Does True Randomness Actually Exist?

Sort:
noodles2112

Elroch - triangulation would work on a level surface not on a spherical one, furthermore, Light Years is not a measurement......it is strictly an assumption. 

Take the sun for a better example....how did they determine the distance?

Simple. They guessed. Copernicus said 3 million. Kepler said 12 million. others said 50 and some said more than a 100 million miles away.

Newton Came along and said the distance mattered not. 

Elroch
noodles2112 wrote:

Elroch - triangulation would work on a level surface not on a spherical one,

The triangulation is in outer space, which is very close to flat.

furthermore, Light Years is not a measurement......it is strictly an assumption.

You need to learn the meaning of words. It is a CONCLUSION, not an assumption.

Take the sun for a better example....how did they determine the distance?

They deduced it by combining many separate observations. I will provide a link.

Simple. They guessed.

No, that is a bad guess. See the previous comment.

Copernicus said 3 million. Kepler said 12 million. others said 50 and some said more than a 100 million miles away.

The Sun has been KNOWN to be around 93 million miles away for a long time now. Of early calculations, Hughens was the only one that involved a guess (about the size of Venus). He was lucky to be nearly right, but his calculation is rightly not respected like those that involved no guesses are.  The crucial observation that made no guesswork necessary was of the transit of Venus in 1761.

See the history of estimation of the Sun's distance.

Newton Came along and said the distance mattered not.

No, that is a made-up claim by an unreliable source called @noodles2112. What Newton did do was arrive at a reliable, adequately accurate model of the physics that governed all motion in the Solar System. Still working fine today.

 

noodles2112

Not really working fine at all. If it did, it would not be challenged today. 

 

Elroch

It is not challenged today by non-flakes.

noodles2112

Well, I beg to differ. Even so-called "experts" continue to debate the theory of gravity. 

Elroch

They do, but none of their debate is about anything that would significantly affect the dynamics of the Solar System. That is well-tested science - Newtonian gravitation and Newtonian dynamics, with just a smidge of correction from General Relativity (for Mercury's orbit).  Any new theory of gravity has to closely approximate the present ones where they work fine.

noodles2112

What about the corrective measures for UrAnus? wink.png

Elroch

If that was anything more than a joke, the only thing it could refer to is new planets beyond Uranus perturbing its orbit. This is all pure Newtonian gravity.

noodles2112

I enjoy heliocentric science fiction as much as the most ardent promoterhappy.png 

Elroch

Of course. You are oblivious to so much.

noodles2112

Who isn't? 

noodles2112

The theory of gravity is required to hold the entire heliocentric theory together. Without the theory of gravity................. heliocentrism falls apart completely. 

Elroch

True. All scientist agree that is no problem, because they reason correctly.

noodles2112

They have to "reason" it all away because if they actually reasoned they would not deny their own senses which is mandatory if one chooses to believe in the religion of heliocentrism. 

Elroch

Blah-de-blah. Same old gross misrepresentation of a scientific method beyond your capability to understand.

noodles2112

Never claimed to be some genius. I am looking at the sun/moon right now. If heliocentric theory was valid then the moon would be full like the alleged sunlight reflecting rock ball heliocentrists claim it to be. 

654Psyfox

I say computers can achieve true randomness, but humans can't. 

Elroch
noodles2112 wrote:

Never claimed to be some genius. I am looking at the sun/moon right now. If heliocentric theory was valid then the moon would be full like the alleged sunlight reflecting rock ball heliocentrists claim it to be. 

As usual, your reasoning is nonsense. The Moon is NOT currently opposite the Sun in the sky. It is quite a long way off 180 degrees (see map of where the Moon and Sun are overhead right now -  the point 180 degrees from the Sun is somewhere near Bangladesh). 

As a result, the Moon is more than half full, but well off full.

BCchessnut

True randomness does exist; but only at unknown times.

noodles2112

I started to believe/trust my own senses/eyes again.......then things began to make perfect sensewink.png