"he's a friend from work" got me lmao

I just realized.. this was the whole point of Heath's Joker: All these years I was a bit confused because the Joker describes himself as an Agent of chaos & a dog that chases a car without understanding what its doing. But then he seems to have planned every little detail… Thus, that's the whole joke, the Joker is unpredictable, but not random.

“Chaos does not mean randomness.” A sentiment shared by respected scientists and exasperated dungeon masters around the world.

Fun fact: Tolkien included elements of this theory in the Lord of the Rings. It was represented by the question: where are the Entwives? aka: the tree body problem.

@7:16 "back when this virgin was creating the cover for Dark Side of the Moon" - ABSOLUTELY EPIC.

"Goldblum!" I often yell, at the sky, while shaking my fist. For no particular reason.

"to recap, no cap ... fam" - Goldblum levels of cadence and delivery 👌

The layers in that "he's a friend from work" joke. Amazing. (There's the obvious Thor says that line and kyle is discount Thor layer. But in addition, Jeff Goldblum appears in the movie that line comes from [Thor: Ragnarok]. So during the filming, Jeff and -Kyle- Chris Hemsworth were in fact coworkers.)

Fun fact: chaotic systems with very small predictability horizons are used to generate "random" numbers in computers because digital machines are very bad at not following precise, predetermined steps. That is why pseudorandom algorithms are still repeatable and you can play on the same Minecraft world more than once if you copy down the seed value (initial condition). Edit: it seems a lot of people are confused by my phrasing. I'm not saying chaotic computer algorithms are the _only_ way to generate pseudorandom numbers in computation, I'm saying they are used for that purpose. The video is about chaos, not generating random numbers, so I'm making the connection lol

"back when this virgin was creating the cover for dark side of the moon" man, thats a lot of chaos in that joke

The best thing is that they got the dialogue right AND the attitude right: he's right on the line between smug and infinitely humbled.

"3 of you that are still watching..." I always watch each second of your videos. Great content, thanks.

Was not quite prepared to have Neeton referred to as "this virgin".

That bit of him getting worried about Goldbloom and Aria then he exclaims, "Goldbloom!" made me burst out laughing. Kyle you can make some funny shit, the reason why you're one of the most entertaining science educators on this platform

Eris throws a Golden Apple into the room and leaves, laughing like Jeff Goldblum.

"He's a friend from work" i didn't see that one coming. Amazing! I actually laughed out loud

My wife laughs at me for having never seen a Jurassic Park movie. I've been convinced.

An entire video dedicated to chaos ? Mmmh... *speed-dials the number of his closest Imperial Inquisition Bureau*

"What is Chaos?" CHAOS IS THE ONLY TRUE ANSWER! - Most sane chaos cultist

As a Social Psychologist, I can tell a word or two about Uncertainty in measurement, and how in this discipline is mandatory to pay special attention to the Reliability and Validity of the instruments you measure with. 10:08 _La facilidad_ means _Easiness_ in spanish. The right translation would be something like _Las Instalaciones_ (Yes, in plural).

Your “fun voice” bit will never, _ever_ get old

This reminds me of a certain video on Trackmania, since it features completely deterministic physics, when TASing (bot assisted basically) and doing small but determined variations via machine learning. Just the initial differences within the Floating Point calculations when a car starts from the Start Line it will have different results, so "by fractions and fractions of 1%" everything changes even with the same exact inputs and same exact timings.

Measure the coastline in Plancks, so it’s a finite measurement. Have fun storing/processing the point data though…

Currently prepping for my Orbits 2 Final. Can't tell you how many times we spent a week deriving equations just to get told "And this last step will get you a nobel prize, let's move on to something else". Part of the complexity is that you can somewhat relate variables in a system to each other, but relating them to time or integrating with respect to time is impossible.

Hoping Kyle does another three-body episode how about how terrifying it would be to weaponize the fundamental forces of physics

40K fans malding when Chaos has "no randomness" 😡

As I understand it, its only unpredictable because you don't have precise or complete enough starting conditions to remain accurate for as long of a time scale as you're interested in. The longer the time scale you want to be accurate over the more precise your starting conditions need to be. It could be just because you didn"t measure precisely enough to be accurate over the time horizon you want, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle means there is a limit to how precise your starting conditions can be, and random quantum phenomenon adds randomness to your system. So even if you had a system with no introduction of randomness due to quantum phenomenon (which is impossible) and you exactly measured the velocity OR position of each particle in the system to an "infinite number of decimal places". Heisenberg's uncertainty principle means there will always be a non-zero level of imprecision in your starting conditions. So the time horizon of accuracy of any model is inherently finite.

I can vouch for Kyle's pickup method at the end there, it does in fact have a 100% success rate and is anomalously not subject to unpredictable outcomes.

The fact that that water drop trick worked for you is only anecdotal evidence Kyle! To cement it as an actual, successful technique we have to do more experiments on it with people not as charming and magnetic as you and Mr. Goldblum. That being said, nice! ;)

I can't wait until season 2 of Three Body Problem and all the science tube makers are going to explain to their audience the Dark Forest solution to the Fermi Paradox. That will be great times to share the depression.

My brother in law asked me if I had been watching the Three Body Problem. I told him I had not, but I was familiar with the concept in physics and proceeded to explain it to him and its history in the understanding of chaos. He said I should really watch the show. I haven't yet, but I probably will.

I love that you Goldblum'd your way into (i presume) Aria's heart only for Aria to encounter Goldblum Prime. It's like poetry, it rhymes...

I’m reading Cixin Liu’s The Three-Body Problem for school, it’s really good and I highly recommend it. The ideas and concepts in it are so bizarre and creative, it’s truly a masterpiece especially considering the author’s relation to the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Go read now.

Awesome stuff. I never even considered why we couldn't predict weather further than a week's time, this is the kind of stuff you never stop to think about, and we usually take for granted.

I learned to build guitars from the renowned American builder, William Cumpiano who was the former editor of a journal on acoustic science. He basically said the journal closed after a few years because the community of researchers determined(paraphrasing), “acoustic build problems have multiple interlinked oscillating feedback systems and are therefore unsolvable.” It makes me smile knowing there will always be some mystery.

That Ian Malcom and Ellie Sattler scene is a masterclass in classy flirting.

Your Jeff Goldblum impression is excellent btw "Jazz piano" 😂

Only Kyle would do science education, using phrases like "Hitchey Gitchey Goo Goo" and "Billy Billy" 😂

7:48 "Goldblum!" lmao 🤣🤣🤣

In addition to 'horizons of predictability', systems with chaotic behaviour are also able to have 'regions of predictability' - connected/continuous sets of initial conditions that, in some region of the space of possible values for those conditions, exhibit predictable behaviour. Near the boundary of these regions, the tendency to chaos increases (depending on your ability to measure/control the conditions with that amount of accuracy). One of the famous examples of this is the Magnetic Pendulum - set up a single-rod pendulum with a ferromagnetic material at the tip, and set three magnets underneath where the pendulum is allowed to swing, arranged in an equilateral triangle (with the pivot of the pendulum above the center of the triangle). The prediction is which of the three magnets the pendulum will end up pointing towards when it finally reaches equilibrium. This system will experience Chaos over quite a lot of the initial condition space - many starting points will have high sensitivity to adjustments in terms of where the pendulum ends up, much like the drop of water on your hand. However, there are large regions of starting condition space that are are stable under small adjustments instead. As long as you aren't 'near' the boundary of one of these regions, the system has predictability.

Looks like Kyle's got himself a super vill-, errr, totally normal science arch nemesis now. Goldbloom!

The coastline of Britain will also constantly change, since water is constantly eroding it. Not to mention the sea levels are constantly changing. They could be going up as the polar caps melt and add water to the sea or recede if we start getting another ice age from the water freezing up.

Kyle's hair and beard are a good example of chaos at work. Thanks for the info, Kyle!

Today's Fact: The smallest reptile in the world is a chameleon called Brookesia micra, which measures just 29 mm in length.

Thank you for more content, science Thor

Must be a chaotic era! Dehydrate! Dehydrate! Dehydrate!

I love every word of this video script. One of your best yet!

“Because Science”, now that’s nostalgic

the books were amazing so happy Netflix made a video version in english

"To recap, no cap, Fam". You're so hip and with it. :)

This is not often talked about, but still interesting to state: I studied Complex Systems for a very long time (5 years). One thing that is often overlooked about it is that, the initial conditions aren't the only piece of information you need in order to predict what a system will do. You need a model of the large scale, because the large scale contains information that the smaller scale needs to also have, to determine its initial conditions, which makes such problems undecidable. Think of it like this: It's a clear blue sky out right now. Technically, a tornado can form at this very instant, but it doesn't and we know that the likelihood is close to 0. The reason is because in order to have a tornado, requires a supercell, which requires the right atmospheric conditions and so on. The macroscale informs the microscale, what is or should happen, and this is called "Downward Causation," and in extension, a complex system is a system such that you can not definitively separate or talk about any particular scale of the system, without talking about all the other scales of the system, which is partly the reason why you can not know the initial conditions, as to do so requires knowledge of every system casually connected to it. Mathematical models like the double pendulum over simplify the concept of chaos to its detriment because in reality the double pendulum isn't a simple two body system. The system also contains a bunch of air molecules, its in a room, sitting on Earth, flying through space...all of these things one ignores when talking about the chaos of the double pendulum...and on a computer, the system is made of pixels, which run on your computer, which sits in your room full of air molecules, sitting on Earth, flying through space. The macroscale, influences non-trivially the initial conditions of the system, like the fact that you, a human organism initiated some kind of process that moves electrons in your computer around to change colors of pixels on a screen in such a way where they follow this particular pattern that we recognize as a double pendulum...which could have turned out differently. If you ignore the artificial separation of these systems (rather that all of them are connected and just parts of the same system) then it begins to make sense how we don't just see double pendulums randomly appearing on our computer screens when those are equally likely to happen as a monkey typing on a keyboard to do the same thing.

(raises eye brow) you selling weapons son? (pulls up the FBI agent sunglass from my pocket to put on)

0:56 , Chaos is a ladder. We already know. If you get the reference, you get it ;)

My favourite example is this: A ball on a billard table is a perfect predictable system. A ball on a billiard table with two round sides, is a chaotic system. I was programming this a couple of years ago. On the first table you can reverse the balls direction after some time and get back to your starting point. On the round table this does not work, as it becomes a chaotic system. This blew my mind back then.

“Noted Space Zaddy Kyle Hill” in the description is amazing

My two cents to the three body problem: "Heisenberg is a b#@ch!"

The three body problem series is funnily enough named wrong, particularly because it follows the dark forest hypothesis not the 3 body problem

I can’t believe you said “different” differently 6 times and it make perfect sense to me. Huh, that’s pretty cool

7:48 - 7:50 I love the sudden cut in and out of: "Goldbloom!" 💪😡💪

I've been waiting for you to make a video on this show!! It was an amazing watch!

That was a low blow... "This virgin..." 😂😂😂

I really enjoyed this episode being headed by jeff goldblum doing an absolutely fantastic impression of kyle. Rarely broke character. What a pro!

- Chaos is a pit. - Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder!

You didn't even say Lyapunov Exponent. But who can blame you when you have this much Jeff in your video for distraction.

Man, I had forgotten how creepy that Jeff Goldblum scene was... 🤣

Thanks for the video, Kyle! :D

Awesome video Kyle! Great food for thought and thank you for enhancing my understanding of what defines chaos!

I really love the distinction between Random and Unpredictable

Some times I wonder if different channels having videos about the same topic (StarTalk just did a 3 body problem video) are merely a coincidence or perhaps some sort of pattern coming out the chaos.

Bro called Newton "this virgin" 💀

There is a story how it was found in weather systems. "There used to have a decent model and calculated the weather in a few days. Then one guy did the same thing, and got a completely different outcome. Totally puzzled they went on a search of what went wrong, and found nothing. Eventually, they found a difference. One calculation was done with 1.00000000 and the other was done with a 1.0. Numerically identical, but the computer isn't perfectly precise and used something like 1.000001 for the second number. (Don't ask me how this works, but my excel also did stuff like this in the past)." And this virtually identical numbers, caused it to have completely different outcomes. The difference was "about as much as a butterfly disturbance", and still the outcome was incredibly huge. Since then, the weather forecasts are done, by putting in the initial measurements, and calculate the different outcomes by varying the inputs and different weather models. And we get then the averages, respectively some confidence intervals in modern forecasts.

LEROY JENKINS

So yet another video trying to get you to worship the Dark Gods of the Warp.

The French mathematician Henri Poincaré won a scientific challenge organized in Sweden in 1889 about the Three Body Problem. He proved the existence of chaotic solutions. An explicit reference to Henri Poincaré can be found in the first volume of the book Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin.

2:02 speaking of Jeff Goldbloom, his rizz was legendary. I remember joe Rogan discussing it with several Hollywood insiders that he went after peoples wives, without fail, to EVERYONE he could. Very lengthy list of “conquests”. Apparently some Oscar winners wives are among the “list”

this needs an NTR flag

If you found this comment, congratulations 🎊🎈🍾

Tzeentch is pleased that this video came together just as planned.

The show was great but the book was absolutely incredible. I loved both for different reasons. I still need to read the other two books. I'm partway through book two rn, but I would highly recommend it to anyone who enjoys science and reading

I think it's fascinating that Laplace's Demon and Chaos Theory went head to head in thought experiments, and the eventual conclusion was Chaos Theory works in real life, where knowledge is imperfect; Laplace's Demon, as per the parameters given, wouldn't be subject to Chaos Theory because it perfectly knows all conditions to infinite precision, but of course, that's not realistic.

I really like that papers have been published that make use of the fact that only tiny differences in initial conditions are needed for vastly different outcomes, in order to kind of control the chaos. Just using super tiny nudges to a system to put and keep it on the path you want it to be on. Of course, those algorithms are applied within the Lyapunov timeframe, such that the outcomes stay predictable. People train machine learning models to handle the tiny nudge inputs, and keep the system on its desired path. You know, an actually good and sensible use of neural networks, one that's pretty much tailor-made to take advantage of their strengths. Not like the generative crap that we keep seeing at the moment. Which follows the (false) idea that any problem becomes a nail so long as your hammer is large enough.

*Space marine looks up from his cup* Chaos? Get the flamer.

And if you're able to predict even through these tiny Variations, then you've now become Laplace's Demon.

There is no true randomness anyway. You can't argue, that it exists either. Also there's absolutely no system, that's not chaotic in reality. There's just enough of them with very long period of predictability.

“This virgin was creating the cover of The Dark Side of the Moon.” 🤣🤣🤣

You have reaffirmed my knowledge, sir. Thank you

Chaos = overly complicated calculations, because of exponentially growing number of variables as we move forward in time.

10:43 *Waves to the other two*

you just explained chaos so much better than any teachers I have ever had, that is super useful. he idea of predictable in a simple system and not random, however is impossible to predict in complex systems where so many variables interact with each other because you need to consider each variable, and its near impossible to consider each and every single variable that causes every variable. and the reason you have to consider each is because it is so ridiculously sensitive to change that even the slightest change in the fucking hairs on your hand can change the outcome from a simple linear movement, to something like creating a black hole, that the only way you could predict it is through theoretical possibilities like the " if this object is on a frictionless, zero gravity plane, with zero entropy, what happens when ____"

"We were so busy wondering if we should solve the three body problem, that we never stopped to think if we COULD." -Jeff Hill on body problems -I mean Kyle Goldblum on three bodies - I mean Jeff Goldblum on Kyle Hill's three body problem... Yeah. That last one.

Related: entropy is not the progress into a more chaotic (by either definition) state, but the progress towards the most static one. The only association with "chaos" is because the thing we predicted would happen doesn't.

I don't know where this quote originates, but I've heard it said that "chaos is just order that we don't understand, and order is just chaos that we do understand".

Chaos theory does not state "things happen randomly, so you can't tell what will happen." It states "The parameters of all natural events are hyperdeterministic to the point that tiny changes cause dramatically different results." And the original description was of how a difference between a hurricane's predicted path and its actual path only required an added precision of the force of a seagull's wingbeat where it first made landfall, not a butterfly's on the opposite side of the world.

To say something a bit more bluntly: The butterfly effect does not show that a butterfly can cause a hurricane. But a butterfly does pose a significant input if, when and when such a hurricane exists.

HAHAHAHA THATS SO OUTTA POCKET KYLE LMFAO But dark side of the moon goes hard

the thumbnail looks like an art student over dosing on coke while wearing the new apple vr headset

big throwback to my chaotics dynamics class. Great video!

In a strange way, this prooves how correct people are - whether right or wrong - when they say that life or people are chaotic. There are so many tiny features of people's lives that we will never see or know to to measure.

I already have several white lab coats. One even has the original patch issued for the opening of the Arizona Cancer Center in Tucson. My lab was on the 4th floor near the elevator.😎

The more complicated a system is, the more it needs to be expressed as a quantum state problem. The rigid bodies start to behave less like a solar system and more akin to electrons orbiting a nucleus where probability clouds are more descriptive of their behavior rather than the ellipses we intuit them to be. We should therefore embrace the chaos and expect some set of wave functions to be a solution.