Mathematically clean and tidy would be a better description. This system is particularly close to the natural harmonics that either occur when planets form, or that planetary systems tend towards.
It’s akin to watching a group of metronomes move into sync. Mathematically, it’s not that special. To us monkeys, that particular pattern feels a lot better and cleaner.
Scientifically, it’s quite useful. By judging the age of the system, we can tell a lot about early formation and planetary movements. As the article mentions, it’s likely that planets form in such a resonance, then get knocked into chaotic orbits. However that’s not been tested. This system would let us test some of our models against reality.
Hol’ up.
Mathematics tries to describe our world. So … Essentially EVERYTHING is mathematically described to the extent of our knowledge…
What is not mathematical? Human thought? Human behaviour? Even those are described but not perfectly.
So even if we say something is “perfect” it is only to the maximum observable human extent and limits.
Either everything is perfect or nothing is perfect or it is somewhere inbetween.
Am I in lemmy shitpost or something?
Mathematically clean and tidy would be a better description. This system is particularly close to the natural harmonics that either occur when planets form, or that planetary systems tend towards.
It’s akin to watching a group of metronomes move into sync. Mathematically, it’s not that special. To us monkeys, that particular pattern feels a lot better and cleaner.
Scientifically, it’s quite useful. By judging the age of the system, we can tell a lot about early formation and planetary movements. As the article mentions, it’s likely that planets form in such a resonance, then get knocked into chaotic orbits. However that’s not been tested. This system would let us test some of our models against reality.
You’re thinking of physics.