Re:Mathematicians Find Wrinkle in Famed Fluid Equations
by eru on Friday December 22, 2017 @02:13AM
(#15985780)
Quantum Mechanics is entirely deterministic and linear.
(It only become non-deterministic, when you muck around with collapse of the wave function.)
Re:Mathematicians Find Wrinkle in Famed Fluid Equations
by mehwoot on Friday December 22, 2017 @02:38AM
(#15985862)
Yes well the Copenhagen interpretation is the most widely accepted interpretation of Quantum mechanics, so it's not crazy incorrect to equate the two
Re:Mathematicians Find Wrinkle in Famed Fluid Equations
by eru on Friday December 22, 2017 @02:14AM
(#15985785)
Navier-Stokes is only incidentally related to real life. It's pure math.
Re:Mathematicians Find Wrinkle in Famed Fluid Equations
by kindfellow92 on Friday December 22, 2017 @04:02AM
(#15986176)
Right, smooth vector fields aren’t actually physically realizable.
Re:Mathematicians Find Wrinkle in Famed Fluid Equations
by Gibbon1 on Friday December 22, 2017 @02:38AM
(#15985863)
Navier Stokes is probably Turing Complete.
Re:Mathematicians Find Wrinkle in Famed Fluid Equations
by eru on Friday December 22, 2017 @03:47AM
(#15986120)
Probably, yes. But the gymnastics required to make it Turing complete are unlikely to be in the regime that describes real fluids.
The responders' point was that Quantum Mechanics is a different framework for modeling physical phenomena which takes a probabilistic framework, and so if fluid were to be modeled in a similar framework, you could work more naturally with these "vanishingly unlikely" events.