Mathematicians Crack a Fractal Conjecture on Chaos
Posted24 days agoActive17 days ago
scientificamerican.comResearchstory
informativepositive
Debate
20/100
MathematicsFractalsChaos Theory
Key topics
Mathematics
Fractals
Chaos Theory
Discussion Activity
Moderate engagementFirst comment
49m
Peak period
7
156-168h
Avg / period
4
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 9, 2025 at 7:10 PM EST
24 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 9, 2025 at 7:59 PM EST
49m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
7 comments in 156-168h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 16, 2025 at 2:53 PM EST
17 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 46212450Type: storyLast synced: 12/16/2025, 4:20:25 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
I wish writers would do a better job of conveying chaos. Yes, the butterfly flapping it's wings in Brazil (or whatever) can drastically influence the weather a continent away. But I think the true wonder of chaos needs to consider that if that butterfly were turned a few degrees in another direction, the resultant weather can be completely different. It's these infinitesmally small changes in parameters resulting in widely different outcomes that really brings the idea of chaos to life I think.
> But I think the true wonder of chaos needs to consider that if that butterfly were turned a few degrees in another direction, the resultant weather can be completely different.
The former is simply a different way of saying the latter.
For balance it’s worth say that chaos can greatly magnify the impact of small variables, while greatly suppressing the impact of others. Which are two reasons that make specific predictions in chaotic systems difficult or impossible.
The productive response is to look for behaviors of a given chaotic system. Which can provide a lot of insight, despite specific unpredictability. (I.e. “this heat is going to generate more storms, even if we can’t place those storms on a calendar.”)
My crackpot hypothesis is that fundamentally, the structures of consciousness are just the result of thermodynamic evolution finding a way to emulate quantum effects at the macro scale: assuming the two-state vector formalism is true, the present is formed by a particle arriving from the past and future. Cross your eyes, and consciousness sure looks a lot like information arriving from the future.
Aka consciousness is just a roundabout way to create an emulation layer for quantum effects.
I like your framing because it makes it clear that the boundaries of those stable structures are what encode the world model that encompasses the future. Conscious systems just decode the boundaries of these recursive structures.
Corollary: LLMs aren't smart, they're just recursive structures (differently recursive than our minds) that can decode the boundary we store in language the recursion of language?
Why?
Not _how would this be the case_—I'm curious _why_ this would be the case, i.e. if this represents an outcome that was selected for/climbed to,
what advantage does that offer entities with consciousness?