Edward Lorenz, Father of Chaos Theory and Butterfly Effect, Dies at 90

MIT News ^ | April 16, 2008 | massachusetts institute of technology

[mikrofon]

Edward Lorenz, an MIT meteorologist who tried to explain why it is so hard to make good weather forecasts and wound up unleashing a scientific revolution called chaos theory, died April 16 of cancer at his home in Cambridge. He was 90.

A professor at MIT, Lorenz was the first to recognize what is now called chaotic behavior in the mathematical modeling of weather systems. In the early 1960s, Lorenz realized that small differences in a dynamic system such as the atmosphere--or a model of the atmosphere--could trigger vast and often unsuspected results.

These observations ultimately led him to formulate what became known as the butterfly effect--a term that grew out of an academic paper he presented in 1972 entitled: "Predictability: Does the Flap of a Butterfly's Wings in Brazil Set Off a Tornado in Texas?"

Lorenz's early insights marked the beginning of a new field of study that impacted not just the field of mathematics but virtually every branch of science--biological, physical and social. In meteorology, it led to the conclusion that it may be fundamentally impossible to predict weather beyond two or three weeks with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

[To Hell With Poverty]

In meteorology, it led to the conclusion that it may be fundamentally impossible to predict weather beyond two or three weeks with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

Someone at MIT's gonna get it for that....

[Strategerist]

Wow, had one of those “THAT guy was still alive?” moments.

[jerod]

Ah... But Al Gore can predict what the weather will be like in fifty years. LOL

[SatinDoll]

It’s not just about the weather.

The behavior of liquids or saturated steam, rushing through pipes at high velocity, is chaotic. Interior erosion of piping, such as those in power plants, occasionally rupture without warning because of the difficulty in predicting where such erosion will occurr. People die becuase of these accidents, mostly due to the very high temperatures of the water or saturated steam.

[Jeff Chandler]

OPERATION CHAOS THEORY

[grey_whiskers]

Like, *PING*, folks.

Sad news here.

[EveningStar]

sad ping here

[TheWasteLand]

Bump for a great man.

[al baby]

Now thats funny

[al baby]

Very sad my mom said if we farted it would rain in a day or so

[fieldmarshaldj]

RIP.

[mikrofon]

LOL

(However, I don’t think the Butterfly Effect had anything to do with confusing ballots in FL ;)

[MARTIAL MONK]

You’re the one. You caused Katrina.

[Enchante]

Quite a man, may he R.I.P.

One thing I have wondered (without possessing the mathematical or technical knowledge to answer this):

If a change of something like 0.0001 can produce dramatic effects somewhere down the line (some of idea of the “butterfly effect” I hope) then there would seem to be enormous indeterminacies in trying to assess anything as vast and complex as the earth’s climate.

i.e., can any of the current “climate change models” come ever remotely close to representing all of the complexities of earth’s actual climate?

[Ranxerox]

In meteorology, it led to the conclusion that it may be fundamentally impossible to predict weather beyond two or three weeks with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

But-but-but- we know global warming is true!

Read James Gleick's Chaos back in the late 80's - good book for understanding chaos theory from a layman's point of view.

[Dumpster Baby]

I used to play around with Chaos programs on the computer years ago to help me learn programming. The math involved dictates that many human ideas and inventions cannot be made to work, no matter how "obvious" the process seems.

Positive feedback oscillators are used in every nearly every radio and every computer in existence, but they work in tightly controlled circuits. When tight control is lost the circuit function goes nuts.

Everyone has heard squealing and crackling in public address systems from too much feedback. That is chaotic math at work on the feedback loop. Some feedback gives squeals, just a little more feedback gives crackling, and just a little more feedback give popping and banging noises as the amplifier saturates at its limits. This phenomenon is not caused by electrical laws but by mathematical laws acting on signal levels and the feedback loop parameters.

Seeing a moving graph output of a running positive feedback system is a revelation - aha! this is how nuclear chain reactions work, massive amounts of positive feedback causing massive spikes in output.

Chaotic math also seems to work on the human ego - too much positive feedback results in chaotic behavior.

:o)

[lesser_satan]

Two or three weeks? Hell, most of the time they can’t get it right within two or three DAYS. I can’t even count the number of times I’ve canceled weekend plans because the forecast I saw on Wednesday was dead wrong.

[TBP]

Bump for morning reading.

[Gondring]

Climate isn't the same thing as weather. While it would be impossible to determine the weather 10 years from now, the climate is a different matter...much like trying to determine the outcome of a die roll--even if you knew the physical parameters of the die and how it was falling (e.g., weight, friction, density, angle, air density, air currents, etc.), you would be unable to calculate what it would end up showing when it stopped...whereas you could quite easily predict that it would be 1:6 likely to land with a single pip face on top.

That's not to say that chaos theory (or its descendant, complexity theory) isn't relevant--it definitely is! It means that we have to develop our models with these characteristics in mind.

In any case, RIP, Dr. Lorenz.

[Gondring]

Yes, it's pure luck that casinos can make money...after all, since they can't predict the spin of the roulette wheel, there's no way they can possibly tell the overall odds!

</sarc>

[Gondring]

Ah... But Al Gore can predict what the weather will be like in fifty years. LOL

Yeah...someone told me today that it was going to be hotter here three months from now than it was three months ago!!! Why, we can't even predict the weather in three days...how can we possibly predict the effects of a variation in how the earth's axis is tilted relative to the sun?!?

</sarc>

In other words, even if you can't tell exactly what the weather will be on a specific date several months out, you can still tell general characteristics that will be experienced.

[Gondring]

“Wrong” is a very imprecise term.

Did they say it was going to be -90 degrees and it was 65?

In other words, they were off by a certain amount. All forecasts have uncertainty, and you’re saying that the precision and accuracy didn’t meet your standards.

[RightWhale]

The butterfly effect is that recent an idea? 1972 seems like current events. We’re losing more giants every day seems like.

[Froufrou]

And El Nino, too. Lord, lay off the beans ping!

[snarks_when_bored]

While sitting on the throne this morning, I was leafing through back issues of the Monthly and noticed a Lorenz-inspired cartoon. Here's a thumbnail link to a scan of it, posted in remembrance of a fine scientist:

(From The American Mathematical Monthly, Volume 100, Number 5 / MAY 1993, page 470.)

[lesser_satan]

I was thinking more of when they say it will be sunny and calm and it turns out to be torrential downpour and 50 mph wind.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks grey_whiskers.

· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic ·

[SuziQ]

Chaos Ping!

[SuziQ]

Katrina, huh? Must have been some BAD gas!

[Little Bill]

In my experience, with all things being equal, where you have turbulence you will have a failure. There a lot of things in a piping system that can cause turbulence

[Gondring]

Great pic!

[grey_whiskers]

The butterfly effect is that recent an idea? 1972 seems like current events.

I know what you mean...

...but according to the Clintons, Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky are "ancient history", don't you know. (Hey, this *is* FRee Republic. I had to interject politics somewhere.)

Cheers!