You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Chemistry and Math vs Destiny - unusual reactions
Real-life is not deterministic :P
If you want to simplify this even further, you can just use time-one maps then you don't have to resort to the use of ODEs.
Bonus video:
(= a very bad model but it still makes a nice story)
Ah, but it is stochastic. There's no gaurantee that I'll make it to 100 by eating my veggies, but it's reasonable to assume it's a better strategy than eating wings and bourbon every day (more's the pity).
@alexs13230
Made me laugh.
but it is stochastic
I know, I know, but it feels so good to think that you can control all the parameters or at least turn some of them to negligible noise
I've had multiple conversations about this with various people over many years. Specifically, it's why I think The Sims is a such a popular video game - to the point where people are spending time making their characters study to pass a test instead of actually studying for real tests. No guarantee of an A in the real world, but you know you'll be top of your class if you spend X mins reading in the game.
And it's probably one of the reasons why the best students are not the best entrepreneurs. Good students know how to learn from the books they have, but they never get training in innovation, marketing, psychology, "street-smartness"...
It's also a problem that during the entire education, many people never learn about fuzzy logic, about non-linear processes, about particle swarm, Monte Carlo, Neural Networks... And those concepts are important at philosophical level.
You can find a solution, for some problems (not for all the problems), if you apply many iterations. Working hard is not always the solution.
You can fit anything if you apply the equation with 5 or 10 parameters.
Something can be 83% correct.
You can't predict the weather (or your future) for a long time span - because you can't solve such equation.
You are not allowed to extrapolate!
And so on, and so on... Math is The Queen
Moreover, in engineering at least, one indicator is whether they can interpret the math or not. Equally valid answers could be 'because the denomiator gets larger, so it must get smaller' and 'there is increased turbulence, so mixing is more efficient', but one answer certainly shows a better grasp of the concept.
Nice story + some math + blond girl = nice way to spend 15 min :)
yeah a bad model can still be pretty :D
She is a good model. That's the weighting parameter fo the mathematical model
I think this guy is a better role model ->