On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 8:20:04 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > > "Good old classical chance" is just quantifying ignorance. At a > fundamental level there must be either inherent chance, QM, or determinism. > > Brent > > That's true.
*Stochastic processes* [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_process] are, primarily, "approximate" models of phenomena that are extremely complex (too complex to model), but still deterministic. It is assumed that only (possible) source of *actual stochasticity *is from quantum events, but science news stories about how large molecules can exhibit quantum behavior bleeds that randomness into the "macro" world. I think the only alternative to "true" randomness is the MWI, which physicists like SeanCarroll like (*"The Many-Worlds formulation of quantum mechanics Is probably correct"*, June 30, 2014). Ironically, the word "probably" is in his assertion. William James said aversion to randomness is superstition. @philipthrift -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3c4a2c00-647c-4759-a54e-ed186ce6703a%40googlegroups.com.
