3 ms·

Philisophically, you can't say either way. For example, consider the case where the kernel scheduler uses random numbers from a hardware random number generator

Philisophically, you can't say either way. For example, consider the case where the kernel scheduler uses random numbers from a hardware random number generator which uses quantum uncertainty. Since physics doesn't know whether or not quantum mechanics is deterministic, we can't say whether or not this system is deterministic.

philwelch 16y ago
I was assuming a deterministic scheduler, but sure. I wasn't aware that hardware RNG's were commonly used by kernel schedulers.
- Dylan16807 16y ago
  If the cores aren't at the same speed it can probably happen.
hasenj 16y ago
> Since physics doesn't know whether or not quantum mechanics is deterministic Just because we don't know the laws that govern quantum mechanics doesn't mean they're not there.
- Natsu 16y ago
  Knowing the laws wouldn't necessarily make the system deterministic, though. You'd need hidden variables (and non-local ones, to boot). As best we can tell, sometimes certain information doesn't exist so you may very well get something truly random that averages out to something that looks like what we think of as deterministic, classical behavior.
  - hasenj 16y ago
    I would say there are just so many unknown variables (probably impossible to know), to the extent that people can get away with pretending that it's non-deterministic, when it actually is deterministic.
    - Locke1689 16y ago
      <former physics minor pedantry> Which is why there's no way to be certain that it is or is not deterministic. According to current knowledge, quantum uncertainty is not deterministic -- solving the Schroedinger wavefunction for hydrogen, for example, shows no way to predict the future location of an electron. The best we can do is a probability distribution. If, however, as the parent mentions, hidden variables do exist behind quantum mechanics, it could turn out that it was deterministic all along. </pedantry>
      - hasenj 16y ago
        > "Equation X doesn't help us understand phenomena Y" How does that even remotely suggest non-determinism? > If, however, as the parent mentions, hidden variables do exist behind quantum mechanics, Isn't it obvious that we're not even remotely close to knowing everything? The uncertainty principles simply suggests that we perhaps can never grasp or understand all the details; it doesn't in any way imply that these unknown details don't exist. It'd be foolish to think that "because we can't predict it therefore it's non-deterministic".

philwelch 16y ago

I was assuming a deterministic scheduler, but sure. I wasn't aware that hardware RNG's were commonly used by kernel schedulers.

Dylan16807 16y ago
If the cores aren't at the same speed it can probably happen.

hasenj 16y ago

> Since physics doesn't know whether or not quantum mechanics is deterministic Just because we don't know the laws that govern quantum mechanics doesn't mean they're not there.

Natsu 16y ago
Knowing the laws wouldn't necessarily make the system deterministic, though. You'd need hidden variables (and non-local ones, to boot). As best we can tell, sometimes certain information doesn't exist so you may very well get something truly random that averages out to something that looks like what we think of as deterministic, classical behavior.
- hasenj 16y ago
  I would say there are just so many unknown variables (probably impossible to know), to the extent that people can get away with pretending that it's non-deterministic, when it actually is deterministic.
  - Locke1689 16y ago
    <former physics minor pedantry> Which is why there's no way to be certain that it is or is not deterministic. According to current knowledge, quantum uncertainty is not deterministic -- solving the Schroedinger wavefunction for hydrogen, for example, shows no way to predict the future location of an electron. The best we can do is a probability distribution. If, however, as the parent mentions, hidden variables do exist behind quantum mechanics, it could turn out that it was deterministic all along. </pedantry>
    - hasenj 16y ago
      > "Equation X doesn't help us understand phenomena Y" How does that even remotely suggest non-determinism? > If, however, as the parent mentions, hidden variables do exist behind quantum mechanics, Isn't it obvious that we're not even remotely close to knowing everything? The uncertainty principles simply suggests that we perhaps can never grasp or understand all the details; it doesn't in any way imply that these unknown details don't exist. It'd be foolish to think that "because we can't predict it therefore it's non-deterministic".