Against the Butterfly Effect

I agree with the whole idea that the POD is the cutoff date for conceptions of OTL figures. However, nothing is stopping a similar (but not identical) person from being born, if they have the same parents. Many families, especially dynasties, love using the same names over and over.
 
These last two posts I agree with quite a bit. I suppose that's what I was trying to say, in perhaps more words then strictly needed.

Also I must say, when working on royal family trees, it can be pretty hard to find suitable names for the monarchs x.x
 
I agree with Sam all the way.

One point of order:

butterflies properly mean only those effects where we can't actually trace the cause-and-effect relationship from the POD. They are the changes that happen either because history is re-rolling the dice and might get a different number than in OTL, or else they are cause-and-effect but chaotic and probably untraceable. I think that's how Sam is using it.

This forum sometimes uses butterflies to simply mean the cascade of consequences that a POD causes, most of them traceable. In that sense, any decent alt-history, whether its literary or explorative, has to take account of butterflies. But Sam is using the term more narrowly.

If you're doing explorative alt-history, I have no problem with OTL historical figures being born instead of siblings with similar names or whatnot. In effect, you are saying that where OTL history rolled the dice, you are keeping the rolls the same to better explore the *necessary* effects of your POD.
 

MrP

Banned
I agree with the whole idea that the POD is the cutoff date for conceptions of OTL figures. However, nothing is stopping a similar (but not identical) person from being born, if they have the same parents. Many families, especially dynasties, love using the same names over and over.

It's really common with the poor in England, certainly. Forenames tend to stay in families down the generations.
 

Orry

Donor
Monthly Donor
I agree with the whole idea that the POD is the cutoff date for conceptions of OTL figures. However, nothing is stopping a similar (but not identical) person from being born, if they have the same parents. Many families, especially dynasties, love using the same names over and over.

Uh?

So what you are saying is that any semi-random event has the base Random number re-seeded by the POD even if it happens on the otherside of the planet?

Does that reseeding expand faster than the speed of light?

If in OTL a gamble in New York rolled a 3 & 4 at 10:01:01

and then there is a POD in Berlin at 10:01:00 that will mean that the dice roll is changed (it may end up being the same but that is just Random)?
 
butterflies properly mean only those effects where we can't actually trace the cause-and-effect relationship from the POD. They are the changes that happen either because history is re-rolling the dice and might get a different number than in OTL, or else they are cause-and-effect but chaotic and probably untraceable. I think that's how Sam is using it.

This forum sometimes uses butterflies to simply mean the cascade of consequences that a POD causes, most of them traceable. In that sense, any decent alt-history, whether its literary or explorative, has to take account of butterflies. But Sam is using the term more narrowly.

That's completely true. But at the same time, the term is used for arbitrary changes which are neither traceable back to the PoD, nor chaotic implications of it in the sense of physics.
AH without arbitrary changes would be restricted to political (or other) case studies of up to 3 years range, so of course these are completely fine. But I aways think it's a good idea to call a spade a spade.



Moreover, referring to "butterflies" only as a source for building an ATL, requires to be an determinist. History, however, has a lot to do with people, and I firmly believe that people have freedom of choice in their actions. I'm sure this is not a consensus here, but certainly I'm not alone either.
If your a determinist, it's not exactly clear what "alternate history" can be supposed to mean, as the PoD then is already unavoidable and a necessary implication of everything before. Anyway, I would prefer a terminology which does justice to historical causal relations and at the same time can be applied by everybody in this forum.
 
Does that reseeding expand faster than the speed of light?

If in OTL a gamble in New York rolled a 3 & 4 at 10:01:01

and then there is a POD in Berlin at 10:01:00 that will mean that the dice roll is changed (it may end up being the same but that is just Random)?

My 2 cents:

1st cent--> If it's a TL written for the sake of the story, why not?

2nd cent--> If it's an AH case study, I would prefer to see at least two cases if that game is important. For instance, rolling a 1 and a 6.
If you want to show only one variant, then, of course, it's best to stick to OTL's outcome.

There is a continuous range between these two extreme cases. I suppose the mean TL here lies somewhere at 1.25 cents ...
 
I'd say there is some lag time to butterflies, even with births, but it depends on the setting and how big a PoD. In modern times, it'd be quite fast, perhaps a single day for most people in the same city with time radiating outwards geographically and from everyone those people have contact with. In olden days, it would take a bit longer because contact was slower, or sometimes non existant. I won't get into the weather can of worms, but if you subscribe to that, it'd take it's toll eventually. Things might even get thrown out of wack anyway.

As for the dice rolling example, the change from that in births in Berlin I'd rate as six hours to one week, perhaps longer for a few outliers. Of course, the first thing that now happens might be the winner calling someone in Berlin, unless they're getting their freak on RIGHT THEN it probably wouldn't matter for awhile.
 
My take on the "Butterfly effect," well I guess Im pretty liberal in that matter also... :D

Let me quote myself on this subject:



Btw, there are several other threads about this subject floating around... ;):)

I agree with you insofar that we must differentiate between two kinds of alternate history. First, 'literary' alternate history, where a person may want create the setting for a novel(for example). However, I must also add that thinking of alternate history purely as a device to create a world seems silly to me, since literary worlds don't need plausibility. If you want the CSA to last into the 21st century with slavery in your novel, then go ahead and do it. Want to make it plausible? Too bad. Second, 'case study' alternate history, where somebody is genuinely curious: What would have happened if (for example) the allies had invaded Japan? Would it have killed more people, was dropping the a-bombs a good idea, or would it have saved lives? I find such case studies like this important to think about when studying history itself.

Try not to speak with such an authoritive tone about a subject your text reveals you have quite a weak grasp off. A sperm on average survives at most a week after maturity (and the sheer billion to one odds make the one that made it OTL hitting the egg almost nil), and the egg up for bat changes every month. The person born in the alternate time line even days seperate from you will not be you, they will be a sibling (possibly one of the opposite sex), with anything from 50-100% homology of their genetic inheritance.

Unless you can honestly say your siblings are indentical to you in every respect and have taken up the same career path, I think you should see the problem. Why should the alt version of Reagan get into office when his OTL brother became an advertising executive.

And thats before we get into the shit you write about genetic predispositions to such subtle factors as gun-manufacture and free market ideals. GENETICS DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

I quote you to emphasize my position on the butterfly argument; when looking at 'case study' history, it's absolutely necessary to look at butterflies, because the chaos theory works. I don't really get the logic of people saying ignore the butterflies;if you do, then your alternate history turns into a Turtledove book. To me, alternate history is made interesting because of the butterflies, because just as crazy random things happened IOTL, crazy random things will happen in an ATL. Ignoring butterflies is ignoring an essential part of history.
Sam,

I agree to your initial posting almost completely and I am grateful that you made this point, in a comprehensive and stringent way I couldn't have done it.

Let me add a little thought: To me it doesn't make sense to choose one single scenario of possibilites as a TL, and claim everything would be a consequence of the PoD - and claim you know that for sure.

However, I think it makes a TL more lively if you vary small, perhaps even irrelevant details.
This is not only entertaining, but it illustrates the range of possibilites; moreover, it is a fair little reminder that "this is not real history".

I tried to cover the range of possibilities once by starting a time tree rather than a TL. This emphasizes the "case study" nature of this piece of work. But of course I couldn't include all possible states of the world, but I think my selection gives a good impression of what I thought was plausible.

There are two other reasons why I like little random changes in a TL:
It avoids the complete ignorance of interference. Keeping everything else the same can create absurd situations. Of course, if we are doing a serious case study this should not go as far as changing everything for the author's taste. If the TL is written for the sake of the story, however, this is also fine.

Finally, there might be several conflicts in the world with uncertain outcome. If your PoD is to change the outcome of one, and if the two are not linked in a clear and obvious way, then it makes sense to (ideally) consider two cases, according to the outcomes of the other conflict. I suppose this is what you mean by your "case study" type of AH.

As for the time tree theory of alternate history, and my general interest in alternate history, it comes from the fact that I believe in alternate history.


To sum up, I can find several reasons to depart from the ceteris paribus method.
However, we shouldn't put that down to butterflies, as we can't control them and they can't defend against the blame. We should just say "I want it that way."

Your 'time tree' idea really just about sums up my whole philosophy on alternate history. When considering an Anglo-American War in the 1890-1910 range, it's really up in the air who will win the war, it's not a matter of just saying 'Team America' or 'Time Britain' and being done with it. It's all a matter of probabilities. It's saying that about 75% of the time America will win, while 25% of the time Britain will win(adjust those numbers how you will). I agree with the general idea that you can never know what will for sure have happened after a given POD, but you can try and predict what could have happened. This is what I think this site is all about.
 
My beliefs are for a couple of reasons. Regarding butterflies, I discovered this site before I discovered Turtledove books. I was immediately disappointed with his books, because they ignored butterflies and were boring, mimicking history far too much. I vastly preferred the timelines on this site because they included butterflies, and therefore I am a staunch defender of butterflies. Furthermore, to put it bluntly, I actually believe in alternate history. From here

Many-worlds
is a postulate of quantum mechanics that asserts the objective reality of the universal wavefunction, but denies the reality of wavefunction collapse, which implies that all possible alternative histories and futures are real —each representing an actual "world" (or "universe"). It is also referred to as MWI, the relative state formulation, the Everett interpretation, the theory of the universal wavefunction, many-universes interpretation, or just many worlds.

In my opinion, Occam's razor indicates that only one Universe is far too unlikely. Rather than specifying one number, an infinite number, in my opinion is far more likely. Now just think about how big infinite is; there are thousands, millions, an infinite number of of Universes for every single POD on this board. There is a Universe where the CSA won the Civil War. There is a Universe where the Nazis won World War II. Keeping that in mind, I feel the thought exercise of thinking what these Universes would be like is interesting and worthwhile. To, therefore, dismiss the butterfly effect, and even the whole idea of trying to figure out what history would be like is something happened differently is foolish. This idea is also why I subscribe to the 'time tree' theory of alternate history--there is not only one option for what would have happened if a specific POD occurred. Due to butterflies, there is an infinite number of possibilities. Now having said that, history is a culmination of social, technological, political, and religious movements that cannot be swayed by a single event, so yes, these Universes will all be very similar. But at the same time when I see board members arguing over who would win an Anglo-American War in 18** or 19** my thought is usually, "You're both right". Obviously one side winning is more likely than the other, but my point stands.

Now, this theory is not scientifically proven, it is just my belief. Despite that, I still think 'case study' alternate history is a completely worthwhile thought exercise, because it gives us insight into our own history. As I said above, history is a culmination of many movements, political, religious, etc. Alternate history gives us insight into these movements by comparing them to one another. Thinking about what would have happened if Teddy Roosevelt had won the Presidency as a Progressive in 1912 gives us insight to the Progressive Party as a whole, a movement that is generally forgotten. Thinking about what would have happened if the CSA had become an independent nation gives us insight into what the slave-holding society was like. Looking at a Nazi victory scenario reminds how evil that movement was. While I learn mostly through reading and classes, it is this website that has most shaped my fundamental understanding of history, and all the intricate factors that go into it.
 
I agree with Sam all the way.

One point of order:

butterflies properly mean only those effects where we can't actually trace the cause-and-effect relationship from the POD. They are the changes that happen either because history is re-rolling the dice and might get a different number than in OTL, or else they are cause-and-effect but chaotic and probably untraceable. I think that's how Sam is using it.

This forum sometimes uses butterflies to simply mean the cascade of consequences that a POD causes, most of them traceable. In that sense, any decent alt-history, whether its literary or explorative, has to take account of butterflies. But Sam is using the term more narrowly.

If you're doing explorative alt-history, I have no problem with OTL historical figures being born instead of siblings with similar names or whatnot. In effect, you are saying that where OTL history rolled the dice, you are keeping the rolls the same to better explore the *necessary* effects of your POD.
I think you could explore the effects of specific butterfly after the PoD though.

For instance, saying your studying oh I don't know, the affects of Dante writing in a particular language. The argument as I understand it is that if you are writing to understand the importance of Dante writing it in essentially Tuscan, then introducing other butterflies elsewhere complicates things in a way that might obscure your subject. It's impossible to do it right, so trying is counterproductive to your objective.

But say you have a butterfly of a gender switch or something. Something we have no idea the likelihood of at that time the essence of what he points out as butterfly. You can use that to explore how that particular butterfly is effected by your original PoD in a way that furthers your examination of the topic or of the butterfly's relation with the topic your studying.

Anyhow, I'd say in general maybe we should use a different term. Butterflies need to stick with meaning "logical consequences" because it's too late to change it now. Chaotic events?
 
Top