Conceptual analysis reveals foundational flaws in dynamical systems modeling, indicating that modern technological success relies on layered abstractions rather than true predictive understanding.
“Everything appears to work — and no one knows why.”AbstractModern science, engineering, and computation rely heavily on the framework of “dynamical systems” to model, predict, and control the physical world. From numerical weatherforecasting to structural engineering, computer simulations are treated as objective mirrors of reality. This paper argues that the entire enterprise rests on an epistemological andmetaphysical fallacy. By mistaking localized operational utility for fundamental truth, computational models substitute chaotic reality with bounded, useful fictions. We examine theillusion of mathematical solutions, the precise mechanics of the Lyapunov horizon, the paradox of non-autonomous forced systems, and the distinction between wild dynamical systemsand engineered control systems. We conclude that humanity’s technological successes aresustained not by true prediction, but by a cascading hierarchy of abstractions where no onetruly understands the foundational mechanics—yet everything appears to work
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sagar Kapadia (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: