*

Offline WellRoundedIndividual

  • *
  • Posts: 605
  • Proverbs 13:20 is extremely relevant today.
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #20 on: April 24, 2019, 02:36:20 PM »
QED admits no where in any of the responses in this post that he took a cursory glance at the articles.  That is an outright blatant lie, Tom. The only thing he states is that it took him 15 minutes to find the documents.  He did not state that he took 15 minutes to read all of them. WOW.
BobLawBlah.

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2019, 02:39:32 PM »
Very funny. First you admit to only a cursory glance at the articles, as it only took you '15 minutes' to find them, and now you claim to have read them and that it's abstractly 'in the equations' and never stated anywhere,
Here's an equation from the paper showing that they have separate masses. This took me less than a minute of skim-reading.
Recommended reading: We Have No Idea by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whiteson

Turtle Town, a game made by my brothers and their friends, is now in private beta for the demo! Feedback so far has been mostly positive. Contact me if you would like to play.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6507
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2019, 02:42:29 PM »
Quote
QED admits no where in any of the responses in this post that he took a cursory glance at the articles.  That is an outright blatant lie, Tom. The only thing he states is that it took him 15 minutes to find the documents.  He did not state that he took 15 minutes to read all of them. WOW.

Yes, sure. It took him 15 minutes to find them -- and he took  hours to head then all -- but he didn't bother to tell us which part of the article supports his ideas since a follow up statement says that they are never stated anywhere.

Good one. How about you guys actually directly reference your sources rather than a convoluted argument based on abstract inference based on things that are never stated anywhere in your source?

Very funny. First you admit to only a cursory glance at the articles, as it only took you '15 minutes' to find them, and now you claim to have read them and that it's abstractly 'in the equations' and never stated anywhere,
Here's an equation from the paper showing that they have separate masses. This took me less than a minute of skim-reading.

You think that an equation would only have one mass referenced to describe three bodies?

Separate masses != All masses are the different

I would recommend that you guys do more than a "skim-reading".

« Last Edit: April 24, 2019, 02:51:02 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2019, 02:47:27 PM »
"My argument is buried in this paper somewhere and somehow" is an invalid debate tactic.
Why do you think selective quoting is a valid debate tactic?
The paper makes it very clear that it is concerning the general 3 body problem where the masses of the bodies may be different.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6507
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2019, 02:51:27 PM »
"My argument is buried in this paper somewhere and somehow" is an invalid debate tactic.
Why do you think selective quoting is a valid debate tactic?
The paper makes it very clear that it is concerning the general 3 body problem where the masses of the bodies may be different.

More "skim-reading," we can assume? Quote it for us.

*

Offline markjo

  • Purgatory
  • *
  • Posts: 3804
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2019, 02:52:09 PM »
You think that an equation would only have one mass referenced to describe three bodies?

Separate masses != All masses are the different

I would recommend that you guys do more than a "skim-reading".
Tom, I would recommend that you read the article for yourself rather than rely on what other people tell you about it.  After all, first had experience is the Zetetic way, isn't it?
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6507
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2019, 02:53:03 PM »
You think that an equation would only have one mass referenced to describe three bodies?

Separate masses != All masses are the different

I would recommend that you guys do more than a "skim-reading".
Tom, I would recommend that you read the article for yourself rather than rely on what other people tell you about it.  After all, first had experience is the Zetetic way, isn't it?

I read the article and quoted from it. It t does not say what was alleged.

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #27 on: April 24, 2019, 02:54:16 PM »
You think that an equation would only have one mass referenced to describe three bodies?

Separate masses != All masses are the different

I would recommend that you guys do more than a "skim-reading".
If the masses were assumed to be the same, then the paper would use a single variable for mass instead of 3 variables.

And this is still besides my main point (in the OP) that a model doesn't need to be solvable to be accurate.
Recommended reading: We Have No Idea by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whiteson

Turtle Town, a game made by my brothers and their friends, is now in private beta for the demo! Feedback so far has been mostly positive. Contact me if you would like to play.

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2019, 02:56:05 PM »
Quote it for us.

Quote
In the general three-body problem, three bodies of arbitrary masses move in a three
dimensional (3D) space under their mutual gravitational interactions
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6507
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2019, 03:11:25 PM »
Quote it for us.

Quote
In the general three-body problem, three bodies of arbitrary masses move in a three
dimensional (3D) space under their mutual gravitational interactions

It's talking about the general three body problem... which is unsuccessful and has no solutions.

From the article on the general three body problem:

Quote
In the three-body problem, three bodies move in space under their mutual gravitational interactions as described by Newton’s theory of gravity. Solutions of this problem require that future and past motions of the bodies be uniquely determined based solely on their present positions and velocities. In general, the motions of the bodies take place in three dimensions (3D), and there are no restrictions on their masses nor on the initial conditions. Thus, we refer to this as the general three-body problem. At first glance, the difficulty of the problem is not obvious, especially when considering that the two-body problem has well-known closed form solutions given in terms of elementary functions. Adding one extra body makes the problem too complicated to obtain similar types of solutions. In the past, many physicists, astronomers and mathematicians attempted unsuccessfully to find closed form solutions to the three-body problem. Such solutions do not exist because motions of the three bodies are in general unpredictable, which makes the three-body problem one of the most challenging problems in the history of science.

The position of the article is entirely contradictory to what you, the OP, and QED are "skim-reading".
« Last Edit: April 24, 2019, 03:13:48 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #30 on: April 24, 2019, 03:18:20 PM »
The position of the article is entirely contradictory to what you, the OP, and QED are "skim-reading".
Huh? I was just opposing your point that the paper set all the masses to the same value.
Recommended reading: We Have No Idea by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whiteson

Turtle Town, a game made by my brothers and their friends, is now in private beta for the demo! Feedback so far has been mostly positive. Contact me if you would like to play.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #31 on: April 24, 2019, 03:27:05 PM »
If the three body problem is unsolved then there is no working model.

Why?

Surely not " ... because I  (you) say so" ?
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2019, 03:33:40 PM »
It's talking about the general three body problem... which is unsuccessful and has no solutions.

From the article on the general three body problem:

Quote
In the three-body problem, three bodies move in space under their mutual gravitational interactions as described by Newton’s theory of gravity. Solutions of this problem require that future and past motions of the bodies be uniquely determined based solely on their present positions and velocities. In general, the motions of the bodies take place in three dimensions (3D), and there are no restrictions on their masses nor on the initial conditions. Thus, we refer to this as the general three-body problem.  At first glance, the difficulty of the problem is not obvious, especially when considering that the two-body problem has well-known closed form solutions given in terms of elementary functions. Adding one extra body makes the problem too complicated to obtain similar types of solutions. In the past, many physicists, astronomers and mathematicians attempted unsuccessfully to find closed form solutions to the three-body problem. Such solutions do not exist because motions of the three bodies are in general unpredictable, which makes the three-body problem one of the most challenging problems in the history of science.

The position of the article is entirely contradictory to what you, the OP, and QED are "skim-reading".

you absolutely have not read this article, and you don't understand the difference between a numerical solution vs an analytic solution.  you just ctrl-f and search for keywords that you think fit your narrative.  i recommend not doing that and at least reading the section on numerical methods.

numerical methods are basically just doing a bunch of multiplication and addition.  i don't get why you think computers can't do that.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6507
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2019, 03:39:02 PM »
There is no way to do it. The motions of the bodies are unpredictable.

From the above:

Quote
Such solutions do not exist because motions of the three bodies are in general unpredictable

Look up chaos theory, which directly spawned from attempts to solve the three body problem. Neither an analytical solution or a numerical solution can solve chaos theory.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2019, 03:42:07 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2019, 04:00:25 PM »
There is no way to do it. The motions of the bodies are unpredictable.

From the above:

Quote
Such solutions do not exist because motions of the three bodies are in general unpredictable

Look up chaos theory, which directly spawned from attempts to solve the three body problem. Neither an analytical solution or a numerical solution can solve chaos theory.
It's not a numerical solution, it's an approximation. It has a known error bound. Nobody ever called it a "solution".
Recommended reading: We Have No Idea by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whiteson

Turtle Town, a game made by my brothers and their friends, is now in private beta for the demo! Feedback so far has been mostly positive. Contact me if you would like to play.

Offline iamcpc

  • *
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2019, 04:02:38 PM »
There is no way to do it. The motions of the bodies are unpredictable.

From the above:

Quote
Such solutions do not exist because motions of the three bodies are in general unpredictable

Look up chaos theory, which directly spawned from attempts to solve the three body problem. Neither an analytical solution or a numerical solution can solve chaos theory.

The fact that we claim the official orbiting model is defined by very specific laws and mathematical formulas.

The official round earth model is not even a 3 body problem. It's like a 90 body problem.


The fact that the three body problem has not been solved, and the official model is a 90+ body problem is something that definitely weakens some aspects of the official model and should be kept on the wiki.

Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #36 on: April 24, 2019, 04:13:27 PM »
There is no way to do it. The motions of the bodies are unpredictable.

From the above:

Quote
Such solutions do not exist because motions of the three bodies are in general unpredictable

Look up chaos theory, which directly spawned from attempts to solve the three body problem. Neither an analytical solution or a numerical solution can solve chaos theory.

The fact that we claim the official orbiting model is defined by very specific laws and mathematical formulas.

The official round earth model is not even a 3 body problem. It's like a 90 body problem.


The fact that the three body problem has not been solved, and the official model is a 90+ body problem is something that definitely weakens some aspects of the official model and should be kept on the wiki.
Once again, solvability has almost nothing to do with veracity. There are solvable models that are inaccurate, and there are unsolvable models that are accurate.
Recommended reading: We Have No Idea by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whiteson

Turtle Town, a game made by my brothers and their friends, is now in private beta for the demo! Feedback so far has been mostly positive. Contact me if you would like to play.

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #37 on: April 24, 2019, 04:40:37 PM »
Quote from: QED
I encourage you to read the source. I know that it what it says in the abstract, but that is simply the stronger focus.

Quote
If you follow the equations, it is shown blatantly that no conditions are imposed on the masses either. They do not specify this in the abstract because it is uninteresting

Very funny. First you admit to only a cursory glance at the articles, as it only took you '15 minutes' to find them, and now you claim to have read them and that it's abstractly 'in the equations' and never stated anywhere, and that the abstract makes a similar statement about the positions and velocities, but it was only a coincidence. You often rely on "it's too simple" and "everyone knows..."

Please quote your sources directly if you are going to make an argument. "My argument is buried in this paper somewhere and somehow" is an invalid debate tactic.

Oh! You misunderstand. I’ve read all the technical sources before, I did not newly find them in 15 min. What I was able to do is build that collection using google in that time. The reason why I chose many of those sources in particular (instead of the dozens of others I had to choose from) was precisely because they are familiar to me.

I never stated that I took a cursory glance at them - this was an incorrect assumption. 

Also, I am not trying to debate you. There is no debate here. I am simply trying to provide you with information to improve your understanding of these things so that YOU become a more effective debater with your adversaries in the future.

Believe you me, when you break through and publicly go up against physicists, you will appreciate having an arsenal of prior detailed knowledge of the arguments they will bring against you.

Do not let my lower fora posts muddle our efforts here: that is just careless childish venting (which is what those fora are meant for). I am on your side here.

I will pick out some relevant Trajectories for you from these sources and post them - so that future discussions can have a finer focus. But please do not let them take the place of your own study. Alone, they will be insufficient to prepare you for the future.

Best,
QED
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #38 on: April 25, 2019, 01:13:41 AM »
Hi Tom,

I found a nice article that is very readable and rather short. It investigates the tidal perturbation effects of the Sun on the moon and Earth, and in these context provides the equations of motion for them. You will not be able to miss them: pp.10-11.

I hope this assists in your pursuits. If I happen to come across others that I feel might be additional benefit, I will take the liberty of beginning a new thread, so as to avoid spamming this one, and allow conversation of other participants to continue.

https://www.ias.ac.in/article/fulltext/reso/010/08/0006-0024
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
Re: The three-body problem wiki article
« Reply #39 on: April 25, 2019, 09:13:24 AM »
If the three bodies concerned are the Sun, Earth and Moon, then wouldn't that make it exceedingly difficult to navigate a craft to and from the Earth, if the "equations" were wrong?

However, Israel managed it recently, China and Saudi Arabia not long before that, and in the past, USA, Russia, Japan and India have all managed it.
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"