🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 17:12:13 UTC No. 16631021
Why aren't most of the important equations that govern cutting edge theories like QFT or General Relativity solvable? It's almost like we were never supposed to know how the universe works
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 17:16:47 UTC No. 16631024
>>16631021
Why do you think they're not solvable?
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 17:48:23 UTC No. 16631056
>>16631024
ok, show me their solutions
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 17:53:16 UTC No. 16631063
>>16631021
The regular pendulum is a simple example that already doesn't have an analytic solution but that doesn't mean you can't approximate it with arbitrary precision. You just can't write the solution as a function on a piece of paper.
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 17:54:07 UTC No. 16631064
>>16631056
What do you think a solution is?
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 18:49:36 UTC No. 16631137
>>16631021
You came to this conclusion after watching a pop-sci video, is that right?
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 19:14:39 UTC No. 16631163
>>16631063
>The regular pendulum is a simple example that already doesn't have an analytic solution
It can be done with junior high trig.
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 19:29:47 UTC No. 16631182
>>16631163
Not without the small angle approximation
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 19:50:56 UTC No. 16631196
>>16631182
>less than 6°
No one serious is working in small angle pendulum analytics, Anon. It's a non-field.
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 21:00:40 UTC No. 16631245
>>16631182
You can do pendulum motion with Lagrangian without having small angle approximate
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 21:13:16 UTC No. 16631255
>>16631245
No. You get the same nonlinear differential equation that can't be solved analytically
Anonymous at Fri, 28 Mar 2025 23:07:46 UTC No. 16631373
>>16631064
get off the narcotic, Loser.
Anonymous at Sat, 29 Mar 2025 21:00:03 UTC No. 16632076