![]() ![]() He mentions that iterated maps can produce fractals that look very much like realistic mountains, leaves, ferns, etc., and implies that the failure of 18th/19th-century dreams of predictability has something to do with the failure to use these realistic, fractal models of objects in physics calculations. ![]() ![]() When Stoppard tries to write about chaos theory, he fails to mention the central concept - sensitive dependence on initial conditions (the famous "butterfly effect") and its appearance even in simple systems - and instead only tells the audience that chaos has something to do with iterated maps. It feels as though Stoppard read James Gleick's Chaos (or a similar popular text), misunderstood it, forgot half of it, and then wrote the play on this basis of what remained. But I just couldn't get past the snide, obnoxious characters, and the facile, frequently inaccurate treatment of science and math, which panders to the "science is just the product of fallible human impulses and, like, we don't really know anything for sure anyway, man" attitude that has become the norm among intellectuals and wannabe intellectuals who, for one reason or another, aren't interested in science.Īs a presentation of math and science to a lay audience, the play is a failure. Enough people love this play that it presumably has some good qualities. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |