So what exactly in nature do we think is TRULY random?

[SaltyNuts]

So I'm asking this to help me in me in my theory of the universe I'm working on. To be clear, I'm not talking about pseudo-random. You roll a dice, and the rolls appear random, but you could reverse engineer the numbers based on how hard you through it, friction on the table, and on and on and on. I'm talking non-deterministic random.

So what is it in the universe that we think is truly random? The only thing I can think of is the collapse of the wave function in quantum mechanics, and possibly something about the decay of radioactive material? Anything else? And is there any way we can KNOW those are truly random?

Thanks for any serious replies!

 

[KMFJD]

your posts

 

[Yakk]

If something appears random is it really, or is it that we just don't understand something which explains why something occurred?

Flatland is always a good example, shapes appearing on the 2D plane do not seem to make sense, and are unexplainable/random unless you understand what the 3rd D is.

I'm on the side of nothing is random as everything is interconnected and dependant on something else to exist at some point. Is the collapse of a wave really random? Or is it affected by a phenomenon we just don't know yet, or may never be able to understand?

 

[SaltyNuts]

Yakk, you are definately thinking along the lines I am. However, if you argue that NOTHING is random, EVERYTHING is deterministic, then you've essentially shot yourself in the foot because there cannot be LOGIC behind that argument - you just posted it because you were destined to post it, not because it is logical or true. You've created a paradox essentially.

But your questions are right on point!

 

[dave_the_nerd]

The background static of the universe?

 

[SaltyNuts]

Dave, thanks. I guess that is right - apparently (so the "scientists" tell us), there are constantly particles popping into and out of existence. I suppose those would indeed be random, at least theoretically so, although I suspect that proving anything is truly random is impossible.

 

[IronWing]

Yakk, you are definately thinking along the lines I am. However, if you argue that NOTHING is random, EVERYTHING is deterministic, then you've essentially shot yourself in the foot because there cannot be LOGIC behind that argument - you just posted it because you were destined to post it, not because it is logical or true. You've created a paradox essentially.

But your questions are right on point!

You have made a non-logical leap from a deterministic universe to the impossibility of logic.

 

[SaltyNuts]

Do explain IronWing! How could true logic exist if everything we will ever do and think is known with a certainty from our inception?

 

[IronWing]

Do explain IronWing! How could true logic exist if everything we will ever do and think is known with a certainty from our inception?

Logic is a system of thought. There is nothing inherent in a deterministic universe that would preclude people from employing such a system of thought. Also, "known with a certainty" presumes the existence of a "knower".

 

[SaltyNuts]

"Logic is a system of thought."

Sure. It is one using thought and reason to try and make a determination.

"There is nothing inherent in a deterministic universe that would preclude people from employing such a system of thought."

Disagree. Using thought and reason to analyze something and come to a conclusion is inconsistent with you coming to that conclusion BECAUSE YOU HAD TO COME TO THAT CONCLUSION SINCE IT IS DETERMINISTIC.

"Also, "known with a certainty" presumes the existence of a "knower"."

Huh? That was just a figure of speech. For everything to be deterministic there does not have to be some outside "knower". Its like you are just trying to argue about semantics.

 

[IronWing]

You have restated your position without providing any supporting rationale for the position. Capitalization is no substitute for reasoned argument.

 

[SaltyNuts]

I don't see what is so hard for you to grasp. I clearly went through the analysis. Explain to me why that is wrong? Use clear, simple words please, let's not muddy the waters, eh?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

I don't see what is so hard for you to grasp. I clearly went through the analysis. Explain to me why that is wrong? Use clear, simple words please, let's not muddy the waters, eh?

If a tree falls in a forest, it doesn't care whether you hear it or not.

 

[SaltyNuts]

If a tree falls in a forest, it doesn't care whether you hear it or not.

And.....?

 

[who?]

Where the raindrops fall on the sidewalk.

 

[SaltyNuts]

Where the raindrops fall on the sidewalk.

No, you could reverse engineer that. Not truly random.

 

[BD231]

 

[BarkingGhostar]

The weak nuclear force.

 

[SaltyNuts]

What do you mean BarkingGhostar? The force is consistent as to what it is, so far as I know. Do you mean that the VALUE of the force is random in that it could have been any number, but it appears extremely finely tuned to permit the existance of galaxies, stars, planets and life? Almost like it, along with the other fundamental forces of nature, were purposefully set to what they are by someone or some thing? That is a different topic, I've tried to explain to the bafoons on here but they just don't get it.

 

[JulesMaximus]

An asteroid striking a planet?

 

[SaltyNuts]

An asteroid striking a planet?

Not sure if serious...

 

[Yakk]

Yakk, you are definately thinking along the lines I am. However, if you argue that NOTHING is random, EVERYTHING is deterministic, then you've essentially shot yourself in the foot because there cannot be LOGIC behind that argument - you just posted it because you were destined to post it, not because it is logical or true. You've created a paradox essentially.

But your questions are right on point!

I was waiting for that reply

When dealing with dependant phenomenon, we assume a linear experience of space/time the way we experience it every day. What if we were to experience time in a non-linear fashion? Dependant phenomenon would not be linear and could not be interpreted that way. In a non-linear time model would anything depend on anything? Our brain's interpretation of the space around us could be very limited.

 

[SaltyNuts]

Thanks Yakk. Interesting, but I'm not quite sure quite what to make of it. Sounds kind of "out there". So, is there any example of known non-linear time? If nothing depends on anything, it just sounds like a bunch of mush haha. Thanks!

 

[Red Squirrel]

The background static of the universe?

Technically that is predictable, it is produced by processes that were produced by other processes, eventually you can break it down to a specific process that happened in a specific way at the creation/birth of the universe. A seed if you will. You would then be able to figure out all the other possibilities based on slightly changing that process.

Even a bingo ball machine is predictable, the balls were placed in the machine a specific order in a specific way and landed because of that, the rest is all determined based on that and other fixed environmental factors.

There's no such thing as random man, it's all based on a single action that cascaded it's way down. The universe and everything is based on a single seed, just like Minecraft. *mind explodes*

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Technically that is predictable, it is produced by processes that were produced by other processes, eventually you can break it down to a specific process that happened in a specific way at the creation/birth of the universe. A seed if you will. You would then be able to figure out all the other possibilities based on slightly changing that process.

Even a bingo ball machine is predictable, the balls were placed in the machine a specific order in a specific way and landed because of that, the rest is all determined based on that and other fixed environmental factors.

There's no such thing as random man, it's all based on a single action that cascaded it's way down. The universe and everything is based on a single seed, just like Minecraft. *mind explodes*

Deterministic systems break down around the atomic level. Nuclear physics and stuff is based on probability.