Group Abstract Group Abstract

Message Boards Message Boards

Misunderstanding section 2.7 of Wolfram physics project?

(Edit - removing the bold accusation that this was a typo - but leaving the core of the question as it had me stumped and the answer below is worth thinking about)

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this but I think (i.e. just a smidge over 50% sure) there might be a typo on the Physics Project docs - section 2.7

https://www.wolframphysics.org/technical-introduction/basic-form-of-models/rules-depending-on-more-than-one-relation/index.html

specifically in the second panel, when I work it through I get this pattern:

enter image description here

POSTED BY: Zephyr Penoyre
8 Replies

This sketch helped me make sense of it: enter image description here

POSTED BY: Zephyr Penoyre

Keep in mind, evolution is not unique (as this is not a causal invariant rule):

Specifically, in the default evolution order, we get the result from the paper: In[] := WolframModel[{{x, y}, {x, z}} -> {{z, w}, {y, w}, {x, w}, {x, y}}, {{1, 2}, {1, 3}}, <|"MaxEvents" -> 2|>]["StatesPlotsList", VertexLabels -> Automatic] Automatic ordering

If, however, we use a different event ordering function, we get the evolution you found: In[] := WolframModel[{{x, y}, {x, z}} -> {{z, w}, {y, w}, {x, w}, {x, y}}, {{1, 2}, {1, 3}}, <|"MaxEvents" -> 2|>, "EventOrderingFunction" -> "ReverseRuleOrdering"]["StatesPlotsList", VertexLabels -> Automatic] ReverseRuleOrdering

You can use MultiwaySystem to find these two are the only possibilities for the first two steps (up to isomorphisms): In[] := ResourceFunction["MultiwaySystem"][ "WolframModel" -> {{{x, y}, {x, z}} -> {{z, w}, {y, w}, {x, w}, {x, y}}}, {{{1, 2}, {1, 3}}}, 2, "StatesGraph", VertexSize -> 1.3] // LayeredGraphPlot MultiwaySystem

POSTED BY: Maksim Piskunov

This helps make a lot of sense of it - thanks!

I need to think some more about rule-ordering perhaps

POSTED BY: Zephyr Penoyre
Posted 3 years ago

To me this implies that the rule as presented is not a well defined function without designating the ordering used. Are evolution rules not supposed to be functions? Maybe i should try reading the paper and not the website technical introduction?

POSTED BY: Kirk Boyer

Yes, rules are not functions, that is, they are not necessarily deterministic. I'm not sure which papers you are referring to, but, maybe, the docs on event ordering and selection could be helpful.

POSTED BY: Maksim Piskunov
Posted 3 years ago

I think you're right. It's looking like I just need to keep reading more sections, because this is addressed already. Thanks for the reply!

POSTED BY: Kirk Boyer

i think maybe this was the intended rule: enter image description here

POSTED BY: Zephyr Penoyre

seem to be similar issues throughout the page - maybe just y and z got switched somewhere (or I'm being dense...)

POSTED BY: Zephyr Penoyre
Reply to this discussion
Community posts can be styled and formatted using the Markdown syntax.
Reply Preview
Attachments
Remove
or Discard