I think you're fooling yourself if you think a non-determinsitic process is comprehensible. AG
On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 5:46:09 PM UTC-6 [email protected] wrote: > > > On 4/16/2022 4:24 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 5:03:55 PM UTC-6 [email protected] wrote: > >> >> >> On 4/16/2022 2:58 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 1:44:09 PM UTC-6 [email protected] wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 4/16/2022 8:34 AM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> Of course I favour the first version of the argument, using the >>>> many-world formulation of collapse, to avoid the "God plays dice" >>>> nightmare. >>>> >>>> >>>> Why this fear of true randomness? We have all kinds of classical >>>> randomness we just attributed to "historical accident". Would it really >>>> make any difference it were due to inherent quantum randomness? Albrect >>>> and Phillips have made an argument that there is quantum randomness even >>>> nominally classical dynamics. https://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0953v3 >>>> >>> >>> True randomness implies *unintelligibility*; that is, no existing >>> physical process for *causing *the results of measurements. AG >>> >>> >>> "It happened at random in accordance with a Poisson process with rate >>> parameter 0.123" seems perfectly intelligible to me. There is a physical >>> description of the system with allows you to predict that, including the >>> value of the rate parameter. It only differs from deterministic physics in >>> that it doesn't say when the event happens. >>> >>> I always wonder if people who have this dogmatic rejection of randomness >>> understand that quantum randomness is very narrow. Planck's constant is >>> very small and it introduces randomness, but with a definite distribution >>> and on certain variables. It's not "anything can happen" as it seems some >>> people fear. >>> >>> Brent >>> >> >> Every single trial is unintelligible. AG >> >> >> I find that remark unintelligble. I don't think "intelligble" means what >> you think it means. >> >> Brent >> > > It means there exists no definable physical process to account for the > outcome of a single trial. AG > > > That's what is usually called "non-deterministic". "Unintelligble" means > not understandable or incomprehensible. > > Brent > > > -- 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/f873f226-b8f7-40db-9036-ceb8b31427een%40googlegroups.com.
