It seems like it ought to be possible, but Navier-Stokes shows that you simply cannot.
If you don't understand differential equations and how to solve them, and you don't know what the Navier-Stokes equation is, then you won't be able to fully grasp the futility of weather forecasting and climate science.
I can't give you a full education in physics and such, but let me break it down for you.
We have discovered "laws" of nature that describe, perfectly, the behavior of matter and energy in all circumstances.
These laws are entirely consistent and not in any way contradictory.
The laws give rise to mathematical formula that aren't just difficult to solve, but provably IMPOSSIBLE to solve.
Except in some extraordinary circumstances, we cannot make any predictions at all about the behavior of matter and energy. These extraordinary circumstances are so rare that in order to achieve them we must build purpose-built machines designed to create the conditions. (IE, laminar flow.)
Whether or not you can exactly measure the initial conditions -- the state of matter before you make your predictions -- is largely irrelevant. You can't measure anything exactly (error is everywhere) and that in and of itself means you can never make any meaningful predictions.
That said, there are certain broad and general observations we can make. IE, heat flows from hot to cold, etc... We can definitely measure temperature and heat flow and indeed, it will always flow hot to cold, even though we cannot predict everything about the flow.
“Always” has a caveat of “under these conditions” and you agree that we don’t perfectly know our conditions.
So I guess we would both agree then that we can learn more about what is occurring but what you’re saying more precisely is that we’ll never be able to predict exactly what happens.
Rather than using your imagination, use the measured properties of fluids. Use physics. See how the Navier-Stokes equations are? They describe ALL motion of all fluids (gasses and liquids) for all time. Nothing can move or stay motionless without conforming to those equations.
Yet, we cannot predict, in the slightest, what will happen in the next moment, let alone the next day or year.
It seems like it ought to be possible, but Navier-Stokes shows that you simply cannot.
If you don't understand differential equations and how to solve them, and you don't know what the Navier-Stokes equation is, then you won't be able to fully grasp the futility of weather forecasting and climate science.
So basically energy can’t be predictable enough in any space because from any point it will never be consistent?
I can't give you a full education in physics and such, but let me break it down for you.
Whether or not you can exactly measure the initial conditions -- the state of matter before you make your predictions -- is largely irrelevant. You can't measure anything exactly (error is everywhere) and that in and of itself means you can never make any meaningful predictions.
That said, there are certain broad and general observations we can make. IE, heat flows from hot to cold, etc... We can definitely measure temperature and heat flow and indeed, it will always flow hot to cold, even though we cannot predict everything about the flow.
“Always” has a caveat of “under these conditions” and you agree that we don’t perfectly know our conditions.
So I guess we would both agree then that we can learn more about what is occurring but what you’re saying more precisely is that we’ll never be able to predict exactly what happens.
Cool thanks
My imagination figures that just because you’re inside the fluid doesn’t mean you can’t view the whole container.
Rather than using your imagination, use the measured properties of fluids. Use physics. See how the Navier-Stokes equations are? They describe ALL motion of all fluids (gasses and liquids) for all time. Nothing can move or stay motionless without conforming to those equations.
Yet, we cannot predict, in the slightest, what will happen in the next moment, let alone the next day or year.
Maybe if you can’t predict it and there’s huge holes in the equation then the equation is wrong.