Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.talk.creationism > #398504

Re: rolling dice is not random?

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Followups directed to: alt.talk.creationism, alt.atheism, alt.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.physics, sci.skeptic

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/21/2015 08:52 PM, nature bats last wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 2:47:53 PM UTC-7, Dale wrote:
>> assuming determinism means nothing is random, everything is bounded by
>> cause and effect
>>
>> to roll dice they start in a particular position in the hand, they exit
>> the hand in a position, their path to the environment to the table
>> bounds them to cause and effect physics, their landing and final roll on
>> the table is bound by the environmental cause and effect physics
>>
>> someone ought to construct a physical dice rolling/receiving apparatus
>> to prove the point, rolling dice is too often used as an excuse for
>> random existence
>>
>
> .
> .> the only empirical evidence of randomness in quantum physics is the
> .> Casimir Effect.
>
> Radioactive decay.



   Which slit a particle goes  through
> in the double slit experiment.  The Schroedinger equation,
> which gives only probabilities, not predictions.  Quantum
> physics if full of examples of randomness.  I'm afraid I'm not seeing
> how the Casimir effect is particularly an example.
>
> .> which does not create a true vacuum for virtual
> .> particles, zero-point energy, etc. to be observed
>
> .> things like Faraday Cages aren't true vacuums
>
> Faraday cages aren't supposed to be any kind of vacuum.
> Instead they're metal containers which intercept incoming
> radiation, generally lower frequency radiation, and shunt it
> off to ground.  Generally not solid but mesh, as the only
> requirement is that the holes be small enough to block
> wavelengths above a given frequency.
>
>
>> even the apparatus introduces something else into a vacuum
>> things like neutrinos can enter the apparatus and attempted vacuum
>> probably more stuff from more scholarly people
>>
>> treating something as random, or assuming it is effectively random, does
>> not make it random, secondly does not make randomness part of determinism
>>
>> before you can address that something is random, you have to address
>> whether random exists
>>
>> by deduction, if random exists then random does whatever
>>
>
> ,> there is no inductive reasoning, if something appears random apply
> ,> statistically designed experiments with all the appropriate control
> ,> variables to something indescribable by statistics until you agree that
> ,> randomness cannot be described statistically or out of stubbornness
> ,> devote your life to the cause
>
> That sort of thing has been done with radioactive decay.  In fact
> there are true random number generators based on radioactive
> decay.  Heck, they're even online any more.  Here's one:
>
>      https://www.fourmilab.ch/hotbits/
>
>> note, all assumes logic, if illogic exists then random may do many
>> things, and many things may do many things
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dale
>> http://www.dalekelly.org


I'll give a brief reply now and get back to you

choose one of the two, not both, randomness or determinism,

unless time is a continuum and random things need no cause to exist, 
finite time binds the end to the beginning and random things have no 
beginning/cause, cyclical time is sort of like finite because its last 
effect is the first cause and no cause even a first can be the cause of 
something random

I'm not a determinist, at least the concept of free will is around, I 
might not have it, but a Supreme Being would, are concepts part of the 
set of things that exist and what role do concepts play? if they only 
play into valuable metaphors/parables why not be light on such?

-- 
Dale
http://www.dalekelly.org

Back to alt.talk.creationism | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-21 17:47 -0400
  Re: rolling dice is not random? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-22 09:45 +1100
    Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-21 20:12 -0400
      Re: rolling dice is not random? Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-22 12:04 +1100
        Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-21 22:21 -0400
          Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-22 18:56 +1100
            Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net> - 2015-10-22 03:09 -0700
            Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-22 16:36 -0400
              Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2015-10-22 23:49 -0400
            Re: The Ensemble Interpretation. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-23 11:32 +1100
              Re: The Ensemble Interpretation. Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-22 20:40 -0400
                Re: The Ensemble Interpretation. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-23 11:50 +1100
              Re: Quantum Mechanics is statistical, not real. lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-24 11:21 -0700
              Re: Quantum Mechanics is statistical, not real. lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-24 11:34 -0700
          Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. The BORG <borg@future.com> - 2015-10-24 15:27 +0100
            Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-24 11:13 -0700
            Re: "Life" is virtual, not real. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-10-25 13:54 +1100
        Re: rolling dice is not random? lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-23 12:04 -0700
        Re: rolling dice is not random? lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-23 12:07 -0700
      Re: rolling dice is not random? lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-23 11:54 -0700
  Re: rolling dice is not random? bilgat@m.nu - 2015-10-21 18:46 -0500
    Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-21 20:13 -0400
  Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-21 22:48 -0400
    Re: rolling dice is not random? John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2015-10-22 09:57 +0100
      Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-22 16:32 -0400
        Re: rolling dice is not random? John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2015-10-22 22:53 +0100
          Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-22 19:36 -0400
            Re: rolling dice is not random? John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2015-10-23 10:26 +0100
              Re: rolling dice is not random? "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@sci.research.careers.i.have.shorter.stature.can.i.grow.taller> - 2015-10-24 09:56 +0000
  Re: rolling dice is not random? Hans Wussel <hanswussel@openmailbox.org> - 2015-10-22 19:40 +0200
    Re: rolling dice is not random? Dale <dale@dalekelly.org> - 2015-10-22 16:38 -0400
  Re: rolling dice is not random? lucaspa <lucaspa@optonline.net> - 2015-10-23 11:42 -0700

csiph-web