The ButterflyEffect is one of the theories i ran across while researching ChaosTheory. It states that in the randomness of physics, a butterfly flapping it's wings at one end of the world can cause an action at the other, such as earthquake, storm, etc.

The problem is in itself. There's no way to prove this, because of the randomness =D.

The theory is that if a butterfly flaps its wings at a particular time in Hawaii, you end up with a hurricane blowing over Florida.

The point of the theory is this: We do not know enough to truly model the universe.

How the atmosphere acts is an extremely simple thing. Its behaviour is well know and formulated. However, to truly model our world's atmosphere, we need to know the state of an incredibly wide amount of data (a data point for every spot in the atmosphere). As that is impossible for us to know, our models of the atmosphere's behavior cannot stay accurate. Everything that creates a change in the atmosphere, from a butterfly flapping its wings to you farting, everything that isn't modelled in, creates change in the real world's atmosphere that isn't represented, or even known, in the model. And that is why the models fail.

Chaos theory is that there is so much going on, that no matter how much we understand the principle behind something, we will never be able to 100% accurately model it indefinately, because we will never be able to input and model everything affecting it.

---StarPilot

ButterflyEffect showsthe relationship between cause and effect.

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost; %%% For want of a shoe, the horse was lost; %%% For want of a horse, the rider was lost; %%% For want of a rider, a message was lost; %%% For want of a message the battle was lost; %%% For want of a battle, the kingdom was lost====

==

Because of the nail, the kingdom was lost.

ChaosTheory describes NonLinear aspects of systems. ButterflyEffect defines this by saying that from the slightest incident, a total failure is possible to occur. --KenSchry

That isn't ChaosTheory==== That's disaster engineering - single point of failure. The "Lost Nail = Lost Kingdom" shows a chain of consequences, not chaos. Chaos is how you can measure a particle's spin or its position, but not both at the same time. It is all the factors that cannot be known that keeps things from being entirely predictable to us (humankind). You can model single points of failure, and their effects on their larger systems/communities. That's basic engineering. What you cannot model is how a 0.0000001 degree rise of temperature in Boston Harbor will ultimately lead to a new ice age. Or our planet turning into a twin of Venus... that is the chaos factor. We cannot accurately model the universe, and many significantly smaller domain problems, because we simply do not have the necessary data to do so.

==

Consider this

The universe is one big super complex clock, set into motion. If we had a data set accurate enough and great enough of the universe, and a big enough computer (bigger then our universe), we could accurately use it to predict anything in the universe. However, we do not. We do not have the data input, and we never will. Therefore, we will never be able to truly model the universe, although we will be able to come "close enough" on certain things and under certain circumstances. That is ChaosTheory. You can never really know what is happening, or has happened, that you think is inconsequential or unrelated, but which will affect the outcome in ways unpredicatable to modern humankind. Or, put another way... what outside influences that you do not know about are the final weights that helped keep you from becoming a homeless crack addict? You can certainly guess at many factors in your life, but there were equally other things happening beyond your knowing that, having gone sligthly differently, would have turned your life choices into other paths, leading you down other decision chains. 'That is ChaosTheory.' ---StarPilot

Sigh. That is exactly what I said==== A linear system works correctly, and there are no problems, it the perfect system. Nonlinear aspects of systems show the deviations (0.0000001 change), that may prove to be fatal to the system ("disaster engineering"). "Disaster engineering" is tied closely to ChaosTheory, as the root cause. The 'Factors' that cause the disaster. --KenSchry

==

Disaster Engineering has zero to do with ChaosTheory. It has to do with the human stupidities, human presumptions, and humar errors in the process. Take a look at the Columbia Investigation if you want to see Retro-active Disaster Engineering. Most of that is due to the human stupidity and human presumptions which were used to rationalize the reducing the following of the original built-in guidelines from the initial Disaster Engineering in the shuttle program.

There is a very big difference in terms of fields. In ChaosTheory, you cannot model all the factors that go on. In Disater Engineering, you can determine all the factors, and consequently, how to mitigate and reduce your risks. It is when several elements of human stupidity, human presumptions, and human errors line up that you engineer a disaster. These are very different. Mainly, because you can look through Disater Engineering, and see the elements that led to that engineered disaster. However, no matter how much modelling is done, we will never be able to accurately predict when the next tornadoes will touch down, where, for how long, and what track they will follow. We will be able to approximate that behavior to some degree, but never truly model and predict it. It is because of Chaos, of all the events that affect our atmosphere, and our inability to even measure them, let alone model them. That is ChaosTheory.

If you can accurately model it, it isn't in the realm of ChaosTheory. That's part of the defination of ChaosTheory. That's the key difference. Not "same thing".

---StarPilot

NetworkTheory is becomming a good way of analysing non-linearities in better difined system, but systems with non-linearities tend to be chaotic no matter how well they are defined. -- JimScarver