Dynamic Geomag: Chaos Theory Explained

A simple pendulum demonstrates Chaos theory. The pendulum ends in a south magnetic pole, attracted by the four coloured north poles below.

Versione italiana: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Tags: Dynamic, Geomag, Pendulum, Chaos, Sissi

Published: 14 June 2007, 05:52

Overal rating: 4.7664976 Total ratings: 394 From: aldoaldoz Views: 103,652 Duration: 4:36 Category: Tech

Share this video: Embed this video into your site:

Comments

Published: 17 March 2010, 00:47 , Edited: 17 March 2010, 00:47
Written by: Nederdien

well, the air resistence does not have to be 0, you can demonstrate chaos theory also with normal air resistence ... I really liked the experiment, the whole video is great! I think it took a lot of time to run the experiment ... But I've one question, at least at the computer, shouldn't the result be congruent then? I mean should not be in every corner e.g. a different color then?

Published: 13 March 2010, 23:37 , Edited: 13 March 2010, 23:37
Written by: sephrinx

This would have to be done in a Zero atmosphere Environment with a preciesly calibrated mechanical arm that brings the Pendulum to the exact same point each time, and the structure must be perfectly built. There are to many variables in this that can cause fluctuations in the outcome therefor it is invalid, But i see what your point is.

Published: 13 March 2010, 11:19 , Edited: 13 March 2010, 11:19
Written by: duchas

What if you try with the exact same positions.. not with a hand shaking.

Published: 8 March 2010, 01:01 , Edited: 8 March 2010, 01:01
Written by: Fisherdec

Should have tried swinging the pendulum from the same start position just to see if the swing affects the odds.

Published: 6 March 2010, 13:36 , Edited: 6 March 2010, 13:36
Written by: edmanueloo

wonderfull

Published: 1 March 2010, 01:08 , Edited: 1 March 2010, 01:08
Written by: DresonStewart

you have to take in the account for the spin of the earth on the real pendulum, the earth will never be in the same spot twice so therefore the pendulum will never have the same result as before. im not trying to say this was wrong or anything im just wondering if that would change anything on the computer program

Published: 26 February 2010, 15:10 , Edited: 26 February 2010, 15:10
Written by: glupsamja

what program do you use for computer simulation?

Published: 25 February 2010, 16:41 , Edited: 25 February 2010, 16:41
Written by: vishmonster

Sorry, no, you're wrong and misinforming people. Read up and try again.

Published: 25 February 2010, 15:43 , Edited: 25 February 2010, 15:43
Written by: znobberful

And i tought i was good at explaining lol

Published: 17 February 2010, 19:56 , Edited: 17 February 2010, 19:56
Written by: ShukakuSleeps

Not just philosophical, but scientific... Oh my god I'm learning!

Published: 17 February 2010, 16:35 , Edited: 17 February 2010, 16:35
Written by: FlashEF

Great. Easy to understand, and only true information given, no harmful simplifications. Quite an achievement. Great video.

Published: 17 February 2010, 04:54 , Edited: 17 February 2010, 04:54
Written by: ArtursLicis

Really nice demonstration of chaotic system (with later visible attractors around the poles) vicolachips44: the chaotic system is very sensitive to the initial params. You get same result, if you model on a computer with exactly same function input taken (as the calculations are deterministic). I can't image what kind of technology should be used to produce a robot with such a precision (and don't forget about the execution environment :) )

Published: 12 February 2010, 16:18 , Edited: 12 February 2010, 16:18
Written by: NichtDieseTone

in quantum mechanics today there is no such thing. Not only is the results always non-deterministic, but also non-causal. That means a particle can (and evidently do) take multiple paths at the same time and interferes with itself, as well as beaves stragnely when examining cause and effect. Quantum mechanics is only ever probabilities; Definite outcomes does not exist.

Published: 8 February 2010, 15:20 , Edited: 8 February 2010, 15:20
Written by: vicolachips44

I y understand what I see is that the human arm is the source of the chaotic result. If you take a robot to do this experiment you might get a none chaotic result. Is that correct ? Thank' s to sissi' s collaboration :)

Published: 28 January 2010, 21:14 , Edited: 28 January 2010, 21:14
Written by: mikerade

Wonderful job. Where do you live in? In Italy?

Published: 24 January 2010, 06:57 , Edited: 24 January 2010, 06:57
Written by: intruda11

I really doubt quantum mechanics ability to find a theory for 'everything' as such. If they do then maybe they will be able to coordinate a definitive starting point for an experiment, and under certain control measures, render the chaos theory useless. Modern science is succeeding in showing how abstract the world really is.

Published: 24 January 2010, 06:42 , Edited: 24 January 2010, 06:42
Written by: intruda11

good explanation

Published: 18 January 2010, 21:04 , Edited: 18 January 2010, 21:04
Written by: TheBastered

...dude it's almost the calculator 1/4 dived into and they all have same equal amount a same it's just simple, but if you change the spot then different story (because the speed, distances, timing, gravitational(force), and [don't get me wrong] angles) Don't get me wrong sometime if you change the place they were they will might different law order of form.

Published: 18 January 2010, 16:12 , Edited: 18 January 2010, 16:12
Written by: curlymolly70

there is a lot of variables not factored. its not good science. its not even a good anology.

Published: 15 January 2010, 17:42 , Edited: 15 January 2010, 17:42
Written by: crucifact

great video. show on tv..guy created a computer programme in order to demonstrate an aspect of chaos theory...evolution. the computer selected the programmes with the best chance of success and "bred" them with similar programmes. after 30 generations the programmes are so advanced their behaviour is nearly impossible to map

Published: 12 January 2010, 17:35 , Edited: 12 January 2010, 17:35
Written by: TiffyPixel

Tolles Video, klasse gemacht. Sehr interessant!

Published: 10 January 2010, 13:07 , Edited: 10 January 2010, 13:07
Written by: linson999

this is very interesting...nicely presented

Published: 23 December 2009, 18:11 , Edited: 23 December 2009, 18:11
Written by: cube11235

This is an excellent example of the chaotic nature that can arise out of simple deterministic laws. Thank you so much for making this! It seems many posters here confuse the term chaos with the term randomness. Chaos is a part of determinism.

Published: 16 December 2009, 14:18 , Edited: 16 December 2009, 14:18
Written by: mosquitobight

If you repeat the whole experiment thousands of times, that should statistically average out much of the variation from human error, air current, floor vibration etc. and produce for each starting square a statistical probability of finishing on each pole. What you should find is that directly above a pole, the probability of finishing on that pole is 100 percent, but as the starting position is moved outward the probabilities quickly even out to 25 percent for each pole.

Video previews

Video search

Related videos