/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15112241
True. People that believe in physical countinuousness won't like it either. The physical world is discrete/digital (computable/informational).

>>14857433
With regard to this
>>14858786
Things like the orbits of planets are EFFECTIVELY deterministic since they are so large that there is low uncertainty and constantly monitored, and this is why the deterministic dif eqs map on to them with such utility. But there is still SOME uncertainty. Every delta T a random draw from a probability distribution is taken by the computer and the probable outcome is going to be that it will continue apparently continuously deterministically. There would be SOME non-zero chance that a planet or some other macro celestial object could tunnel across the universe from one refresh frame to the next. I believe this is reported actually in some of the ancient myths. The smaller down you go, ie our level, the more uncertainty and the more probabilistic things become. More chance, more free will.

So the physical reality is not a continuous. It's discrete and without infinities. picrel.

>>14816096
No it doesn't. It explains why it doesn't fit with a certain belief systems that says that the mathematical models that players immersed in the virtual reality called the physical world came up with to make predictions in the virtual world, are describing the world to a degree of arbitrary precision. This is not the case. The continuous model of space is a model and has utility at particular resolutions of reality. It is just an approximation though and says nothing about physical reality at the fundamental level. see pic
Here is a good vid that talks about continuous vs discrete functions and the mechanics of computing reality
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYjYhLUGHqI&t=103s