Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-11-2013, 10:38 PM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 09:19 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(11-11-2013 08:59 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  There is no such thing as 'random' only the illusion of randomness. We live in a deterministic universe to large and complex to allow for the prediction of the mundane movements of us bags of flesh and water, but which determines them none the less.

Even your computer cannot create truely random numbers and instead it uses clock cycles to fake randomness.

No, Spiral, no!

Did you even read all the stuff I just wrote about quantum?
Tongue

Why would anybody do that? It's like homework. Big Grin

Besides, I just cheated and used the mathematical definition which requires infinity, thus, no; and counters Heywood's noise, which is the whole purpose of the exercise. Smartass

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2013, 10:51 PM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 10:28 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(11-11-2013 12:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  Others have already stated this. Non-determinacy may be intrinsic at some level.

That is the consensus view of quantum physicists is it not? The Laplacian idea that randomness == ignorance is not a widely supported view.

I did not say that randomness was ignorance. Dodgy

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2013, 11:12 PM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 10:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-11-2013 10:28 PM)Chippy Wrote:  That is the consensus view of quantum physicists is it not? The Laplacian idea that randomness == ignorance is not a widely supported view.

I did not say that randomness was ignorance. Dodgy

Pretty sure he was agreeing with you, Chas.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2013, 11:43 PM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 11:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(11-11-2013 10:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  I did not say that randomness was ignorance. Dodgy

Pretty sure he was agreeing with you, Chas.

I was.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2013, 11:53 PM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 11:43 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(11-11-2013 11:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Pretty sure he was agreeing with you, Chas.

I was.

My bad. Might be the Percocet. Blink

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2013, 12:02 AM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
@HJ:

I watched Polis'(?) video and he is claiming that there is no such thing as randomness, he is repeating Laplace's idea that randomness is an epistemic rather than ontological phenomenon. So there is no die thrower according to Polis. He is just repeating his earlier argument about the uniformity of the universe and the need for a god to produce the uniformity.

Not being a physicist I will adopt the consensus view of physicists (as I do on all matters in which I am unable or unwilling to gain expertise) that randomness is an objective feature of the universe, an ontological category. I agree that this randomnes--like everything else--needs explaining but I don't see any grounds for ceding the issue to a deity. Quantum theory is less than 100 years old. In the context of human history 100 years is miniscule. The history of science suggests that we should work on it a little longer before invoking a supernatural origin.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2013, 12:02 AM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 11:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  My bad. Might be the Percocet. Blink

I wish I had Percocet.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2013, 03:30 AM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(11-11-2013 04:17 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You are a dishonest to say "among your other errors", and not have the balls to say what they are. I am not "conflating" anything, (funny, as Chippy says, how people NEVER use a word, and all of a sudden it appears in a post in rebuttal. You are VERY suggestible, maybe that's why you are a belieber ?
The rate of decay is nothing more than instances, summed over time. What do you think the rate actually measures anyway ? If the decay of a group of Uranium or Plutonium atoms was "completely random, there would be no radioactivity (predictably) no Radiation Therapy, no nuclear bombs, and no nuclear power.

Suppose you awake and find yourself trapped in a strange room with no man doors, a toilet, and a drinking fountain. On one wall is a button and below that button is a small chute. You press the button and a tiny edible puck comes down the chute. You press it again and a tiny edible puck comes down the chute. You press it again and you get shocked.

50 years later, your still in the room and you've learned something about the button. You've learned you can never predict when it will dispense an edible puck or when it dispenses a shock. There is no discernible pattern. It is completely random. However on thing you observe is that on average about once every six times you get shocked by the button.

Its not hard to figure out what is going on here. Every time you press the button a six sided dice(or something equivalent) is being rolled and if a particular result is achieved...you get shocked. Completely random events can occur at predictable rates.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2013, 03:47 AM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(12-11-2013 03:30 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  ...
Completely random events can occur at predictable rates.

Yabut...

What da good folks here have been trying to point out to you is that even the outcome of a rolled die can be predicted if we knew (and have the technology / processing oomph to generate and calculate) all the input variables.

That would be Newtonian die / dice / dices.

Quantum die? That's too hard. I'm not going there.



Quantum Die Harder.
Starring Bruce Willis.
In Movie Theatres near you.

(or not, depending on which dimension(s) of which universe(s) you are travelling from).

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
12-11-2013, 03:49 AM
RE: Who or what throws the dice for atheists?
(12-11-2013 12:02 AM)Chippy Wrote:  Not being a physicist I will adopt the consensus view of physicists (as I do on all matters in which I am unable or unwilling to gain expertise) that randomness is an objective feature of the universe, an ontological category. I agree that this randomnes--like everything else--needs explaining but I don't see any grounds for ceding the issue to a deity. Quantum theory is less than 100 years old. In the context of human history 100 years is miniscule. The history of science suggests that we should work on it a little longer before invoking a supernatural origin.

Its not proof of God....and Polis isn't making the argument that I am making. I included it so people could have some reference to probability and randomness.

If you think about it, If God exists, what are the minimum functions you would expect God to fulfill in the world? Creator would be one, and right behind that would be dice thrower. If the dice thrower is supernatural, it is not unexpected then that the physics would say the world is just random on the deepest levels and there are no hidden physical variables. This isn't God of the Gaps.....but rather God of expectations. We see what we would expect to see if supernatural God exists.

We generally acknowledge that randomness is a function of ignorance(Polis explains this)....We all acknowledge this until we get we get to the quantum level....then suddenly its randomness just is. I have a hard time accepting randomness just is...it doesn't jive with any of my experiences with randomness....which is random events always require a randomizer or dice thrower.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: