Re: The Barren Desolate Wasteland of Superdeterminism

From: Joe Dees (joedees@addall.com)
Date: Mon Jan 28 2002 - 10:56:47 GMT

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: sex and the single meme"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id LAA03759 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 28 Jan 2002 11:01:55 GMT
    Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 02:56:47 -0800
    Message-Id: <200201281056.g0SAulk08460@mail21.bigmailbox.com>
    Content-Type: text/plain
    Content-Disposition: inline
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
    X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116)
    X-Originating-Ip: [65.80.160.154]
    From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: The Barren Desolate Wasteland of Superdeterminism
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    ('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)

    > "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com> memetics@mmu.ac.uk Re: The Barren Desolate Wasteland of SuperdeterminismDate: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 07:48:42 -0800
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >
    >>
    >> > On the randomness thing: true randomness really does exist. They come in
    >> > the practical guise of random number generators based on atomic decay.
    >>
    >>Hm, so how can you show that the atomic decay does not follow
    >>certain physical rules which are just to complex to understand at
    >>the moment? I could show some random number generator on my
    >>computer to someone and he'd say "yes the numbers which
    >>appear are random, there's no rule to be observed", but when you
    >>look at the sourcecode of the "random" number generator you
    >>realize that there actually IS a calculating process behind, just to
    >>complex to conclude it from just observing the outcome.
    >>
    >Most people use the word "random" to mean unpredictable. A superior being
    >might be able to compute at a level beyond that of humans, and therefore
    >would treat our random events as predictable. To him/her they would not be
    >random. So "random" says more about the ability of people to predict than
    >it says about the event being observed. Also, once it happens, a random
    >event is no longer random. If you draw a straight flush in poker, the odds
    >against it happening no longer apply and everyone who calculated the odds
    >for their betting strategy is gong to loose their money.
    >
    >Grant
    >
    As Heisenberg showed us, it is impossible to calculate both the position and the momentum of an electron, beyond a certain quotient precision (the more precise momentum is measured, the less precise position can be, and verse vice-a), and this limit follows in principle for our universe, due to the limits of using matter/energy to measure itself, specifically the fact that the very act of measurement changes the character of the measured.
    >_________________________________________________________________
    >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
    >
    >
    >===============================================================
    >This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    >Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    >For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    >see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    ------------------------------------------------------------
    Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
    http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 28 2002 - 11:57:51 GMT