4 ms·

I don't think this is proven. Can you elaborate?

• godelski 8y ago
  It is definitely not proven. If it was we'd have a completely different view of quantum mechanics. This was even quite a big debate among quantum physicists in the 20th century and talked about in the beginning of every quantum book (at least that I've seen).
• jjeaff 8y ago
  Well, if you have enough data you can predict anything. A dice roll is "random", unless you know the starting position of the die, mass, size, air currents, force of throw, on and on. With perfect data, you could predict the outcome. Thus, it isn't 'really' random.
  • godelski 8y ago
    Except that you're wrong. > unless you know the starting position of the die, mass, size, air currents, force of throw, on and on. With perfect data, you could predict the outcome. This is what Einstein believed, but he was wrong (quote about God doesn't play dice). Physics uses the Copenhagen Interpretation, which means that we have probability waves until we measure and the wave collapses. You may have also heard of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (read: "There is a resolution to what we can measure"). The fact is that you can't know all your conditions. That's why we say things are random. Because there is a probability distribution to all these constraints (even if we had a device that could measure with "infinite" precision. The problem is that the universe itself hides information from us. There's great sources for true random numbers. White noise (in atmospheric data), particle decays, particle motion (yes, even particle motion), etc. Tldr: There's a lot of random stuff.