Three-Body Problem Simulation with 3 Free Masses | Gravity | Physics Simulations
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 сер 2021
- A simulation of the three-body problem / n-body problem with three free masses. Each mass moves under the gravity of the other two. The masses start with equal distances from each other, and the same speed, moving along a tangent to the circle formed by the positions of the three masses.
- Newtonian Gravity
- all masses equal
- chaos / chaotic motion
- velocities and positions calculated using Runge-Kutta methods
- 25fps, 45s
#Physics #PhysicsSimulations #ThreeBodyProblem #Gravity #NewtonianGravity - Наука та технологія
Questions for the viewer:
1. Given the apparent symmetric start, why are the orbits of the three masses not stable? (Hint: this is partly to do with how computers store numbers.)
2. Real stars, planets, and moons have internal structure, and tidal effects mean that that structure can change as they orbit each other. This has not been included in this simulation. How would this simulation be different if it had been included? (How would the energies of the system be affected?)
3. Real objects will collide if they get too close. This has not been included in this simulation. How would this simulation be different if they were able to collide? (Also worth thinking about energy conservation here.)
4. This simulation is based on Newtonian gravity. How would it be different if it had been based on Einsteinian gravity / General Relativity? Would it be noticeably different?
Let's not forget the question of the relativistic blue & red shifted objects appearing to move at the same speed....😉
Ah, hmmm... these are way above my pay grade, I believe, LOL! My _wild-arse guesses_ would be that: 1) possibly write errors happen in the storage of the data, adding or taking mass, speed, or directions of their parabolas?
2) with the close passes these make with each other, there should be mass sprinkled out everywhere as they rip pieces off of each other as they pass so closely. That would add mass in the open that could affect their parabolas, and even pile onto them on one side, making them spin potentially quite erratically.
3) if two of them collided, it would either a) cause a massive explosion of matter all over the place or b) cause them basically to spaghettify each other's masses along a parabolic path of perhaps each object, if they were at the time going the same speed, or along the path of the one with the most energy, the fastest. Without the 3rd body or whatever they were initially orbiting, they would eventually coalesce into different sized masses, and possibly with much different speeds. With the other item(s), though, that would drastically depend on where they or the other object(s) were at the time.
4) it would be different, and I think the divergence would grow over time. After all, that's how we found Neptune, and how we figured out that there wasn't and shouldn't be a Vulcan (I think I recall reading the latter fairly recently).
Well, this is coming from someone who didn't take any physics courses, couldn't afford college, and only got through Algebra II in high school, so be merciful, please. All I can call my own is the bits of knowledge I've acquired over the years by following my dad's advice of always learning at least one thing a day. So, yes, please be kind to me as you critique me.😄
so where is the problem
Which what program did you do it?
1. assuming you are using floats, they are getting rounded, hence tiny deviations leading to chaotic outcomes.
2. Only by moving the centre of mass so your coords will be off
3. Snooker balls and chaos, or gas cloud with a hard integral for the last planet travelling through the mass
4. depends on the masses, but I think in laymans terms the effective gravity when they get closer is higher. In terms of the chaotic mess it would be different chaotic mess?
no wonder those aliens didnt want to live there
Well, with so big gravity there's no way any life would evolve
@@borsuk96 I would even say, there's no way any planet survives that without falling into one of the three suns.
@@mori1bund
Well 10 other planets in that system had already fallen.
@@mori1bund Are there 3 suns involved IRL? I thought the planet is one of the 3 bodies. Alpha Centauri is indeed a 3-star system, but Proxima (the closest star to Earth) is very small and is further away than the Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B. I was under the impression that the planet in question is in the region of A and B.
@@wyqtoras I understand it the planet has not enough mass to be actually relavant in a three body system. Like our solar system is theoretically an n-body-system but since the sun has 99% of the mass the other bodies are not so relevant.
But you're right with Alpha Centaury!
By now I've read somewhere, that the there are actually planets around the red dwarf in the Alpha Centauri three body system (red dwarf + 2 suns) with a relatively stable orbit (one planet even in the habitable zone).
Dehydrate! Dehydrate!
wait , why this comment have an year old , if the series on netflix is new?
@@gonzofonzo5814 has the universe ever blinked at you? 👁️
@@gonzofonzo5814 Book in 2008 and a Chinese film adaptation in2015
the time between we got this recommended is fascinatingly small
If only a race capable of interstellar travel and n-dimension folding was also capable of running a simulation like the one above... Or building a space station.
Alas, they were also pangallactically stupid.
Or the writer was a misanthropic nationalist idiot.
This is basically a simulation of trying to get three kids getting ready for school when you're already late... 🤔
😅😅
😂😂
A no smoking sign on your cigarette break
😂
@@bignumbersquit smoking bruh
When is the next stable era?
Probably 8 months
@@GabeLily 8 months. Not great, not terrible.
REHYDRATE THE MASSES
Put your hands on the floor and speed up time to find out.
..we don't understand....." 😂
Blue and Green fighting for the love of Red is the most dramatic thing I've ever seen. When Green came back... What a plot twist
Yes, but was that redoubtable effort merely all for nought? Or did the geodesically-crossed lovers make it in the end? A sequal..for some closure!
What strange attraction...
World's most smartest comment
Bruh
They fight each other.
trisolarans hate this.
wtf are you all talking about
@@MaxArceus Three Body Problem book/series
currently, 80 trisolarians disliked this video.
@@NathanY0ung🤣🤣
@@TheFrankuck99 they don't get the jokes.
Typical.
HE THOUGHT THE STABLE ERA IS GONNA LAST ANOTHER 100 YEARS🤣🤣🤣🤣 HE MAD💀💀😭🤣🤣🤣
it took like 80 million trisolarins holding up bits of color to make this, have respect
Earth: We make CPUs out of sand
Trisolaris: We make CPUs out of people
@@wyqtorI don't think the aliens really made that, it was just in that video game that guy played as von Neumann or smth, trying to find a solution that would help the aliens
@@ix12no they really made a cpu out of people, it was just way more efficient because they can communicate at light speed
@@ix12 Santis communicate by brain waves which travel at light speed. But it also make them unable to hide their thoughts because every time they think, the messages are automatically broadcasted.
@@ix12 Well, I accidentally spoiled it for myself and I won't do that for you but.. If you open your mind to what the Trisolarians could be, this scenario makes a lot more sense
This is true chaos
Starts predictable then boom
I think it's still predictable but just extremely hard.
@@omarahmed83 yeah I'm pretty sure this is a strictly deterministic system..
@@SineEyed Yes. Problem is its impossible to have enough data to really predict anything here, as even the slightest change in mass of one of the 3 bodies will completely change the result. You just cannot measure the mass of an object with enough precision.
@@BastiVC it's not like there's a lot going on here. There's the mass of each object, the initial velocity and vector to them respectively, and then the interactions of the dynamic gravitational forces. Anything else? And as far as the mass of the objects, this is a simulation, so those data are explicitly defined as input. Precise measurements aren't required.
By knowing the initial conditions, what follows can be calculated for any given point in time..
The chaos in this simulation is from rounding errors. The chaos in real life versions of this is from the uncertainty principle. The probability field is long term stable, but difficult to predict outside of very fast interactions.
If you haven't read the scifi trilogy "The Three Body Problem" by Cixin Liu, you should drop everything and read it immediately...
Many people talk about it, can you sum up what's so good in it ?
@@En_theo it's good science fiction with fascinating concepts, that's all
@@En_theo It's an epic trilogy. Best books I've ever read. I'm reading them again for the 2nd time.
@@entropyalwaysincreases.6867
But what makes it interesting ? It's the scientific aspect ?
I read the first book, very nice! 👍
MR KRABS THE THREE STARS HAVE ARRIVED WE HAVE COME INTO THE KHAOS ERA
*SPONGEBOB ME BOY, WE NEED TO INVADE THE THE HABITABLE PLANET IN THE NEAREST STAR SYSTEM*
*SpongeBob fucking dehydrates in sandy's house*
AAAAA I feel like it ended too early. I read somewhere that many 3 body systems end up with one body getting ejected and the other two forming a simple 2-body orbit between themselves. I'm not sure about this, though, but it looked like that was happening towards the end. It would be great if you could upload a longer video, and if you could explain why a system that looks VERY symmetric ends up in chaos.
3 body problems do have a few (very weird) stable solutions. but almost all end up with one (or sometimes all) bodies getting ejected
edit: all bodies can't get rejected as pointed out by Aaron Fisher
@@officiallyaninja Conservation of energy prevents all three from being ejected, unless the starting state has so much energy that the bodies were never coupled.
You can see by the end of the video that the green particle kept getting farther and farther from the other 2 binary.
@@G.Aaron.Fisher mmm I just realized my simulations ended up having approximation errors that led to all the bodies gaining massive amount of energy until they all ejected themselves.
To answer your final question: this is precisely what the study of chaos is about. Studying systems where tiny changes in the initial conditions can produce radically different results. This is an incredibly comp l icated field of maths and science but an overview of the idea is that certain systems magnify change in such a way that a small change in initial conditions can produce a big change in outcome. Very interesting field of study
me and my two other roommates trying to stick to a cleaning schedule
We demand a season 2!
We too. But we ain't same.
how was this comment made 2 years ago
@@JuanPretorius there is also Chinese tv series adoption on the book
That comment was in regards to this Chinese series
@@JuanPretoriusit was made by D&D, the same that made and ruined game of thrones to move to other things. If I knew they made the series I wouldnt start watching but I only noticed once I was already hooked to the plot.
I doubt it will be ever finished.
@@Hasharin14they apparently want to get to at least season 3. They're doing all 3 books at once so it's not going to be a ten season slog
It's in my recommended page
same, top recommended video despite not having seen the channel before. instant watch, obviously.
Mine also
same dude
No shit
Mine too
Should be fun living on a planet in a trinary star system...
@ExDeeXD Depends on your definition of "life", I guess. The aforementioned stars could themselves be "life".
*the trisolarans want to know your location*
Read the book 'The Three Body Problem'
@@theodiscusgaming3909 lol I missed out on adding ** sophon transmission incoming ** to the front of that facepalm.
@@mikelevels1 Still in the middle of reading the series (on book 2). So heckin' fascinating. It's rare that a book sucks me in nowadays.
Ans THIS us why winter is so variable in Game of Thrones.
Trisolarians meanwhile: 💀😶💀🫠💀🥶😄🌋💀🥶🫠😶💀
Niceeee, Can you create a 10 mins video, erasing the path slowly?
Well eventually a body will get ejected
@@mrcat1043 it’s still a factor and can crash in at any second
I use algodoo -- I'll see what I can do..
One thing I've found that helps immensely with stability in these iterative n-body simulations is using a floating point summation algorithm like the Kahan-Babuška-Klein algo when summing the forces or accelerations imparted by the other masses. My 4-body Euler half-step simulation went from 4-5 stable orbits to what looks like indefinite stability (5000+ orbits and still counting!)
wow, what a chaotic system, what a shame it would be to be a living being on a planetary system were the 3 bodies are suns, and the chaotic nature of living there makes your socierty develop into an genocydal autocracy
You don’t need three suns to live in a genocidal autocracy
Thank you for these fascinating peeks into classical physics simulations!
0:34 when the character you thought was dead randomly appears in a later season
I can watch this for hours!
Fully deterministic, yet impossible to predict! Keeps the physical universe very interesting.
To expand, by deterministic, we mean that we know the mechanics -- the equations that determine the motion of the three bodies.
Given that, we can predict the behavior for a very short horizon. But, beyond that time frame, we leave it to fate ;-)
It is possible to predict, but not far into the future. It's like weather forecasts.
If you take precise measurements of the position of the 3 suns now and run a computer simulation, you can somewhat accurately predict their movements in the next few hundred hours. Of course, miniscule errors gets amplified greatly over time, so it must be constantly updated.
I guess it's totally predictable in a simulation since you got at t = 0 100% of all parameters. Something impossible IRL but not in your simulation.
I think the issue is rather that there *aren't* equations that determine the motion of the three bodies. You can do a discrete-time simulation as shown here, but that's not what happens in the real world.
@@Morphinem Even when we know all the parameters and the state of the system fully, the solution doesn't converge, in the general case. The error of the infinite series expansion increases as we add more and more terms.
@@hubbsllc In fact, all the partial differential equations are known exactly, at least in theory and on paper. But, there is no closed form solution to them. As in many other problems in calculus, the solution is expressed only as an infinite power series. Interestingly, the error term doesn't diminish or converge to zero. It increases. That's why the only solution is to simulate it. But, even that is problematic due to the inaccuracies (or alternatively very high memory and runtime) of simulation.
Woah. That was quick. I expected it to slowly go into chaos.
If you manage to travel to the 90s this would do a great screensaver for those CRT monitors ❤️
Wasn’t this starting condition one of the very few examples of a stable analytical solution to the 3 body problem = equal masses, equal distances, and the perfect tangential starting velocity? If so, this is then a good Check of integration algorithms to see when they go „off track“ - in this case before one orbit was completed.
I came to the same conclusion. It starts with an unstable equilibrium, which can never remain stable, be it because of calculation errors or Heisenbergs uncertainty relation.
@@2manypeople1 but it is numerically possible to delay the onset of chaos with more precision. Are you integrating with Runge-Kutta or some other method? Which order? Are you forcing conservation of energy and linear and rotational momentum as constraints of integration?
@@idjles I wish I could say I knew what you were talking about.. 😔
@@SineEyed the 3 body Problem is not solvable, therefore you have to numerically calculate it - and that means errors. You start at time t=0 with known starting conditions and them you move forward time a small amount dt. You calculate all forces with Sum F=GmM/r^2, and then the acceleration with a=F/m. Then you have v=v+a*dt, and s=s+v*dt. This is numerical integration. There are various techniques for this. I showed Newton/Euler method. Runge-Kutta is far superior and you can do it with x or x^2 or x^3 or whatever - this is the order of Integration. Higher orders are higher precision but more calculations.
And after you integrate each step, you need to finely readjust the predicted positions and speeds so that energy and momentums are conserved - this is not easy and may require solving a set of linear equations iteratively. All of this is needed to produce trajectories that are stable over time and precise.
This particular example should have generated 3 ellipses that repeat forever, but it went far off track in the first orbit. That’s why I asked about the order of integration. It shouldn’t be difficult to get 10 or more stable orbits before things fall apart.
The Lucy mission has integrated to high precision because they need to know where they will be in 20 years without any surprises.
It made me wonder too. I'll bet if the starting positions are exactly symmetric in the simulation's coordinate system then it will stay so. There must have been at least a miniscule difference in one of the starting positions.
You can see the chaotic era happening.
DEHYDRATE
Imagine if you lived on a planet in a 3 body system. There is an interesting science fiction book I read by Ken Liu that considered what life might be like on a world such as this.
Did you mean cixin Liu? He is great, The three body problem is the first Book and the trilogy is great overall.
@@thomasfevre9515 Cixin Liu wrote the original for Chinese readers. Ken translated the novels to English.
@@CAPSLOCKPUNDIT ok, did not know since i read it in french.
Check out Asimov’s “nightfall” as well
this is actually very scary knowing that the solar system is a n-body (more than 200 planets and moons) system in a temporary balance, and how crazy things are going to get once that tenuous in-balance phase is completed!
I think the solar system is way more stable than this because our Sun concentrates 99.8% of the system's mass, so all the other bodies have little influence over the system.
@@JVitor32 The gravitational effects from the giant planets are _not_ negligible. It's thought that in the first few million years (up to about a billion years after the solar system formation) a lot of planets (and planetary embryos) were sent into the Sun or out into interstellar space, in a big part due to the interplay between the giant planets (which at that time were about the mass of the Earth). The Sun has the vast majority of the mass of the solar system, but it has very few ways to disrupt (or stabilize) it gravitationally.
That role falls to the massive planets. While the interaction between any planet and the Sun is stable, the same isn't true of the interactions between the planets. We're pretty sure the early system was _extremely_ unstable, and we think much of that instability ended when Jupiter and Saturn reached their present orbits, and their current orbital resonance. In fact, the more we observe deep space, the more we see this _must_ be true - by observing planets around other stars and rogue planets, in addition to our computer models, it seems pretty likely that even the ejection of _giant_ planets is extremely common, and it probably happened in our solar system as well.
_However_... the current solar system is pretty stable on human timescales. It's extremely unlikely any planets are going to be ejected over the lifetime of our civilization. It's still decently likely we'll get hit by a civilization-ending impactor from the disruptions, of course. And the scale of the simulation is incredibly tiny - consider that when Jupiter (most likely) moved inward and scattered many Earth masses of material out into the void or the Sun, it took about a million years. And the simulation doesn't have any collisions, which would make many of the near misses (which impart _huge_ velocities on both the objects involved) into collisions (which average the velocity).
For example, according to one of the serious simulations (from a supercomputer), there's a 1-2% chance that Mercury will be ejected _in about 5 billion years_. That's the smallest planet, and the closest to the Sun, and even then, the prediction comes from a potential synchronisation between the perigee of Mercury and Jupiter (since the two are slowly catching up, due to their precessions being pretty close together). Today, the giant planets probably help more than hurt the stability of the other planets, and send a lot of the would-be dinosaur-killers out of the solar system (or just capture them outright). We've actually seen a few of those impacts to the giant planets which would be enough to end our civilization if they hit the Earth instead.
@@LuaanTi Nice, long explanation there...very good! I often wonder about the peculiarities concerning the long-term stability of Mercury's orbit. I believe I read [somewhere] that if Murcury's orbit destabilizes then there are two main outcomes for Earth:
1. Mercury gets ejected from the system, during which the Earth and Venus will swap orbital paths (more or less, that is).
2. Mercury gets thrown outward and crashes into the Earth (from my understanding, this scenario is much less likely than #1 above).
Also, I like how you mentioned that Jupiter and Saturn probably do more good than any real harm these days by devouring or banishing potentially harmful asteroids and the like. Well put!
@@LuaanTi Thank you for the very informative comment.
Good demonstration of chaos theory
So this is how Trisolaris system looks form the top.
i can feel myself dehydrating while looking at this.
stinky monkey: you know I'm a huge sucker for sunsets, what about you?
trisolaran:
You are a B U G !
I can already picture the next Sci-Fi villain. He will bring 2 bodies to a 1-body system or 1 body to a 2-body stable system to cause chaos
Yep, that one definitely ended too early... I could have watched that for another 5 mins I reckon. :)
A huge thank you to the content creators!!!
This will now be my "go to" channel as factual evidence and observable reference to the absolute fail and absurdity within the concept of "orbital mechanics."
Two thumbs up!👍👍
Newtonian gravity, 3 body systems, what other factor have you included in this system. Also did you write a code to simulate? If yes then which launguage and GUI?
First of all I may assume that the initial position is not symmetric to begin with. To represent an equilateral triangle one needs to represent sqrt(3) exactly (using for example some computer algebra system). If you use a floating-point arithmetic you end up using a finite set of rational numbers of form N/2^m. And it's impossible for an equilateral triangle in plane have all three vertex coordinates rational. So regardless of integration method you already start with a position that is not truly symmetric.
" it's impossible for an equilateral triangle in plane have all three vertex coordinates rational"
Woah. [insert keanu image HERE] I never knew that b4, and it took me a good several moments (it's been a long time since 10th-grade geometry) to appreciate why it had to be that way.
Thank you very much for that observation!
I could watch this for hours
Awesome
Simple & quick explained. Perfect.👍
Yes, better than thousands of hours of verbal explanations
Trisolaris be like
0:30 Green has left the chat
0:35 bonjour
And this is only in two dimensions... Really makes you appreciate the scale of the problem
Simulate orbits of stars in rotating frame of galaxy bar: x1 family orbits with two loops, 4/1orbits resonance and other.
What's the difference between the 3 body problem and chaos theory... or even the trouble behind a general formula for fluid dynamics?
a true chaotic period
DEHYDRATE
Friendly reminder that the Alpha Centauri system has 3 stars in it...
They recently discovered a planet in the three star system GW Orionis.
Yeah, but not like this :D The two big stars are basically a binary of similar masses, and they orbit at a distance that ranges from about 11 AU to more than 35 AU (rather eccentric! :)) - the shortest approach is about the distance of Saturn from the Sun, the longest would be all the way to Pluto. The third star seems to be gravitationally bound to the other two, but is currently at a distance of about 13 _thousand_ AU, or 0.21 light years. It's also a red dwarf, tiny in comparison to the other two - around 1/20th of the mass of the binary.
Proxima already has two confirmed exoplanets too. We're not quite sure about the other two stars - there's indication they also have planets, but they're not quite confirmed yet.
Very cool!
I'll follow your job, man
Did you save your script on github to let us play with it? Cheers (nice work)
Hay, it's the new ATV logo. Very nice like it.
Can there be an animation like this, but that shows the Lagrange points?
Man the Netflix Adaptation has no chance of being This Good.
Wow, i like your video
Nice
Nice, looks like a fun Beyblade Battle
The third body usually eventually gets ejected by a an accidental gravity slingshot made by the other two
Question: since this is a 2D simulation, did you program it with the hypothetical formula for 2D gravity? (F=1/R), or the realistic formula for 3D gravity (F=1/(R^2)) that actual stars and planets follow?
Fights in anime be like:
If we start with three objects with velocities more or less along the plane that includes the three objects, do the velocities stay more or less on the plane, or is it chaotic in the third dimension too?
What software do you use?
Which was prepared on program?
This animation depicts very accurately how my relationships go.
What if you add an “ort cloud” to the simulation?
Did you let it run for a while? Does it ever settle to a stable orbit?
What is more likely to happen first: Collision or one of the bodies achieving escape velocity?
Is there minute variations modeled in to allow for this chaotic behavior? How can they be moving exactly the same at the beginning but then move into different paths?!
the movement is chaotic (deterministic chaos) because there are not enough integrals of movement (property of the system that is not changing in lagrangenian equasions)
1) It's not clear the universe represents the positions and velocities of particles with infinite precision either (see Heisenberg)
2) Might be some kinetic energy loss into planetary internal heating. Seems minor.
3) If they collide, could turn into a two-body problem. 😂 Or a 600-shard problem! 🤣
4) Different in detail if they are ultra massive or even black holes that pass near each other. Probably still chaotic, though.
Wow! New subs!
A collision eventually occurs, rather quickly actually. That would make the while thing impossible but makes good science fiction!
Add one more to the question list:
This is a 2D simulation, would it be significantly different in 3D?
Yes, 3 stationary points form a plane, but what if 3 moving objects vibrate or go slightly off in the z-axis?
Nice recommendation
I would love to see the planet added to this simulation and how it would move visually around the three suns.
In a real time example, the mass of each object would change the outcome dramatically.
Would the simulation be somewhat more stable if using Einstein's General Relativity? Rather than being pulled towards each other, the 3 objects would follow a curvature in spacetime. Given enough time, they would all meet at a centre point. I could be wrong however.
When I wake up from my dehydration, ya'll better have figured this shit out.
we built spaceships n left for a new planet- Earth
All of these simulations are for Newtonian physics right? Does anyone know how the problem changes under relativity? Does time dilation, length contraction, gravitational waves, etc make the pseudo stable systems even rarer?
what causes the first turbulence since everything is symmetric in the beginning?
People keep referencing the three body problem series, but I personally can’t wait to see how Freyr and Batalix eject star C.
Put a third body of similar mass and chaos ensues, which finally kicks one of the three and then stability returns for the two
did the over all energy grow in the system?
Something I’ve been thinking about: we know that the system will fall apart at some point. From the perspective of a planet in the system (our friends from Trisolar), wouldn’t it just be a matter of time before they end up in a stable system? Either with 2 or 1 star(s). If they just dehydrate and wait a very long time, their problem should be solved. (They still don’t know when it’s become stable though).
I wonder, if you were standing on one of those planets, would you feel it when the planet took one of those really sharp turns in the orbit? Would you feel like you’re going to be flung off into space or something?
FWIW, my guess: no.
The gravitational forces acting upon the planet on which you're standing are also acting on your body in the same way, so you feel only the gravitational tug of your planet. (Any inertial effects are too small to notice, on the time-scale of planetary motions.) Caveat: *this is only a guess; I am not a physicist* I could well be entirely, diametrically wrong.
Could you redo it but add a visual representation of the barycenter to the simulation?
The three body problem is actually one of the most reassuring concepts for me. For a moment when I studied a bit more about determinism than what I already knew I started finding the idea both very plausible and scary. The idea that, since you could follow a predictable trajectory with any particle of the universe, that meant that you could predict where every particle was going to end up since the explosion at the beginning of time.
Well, reading about how it's actually basically impossible to calculate where even three free moving bodies are going to go next, I'm thinking it's ridiculous to think we can calculate where every human consciousness and decision is going to end up. In the end, maybe free will does exist and an infinite number of overlapping universes can exist where every different decision was taken. Maybe we are not meat automatons bound to basic physics and mathematics: we are, like these free moving bodies, impossible to predict.
Impossibility to predict on a cosmic scale, as well as on subatomic level (the Heisenberg's uncertainty principe). And there are some determinists still!
Can stars and their planets also be similar to this? Please im very curious? Ever observed?
Is there a software to make this?
What software is used for this ? Can we program these conditions with python?
Short answer: Basically any program can be programmed with any programming language. As long as it can output graphics if you need it to you are good. So yes.
I'm pretty sure it will follow some pattern.
Ramanujan was not wrong when ne said Mathematics is all about patterns, there's pattern in everything in nature
Could I code something like this in python? Let me know what languages you think were used or what I should try
Its kinda beautiful
Cool AF
From where can I get this simulation program??can anyone provide this type of program......
Which one of these is where the 3 suns line up and cause gravitational destruction on any planets directly behind all three?
F=gMm/r^2 Pretty easy to calculate for 2 bodies. All the vectors and integrals for 3 would be an automatic F in a calculus exam.
Even though the math is deterministic, the result can't be predicted.
And that is just fine. Much like the quantum realm, it seems our knowledge can never be perfect, and so we just have to make do with what we have, and continue refining and improving our ability to make statistically significant statements about probabilities.