Does True Randomness Actually Exist? ( ^&*#^%$&#% )

We are able to strengthen our chances of getting, as a example, a six by making some changes into the factors that determent the outcome. A professor once told me that friction is one of the most important factors in this case (rolling a dice). So, if you change the friction to the ideal your chance of getting best outcome will increase. 

How could someone intuitively do that, shaking the dice up in their hands for a long time on each throw? If it were random have you any idea what the odds against it are?

To the saying that the dice roll is random. 

New theoretical models and high-speed movies of dice rolls of numerous shapes and sizes confirm this is not strictly the case. They show that dice thrown with a 1 on the top are slightly more likely to land as a 1 than as the other values for every type of the various kinds of dice they studied. But at the same time, it's usually too hard for someone to predict the outcome of the throw of a single die--you'd have to know the starting conditions of the throw and its environment so precisely that for all practical purposes, the result could be considered random.

Again, mentioning the factor of friction. With a high-friction table, in which the dice can't slide across very easily, the dice tend to bounce around more times, tumbling and twirling, and making the results harder to predict. With a smooth, low-friction, or soft table, the dice tend to bounce fewer times. 

Even bouncing doesn't always mix things up. A high-speed video will show that the  dice frequently did not change their face even after a bounce.

I have no idea how to use in on a practical view. Although, it’s worth noting. 

I wouldn’t say a dice is random, for me it’s more chaotic. Let’s present a popular concept that originated in the second half of the 20th century, in which small differences in starting conditions can lead to large differences in end results. The most common example is the hypothetical picture of a butterfly flapping its wings in South America changing air circulation patterns to influence the weather halfway around the globe. (Also known as the butterfly effect) The end result is knowable only if you have precise knowledge of the starting conditions of the world's weather.

All though, to somewhat debunk my idea about a dice roll being chaotic. A die roll is only truly chaotic if it bounces on the table an infinite number of times, But this is far from attainable, due to the fact that the die loses energy with each bounce due to friction.

With the high-speed camera images and the new theoretical treatment, this paper provides a new contribution to the question of the true randomness of dice throws and coin tosses. It contributes to an increasingly sophisticated understanding of what can be considered fully random in everyday life. 

And in a more practical vein, if you're playing in a casino tonight, it probably wouldn't hurt to start your roll with the coveted 20 on top. It may occasionally give you the desired results, while the casino dealer could insist on playing on the roughest, highest-friction table they can find.

 Let’s present a popular concept that originated in the second half of the 20th century, in which small differences in starting conditions can lead to large differences in end results.>>

I never bought that at all. It only happens when a situation is unstable. Doesn't apply to dice rolling.

Another good example is the roulette wheel ... Random numbers? Nope. Far easier to predict than a coin or die. Of course the possibility is greater with the 38 numbers - what is meant, preexisting conditions are easier to map.

It does apply to dice rolling. "Starting conditions" (what force you use to throw the dice, what weather it is, how the die is turned) etc. Throwing a dice is very unstable. I don't get your point...

I completely agree with your point. One that's been debated in another thread. Suggesting that with the roulette wheel, speed of the table, friction and speed of the ball, makes predicting a result easier than the dice, as these factors could be easier to observe and measure.

The earlier message was meant for "Optimissed". 

All though, I do agree with you on that part. A spinning wheel is easier to predict than a dice because it eliminates some of the starting conditions. 

Amalia: "In the unlikely and near impossible scenario where you're able to control every natural part of the universe you could recreate a event where the result of the action would be obvious."

you nicely captured the essence of this topic...  "Does True Randomness Actually Exist?"

unfortunately, science cant objectively answer this question, and dont let people trick you for thinking otherwise. (i've been arguing about it here for quit a bit)

i agree with you, if you look at dice rolls and roulette, its all pretty much comes down to pseudo random (objects obeying the laws of physics).
even if you look at quantum mechanics, which many people believe to has true randomness inherent to it..  don't let them fool you, because it just a belief.

the existence of true randomness is still an open question, which physics fail to answer. like the ol' saying...
Maybe yes, maybe no. exactly? we dont know : )

king, i ended up not doing the gliding thingy.. they wanted to strap me under an instructor like a bag of potatoes.. i didnt like that idea at all. lol

so. roulette....if the number 31 hasnt come up in 300 spins, then what would compel u to play it on the next spin ? how do u make the case ?

Maybe yes, maybe no. exactly? we dont know : )

Sounds random to me ! 

I'm not very bright and believe 31 is more likely to happen. Maths is on my side !

in this ex. ?....nearly all ppl will fall back on probability and abandon their common sense. i personally disagree and have actually found it to be the opposite.

Monty Hall Problem

Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?" Is it to your advantage to switch your choice?

The problem is a paradox of the veridical type, because the correct choice (that one should switch doors) is so counterintuitive it can seem absurd, but is nevertheless demonstrably true

Many readers of vos Savant's column refused to believe switching is beneficial despite her explanation. After the problem appeared in Parade, approximately 10,000 readers, including nearly 1,000 with PhDs, wrote to the magazine, most of them claiming vos Savant was wrong (Tierney 1991). Even when given explanations, simulations, and formal mathematical proofs, many people still do not accept that switching is the best strategy (vos Savant 1991a). Paul Erdős, one of the most prolific mathematicians in history, remained unconvinced until he was shown a computer simulation demonstrating vos Savant’s predicted result (Vazsonyi 1999).

https://brilliant.org/wiki/monty-hall-problem/

As I have somewhat stated. In theory, it doesn't but in a practical view a outcome can be "chaotic". But not truly random. Anyhow, it will take much for me to change my stand point but i'm open for new ideas.

I like how you mentioned Quantum Mechanics. Just took a "quiz" or a "exam" (whatever what they are called) in it. It's a pretty neat thing. To lazy to bring it up at this very moment. 

I'll try to explain the idea that we're talking about. 

When you spin the roulette and gets, in this case, the number 31. There's a lot of factors involved. Let's take some examples. One factor could be wind, how hard the wheel is pulled when the spin start, which number it started on and etc. 

If you now where to recreate all factors that currently was present while getting the 31. (every factor not all that I mentioned) you will get 31 every time. All though, that ain't possible to do. (yet) 

Rather basic stuff Amelia. I think topic has advanced.

Logic is tested where a paradox exists. 

Seemingly logical thought becomes refuted. 

What is a  depiction of reality ?

lol. Ahhhh Silver, lol.. You had me cracking up all morning long. Man, in other words you chickened out huh? lol. Lookit, I understand the vertigo thing, you wont get a pass from me on that one. Maybe on all this other stuff that we have under discussion here, but not when it comes to heights.

Back in the day, I used to trim trees around the power lines for the utility companies. Did it for years, got paid to get 'high' on the job. (Literally) Now the flip side is, I had the living **** scared out of me at least twice a week the whole time I was there.

Silver, I know what you mean about that 'bag of potatoes' thing, but it does keep you from going splat.! You just passed up a really cool opportunity on your business trip/vacation. Not funny, but I couldn't help myself.

I will always remember the last tree that I climbed.. I was all decked out in my climbing gear, standing in the bucket of one of our boom trucks. They then extended that boom as high as it would go, and then leaned it against the tree. I then steeped out onto the tree, and proceeded to climb up about that same distance to where the work was at. : )

Cant really remember now what species that tree was, but the trunk was hard as rock. When I gaffed in as hard as I could, it barely went in a quarter inch. And with all the gear attached to me, chainsaw, ropes, pruners and such.. It was more than just a bag of potatoes, with no help. You had help.

Unless you want to count my 'cheerleaders.' Yeah, the owner of the tree company and the lead foreman, the regional utility rep and his homies, and lets not forget the neighborhood watch group either. All eyes on me, plus vertigo gut punching me. There is more to say on that day, but I got the job done.

Hot air balloon rides are a viable alternative too. (If you wont hang glide.) I would take one over wine country with my excellent girlfriend. When we float low over a beautiful lake, I will strap a bungee cord onto her ankle, and toss her overboard to make a YouTube video.

Seen pics of those guys, on the beams of the 100th story building skyscrapers in NYC long ago ?

Nuts man, totally nuts. Some people wake up each morning looking forward to such madness.

Put me on the 10th floor looking down out the window - the toes tingle, the knees quake, the heart stops and the mind reels. Looking out is enthralling, like the Grand Canyon, looking down is sheer stupidity or born of a different species.