IJesusChrist a dit:
you don't understand random... in order to make that graph, you would either need an equation (which gives predictable outcomes) or you are measuring things.
Everything we can measure is based on physical laws that we can (or will be able to) describe, and are not random.
Unless you believe in Q.M. B.S.
i believe this one is measuring something. keep in mind that "physical laws" are still theory as far as science is concerned, so how does that validate the sentence? "everything we can measure (with man-made units) is based on physical laws (that are theoretical and man-made)." and what do you mean by will be able to? that leaves a very large opening. not trying to be an asshole, but science IS fallible by definition. it's the best information we've got
right now, and is not claimed to be truth ever, only by evangelics, when describing their opposition.. im surprised you said that.
IJesusChrist a dit:
If there is no randomness, everything can be explained
how do you figure we'll be able to explain everything? im trying to be very honest, i hope you dont think im being snide..
IJesusChrist a dit:
However, if there is random events, nothing can be explained, and all is only based on statistics
nothing HAS been explained, not accurately. theories. we have at least 3 popular ones, none of which
really work when it gets down to it. why are you seeing in such terms "if its not black then it must be white! if not one theory, then another!" i think order is just as non existant as chaos, and
that is the illusion. neither exist. they are only approximations, perfections created and designed by human minds. by that, i dont think that there
can ever be a unified theory, it's just impossible to pin down something thats infinite, and never precise, especially with imprecise instruments (physical tools, human brain, etc). only math is precise, but like i said, it is not real, its man made ideals. so no, i dont believe in qm 100%, but i think it's useful. i think all of the theories out there are
useful just not necessarily true. imo i dont think we'll ever recreate the universe in an equation form, it will always be too complex.
IJesusChrist a dit:
... Random is an indescribable sequence of numbers. The numbers in pi appear random, but they follow a ratio. The sequence itself may seem random, but it's a logical path. It's base 10 for a number that repeats indefinitely, pi can be represented as 1, in base pi... Random is a hard concept to grasp, and if you can show me a process that gives completely random results I will forward you whatever you want.
im not trying to argue that first part, but i
can however, present to you a string of numbers all day long that you will never be able to predict future numbers with...? you could plausibly call that random by definition, correct?
IJesusChrist a dit:
You can definitely experience time, but in determinism, you are only conceiving the past
if you can only conceive the past, then you'd have to be conceiving it from the future for it to be considered past, no? a "path" is itself an expression of time. time is a vector, by space expanding, time is valid, because they are all the same 1 fundamental. energy. energy is space and time combined, and everything is made of energy, so i dont see how you can validate determinism in this climate. i'd like you to try though, really. im interested in trying to see your logic, but i can't right now, too many holes for my mind to peer through..