chaostheoryhomeostasis

[chaostheoryhomeostasis]

Butterflies Can Kill You Part 3

The multiverse only allows for a certain number of actions and realities to take place before its final state of entropy and stale cold death. We can only take actions that eventually lower the system’s overall state of energy and promote its entropy. Which is why we can’t teleport or time travel and why everything - yes, everything - falls apart and breaks down.

Stars die.

Solar systems collapse.

Everything is sucked into a giant black hole at the end of the universe.

If humanity could live until and somehow past the end of the universe and witness its epic and most extraordinary death we might be able to live out the realities of time travel and teleportation. Not only is the technology not feasible - the multiverse simply won’t allow it. Causing its own destruction is against the law. 

But, all in all, I like the idea there. That’s a nice idea, the idea that humanity can create an innovative way to escape even the harshest reality, the past of our mistakes. 

Yet, when the stars die and are encompassed by a force of gravity so strong that they swallow themselves, space bends and time is revealed.

The multiverses arrange and depend among each other to ensure that nobody will invent a time machine. There’s no other way to say it. In this story, a time machine simply won’t solve the problem.

Nobody will save humanity from its mistakes.

We certainly won’t save ourselves. 

A long long long time from now, the multiverse will self-destruct at a time calculated with much precision upon the day of its birth. It will self-destruct when many moments and events meet their absolute endings, after billions of heartbeats have beat their last, and after trillions of butterflies have beat their wings google times. 

The birth of the universe is not why it’s ending this way.

It’s ending this way, because of a single factor beyond my control.

I must find the factor that caused the end of the world.

And so, a butterfly flapping its wings could be to blame.

Butterflies

Can

Kill

You

[chaostheoryhomeostasis]

Butterflies Can Kill You Part 2

As many possibilities as there are in our multiverse there are as many variations among the multiverse. In fact there are more variations than there are possibilities. There are many multiverses and many are similar or nearly identical with minor changes, minor in terms of a cosmic scale and minor in terms of a human perspective. Yes, of course, there are worlds where the only visible human relevance (if you were contradictorily a spectator of this universe with godly powers) is that your mother never birthed you but, is this difference relevant on a cosmic scale?

Human beings are not as observant as we would like to think. We observe things that serve their purposes and keep us out of harm’s way and what we remember is even less, less than 1% of what we observe. We see what we want to see in the most literal sense and we interpret it in a way that serves us.

Which brings me to the concept of the butterfly effect. Yes, in a very eccentric but brief summary, “A butterfly flaps its wings in Toronto and a monsoon happens in China”. From a more objective systematic perspective the butterfly effect effectively states that a single factor can have a drastic change in the outcome and later state of a system. Think of it as a modern description of the snowball effect. One change leads to another and on occasion, out of all the events in the universe, the event catches our attention and we come to reason that a tiny butterfly somewhere in Toronto caused an event with a huge measurable and visible impact on a human scale. Essentially, the butterfly effect describes change. 

Now, look at the butterfly this way: A butterfly has just as much effect on the world as you. A butterfly is another factor in what makes each multiverse unique. A butterfly has a mother, too.  A single butterfly that causes a monsoon in China causes the destruction of Chinese cities and has a cost of human lives. A butterfly can kill you.

…

Don’t you think we’re assigning too much value to a single butterfly?

Wouldn’t it be a more productive use of time, energy, and sense of self to assign value to things we can change?

That is exactly what the self does. You, the being you call yourself, assigns value to things and events that you can and can’t change. We call them, “inspiring”, “heart breaking”, “disturbing”, “beautiful”, “eccentric”, “funny”, “sorrowful”, “wonderful”, “horrific” and we apply so many concepts and feelings to events and objects that aren’t defined in our mother tongues. We call the things we can’t change “past” and “future”. We call them by their names aloud and often, more often than we’d like to believe, we don’t notice them. Which, by the way, is why it's a handy mechanism of evolution that you have eyeballs in the front of your head, are able to see only your immediate surroundings as opposed to having X-ray vision, and forget anything insignificant especially if you can identify that thing as a non-threat. 

For the time and the modern science harnessed in most countries in current 21st century civilization on planet Earth in this multiverse it’s impossible to test whether a single butterfly is the cause or could be a cause of the next monsoon in China. It’s established in a more thorough examination of the butterfly effect that because we only have so many factors within our control and cannot control factors we don’t know about, the butterfly effect doesn’t extend to applications beyond human value. In other words, the butterfly effect only exists in isolated experimental systems. It’s, well, it’s a concept that has very limited use in actual scientific application. None, actually.

I cannot speak for others so I must answer these questions for myself in terms of my own human condition. If I was never born, in other words, let me say if my presence were erased from the current world through means of impossible and unfathomable time-travel, I would assume nothing would change on a cosmic scale. I have done much of nothing even memorable to me in my life, not to say that my life has been an unhappy one. On the note of whether my lack of existence would affect those on a human scale, I see that people are equal -yes, different - but equal in the way they affect the world. It is what we remember that affects what we see as important or not.

Let’s say I were to time travel and disregard the method of time travel. In typical time travel theory, which is very sparse and is mostly attributed to sci-fi movies that have been adapted from real theory, if I go back in time the world line splits into 2 possible universes, one where I don’t time travel and one where I’ve time traveled. When I time traveled I jumped world lines and into a world where I jumped backwards through time and that action is accounted for. Technically it’s the same world, but it’s a copy of the original, and the only edit made is that I time traveled in the copy. You now know what you knew from the last world and have the opportunity to learn the future of the second world, given I remember that I time traveled. In this typical sci-fi culture model, with a few givens, I can successfully say that the overlap of time from where I left in the first world and the point of arrival in the second world (the one where I time traveled) is exactly the same as long as I repeat the same actions I took in the first world during that period of time. In this imaginary situation, if I go back in time and take the exact same actions in the second world during the specified overlapping time frames the world will be identical in past, present, and future, correct?

Incorrect. I did not time travel in the first world and I did time travel in the second. If I undo the fact that I time traveled through some unimaginable, unnamable invention that doesn’t exist in the realms of sci-fi even, I return to the first world. If I jump through time I return to the second and the cycle starts over. 

Let’s say that the fact that I time traveled was mitigated by something. Let’s say that this action alone didn’t matter and didn’t make the difference between worlds just for the sake of an imaginative argument. How difficult do you think it would be to repeat my actions during the overlap of time in the second world exactly as I did them to begin with? It’s impossible. In lieu of the conversation, I only remembered what was convenient for me.

Let’s look at the butterfly a little more closely: The butterfly exists in less than 1% of the total number of multiverses there are, an infinite number. In less than 1% of those multiverses the butterfly flapping its wings in Toronto contributes to, among many many many other factors, the cause of a monsoon in China. Almost never is the butterfly the singular cause of the monsoon in China. The time traveler can say, “A butterfly flapping its wings in Toronto causes the monsoon in China.” and be incorrect 99.99% of the time. The time traveler is only correct when that single butterfly is removed without changing world lines through some unimaginable, unnamable invention that doesn’t exist in the realms of sci-fi even, and the monsoon does not happen. In a single world is the butterfly the cause of the monsoon from the time traveler’s perspective. 

I’ll be frank, a single butterfly alone can’t cause a monsoon. I must ask myself now, among all the factors that exist in regards to how a monsoon forms, can a butterfly be the cause of a monsoon? It is illogical, unfamiliar, and scientifically incorrect to assume one or even many butterflies are the cause of a monsoon. It is an absurd idea, beyond the absurdity of inventing a time machine, to remove each butterfly one at a time until a monsoon does not happen. It’s even more absurd to believe that butterflies, which only exist on planet Earth and have symbolic value to literate humans, can change the universe.

Therefore, as I decipher my own beliefs, it is known to me that people cannot change the universe either, in the same way that we cannot and will never invent a time machine.

But then, why do I remember that butterfly? Over and over, throughout my insignificant human life, I see the butterfly and I appreciate its beauty. Every butterfly, every time. Am I wasting my own time? Unless that one butterfly can be the cause of a monsoon, I don’t see why I should feel it’s significant at all. Why should I notice the butterfly?

[chaostheoryhomeostasis]

Butterflies Can Kill You

“What’s the difference between the butterfly effect and the snowball effect?” one might ask.

The snowball effect implies that a singular event causes a string of others and is causal and linear in nature. One event causes the next and those events increase in intensity and complexity until you’ve got a catastrophic, or at the least, a very problematic ending.

The butterfly effect on the other hand implies that the desired outcome, called the “manifesting event” , won’t happen without the presence of a certain factor. The difference is that the butterfly effect describes factors that happen at a certain time, as opposed to the genial statement that one event causes the other. We call these factors “events” and a singular factor that can be tied to the manifesting event is called the “initiating event.”

In more contrast, the butterfly effect does not assert a linearly casual relationship between the initiating event and the manifesting event.

Look at the butterfly again: “A butterfly flaps its wings in Toronto and a monsoon happens in China”. From a linear perspective the butterfly flaps its wings and somewhere in between the time the butterfly takes off in flight and the monsoon hits China we can say that the atmospheric pressures change to create conditions for the monsoon. If the butterfly flapping its wings causes the event of the monsoon hitting China what caused the atmospheric pressures to change?

One might answer, “The action that the butterfly took before flapping its wings to cause the monsoon to hit China is what caused the atmospheric pressures to change.”

To be factual, that’s incorrect. It simply cannot be true that the atmospheric pressure changed and the monsoon hit China because of one butterfly. If there exists only one world in which you can remove the butterfly and stop the monsoon from hitting China in a multiverse containing infinite multiverses and infinitely more variations of possibilities, it’s strictly and counterintuitively impossible that removing the butterfly also stops the atmospheric pressure from changing which happens long before the monsoon hits the coast, perhaps longer than that butterfly’s single insignificant lifespan. In the intuitive manner in which the phrase makes sense to people in terms of linear time, it’s like saying the butterfly’s existence caused the monsoon.

In another way of looking at it we can try defining the event of the monsoon and breaking it down into its constituent preceding events. Where does it start? Where does it end? Does it start with warm waters and cold currents shifting underneath the ocean or does it start with a butterfly flapping its wings? If we break the event down into infinite parts do we need infinite factors to account for the monsoon?

Billions and billions upon billions of factors have interacted in this very singular moment to create the moment we call ‘now’. All of these factors combined, from the beginning of the universe to its destruction, are their own making. A single butterfly represents life and change to those who see it.

It also means chaos and destruction. 

A long long long time from now when people no longer exist and the Earth has been thrown into the sun and the stars have decayed and fallen to miserable deaths - and when butterflies no longer exist - it will all start over. 

Apoptosis 

is the word for it. Completely random self-destruction.

And chaos is born again. 

[chaostheoryhomeostasis]

[chaostheoryhomeostasis]

The pattern says, “tarot time”.

[chaostheoryhomeostasis]