How do you draw a circle?

[Speakpigeon]

QM randomness is chaotic, not truly random.

So, do you say "chaoticity" or "chaoticness"?

Also, I thought "chaotic", technically, meant that even a very small change can produce very large effects down the line, like in the movement of planets. So, how would it work in QM? Why call QM randomness "chaotic" at all?
EB

 

[fromderinside]

I'm thinking chaotic processes are bound whilst random processes are not bound. Both are deterministic.

For every season turn turn turn ......

For some reason, I thought random was not deterministic (non-existent as well), and chaotic is deterministic. Maybe because I read the definitions on the little, tiny corner of the internet that I am connected to.

Perhaps your response was random.

Your corner of the internet is lovely its still got a sense of humor and style.

My presumptions were too materialistic.

I presume we use random processes and chaotic processes in conjunction with physical processes rather than as a just a mathematics exercise. I demonstrated this when I was viewing chaotic processes.

The take away from my post was meant to be bound unbound in determined systems.

I'm never a mathematician, just a physical applications use of such stuff kinda gee. I thought two axis pendulum real thing, brain activity real thing (my notion of a n-body system). the inclusion of random processes do not make brain function indeterministic.

 

[Keith&Co.]

How do you draw a circle?

I drop a bucket in the circle well then wind the rope back up with the crank.

 

[fromderinside]

If you're going to drop the bucket to draw circle why not just drop it so you don't have to drag up all that water. Besides the bucket's got a hole in it my pretty my dear.

 

[Speakpigeon]

How do you draw a circle?

I drop a bucket in the circle well then wind the rope back up with the crank.

Yeah, so you draw the circle well.

QED. Best method.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

I take the wagons out.

And I circle them.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

I run round in circles.

Very effective.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

I never try what is impossible.

But I can do the opposite.

I circle the square.
EB

 

[Keith&Co.]

I circle the square.

I thought it was 'circle GETS the square...'

 

[Speakpigeon]

I circle the square.

I thought it was 'circle GETS the square...'

Well, it is certainly what you should have said. You should have said "And circle gets the square". I mean, just that. To say you sort of approved.

But, sure, it's valid.
EB

 

[Kharakov]

QM randomness is chaotic, not truly random.

So, do you say "chaoticity" or "chaoticness"?

Never.

Also, I thought "chaotic", technically, meant that even a very small change can produce very large effects down the line, like in the movement of planets. So, how would it work in QM? Why call QM randomness "chaotic" at all?

Slight variations in initial conditions can create unpredictable variations- they can be large variations, but not necessarily.

 

[Learner]

Drawing circles "maybe" a lot easier writing a small letter o or Zero. Then keep drawing circles lightly around the zero's repeating till the circle gets large enough which doesn't use too much effort of judgement between inner circle line and outer circle line being drawn. Apart from a bit of patience.

Or start with a spiraling motion outward and refining at the end.

 

[Speakpigeon]

I go to a large enough public square and gather a private circle of friends.
EB

 

[Keith&Co.]

I thought it was 'circle GETS the square...'

Well, it is certainly what you should have said. You should have said "And circle gets the square". I mean, just that. To say you sort of approved.

But maybe i didn't approve. Maybe i thought you were X, and saying 'circle gets the square' would indicate you were wrong.
You assume a lot.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Well, it is certainly what you should have said. You should have said "And circle gets the square". I mean, just that. To say you sort of approved.

But maybe i didn't approve. Maybe i thought you were X, and saying 'circle gets the square' would indicate you were wrong.
You assume a lot.

I wasn't assuming. I said you should have said that.

You should have said that because it would have made a better post.

Oh, Ok, a better post in my view of things.

But still.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

So, do you say "chaoticity" or "chaoticness"?

Never.

Also, I thought "chaotic", technically, meant that even a very small change can produce very large effects down the line, like in the movement of planets. So, how would it work in QM? Why call QM randomness "chaotic" at all?

Slight variations in initial conditions can create unpredictable variations- they can be large variations, but not necessarily.

Exactly!


So QM is NOT chaotic.
EB

 

[Kharakov]

???

 

[Speakpigeon]

???

Chaos theory: n. The mathematical study of complex systems whose development is highly sensitive to slight changes in conditions, so that small events can give rise to strikingly great consequences.

So I have to assume you were fully unaware of this neat definition of the word "chaos"? Where have you been those last fifty years? Mars? The Andromeda Galaxy? Does your location in space-time obey QM laws?


And, fractals look nothing like random if you ask me.

And I doubt very much that the spread of photon locations in typically QM experiments look anything like chaotic.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

I grab the nearest corner and pull.
EB

 

[Malintent]

I circle the square.

I thought it was 'circle GETS the square...'

.. only the early circle gets the square.