseudorandom Number Generators), as it is incredibly sensitive to whether the say 400th bit is a 1 or 0 and also if you run through starting positions you end up with a lot of outputs that appear random (pseudorandom).

[@DonMeaker]

Three implies chaos. Edward Lorenz used to call it "sensitive dependence on initial conditions". The nonlinearity in the Navier Stokes differential equations is what causes the mixing in weather. And yes, that is why predictions of global warming/global cooling/ climate change are always garbage. What does the middle initial of Benoit B Mendelbrot stand for? Benoit B. Mendelbrot.

[@zombiedude347]

The books cover chaos theory much better than spielberg's adeptations.

[@muundmue]

The way you talked about chaos and how it is impossible (or extremely difficult) to predict certain outcomes of chaotic systems made me think about quantum physics and the way in which light travels: when you look at single photons it is not possible to accurately predict where it will go. But when you try predicting the *odds* of where the light will go, you will get a pretty decent answer (at least that is what I have understood from reading R. P. Feynman - I am no physicist, just a layman). So could you call the behaviour of photons "chaotic system"?

[@focf1981]

Dude, no spoiler alert? Seriously? J/K. I totally learned something new about Chaos Theory today. Thanks again for an awesome vid!

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Thanks again for watching!

[@focf1981]

The number of views! It's over 9000!

[@focf1981]

Shayna: OMG! You went viral!! Shayna: That was fantastic!

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

When I am KZbin famous, I won't forget my fans from day 1.

[@shans2408]

Not sure, but solar system probably is chaotic. Only that it is so big, empty and slow that we don't notice it. Try speeding up time (say current 1000 years = 1 day) and you will soon notice it is quite unpredictable. For instance the moon is not just revolving earth at a fixed distance. It is moving away very slowly (and earth rotation is slowing down). It's just that from our point of view the change is slow and only about the moon so we have enough time to notice and predict that. Try moving into the asteroid belt, speed up time a little and predict about their paths, or which asteroid will be there are a thousand years and which one will collide. From a different point of view, if we slowed down the ball in your four magnet set up, and had only a fixed starting point (just like we have for moon now) we can very well predict where it will be after "reasonably short" amount of time. Just time we can predict moon and earth's position in near future.

What you say at about 10:40 is basically what happens with the drop of water that slides down the hand in the movie, what Ian's used to explain chaos theory... which you claim is wrong, but is actually correct...

[@Supware]

Remind me what the graph at 1:20 represents? I only remember it's beautiful

[@rj9959]

13:10 if you change your perception of time and see the solar system from a distance with the time sped up then it could appear chaotic. Sure, the planets aren't going to lose their orbit in our lifetimes, but they will veer off course in the long term.

[@alexh3601]

Is there a way to measure how chaotic a system is? I understand that (maybe over-simplistically) systems range from calculus to chaos. Calculus being when you zoom in, things tend to smooth out, and chaos being when you zoom in things tend to look more rough. Is there a way to measure how far you have to zoom in before it becomes rough? For example, the surface of a planed piece of wood is pretty smooth until you zoom in to the atomic level so for nearly all applications it can be assumed to be flat. Weather we can predict pretty accurately a few days in advance. Economics and the stock market though is much more chaotic to my eyes. You can't predict what will happen in a few hours, much less what will happen in a month. Is there a way to measure these differences?

[@Sigusen]

The cat face slowly fading in around 4:57 made me lol! Ahh, that was good. Another example of chaos is a double pendulum: a pendulum attached to the end of another pendulum. kzbin.info/www/bejne/d6i3YZ5mbtxgoNk

[@NobodiesReaIm]

you're gonna be big!!!

[@japhyriddle]

I was really hoping you'd cut to the beginning of Full House ("What ever happened to predictability?") at 10:43.

[@lilfr4nkie]

This guys awesome

[@AinurEru]

The saboteur exemplifies the chaotic nature of human interactions and psychologies. The "life finds a way" (dinosours procreating despite all being females) exemplifies the unpredictable ways in which life sustain itself in-spite of human intervention. In the following movie they then talk about how the dinosours ovecame the lysine deficiency (not being able to produce that amino-acid) by having the natural plant environment lysine-rich, and having the predators eat the herbivores - a dynamic that was not predicted by the park's safety protocols. Maybe these are not technically examples of chaos, but they are examples of unpredictability.

[@kristoferkrus]

Great video! However, the evolution of the solar system _is_ chaotic; it just takes a very long time for it to show. "The evolution of the entire planetary system has been numerically integrated for a time span of nearly 100 million years. This calculation confirms that the evolution of the solar system as a whole is chaotic, with a time scale of exponential divergence of about 4 million years." (science.sciencemag.org/content/257/5066/56 ) I guess this means that we have to compute the motions of the planets many millions of years into the future for small numerical errors in the initial conditions to expand to such a degree that they become noticeable.

[@johnarnold312]

All systems are chaotic given time and all systems have limits of chaos. Now all I have to do is demonstrate that mathematically.

[@khirrog8660]

I love chaos theory!

[@gabetower]

Great video, but I'm a bit confused as to why you say the weather is chaotic, but the solar system isn't. They both seem very predictable for a while - weather, maybe a few hours or days, solar system a few billion years, but that's just a matter of units - but eventually they both fall into chaos. Is it just a label assigned to "stuff we can't compute past a certain point"?

[@AinurEru]

A coin-flip is not really 50:50, it could land on the edge :) Oh, and it's probably not a fair coin, most coins won't be. And 50:50 = unpredictability. If the term means anything, it means that.

[@crossian96]

Love your video but I think you misunderstood why chaos theory is featured in this movie. In the book chaos theory is elaborated on in more detail so i think to truly judge this story we should turn there. Ian Malcom points out that Jurassic Park itself is bound to fall apart. He knows no one will listen to him so he sardonically points out the dire situation the party. Back to your video your 'sensitive' system is the dino DNA. The 'mixing' would be the frog DNA. It was not predicted the frog DNA would enable the dinos to breed. It is true Nedry had a hand in the fall of the park, but I would like to point out the real threat was the raptors getting onto the boat and making it to the main land. Michael Crichton's depiction of raptors is fiction so take it with a grain of salt. They are made out to be super predators with more intelligence than the humans fighting them. The book eludes to the fact that raptor have made it to the main land and live secretly in the jungle. This give the reader the notion that Malcom's application of chaos theory got something right even if you as the reader think that he is just a nihilist who is full of himself (which is the point of his character). Great video though, loved the simple explanation of chaos theory! TL;DR Please read Crichton's book (ironic for a tldr I know)

[@Doomchild_]

my take on the presence of chaos theory (in the book at least) is not that the park failed 'because chaos' but it failed because they overlooked the posibilities implied by chaos theory. without spoiling the book for others, for me chaos theory was validated in the book when it shows that they had already lost some measure of control over the park long before nedry even shut down the power. It failed because they believed to be so fully in control that they did not even entertain the idea of certain problems arising. the power outage and escape of the dinosaurs only revealed the already out of control situation. while not part of the movie, in the book they almost re-established control over the park by sunrise the morning after the power outage showing they had control over this part of the situation, yet still failed and had to evacuate the island.

[@mattiasek2217]

I thought chaos was the very definition of unpredictable / nonreplicatable results from the same set of variables. You do something exactly the same way but yield different results every time.

[@Redhotsmasher]

Mattias Ek I think that's nondeterminism.

[@oscarsymes4954]

Loved the video! How did you visualize the systems you created?!?

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

If you are asking how I made the simulations, most of them were written in Mathematica, which is a really good high level language for math related programming. They have a lot of libraries to very quickly do a lot of math related things without too much work.

[@mathemovie5520]

Nice one :) !

[@thecynicalone7655]

Is another good example of chaos theory the infamous three body problem.

[@ArgieGrit]

I have a question now: Do you think that the specific example of Jurassic Park was a chaotic system? forgetting how the movie and books present chaos theory, and that it went badly because of the actions of one individual factor, would you consider it to be complex and unpredictible?

[@OptimusPhillip]

Nedry was far from the only factor that influenced Jurassic Park in a negative way. So many things went wrong independent of his sabotage. The dinosaurs learning to breed, the lysine contingency failing, the storm and all the problems it caused, and Hammond's general incompetence. I don't know if any of those can be blamed on chaos, but it was pretty much doomed to fail in its current state.

[@JatinSharma-gm5nk]

Hello sir can you explain why is it difficult to prove twin prime conjecture and Riemann hypothesis

[@ghostfox2473]

I can relyably flip a coin on heads every time. It's my con skill.

[@hah1738]

Thanks for the video. Could you explain this third rule to be a chaotic system I have seen online? "it must have dense periodic orbits"

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

I avoided this in the video since it gets a bit technical. This and a few other requirements are sometimes omitted from the definition. For instance, if you talk to most physicists, they will not always make the requirement for dense periodic orbits. But here is a vague explanation anyway: State space = the space of all possibilities in the system . Set = A bunch of points in the state space. Dense set = A set so that if you if you pick any point in the state space, there is a point in the set that is arbitrarily close to the point. Periodic orbit = A set of points that cycles back on itself. So if you start at any point in this set and repeatedly apply the procedure (i.e. the procedure that defines the system) you basically keep cycling in the set. That is where the word "periodic" comes from. So if you put all this together you can get a sense of what "dense periodic orbits" are. Basically, you want to have it so that if you take any point in the state space, there is a set in the state space that "cycles" and gets arbitrarily close to the point that you picked, and this has to work for every single point in the state space. Some people require this for a chaotic system. Unfortunately, if you want a really accurate portrayal of this property, you have to crack open a textbook on chaos theory. I recommend: www.amazon.com/Introduction-Dynamical-Systems-Michael-Brin/dp/0521808413 This book is very advanced, but if you have the required background it is very enjoyable. I should also say that you only need to get at this level if you want to study Chaos Theory at close to the level of an expert. Fun fact! it was written by the father of one of the founders of google. Anyways, I hope this helps.

[@OrrusTHX]

This music is ridiculous.

[@anastasiadunbar5246]

I had no problem with it.

[@TheEpicGene15]

Its.... chaotic

[@pacedelacruz4913]

I love your videos and subscribe but the bg music is not only too loud but highly disruptive, Buddy. I don't understand Peeps who feel the need for muzak in their videos' backgrounds. Really mfn annoying!!!

[@HalfBlindProductions]

Ok so that fractal with the magnets that's basically the magnetic field lines correct?

[@Macieks300]

So was Jeff Goldblum wrong or not? From what I understand he used a simplified metaphor, but wasn't really wrong.

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

You are right that his metaphor was not too bad, and I understand that it isn't possible to give everyone a 10 minute lecture when all they want is a simple analogy and explanation. However, the issue is not that the things he says about chaos theory are simple, the issue is that they are misleading. Goldblum believed that the park was trouble because corralling a bunch of dinosaurs in a theme park is fundamentally dangerous and unpredictable. And that is a perfectly reasonable thing to think. What I don't like however, is that he attempted to use his expertise in chaos theory to give backing to his ideas, when it in fact did not necessarily even apply to the situation. In other words it is a fine thing to have the opinion that: "We shouldn't mess around with complicated systems beyond our understanding" but what I don't like is: "We shouldn't mess around with complicated systems, and you have to believe what I have to say about this because I know chaos theory." I feel like the movie essentially co-opts a rich, interesting, and fun area of mathematics that is full of wonderful predictions and ideas to push a philosophical idea. And the co-opting happens in a very inaccurate way. Chaos theory involves systems that devolve into madness while following rules and without any interference. That is simply not the kind of system that Jurassic Park is. I hope that makes sense, and thanks for watching :)

[@Macieks300]

I took things Jeff Goldblum say as a joke and not as statements about Jurrasic Park that chaos theory implies. The chaos theory is in the movie only because the statement "complicated systems are unpredictable" has something to do with chaos theory and it is a metophor related to the plot. It also adds some depth to the Jeff Goldblum's character, but in the end I don't think the depiction of chaos theory in the movie is inherently misleading.

[@gijsvandergiessen1150]

I luv fractals

[@pauloat]

i liked the music

[@AlexBaklanov]

13:11. You have the sun, the planets, Pluto... 😥

[@themensoguidetowar]

Have you read the book? Ian Malcolm's character and his theory are way more developed.

[@Kowzorz]

Quantum mechanics is probabilistic because it's measuring a chaotic structure underneath.

[@Holobrine]

The solar system is a bad example. The distances are so far that the planet's gravitates don't really effect each other, so it's not all that complex. You want predictable complexity, try a Rube Goldberg machine.

[@vee__7]

U totally missed the point of the movie. It was about ppl believing they could control nature. Chaos was the reason they couldn't. It's the same reason short term weather is fundamentally uncontrollable. He was warning them against trying to play god basically.

[@MonkeyAmmo]

Great video! But please lower the volume of the music, it is too distracting and out of context. Not that I know everything about making youtube videos, but I would change the music if I were you.

[@m322_yt]

can you explain that background picture? it seems so oddly familiar to me...

and last but not least, you put the image of a romanesco broccoli when implying that it would not exist without "mathematical chaos"... in fact it does exist "without mathematical chaos" because "mathematical chaos" is a theory developed by us (humans) in order to understand the nature we see (which indeed already does exist before the theory ever existed)... so the phenomena exist without the theory...

[@juano3000]

I have seen two videos. Great way to tackle interesting issues, but the music keeps bumping me out. Too bad. Wanted to hear more.

[@stewiegriffin6503]

0:13 ask her to give him a .... you know..

[@sergiokorochinsky49]

14:49 ... beautiful.

[@Quasarbooster]

5:55 are there any resources for how this fractal was generated?

[@arohk1579]

This was very interesting, and in all honesty I never really heard the term Chaos theory until I seen Jurassic Park. For me I am not the type to just jump to is this thing correct in what they are talking about or not. In the movie to me it fits with the meaning given. But after watching stuff on the movie yours popped up in the list so I watched it and found it very interesting and informitive.Has it changed the way I view it in the movie, not really as it's a movie and when one picks a movie apart for the inaccurecies then it's no longer fun entertainment. Like for example the idea of no sound in space which is true now imagion watching say Star Wars and all the space stuff like battles etc are now all dead quite, that would be so increadably boring. But again in the real world and knowing the real idea of what it is I can see it in even my day to day work and travel if I understand what your saying that is. So if I understand the idea and correct me if I am wrong as I am not going to be an expert after watching one video. If I leave the house the same time and go the same way everyday I would arrive at the end point the same time. But if I say walk outside and forgot my keys so had to look for them now from that point on the arrival time will be either very close as I can alter my direction and speed or way off due to factors I now havent concidered. Would that be like Chaos. For me it's easier to understand if I put it into things I can understand.

[@rangelguerra1932]

Is the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics related to chaos theory?

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

Maybe kind of. Quantum mechanics is a completely probabilistic model, which means that uncertainty is baked into it right at the start. Chaotic dynamical systems on the other hand are completely deterministic, which means that it is possible to predict the future if you have 100% complete data on the present. In quantum mechanics, due to uncertainty being baked in right at the start, it is not quite possible to even make sense of 100% complete information on the present (see the Heisenberg uncertainty principle) With all that being said Quantum mechanics is just a model. I.e. it is a system where the math always says something accurate about the future. There is no interpretation of quantum mechanics that everyone agrees on. Some interpretations however, fall in line with the intent of your question. So your intuitions just may turn out to be completely accurate in the end. Here is a fantastic video about the lack of consensus in interpretations of quantum mechanics. Highly recommended: kzbin.info/www/bejne/kJLGmJp-btx1bbs

[@ZeDlinG67]

1:18 now *that* is chaos - if you know what I mean ;)

[@maksuree]

chaosh ish a laddah shanshah

[@anthonymacconnell7179]

After 3 months I'm only able to flip the coin 7-8/10 times right

[@pal181]

13:07 survivorship bias)

[@ghostfox2473]

Holy shit it's Jesus talking about dinosaurs

[@Travis7060312]

Chaosh ish a laddah

[@richard_darwin]

Predeterminism is the truth!!!

[@BOBOLAMA]

Chaos is a Ladder!

[@jwhite973]

Bob Spencer *ladda

[@Brandwein42]

So even Chaos is not random, if i understand? Im a math noob. Has true randomness been found yet at all, or is it deemed impossible?

[@GoldPlatedGoof]

The question about true randomness is interesting. Even the most advanced knowledge of physics that we currently have is at best a model of reality as we know it, and the models always have trade offs. So, the question about whether true randomness has been "found" is a very tricky one philosophically. However! if you change the question to "Does the mathematical construct of pure randomness accurately model any physical situations?", then the answer is a resounding yes! Everything from quantum mechanics to population behavior can often be predicted with a high degree of accuracy if you allow for a bit of "true randomness" in the model. Adding in some randomness to the model allows you to put certain things that are hard to understand in a black box, and just talk about the proportion of times certain things happen while still making extremely good predictions. I hope that answers your question.

[@Brandwein42]

Yes, mostly. Thanks.

[@arturaskarbocius6091]

Poincare three body problem never solved even with supercomputers on other hands then all planets line up in one line and gravitational vectors in superposition sum up will be end of solar system earth will be sling out of orbit :)))))))))))))) Ok it was thousads and millions times

[@gonefishing5415]

Newman!!!...