...last time i looked it did
Does True Randomness Actually Exist?
Sort:
Thee_Ghostess_Lola wrote: ...last time i looked it did
I phoned a friend and he said why are you phoning now I'm watching football and I said, "you don't like football" And he said France is getting hammered, losing 2-0. That's why. He actually called them something else, not France. So I asked him, is it the final? He doesn't know. Says he thinks it's just a semi final, France versus Argentina. So we shared a few expletives about France. I wished him bon voyage and switched on the TV and it turned out to be the final. And within 5 minutes of me switching on, France equalised. Of course, the penalty was a dive but the second goal was good. There was another dive in the penalty area, which was turned down by the referee but the penalty given was also a dive. You could see the French player deliberately wrap his leg round the Argentine defender's leg and then go down. It was obvious. The same happened all the way through the England France game. It could only happen with a corrupt referee, it was so bad. I was wanting Argentina to win like anything and I was so glad when France lost in the most humiliating way. Alan Shearer, the ex Newcastle striker, was telling us that All Was Well and it was just one of those things. He was papering over the cracks, trying to retrieve the situation and I'm thinking it's going to be Sir Alan Shearer, next year's honours list. Somebody doesn't want to offend them too much.
Dec 23, 2022
0
#244
Addendum to my #20 post.
The Randomness of "Gravitation"! https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/The-Mystery-of-Gravitation
9-minutes
Dec 23, 2022
0
#245
No true randomness can be created by a humans brain. You cannot create true randomness. Some people get confused and say randomness mean’s there is no pattern, but what randomness really means is the there is no guaranteed pattern. There is randomness almost everywhere but you’re brain cannot comprehend true randomness.
Dec 23, 2022
0
#246
Ellem27 - most live their lives believing aliens exist on some distant "planet" light years away. What is more random then that?
The reason for that................ is the religion they believe in................................. and know it not...............................................................Heliocentrism!............................... Which has been ingrained in their brain since birth.
Ask anyone you know what heliocentrism is ...........and they will say.................................................................................."I don't know!?".......................................................................................... Yet they believe it...........Period!
Dec 23, 2022
0
#247
@noodles2112 that is not random, that is belief. Wether it is true or not, it is believed because of culture (Wich should not be discussed) , the people surrounding you, and how your brain interprets that information. Distant life is as random as an apple.
Dec 27, 2022
0
#251
They have an element of randomness. Randomness is about incomplete information, not a lack of any information.
Isn’t entropy random or something
probability question
I'm pretty sure it does
https://www.askamathematician.com/2009/12/q-do-physicists-really-believe-in-true-randomness/
https://medium.com/illumination/does-true-randomness-exist-5d2fc7f413dd
https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-anything-truly-random/
so according to physics it does, but according to philosophy it doesn't?
According to my philosophy it does definitely exist and is real.
Some philosophers might believe it doesn't exist but they're taking a horribly overly-simplistic view of reality.
Elroch wrote:
They have an element of randomness. Randomness is about incomplete information, not a lack of any information.
That may be slightly prejudicial to a true understanding, if it's taken to imply that the information may exist, except that we don't have access to it. So perhaps it supports the idea of "hidden variables" much more than it should.
Better to define randomness or t.r. as absolute unpredictability. Just thought of that but it seems ok.
Dec 28, 2022
0
#256
What about a variable ratio......is not that how slot machines function and thus so many get addicted?
Think so.
If the exact state of every energy/particle in the universe were known at any given instance, could it be possible to simulate all future events with a sufficiently powerful simulator? Granted that both a universal state and the simulator would be slightly difficult to obtain, but could it be done? The seemingly random creation and destruction of subatomic particles might be perfectly predictable if we knew the strength of each of the fields at any particular point in space-time. We already create rudimentary simulations for weather and such. Could the same be done for the universe as a whole?
It seems logical to me that the creation, existence, and destruction of entities (matter or energy) would be perfectly predictable, including the results of a slot machine. It would be inevitable based on the initial state of the simulator. Where my brain gets a kink is when I try to imagine how my thoughts at seeing a leaf fall from a tree and drift in the wind could be predicted. My logic says it is all predictable because the chemicals in my brain, the tree, leaf, light, and everything else has been moving toward that moment for millennia. The rest of me isn't convinced.
I don't want to join in on all the back-and-forth that's been going on but I'd like to hear thoughts on this idea. I know it's impossible for us to know the exact state of everything. I know it's impossible for us to simulate anything to the degree required. This is just a what-if-we-could scenario.
Gomer_Pyle wrote:
If the exact state of every energy/particle in the universe were known at any given instance, could it be possible to simulate all future events with a sufficiently powerful simulator? Granted that both a universal state and the simulator would be slightly difficult to obtain, but could it be done? The seemingly random creation and destruction of subatomic particles might be perfectly predictable if we knew the strength of each of the fields at any particular point in space-time. We already create rudimentary simulations for weather and such. Could the same be done for the universe as a whole?
It seems logical to me that the creation, existence, and destruction of entities (matter or energy) would be perfectly predictable, including the results of a slot machine. It would be inevitable based on the initial state of the simulator. Where my brain gets a kink is when I try to imagine how my thoughts at seeing a leaf fall from a tree and drift in the wind could be predicted. My logic says it is all predictable because the chemicals in my brain, the tree, leaf, light, and everything else has been moving toward that moment for millennia. The rest of me isn't convinced.
I don't want to join in on all the back-and-forth that's been going on but I'd like to hear thoughts on this idea. I know it's impossible for us to know the exact state of everything. I know it's impossible for us to simulate anything to the degree required. This is just a what-if-we-could scenario.
Hi.
Having thought about this kind of problem off and on for a good number of decades, I arrived at what I think is the only correct solution, many years ago.
The correct answer is that the only possible simulator is the universe itself or an exact replica of it. Which is basically the universe itself.
Incidentally, we assume that true randomness is inevitable. Because the only alternative is something that is far, far more complex. That is, to simulate true randomness would necessitate processing capability beyond the power of anything which is capable of existing. Therefore the only logical answer is that true randomness must exist and it is produced naturally by the universe.
This is naturally not the kind of deductive proof beloved by people who do not realise what we're dealing with. We're dealing with axioms and you can't really prove axioms. They just exist, as does existence itself; and any proof would be circular or non existent. Consequently, a little bit of intellectual brilliance is a prerequisite.
Heheh
It no longer matters who wins because the best team in the World has just been unfairly eliminated so whoever wins is World champion in name only.
I think there's a case for boycotting the World Cup. The refereeing has been poor this World Cup but the France England match can only be explained by a bribed referee. My favourite candidate is FIDE itself, which is more or less controlled by the EU and thus by France, since Germany doesn't care. But Southgate's conduct of the match was also abysmal. The players were noticeably completely rattled by the actions of the bribed referee and Southgate did nothing to counter that. He also use substitutes completely incorrectly. Made a complete fool of himself and deserves to be sacked.