Is randomness really random?
hmmm yesss but maybe no hmmmmmmmmmm
Why is radioactive decay random?
>>11128519 Your question is equivalent to the question if human brains can be simulated using turing machines. Today's usual assumption is 'yes'. It is very unlikely to be 'no'.
>>11128568 >Your question is equivalent to the question if human brains can be simulated using turing machines. Everything can be simulated by a turing machine with infinite tape. It is 0% chance 'no'.
>>11128545 Quantum fluctuations
>>11128519 >Is randomness really random? No, randomness follows the laws of distribution, otherwise we couldn´t operationalize randomness
>>11128545 Is it?
>>11128519 Only apparent because we don't know the full initial conditions. Even in quantum mechanics. The meme about quantum mechanics being random is room temperature coping.
>>11128519 Yes
>>11128804 Open a book, faggot
>>11128857 Shut your mouth and calculate.
>>11128519 Random just means what you can't predict.
>>11128857 Please, explain yourself
If things weren't random or not contrived by someone or something that would mean that our universe itself would necessarily exist based on fundamental logic itself need to exist in the state that it does. That means that some guy is eating buttered toast without a shirt right now somewhere because it is required based on logic itself.
>>11128519
>>11128519 *hold sup spork*
>>11128519 Sometimes
>>11128576 Actually it is not known if we could utilize a machine that can describe more than a turing machine. Conquering true randomness means harnessing all real numbers via a machine that is describeable using natural numbers.
There is actually nothing random in physics. The problem is that we can at any given time only observe an infitesimally small slice of the full picture, that is the multiverse, that we can't make good predictions about what will happen.