It is virtually impossible to attribute any one
event in a chaotic system to any particular cause.
One must be extremely huble when apporaching the task of predicting future
events in a chaotic system.
Not exact matches
In the section headed «The
chaotic», we see that the intuition that «deterministic rules of behaviour give rise to completely predictable
events» is violated everywhere, from weather
systems to ecosystems.
Richard # 63, for that weather to last long enough to become a climatological forcing (it would have to take gigatons of carbon out of one
system and dump it into another) it would either have to be a catastrophic
event (clathrates suddenly erupting, supervolcano erupting, etc) or long lasting (
in which case open to climatological statistics rather than weather
chaotics).
The point of the analogy is that modelling
chaotic systems in the aggregate is not something that is inherently impossible, and certainly a very different problem to predicting specific individual
events.
This chain of
events is identical to that found
in regime transitions
in synchronized
chaotic dynamical
systems [Pecora et al., 1997].
In our
chaotic weather
system, the complex dynamics of the atmosphere mean the size and path of a storm or heavy rainfall
event has a large element of chance, the authors say.
But there are also similarities
in that both the climate and returns on financial assets are complex,
chaotic systems about which making predictions about future
events are fiendishly difficult.
The thing is,
in chaotic systems, particularly markets where «positive feedbacks» are the norm, you don't really have a normal distribution of adverse
events.
Even a perfect model wouldn't be able to reproduce the chronological sucession of
events in Nature beyond a predictability time limit due to the
chaotic nature of the
system.