A very important question to you @noodles2112. Answer it straight.
Do you acknowledge that being able to use science to infer what will happen in the real world is important, and a good quality metric?
Does True Randomness Actually Exist?
Sort:
noodles2112 wrote:
Optimissed - I was curious about it so I got an answer via AI. The Vegas machines e.g. slots etc. are more complex than they were back in the beginning days so I was wondering if there is some sort of advanced technical "widening random gap" - like searching for the topics title - "true randomness" - will they ever create a gambling machine that produces "true randomness" ?
I saw a Columbo episode recently when the murderer was asked -
You like to gamble ?
answered -
What else is there ?
In other words, everything is a gamble to some extent - "random" !
If I am off topic I apologize.
I like your answer whether or not it's off topic.
A machine producing true randomness is perfectly feasible and becomes less difficult if some variable aspect of the environment is measured and fed into the calculation.
Even though there may be objections trying to maintain that there's no true randomness anywhere, if it's fed into the calculation pseudo-randomly, it would be impossible to determine whether it is random or pseudo-random so then we can assume what we like and we'd be right because we wouldn't be wrong.
3 days ago
0
#3564
"being able to use science to infer what will happen in the real world is important?" Elroch
yes
Good answer. But why do you think it's important?
noodles2112 wrote:
"being able to use science to infer what will happen in the real world is important?" Elroch
yes
Why do you think heliocentrism (and the formula for calculating an object’s actual size) doesn’t work in real life, then?
3 days ago
0
#3567
Optimissed - I think I understand -
my uncle was a wizard with computers/programming -
he created a flight simulation program that incorporated "real weather/real-time" - I think that has "randomness" !
3 days ago
0
#3568
because it is available to anyone/everyone in the real world -
people use the scientific method all the time without realizing it - observable - measurable - repeatable - producing tangible results by anyone.
3 days ago
0
#3569
AG1 - please elaborate -
like someone claiming to prove the size of Pluto on a chalkboard ?
noodles2112 wrote:
AG1 - please elaborate -
like someone claiming to prove the size of Pluto on a chalkboard ?
The formula went somewhat like this:
Size object appears to be=actual size/distance between observer and object.
3 days ago
0
#3571
noodles2112 wrote:
"being able to use science to infer what will happen in the real world is important?" Elroch
yes
Great.
So you understand that those who can use science to do this are worthy of respect. For example, being able to calculate the effect of gravity on a cannonball in flight? Or to calculate flight paths, so planes end up where they are meant to go?
3 days ago
0
#3572
I would not compare a cannonball to an airplane -
a pilot/airplane can change flight paths/divert its course/adjust its speed etc. after takeoff - a cannonball can't.
I respect pilots - I only respect cannonballs that are headed my way 
!
my favorite dive in the olympics is the cannonball
3 days ago
0
#3574
noodles2112 wrote:
I would not compare a cannonball to an airplane -
I didn't, but there are many, many varied things that involved the correct application of science. Of course, these days, the plane will be using GPS, which relies on line of sight communication with multiple satellites. And (needless to say) all locations and paths are on the curved surface of the Earth.
But if you start by understanding the local uniform field approximation of gravity (fixed acceleration everywhere) - suitable to calculations about a cannonball - you can move on the more complicated reality of large scale calculations later.
a pilot/airplane can change flight paths/divert its course/adjust its speed etc. after takeoff - a cannonball can't.
True.
I respect pilots - I only respect cannonballs that are headed my way !
If you respect pilots, you need to ask any random one to explain to you what shape the Earth is.
3 days ago
0
#3575
Elroch - next time you fly commercial - pay attention/observe the "horizon" - does it ascend all the way up to 35,000 plus feet & remaining "eye level" ?
Elroch wrote:
noodles2112 wrote:
I would not compare a cannonball to an airplane -
I didn't, but there are many, many varied things that involved the correct application of science. Of course, these days, the plane will be using GPS, which relies on line of sight communication with multiple satellites. And (needless to say) all locations and paths are on the curved surface of the Earth.
But if you start by understanding the local uniform field approximation of gravity (fixed acceleration everywhere) - suitable to calculations about a cannonball - you can move on the more complicated reality of large scale calculations later.
a pilot/airplane can change flight paths/divert its course/adjust its speed etc. after takeoff - a cannonball can't.
True.
I respect pilots - I only respect cannonballs that are headed my way !
If you respect pilots, you need to ask any random one to explain to you what shape the Earth is.
Well, it's a while since I've done it but I'm fairly random and the aerobatic plane I trained in wouldn't go fast and wasn't powerful enough to climb much over 3 miles above sea level since it was prop driven and the air up there is thinner ... in fact I've climbed higher hills.
But it's definitely curved.
3 days ago
0
#3577
The horizon is slightly below horizontal at 35,000 feet. 3.3 degrees, in fact. This is not that difficult to see, nor is the curvature of the surface.
You can see it from that height but it's probably far clearer from 40,000 feet.
It's useful to him as a distraction from not being able to do science that works in the real world.