On Feb 11, 7:32 pm, Brent Meeker <meeke...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

>  From a purely mathematical viewpoint, there is no way to show that a
> finite string of symbols is truly random.  All experimental results are
> finite - hence my "simplistic" comment.

Yeah, but information theoretical randomness isn't quite the same
thing as
(meta)physical randomness. The latter means lack of sufficient
causality. That
can be argued in a non-information-theoretical, non-algorithmic way.
For instance, it could be argued that Occam's razor weighs against
hidden variables.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to