On 26 February 2015 at 23:05, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 25 Feb 2015, at 19:36, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> You've got to think what "random" means, nothing made "it" happen, "it" >> is a brute fact.. > > >> > How can you know that. This is equivalent with saying "we will not try >> to understand". >> > > If there is something to understand about why X happened, if there is a > reason for it, then X is not random. You've got to think what "random" > means. > > Counter-example: step 3 of UDA. You are still stuck by this? > > The iterated self-duplication gives an example of an infinity of first > person random events completely explained in a third person deterministic > theory. > > The MWI, for example. Although as Brent says it still has problems (but all interpretations of QM have problems). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
