There is no true randomness in the machine. Random is usually calculated based on milleseconds or maybe nano seconds (I haven't programmed in a while). Online casinos have to watch out for hackers getting in sync with the calculator and beating their games. But what about in nature? If I walk through a mud puddle and splash; are the water droplets spread at random?
No they're spread out in accordance with the motion and all it's components, of your foot. Physics rules the world. But computers are supossed to be able to randomly generate things.
How can something not exist? That aside physics involves chance, and random choice. Our Eloquint universe gives a good example of this. If someone picks up the habit of throwing darts then he is going to start out bad. Let's say 1/10 hits on average is a bulls eye. So ever chance he throws a dart he has a 10% of a bullseye. But now he practices and it is rises to 5/10 so he has 50% of making a bullseye. This is situational though, but it is still a form of randomosity (my word). I forget what I'm trying to say is called in physics.
No one knows if anything can ever be truly random. The closest thing that I know of that is random lies in quantum mechanics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_chaos Quantum systems are starting to get used more now for security means. But the more we know about quantum systems, they may seem determined as well.
Simple answer: Yes, randomness do exist. More complex: Anything not predictable is per definition random. Ofcourse many seemingly random events are based upon systems of more or less predictable events. As such it is only pseudo-random. But unless you know all the underlying causations, it really does not matter in practical terms. But within QM it would very much seem actual randomness occurs. Take for example the half-life of any radioactive matter. Now, we know the mean time it should take for a given lump of such material to half its energy output (EM radiation), but at any given time there seems to be no system of actually exactly determine what atom in that lump of mass that suddenly gains equilibrium and lowers an electrons orbit for an EM outburst. Or just gets rid of a few particles to the same effect. Outburst EM radiation (surplus stored energy) and gain a higher order of equilibrium. There is no system to it. Or at least as we know. Yet. Just one of those not satisfactory answered questions I guess I really hate to admit this, but I believe in free will, and as such there also must exist actual randomness. Not saying without causation, just that some variable in that causation can lean the one or other way without any more influence than absolutely nothing. And seeing as I think the universe basically is nothing (*) that came from nothing, why the hell not *) It all equals exactly zero. The tension between positive and negative charge. The balance between matter and energy. Everything equals out to nil, zero. We are riding on a wave of disturbance in this nothing. The wave equals time. Nothing from before exist, only this crest. And how that behaves determine the next moment in time, or rather, the wave of nothing we surf upon.
no, that actually has nothing to do with random events. acquiring skill doesn't make something random. i think zylark has the right idea of what it means to be random. also to exist means to be, but also continue to be. that is to say my footprint in a puddle doesn't exist until i step in it. getting a "bull's eye" in darts doesn't exist until i get one.
I got no evidence for this, but I will contend that evolution is very much dependant upon actual randomness. Systems working with or against eachother resulting in complexity that far exceed the sum of the parts. What work, works. What development do given enough time. Chemicals working with and against energy. Who are not to say we are the universe? We can at least contemplate it. Let's have a look'see. And since the universe made us, why not others? Same rules apply everywhere. As such, and once more, we are earthlings. All of us.
To me our understanding of random comes down to our own personal brain makeup, as everybody is capable of understanding varying degree's of the abstract. There are two main centers that you need to talk about when dealing with this subject, the neocortex, and the r-complex (reptillian complex). The r-complex has very little ability to handle the abstract, as it thinks in terms of placing things in order, and finding patterns and repeating them. This can be seen as the industrialized nature of man, and is a serial way of thinking. 'A' comes before 'B', then is 'C', and 1+1=2. However, the neocortex, which is stimulated while smoking pot, has a very different makeup. It is the center for creativity and abstract thought. It allows you to understand the arts, and appreciate what random truly means. Random has nothing to do with an ordered chaos, and like jazz, and to a lesser extent rock and roll, it has the quality of being new and different every time you hear it. If you truly choose to categorize wether something can ever truly be random, it is because you are using your wrong mind to understand it. The reptillian mind can never understand random, as it is cold calculating, methodical, it chooses to believe that there are patterns when no patterns exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-complex According to this, the R-Complex is an area of the brainstem; and the neo-cortex is another name for the cerebral cortex. I think, since the cerebral cortex makes up the majority of our brains, that saying what job it has and weed stimulating it causing certain effects, is way too generalized.
If you don't believe randomness exists than you believe everything is arrayed in an organized systematization which is basically saying everything is constituted for a reason. And I believe that that's not very eviendent...
No it means you're a sick puppy. Cmon, someone seeming to be of the faithful type not believing in purpose for everything? There is a reason you typed that post. There is a reason you come to this forum. There's a reason you smoke. Try to think deeper into what causes your behavior. It is of course not necessarily some grandiose purpose that explains everything-- just a reason such as having a drink of water because you are thirsty; and you are thirsty because your body needs water to continue operating, so your nervous system was activated telling you to be thirsty. And so on. Perhaps... but then again maybe you were looking at something and free associated to get that thought. Free association always has some sort of physical link.
sure there are purposes for even the littlest of things, the nervous system is complicated as fuck. But I don't believe every little thing happens for a specific reason at all. Is every single microscopic atomic particle bounded together for a purpose, you're telling me there is a reason why I broke my cell phone the other week? why I walked in that puddle and got my Nike shox and socks wet? I don't think every little thing happens for a reason...is that so hard to believe? It would be easier to have an explanation for more things if that was the case how? free association n. I think traumatic experiences and things can reveal unconscious thoughts and emotions toward free association. but it's not always dependant on something physical. Sometimes you feel just because you feel, there doesn't have to be a physical link between someone feeling depressed. Depression can happen for whatever reason, and 90% of the time there is no specific reasoning.
Scary isn't it?! Go deep enough and you meet a wall. Some call that god. It is where there are no more answers, just more questions. It is where you can give no more reason. Where "It was a good idea at the time!" was an entirely legitimate mode of thought. Personally I blame genes. Blessed are the instincts
You weren't paying enough attention, because you were bored, and relaxed your hand just enough to drop it? It rained, the puddle was there in an area you were walking in, your guard was down and did not look for the puddle at the time and stepped in it? Yes, it is. Like I said, it doesn't have to be some grandiose reason-- like you had to break your cell phone so you would use your girlfriends home phone one day, only to pick up right before the phone audibly rang, and without realizing it talked to a guy who turns out is cheating with her or something.(that's off the top of my head btw) It could just be little reasons with no higher purpose, only that they are there and the events are connected. Ah but There is a physical connection while freely associating, in that, the neurons interact in a way that the closest related object comes to mind. Well, depression is getting into the category of Psychology(my future profession). Depression is caused by an overflow or blockage of certain neurotransmitters. There are many reasons why someone may become depressed, but there is a consistent and ever present cause-- stress. It is indeed scary. One minute you know exactly what you're doing; the next minute you may find yourself without any reason for doing anything at all. Smoking at the movies while the trailers are rolling is usually the scariest shit in the world for me lol.
haha those are guesses and in no way can be considered reasons. yeah could be.... exactly connections, but they don't have to be physical, notice how the word is no where in the definition... That is a theory. Tell me If we know the cause of depression than why is it that 70% of the people on anti-depressants still feel depressed?
Well of course they were guesses; however, they are possible reasons. That's because it's a simple dictionary.com definition and the brain isn't as well understood as it could be. But what else would you have free-association be? Is it some spontaneous, uncontrolled(random) thought that comes from some consciousness? I think it would be better to go with evidence and say that it's a relation of neurons-- one set of neurons activated by a relation to the previous set. I dunno; possibly bad psychiatrists. I think you'll find most people will say clinical psychologists are more helpful than psychiatrists. It seems like most psychiatrists sleep until it's time to dish out pills. If someone doesn't get a reliable recommendation to a psychiatrist, then I would see a psychologist as well as a psychiatrist for sessions and pills.