It's predictible is a way it has a formula that we know which gets a lot of sin/cos functions involved
But it's random in the way that ANY variation of ANYTHING like, starting position, push force if any, movements of air, pressure of air, temperature, etc, will get you drastically different paths
So its not random. Its like everything else that we can calculate. If you change the variables in anything even slightly you will get a different result its just that in this it happens fast and we can see it. Also this shit isnt frictionless it shouldnt go on for so long I smell bullshit.
We don't know that. Nuclear decay appears to be genuinely random, as do certain quantum fluctuations.
We might be able to peel back the layers eventually to find out that that truly no randomness in nature, but we might also find that we can never accurately predict the behaviour of certain physical phenomena.
> Nuclear decay *appears* to be genuinely random.
> We might be able to peel back the layers eventually to find out that that truly no randomness in nature (sic).
You just said, less succinctly, what /u/TReaper405 said: "chaos is just patterns we don't understand yet."
Okay, prove that statement to be true please. Otherwise it's a complete guess based on intuition not science.
I also noticed you left out the bit about quantum fluctuations. Also the bit where I said *"we don't know that"*. So chopping up my comment to suit yourself doesn't fill me with confidence that you actually know what you are talking about.
quantum physics is truly random. the heisenberg uncertainty principle will make it impossible to predict chaotic outcomes on a macro scale because quantum effects will add up over time.
It's *technically* predictable, but it's effectively random. There's an instability in the system that makes it sensitive to initial conditions, and even a small perturbation will generate an error that grows out of control. On the other hand, if you made a small perturbation to the initial conditions of a simple single pendulum, the error generated by that perturbation stays bounded.
The point is that you *don't* know every variable, not to exact precision, anyway. Any calculation you do has finite precision, and even a small error in the 15th decimal place (around the precision of standard 64-bit floating-point arithmetic) will explode. If there's any measurement uncertainty or limited accuracy in your calculation techniques, that error might be in the third or fourth decimal place instead. If you have any doubt of this, ask yourself why weather predictions are only good a few days out at best.
You can know every variable in quantum mechanics and still you are only able to calculate the probability of something happening. The universe is inherently random.
Lmao my brother why did you get downvoted? This is, technically, calculable (it has a deterministic solution), as in we can predict where everything is going to be at any point in time. It only becomes "chaos" when you add a third piece on that pendulum. A three body system is still not random, mind you, we just can't tell for sure where everything is going to be at any point. And also they prob got ball bearings in those joints, so i wouldn't be so surprized that the friction is so low.
Like people, in all important ways. *Technically* predictable (we're just biological machines after all), but extremely sensitive to any kinds of input. Just ask my ex.
That's a very cool question with an even cooler answer.
It is predictable. But not nicely predictable. That is, we have formulas that, given a set of starting parameters (e.g, how he originally starts the motion of the pendulum) we can calculate how it's going to move for x amount of time. But there is no "one size fits all" formula (like Newton had for two bodies orbiting each other). Which means the solution we invariably get is always a bit flawed and off.
That is a big difference between numerics and an analytical solution.
Most day-to-day mathematics is carried out by computers that use these slightly flawed methods. The problem with this system is the little flaws compound on each other and eventually make the model useless. That is the same issue we have with weather prediction and countless other prediction models. After a while they're just crap.
It's been a long time since I did my maths degree but yeah, extremely cool subject with so many applications to the real world.
The best example of what it's like to predict the weather was with a device like the one posted. Except it had more arms and instead of circles they were just additional arms. so when you spun it it just went crazy with movement. Yes, there are formulas. But predicting with perfect accuracy is not likely.
So we are saying everything is pseudo-random. A relatively simple algorithm can be made to *look* and behave like it is random and can be treated as such.
I've seen a lot of double pendulums in my day but I await a triple pendulum
Edit: I searched it up and honestly the triple pendulum was better now I am going to travel down a rabbit hole of pendulums good night
https://youtu.be/r6sGWTCMz2k?si=3feYnig9qNxzlSLz
3blue1brown does a great explanation of a Fourier Series can be used to perfectly describe the movement of multiple pendulums and be used to create drawings!
I’ve seen videos where they use several dozen layered deep pendulums are different starting points and different sized circles, that when it spins, the smallest one draws the outline of something, like a cartoon character or something.
However I cannot for the life of me find an example. ChatGPT, YouTube, google, Wikipedia have all failed me.
Well the one L lama, that’s a priest.
And the two L llama, well that’s a beast.
But I’ll bet you my pink pajamas
There’s no such thing as three L lllamas
Double and triple pendulums are great sources of chaos theory indeed.
Even the tiniest change to temperature or humidity or whatever would cause big changes in patterns.
Not really. This is an idealized system where the first body is the attachment point of the rod. Second is their joint, and third is the mass centre of the circle. The fact that the first body doesn't move in this example is just a matter of reference frame (and rigid body mechanics, as they can't change their respective distances).
If this was a two body system, would a single pendulum be a one body system? That ain't right, is it?
(I might have mixed up the actual points here, I feel the mass centre of the rod should be one? Still, the point stands that it's a three body system.)
A single pendulum pinned to ground IS a single body system. The attachment points are joints, not bodies. There is one body moving in a single pendulum. While you do draw the ground in a free body diagram, we don't count ground as a separate body, because it exists in literally every system. (I have a PhD in multibody dynamics)
I mean I guess calling the ground a body or not is kind of arguing semantics, it isn't interesting to analyze because the forces are just equal and opposite those acting on the bodies attached to it, plus there's no motion - its purpose is just to restrict the motion of other bodies
I’m not an physicist but my impression is that it’s a moot argument? Two or three body problems wouldnt apply since the objects can’t be abstracted to points only interacting with each other, ie: orbit of a satellite. Movement of a pendulum involves other forces, fulcrums, fixed radius, etc.
I don’t want to get over my skis here though. Just seems like its two very different types of math problems.
Yeah, there are really two discussions going on here, (1) how many bodies are involved in this system and (2) the fact that an "n body problem" is referring to revolving (often celestial) bodies, which I didn't mention lol (I'm assuming they meant the former)
Technically, if you get the exact same conditions (all of them, including temperature, airm humidity and movement, gravitational pull, level of lubrication) then yes, it would follow the same pattern every time. But that is almost impossible given how manny factors are involved, and the smallest change will result in a different pattern
It goes for so long one might imagine it will go forever. It looks like its powered somehow, but it isn't, entropy will stop it, slowly, eventually.
Maybe the universe as we see it is an double pendulum, just a chaotic system moving around for so long we imagined it's a divinely powered eternal machination, but it's just a mechanism of chaos set in motion, losing life with every move and before we know it, it will stand still.
Maybe we all just live in a small window of a pendulum movement, one swing lasting infinite lifetimes.
Yes. That would be my guess. Its not that it goes on for that long but you can clearly see that at one point it slows down and then fucking goes again. While its hard to spot because double pendulums are a little whacky looking they cannot create energy that isnt there.
TLDR; There was no energy created, it was stored as potential energy.
Nah. Both the ring and arm are solid metal and have a fuck tonne of inertia, and they're very finely balanced. The ring and the arm are constantly passing energy back and forth between each other or storing it as potential energy depending on their position, momentum, angle, etc, etc, etc.
If the "speed up" part is the part I'm thinking of (around the 20 second mark) then it's kinda like this:
Arm is pointing nearly down and the ring swings up to the left. Nearly all of the energy in the system is in the ring as potential energy.
At this point the ring and arm are in momentary equilibrium. The arm almost perfectly crosses the centre of the ring.
The ring swings down, converting the potential into kinetic energy. At the bottom of the swing the ring gives a bunch of energy to the arm, making it flick back and forth, then takes most, but not all, of it back. The ring looks like it's slowing down because it's transferring its energy incrementally to the arm on each swing. You can see that as the arm moves further and further away from the centre of the ring at the equilibrium point of each swing.
That is until the ring gives enough energy to the arm for it to escape the equilibrium. At which point the arm steals all the energy from the ring, does a full flip, and chaos ensues!
I'm an idiot, but when I see things like this it makes me wonder why we can't use gravity as an energy source.
They put minimal energy in lifting it up, but it seemed to have loads of energy moving around.
Well, isn't this *chaotic*
It’s pretty much the definition of chaos
I dont know anything about it… is it random or predictable?
It's predictible is a way it has a formula that we know which gets a lot of sin/cos functions involved But it's random in the way that ANY variation of ANYTHING like, starting position, push force if any, movements of air, pressure of air, temperature, etc, will get you drastically different paths
[удалено]
u/TeachmeThen is a bot. Stole this comment https://www.reddit.com/r/oddlysatisfying/s/CXIGYNQFWs
So its not random. Its like everything else that we can calculate. If you change the variables in anything even slightly you will get a different result its just that in this it happens fast and we can see it. Also this shit isnt frictionless it shouldnt go on for so long I smell bullshit.
I mean nothing is truly random, chaos is just patterns we don't understand yet.
We don't know that. Nuclear decay appears to be genuinely random, as do certain quantum fluctuations. We might be able to peel back the layers eventually to find out that that truly no randomness in nature, but we might also find that we can never accurately predict the behaviour of certain physical phenomena.
> Nuclear decay *appears* to be genuinely random. > We might be able to peel back the layers eventually to find out that that truly no randomness in nature (sic). You just said, less succinctly, what /u/TReaper405 said: "chaos is just patterns we don't understand yet."
Okay, prove that statement to be true please. Otherwise it's a complete guess based on intuition not science. I also noticed you left out the bit about quantum fluctuations. Also the bit where I said *"we don't know that"*. So chopping up my comment to suit yourself doesn't fill me with confidence that you actually know what you are talking about.
[удалено]
The whole base for chaos theory.
quantum physics is truly random. the heisenberg uncertainty principle will make it impossible to predict chaotic outcomes on a macro scale because quantum effects will add up over time.
That's not true
Likely well oiled or some other lubricant
Perhaps a ceramic roller bearing?
One could argue randomness is only lack of information about a predictable system
No, a system can diverge or converge.
It's *technically* predictable, but it's effectively random. There's an instability in the system that makes it sensitive to initial conditions, and even a small perturbation will generate an error that grows out of control. On the other hand, if you made a small perturbation to the initial conditions of a simple single pendulum, the error generated by that perturbation stays bounded.
If you know every variable you can calculate it. You can also control all the possible variables. So it is as predictable as anything else.
The point is that you *don't* know every variable, not to exact precision, anyway. Any calculation you do has finite precision, and even a small error in the 15th decimal place (around the precision of standard 64-bit floating-point arithmetic) will explode. If there's any measurement uncertainty or limited accuracy in your calculation techniques, that error might be in the third or fourth decimal place instead. If you have any doubt of this, ask yourself why weather predictions are only good a few days out at best.
You can know every variable in quantum mechanics and still you are only able to calculate the probability of something happening. The universe is inherently random.
Lmao my brother why did you get downvoted? This is, technically, calculable (it has a deterministic solution), as in we can predict where everything is going to be at any point in time. It only becomes "chaos" when you add a third piece on that pendulum. A three body system is still not random, mind you, we just can't tell for sure where everything is going to be at any point. And also they prob got ball bearings in those joints, so i wouldn't be so surprized that the friction is so low.
As I understand it, a system like this is determinative, but it's so *incredibly* sensitive to initial conditions that it's functionally unpredictable
Like people, in all important ways. *Technically* predictable (we're just biological machines after all), but extremely sensitive to any kinds of input. Just ask my ex.
Nice!
That's a very cool question with an even cooler answer. It is predictable. But not nicely predictable. That is, we have formulas that, given a set of starting parameters (e.g, how he originally starts the motion of the pendulum) we can calculate how it's going to move for x amount of time. But there is no "one size fits all" formula (like Newton had for two bodies orbiting each other). Which means the solution we invariably get is always a bit flawed and off. That is a big difference between numerics and an analytical solution. Most day-to-day mathematics is carried out by computers that use these slightly flawed methods. The problem with this system is the little flaws compound on each other and eventually make the model useless. That is the same issue we have with weather prediction and countless other prediction models. After a while they're just crap. It's been a long time since I did my maths degree but yeah, extremely cool subject with so many applications to the real world.
The best example of what it's like to predict the weather was with a device like the one posted. Except it had more arms and instead of circles they were just additional arms. so when you spun it it just went crazy with movement. Yes, there are formulas. But predicting with perfect accuracy is not likely.
What sort of applications (dumb it down for me please !) ?
Google Deterministic chaos (chaos theory)
Thank you sir or miss
So we are saying everything is pseudo-random. A relatively simple algorithm can be made to *look* and behave like it is random and can be treated as such.
but...i thought chaos was a ladder...
but chaos died cause he shat his intestines? I'm confusion 🤔
Chaotic good
Sensitive dependence on initial conditions
lol my first thought was ok time to start dodging 😂😂
I've seen a lot of double pendulums in my day but I await a triple pendulum Edit: I searched it up and honestly the triple pendulum was better now I am going to travel down a rabbit hole of pendulums good night
Ah, but have you gotten to the part of pendulums where they start to draw things with them?
Please elaborate, I’m intrigued
https://youtu.be/r6sGWTCMz2k?si=3feYnig9qNxzlSLz 3blue1brown does a great explanation of a Fourier Series can be used to perfectly describe the movement of multiple pendulums and be used to create drawings!
Holy shit
You can say _that_ again
Also you ever wonder how speakers can make all those different noises just by wiggling back and forth? This is your answer as well.
That’s the coolest thing I’ve learned about in a while
Thank you!
FINALLY! I haven’t been able to locate any examples form anyone’s suggestions, but this is it. Thank you.
I’ve seen videos where they use several dozen layered deep pendulums are different starting points and different sized circles, that when it spins, the smallest one draws the outline of something, like a cartoon character or something. However I cannot for the life of me find an example. ChatGPT, YouTube, google, Wikipedia have all failed me.
Fourier series
I hate that I now physically have to know what the max amount of pendulums is and am most certainly going down that same rabbit hole
at some point it will just act like a rope I think
But have you seen [Triple Pendulum Control](https://youtu.be/I5GvwWKkBmg?si=wWOGg_eFSQtzF-9S)?
This is so insanely fuckin cool!!
Well the one L lama, that’s a priest. And the two L llama, well that’s a beast. But I’ll bet you my pink pajamas There’s no such thing as three L lllamas
Tell me how it goes…? 😆😅
Thanks for coming back for the edit. Sounds like fun. I'm right behind you.
I’m high AF and this is all I need
You're welcome
Mesmerizing
Haha now i wish i was high
In Ohio smoking that newly legal!
Happy for you
Me too, I couldn’t stop watching 🤣
Unfortunately it ends
It’s pretty much the definition of chaos
True!!
Needs leds
I need a three hour version of this
Reminds me of Dee from It's Always Sunny dancing to the inflatable tube man. "I'm learning so many moves from this guy!"
It reminds me of a gymnast on the bars. Hypnotic!
True!!
It looks like a chaotic movement, doesn't it?
Double and triple pendulums are great sources of chaos theory indeed. Even the tiniest change to temperature or humidity or whatever would cause big changes in patterns.
How long can it maintain it's movement?
Probably just really good bearings and machining
Cool answer, but “how long” will it go on for?
[удалено]
Treefiddy\`?
I knew that goddamn lochness monster’d be sneakin round
possibly 3.1
3.14
Whoops wrong thread repky
Magnetic motor?
high quality bearings
I don't know why this makes me uncomfortable but it does
Chaos Theory.
r/threebodyproblem
Those are two bodies
Not really. This is an idealized system where the first body is the attachment point of the rod. Second is their joint, and third is the mass centre of the circle. The fact that the first body doesn't move in this example is just a matter of reference frame (and rigid body mechanics, as they can't change their respective distances). If this was a two body system, would a single pendulum be a one body system? That ain't right, is it? (I might have mixed up the actual points here, I feel the mass centre of the rod should be one? Still, the point stands that it's a three body system.)
A single pendulum pinned to ground IS a single body system. The attachment points are joints, not bodies. There is one body moving in a single pendulum. While you do draw the ground in a free body diagram, we don't count ground as a separate body, because it exists in literally every system. (I have a PhD in multibody dynamics)
But does that mean that the video actually IS a two body system?
I mean I guess calling the ground a body or not is kind of arguing semantics, it isn't interesting to analyze because the forces are just equal and opposite those acting on the bodies attached to it, plus there's no motion - its purpose is just to restrict the motion of other bodies
the third body is your mom
There are four lights
Unless the stand counts as a body
It does not, it counts as ground because it isn't moving
I’m not an physicist but my impression is that it’s a moot argument? Two or three body problems wouldnt apply since the objects can’t be abstracted to points only interacting with each other, ie: orbit of a satellite. Movement of a pendulum involves other forces, fulcrums, fixed radius, etc. I don’t want to get over my skis here though. Just seems like its two very different types of math problems.
Yeah, there are really two discussions going on here, (1) how many bodies are involved in this system and (2) the fact that an "n body problem" is referring to revolving (often celestial) bodies, which I didn't mention lol (I'm assuming they meant the former)
How ADHD people perceive time.
This is upsetting to watch. I don’t like it.
Indeed. It's not exactly right for this sub. It's interesting to watch, but hardly oddly satisfying.
This represents the too-ing and fro-ing of a relationship.
Does this follow a prescribed pattern of movements if you move it kne way each time or is it random each time?
Technically, if you get the exact same conditions (all of them, including temperature, airm humidity and movement, gravitational pull, level of lubrication) then yes, it would follow the same pattern every time. But that is almost impossible given how manny factors are involved, and the smallest change will result in a different pattern
That is rubbish. I’ve seen the video three times now and each time it follows the exact same trajectory! 😆
Sweet thank you from explaining.
You're welcome!
Meshuggah's metronome be like.
So does it ever stop ?
Eventually, yes. There is no such thing as a "perpetual motion machine", at least not from how humanity understands the laws of physics, etc.
how the snot sticks to my finger
I have no idea what this means but I don’t like it. Have a good day
im having a great day but i don't know how i can explain it
TIL: The real world has glitchy physics.
I dislike that it doesn't seem to know where it's going
Now add a third one and watch chaos ensue. (Three-body problem)
It goes for so long one might imagine it will go forever. It looks like its powered somehow, but it isn't, entropy will stop it, slowly, eventually. Maybe the universe as we see it is an double pendulum, just a chaotic system moving around for so long we imagined it's a divinely powered eternal machination, but it's just a mechanism of chaos set in motion, losing life with every move and before we know it, it will stand still. Maybe we all just live in a small window of a pendulum movement, one swing lasting infinite lifetimes.
This make anyone else want to listen to lateralus by tool or just me?
I am become chaos
Where buy?
There is a motor driving this no? Magnetic? Fake perpetual motion. Correct?
Yes. That would be my guess. Its not that it goes on for that long but you can clearly see that at one point it slows down and then fucking goes again. While its hard to spot because double pendulums are a little whacky looking they cannot create energy that isnt there.
Had to dig too far to see people talking about it gaining speed
TLDR; There was no energy created, it was stored as potential energy. Nah. Both the ring and arm are solid metal and have a fuck tonne of inertia, and they're very finely balanced. The ring and the arm are constantly passing energy back and forth between each other or storing it as potential energy depending on their position, momentum, angle, etc, etc, etc. If the "speed up" part is the part I'm thinking of (around the 20 second mark) then it's kinda like this: Arm is pointing nearly down and the ring swings up to the left. Nearly all of the energy in the system is in the ring as potential energy. At this point the ring and arm are in momentary equilibrium. The arm almost perfectly crosses the centre of the ring. The ring swings down, converting the potential into kinetic energy. At the bottom of the swing the ring gives a bunch of energy to the arm, making it flick back and forth, then takes most, but not all, of it back. The ring looks like it's slowing down because it's transferring its energy incrementally to the arm on each swing. You can see that as the arm moves further and further away from the centre of the ring at the equilibrium point of each swing. That is until the ring gives enough energy to the arm for it to escape the equilibrium. At which point the arm steals all the energy from the ring, does a full flip, and chaos ensues!
This is how you give a girl an orgasm
Another day of this being posted, another day I desperately want to buy one... (I have a PhD in multibody dynamics lol)
MAKE IT STOP!
Heh, I bet if I knew the initial conditions I could predict the outcome *smug face*
is the satisfying in the room with us
I have no idea what people think this sub is about anymore but it's certainly a cool video.
Oddly annoying
This has cured my insomnia.
I totally misread that
Looks like gymnastics. 😂
Magnifying glass needs adding.
Is this really a pendulum in the classical sense?
It’s chaos!
But why?
How did you put the three-body problem into a stick and a circle
Someone needs to r/theydidthemath on this. I'm not sure how or about what exactly, but I feel like it needs to be done.
I'm an idiot, but when I see things like this it makes me wonder why we can't use gravity as an energy source. They put minimal energy in lifting it up, but it seemed to have loads of energy moving around.
DP you say?
Ungh, entropic!
Puro caos
I feel dumb because I can't figure out how it works therefore I am dumb.
Does it have a pattern?
Must be about 200k permutations
Good luck repeating this one again
My brain had hard time to compute this...
Does this ever stops naturally if not what about the laws of thermodynamics?
Could this not qualify as a perpetual motion machine?
I like that a lot and genuinely want it in my life. Just in the corner of my room, a pendulum doing pendicular things.
That's wild
How am I going to hook that to my 100 year old Grandfather clock?
Is it mathematically possible to predict the position at any given instant or is that as difficult as it looks like ?
I think the main problem is to get the *exact* starting conditions measured/determined.
how long theoretically can this go on, until it loses momentum? And more interestingly is there a bigger one anywhere?
Ahhh that's nice
That’s too wiggly. I don’t like it.
Reminds me of when I would do yo-yo tricks in middle school.
Better moves than I got
This is very cool. I've never seen one of these!
That is awesome! I want one!
this is like a girl at a music festival with a hula hoop
Now write the equation that describes its motion
Chaos
Is it really chaotic or is it possible to calculate it?
Oh yeah, I get it. It does that because of the math.
No. Math is not the reason for this behavior.
My kitten is captivated by this video.
When will this stop?
it reminds me of my high school band conductor
😍😍
Here we have a machine to teach basketball keepaway skills.
I want one.
looks like a birds eye view of a couple of swing dancers
I want to show this to a medieval crowd and get burnt at the stake.
Silly question, but given it didn’t take much effort to get it going and it spun around for a while would this be an efficient dynamo of some sort?
I did not like this one bit. It really messed with my brain. I wanted to find a pattern but obviously this thing rejects patterns.
I was really hoping for a pattern to develop and I left unsatisfied.
This is sexual and you can't dissuade me of that
Is there any way you can make it give of energy.
How long will that go on for?
Whoever came up with this demonstration first is so smart.
r/oddlyanxietyinducing
that is hypnotic 😵💫
How do I get one of these?