Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.pagan,talk.philosophy.misc,comp.ai.philosophy,alt.consciousness,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!blaze.trentu.ca!ivory.trentu.ca!MEDMONDSON
From: medmondson@ivory.trentu.ca (Rijke.)
Subject: Re: Randomness is a human concept (was Re: Time is a human concept)
Message-ID: <1994Nov8.021916.9632@blaze.trentu.ca>
Sender: news@blaze.trentu.ca (USENET News System)
Reply-To: medmondson@ivory.trentu.ca
Organization: Trent University, Peterborough
References: <367dn4$ls@euskadi.idbsu.edu>  <1994Oct13.135253.21576@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> <38qhnm$117@whitbeck.ncl.ac.uk> <1994Oct30.160017.676@inca.comlab.ox.ac.uk>,<Pine.A32.3.91a.941106172245.17787H-100000@homer05.u.washington.edu>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 1994 02:19:16 GMT
Lines: 39

On 30 Oct 1994, Adrian P Dutton wrote:

> n4521558 (Rob.Smith@ncl.ac.uk) wrote:
> : In article <1994Oct13.135253.21576@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, stevens@prodigal.psych.rochester.edu (Greg Stevens) says:
> : >
> : >In <1994Oct8.025507.11036@cabell.vcu.edu> has2bec@cabell.vcu.edu (Brooke E. Colquhoun) writes:
> 
> : >I think it's funny that you say RONDOMNESS is a human concept, when I
> : >would have intuitively stated it as PATTERN is a human concept (pattern
> : >being the opposite of randomness).
> : >
> 
> : If randomness ISN'T s humsn concept, then where is it?
> 
> Any word or concept you care to mention is obviuosly a human one, since it
> is human in origin. However,  there may be some metaphysical reallity behind
> the concept in question.
> 
> : Can you honestly say that you can find something truly rsndom, or
> : are 'random' processes governed by very complex non-linear but
> : deterministic laws?
> 
> Have you ever heard of Quantum Mechanics ?!?  Do the words uncertancy 
> principal ring any bells? Quantum processes are inhearently undeterministic.
> 
Please forgive my intrusion here, but quantum processes are inherently 
undeterministic to US.  Given the minute energy levels of the quanton (which 
are objects which exhibit both wave and particle properties) dealt with by 
quantum mechanics, any light we could shed on the subject, quite literally, 
would have sufficient energy to alter the position of the quanton is space. 
Just because we don't know where they will be yet doesn't mean there is no 
possible way to determine it.  We simply don't know either way.

The "laws of physics" are based on what our instrumentation can tell us now 
and whether the current theories are correct or not remains to be seen.  I 
guess one has to figure out if you trust the physicists and mathematicians or 
is they're full of malarky.  

	Rijke.
