The Flying Catepillar Effect

Mental dump on Butterfly Effect, before i read any further and my ideas are diluted:

Premise: A butterfly flapping its wings in bangkok affects the weather patterns in New York

- there is a maximum speed of information transfer, even in the case where it *defines* (not just affects) the weather in New York there is still a delay for that result. This delay is proportional to the maximum information transfer constant of the universe and occurs in a straight line from effecting media to affected medium. The affect will also change due to the space between these two points. If we take the butterfly flapping its wings to transfer some sort of momentum to the air in a downward direction which then is tranferred to the earth itself which is then tranferred to New York and its atmospheric system that defines the weather around New York then we need to take into account a dispersion and decoherence of the (in this case) momentum. This dispersion will take the form of entropothic reduction of coherence through increased blur of the pure momentum energy into other forms of energy due to the density and composition of matter between the butterfly and subsequent weather controlling medium. This idea can be fleshed out later, onwards!

- the very idea that a weather system would feel a specific tiny affect due to its causal relationship with the butterfly is questionable. Surely any all energy the butterfly could put out would be mutated and morphed with other "butterflies" until this specific effect would not even register? Well essentially, yes. But all i'm pointing out there is that its very very hard to find the cause to a phenomenon like the weather, but that doesn't mean its not made up of tens of thousands of butterflies flapping their wings. I'm also pointing out the interconnectedness of all things, which is what the premise relies on to assure its validity (causality).

- if the butterfly was the only thing to affect the weather, or it were to even have a measurable effect on the weather, than this would be a much simpler problem. But there are tens of thousands of affecting phenomenen which cause results such as how much it rains on a certain day. Theoretically, if i had infinite amount of data then i could give you a prediction with absolute certainty. But it is never possible to know everything without affecting some of it - so its therefor never possible to know everything. (That's a physicists God) In fact i can only ever give estimations based on past events - like what the weather was like yesterday and what the weather usually does. An initial condition and an extrapolation from that through time.

- but this is all academic... i had an idea... what was it... ah! perception modes and chaos.

- no, oscillatory conditions!

- i challenge you to find me a phenomenon which does not, in some way of looking at it, oscillate. Fluctuate about a mean position. The weather definatley does this, because the weather is defined mostly by the rotation of the earth and the associated energy it recieves from the sun due to this. oscillatory systems, in their purest form, are not random. Randomness comes into a system due to a combination of simpler oscillatory systems cause phenomenon such as beats.