So the computer based solution proposed by Newton and Turing is rejected because the system is chaotic, meaning a general solution will always diverge from reality.

What I don't get is: this should still be good enough Run your solution every month or so, with updated measurements, and you'll have an ongoing "forecast" of conditions.

I'm referencing weather because that's we do. A weather forecast is a prediction of a chaotic system, but of one which changes every day or so. Prediction difficulty is dependent on local conditions and weather type, but we can still make predictions.

A gravitational system of 4 mutually interacting bodies is muuuuuch simpler than weather, and could be predicted far enough in advance to let a civilization adapt and persist!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ped_xing@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Most of us can survive most of the weather most of the time, for now. Getting slingshotted deep into space or into another celestial body is like a category 999 hurricane; nothing's going to be able to adapt.

[–] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well yeah, I guess I just don't like how it's waved away as useless when there's very real civilizational utility in being able to predict orbits with e.g. 99% accuracy out to like 2 months.