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
undetectable
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to