why does predicting things in space (outside the planet) seem to be a lot easier than predicting weather on Earth?
In: Physics
In terms of modelling and learning (am a CS guy) space is a simple calculation of a Handful of variables, like momentum/velocity, gravity, etc. Very little in the way of complex interaction, the equations for orbit are pretty simple and can be solved with algebra and or some light calculus. The future state of a spacecraft can be calculated far in advance, barring some deviation like debris or getting hit by something.
Weather on the other hand involves rippling changes throughout the world. Sea temperatures, season, pressures, temperatures, wind speeds etc, which all continually evolve over time and and affect each other. If we use a knot as the analogy, weather is far more tangled. You pull one strand to loosen it but may tighten another. Things that change themselves also change other factors in strange ways. IIRC weather predictions are a fairly complicated differential equation, aka heavier calculus and harder simulations that have to be consistently re-evaluted. Additionally, the farther out the weather prediction is, the less accurate it is. Predicting weather five minutes from now has few variables, but predicting the weather a month from now means predicting every interaction and variation in the system. With spacecraft , again, it’s not unreasonable to plot the entire trajectory to say, the moon, very accurately and in advance.
Hope this helps .
Latest Answers