- Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:58 pm
#39198
Hi Niki,
Here we are asked to define a conceptual reference that is sprinkled throughout the passage, but becomes much clearer once the uncertainty concept of "chaos" is introduced to the reader. Note how with the riddled basins of attraction, even general destination becomes impossible to predict. This concept of predicting general destination is then carried over to distinguish it from the uncertainty principle of chaos as it's used in particle physics and the prediction of the path of a particle. In other words with particle physics, "chaos" is something less chaoctic than the study of the riddled basins of attraction issue because at least the general destination of the particle can be predicted whereas the water pathway's general destination cannot be predicted at all. That's real chaos, Niki!
I find that many current students struggle with the issues presented in conceptual reference questions (as distinguished from specific reference and global questions). The first question I would ask is: did you have a notation about chaos using the VIEWSTAMP approach? If you didn't, then you definitely need to start notating those arguments better. If you did and you still struggled even when tracking the specific language of the passage, did you read enough of it to realize the distinction was trying to make? If that's what you were struggling with then you need to slow down and make sure you are comprehending the full, nuanced argument that the author was trying to make in order to successfully answer this Must Be True question.
Thanks for the great question and I hope this helped!
