4 ms·

> "You mustn’t misread it, we’re not asserting these particles make decisions, we’re not saying they have any consciousness. What happens is they act, they indu

> "You mustn’t misread it, we’re not asserting these particles make decisions, we’re not saying they have any consciousness. What happens is they act, they indubitably act, and which action the particle does is free in this sense, it is not a predetermined function of the past. And that’s not the same as randomness, oh dear me no!" Why not? Couldn't seem to find a reason for this assertion. If the behavior of a particle is not predetermined, how is it not random?

popnroll 8y ago
I don't know if this adds anything to your comment; The input of a program is neither predetermined nor random. If there is an input "out of our reality", then our reality would not be predetermined nor would it be random. (Which makes sense for the simulation hypothesis, which I enjoy having that conversation with my colleagues)
- joe_the_user 8y ago
  It's easy to say X part of a system is "neither predetermined nor random" within a system defined as open (like a computer program or even a machine with a dial that can be set by an operator). When a system is closed, things become harder. Chaitin's number represents (very roughly) the structure of any complete mathematical system and it can be shown to be random in the sense of Kolmogorov.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- vokep 8y ago
  but that just means there is more logical (predetermined) action 'out of our reality' The input of a program is predetermined by the physics that drive input to reach the program. (or it is from nowhere and is truly random, though I doubt this is the case)
  - madeuptempacct 8y ago
    This is a good explanation. We are saying we give the function x and y, but we can't guarantee that z comes out EVEN if we control for everything we are aware of. Thank you. Still, I don't understand any of this even vaguely past the platitudes.
dplavery92 8y ago
Conway talks a little about this distinction in his talk at Google, at around 40 minutes: https://youtu.be/r1bDSlt1n9M?t=2401 https://youtu.be/r1bDSlt1n9M?t=2401 The crux is that randomness is indistinguishable from a large collection of pre-determined hidden variables (imagine rolling all the dice for all of the outcomes of Physics ahead of time), but not all of the behaviors of quantum mechanics can be accounted for by (local) hidden variables (Bell's theorem.)

popnroll 8y ago

I don't know if this adds anything to your comment; The input of a program is neither predetermined nor random. If there is an input "out of our reality", then our reality would not be predetermined nor would it be random. (Which makes sense for the simulation hypothesis, which I enjoy having that conversation with my colleagues)

joe_the_user 8y ago
It's easy to say X part of a system is "neither predetermined nor random" within a system defined as open (like a computer program or even a machine with a dial that can be set by an operator). When a system is closed, things become harder. Chaitin's number represents (very roughly) the structure of any complete mathematical system and it can be shown to be random in the sense of Kolmogorov.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
vokep 8y ago
but that just means there is more logical (predetermined) action 'out of our reality' The input of a program is predetermined by the physics that drive input to reach the program. (or it is from nowhere and is truly random, though I doubt this is the case)
- madeuptempacct 8y ago
  This is a good explanation. We are saying we give the function x and y, but we can't guarantee that z comes out EVEN if we control for everything we are aware of. Thank you. Still, I don't understand any of this even vaguely past the platitudes.

dplavery92 8y ago

Conway talks a little about this distinction in his talk at Google, at around 40 minutes: https://youtu.be/r1bDSlt1n9M?t=2401 https://youtu.be/r1bDSlt1n9M?t=2401 The crux is that randomness is indistinguishable from a large collection of pre-determined hidden variables (imagine rolling all the dice for all of the outcomes of Physics ahead of time), but not all of the behaviors of quantum mechanics can be accounted for by (local) hidden variables (Bell's theorem.)