Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

Sort:
Avatar of playerafar
Genetics-Unknown wrote:

I think their is true randomness when old people roll those balls with the numbers on em in that hand crank mixer upper and then pull one out and read off the number. Unless THATS rigged also.

There's a lot of randomness there.
But is it 'true' or 'pure' randomness there?
Depends on definitions.
It could be rigged sometimes. Haven't looked that up.
There might be a lot of ways to 'fix' that.
------------
Another idea: something that is 'random' to something else - but not in itself random.
'Random' is kind of a general word.

Avatar of Optimissed

Q. Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

A. Only in a random way.

Avatar of Optimissed
playerafar wrote:
Genetics-Unknown wrote:

I think their is true randomness when old people roll those balls with the numbers on em in that hand crank mixer upper and then pull one out and read off the number. Unless THATS rigged also.

There's a lot of randomness there.
But is it 'true' or 'pure' randomness there?
Depends on definitions.
It could be rigged sometimes. Haven't looked that up.
There might be a lot of ways to 'fix' that.
------------
Another idea: something that is 'random' to something else - but not in itself random.
'Random' is kind of a general word.

I think it could be rigged without too much trouble. You could fiddle with the weights of the balls and vary the thickness from one side to the other. They could be fed in with an inbuilt bias according to keys on the balls and pinged according to a secret input and of course electromagnetism could be used. You could hide a complete set of fixed balls in a teddy bear which, at the touch of a secret button, could replace a set that has just been checked for legitimacy, while they were being mixed. Since I thought of these things in a space of time far less than it took to write them, there will be many more ways to fix it.

Why though, I don't know. So maybe they don't tend to be fixed at all? Maybe some have been though?

Avatar of playerafar
Optimissed wrote:
playerafar wrote:
Genetics-Unknown wrote:

I think their is true randomness when old people roll those balls with the numbers on em in that hand crank mixer upper and then pull one out and read off the number. Unless THATS rigged also.

There's a lot of randomness there.
But is it 'true' or 'pure' randomness there?
Depends on definitions.
It could be rigged sometimes. Haven't looked that up.
There might be a lot of ways to 'fix' that.
------------
Another idea: something that is 'random' to something else - but not in itself random.
'Random' is kind of a general word.

I think it could be rigged without too much trouble. You could fiddle with the weights of the balls and vary the thickness from one side to the other. They could be fed in with an inbuilt bias according to keys on the balls and pinged according to a secret input and of course electromagnetism could be used. You could hide a complete set of fixed balls in a teddy bear which, at the touch of a secret button, could replace a set that has just been checked for legitimacy, while they were being mixed. Since I thought of these things in a space of time far less than it took to write them, there will be many more ways to fix it.

Why though, I don't know. So maybe they don't tend to be fixed at all? Maybe some have been though?

A lot of things are fixed. Like horseraces for example.
Not all of them - but its known to happen.
Sometimes people get caught fixing a race.
-----------------
Regarding plastic balls coming out of a machine - is it 'purely random' usually?
How random?
There's this concept of 'pre-determined' according to all the ingredients of the situation.
In quantum mechanics - it was shown that particular things couldn't be known - but does that mean the results weren't 'predetermined' anyway?
Comes down to the multiple semantics of that word 'random'.

Avatar of playerafar
Optimissed wrote:

Q. Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

A. Only in a random way.

Since 'random' has multiple meanings then it refers back to itself in that way - since the assigned meaning could be 'randomly chosen'.

Avatar of noodles2112

random C.c glitch !

Avatar of Thee_Ghostess_Lola

woodnt it be so booooooring if randomness wuz only in the tiny mind of i ? ...yee !

bump !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RheYzUWoxU

Avatar of noodles2112

that's the way I like it !wink.png

Avatar of yuareba

WHOA wdym by that

Avatar of noodles2112

me?

Avatar of yuareba

yes

Avatar of yuareba
noodles2112 wrote:

that's the way I like it !

what way?

Avatar of yuareba
playerafar wrote:
Optimissed wrote:

Q. Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

A. Only in a random way.

Since 'random' has multiple meanings then it refers back to itself in that way - since the assigned meaning could be 'randomly chosen'.

A

Avatar of noodles2112

the post #6907 way wink.png

Avatar of long_quach
Elroch wrote:

Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

Every time you throw a pair of dice in a casino.

Avatar of playerafar
long_quach wrote:
Elroch wrote:

Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

Every time you throw a pair of dice in a casino.

If you win - the money you get paid does Actually Exist. At that time.
If you lose - your money also does Actually Exist but its then somebody else's.
----------
meaning of the word 'true' in the forum title context.
Maybe there could be multiple definitions of it.

Avatar of Elroch

BTW, I see elsewhere you say that Heisenburg's uncertainty principle does not falsify determinism. It does.

Determinism is the notion that there is no true randomness, while Heisenburg places a strictly positve lower bound on randomess. These two things are incompatible.

Avatar of playerafar
Elroch wrote:

BTW, I see elsewhere you say that Heisenburg's uncertainty principle does not falsify determinism. It does.

Determinism is the notion that there is no true randomness, while Heisenburg places a strictly positve lower bound on randomess. These two things are incompatible.

It falsifies absolute total universal determinism.
But not all determinism.
People can still determine things.
I think processes can 'determine' events too.
The spin of the earth is going to 'determine' that the sun will appear over the horizon tomorrow.
Redshift has been determining for a long time that we'll see it here and we do.

Avatar of noodles2112

one does not need to attribute the sunset/sunrise to a spinning wobbling accelerating & decelerating flying globular rock - Lost in Space -----------------

there are other scientific "explanations" !

Avatar of Guest5469910050
Please Sign Up to comment.

If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.