God's Random Dice: Order or Disorder or...

[sealchan]

Random vs predictable
Order vs disorder

These are two binary concepts which are closely related but not identical.

What is the nature of "random"? Is there such a thing? Does perfect randomness exist or is it always bounded by a measurable order? Is randomness always the result of ordered events that are simply not ordered with respect to some measurement of order? Is perfect randomness itself an order of precisely controlled order-avoiding behavior?

These questions impact how we think about how nature and/or God creates form out of...something else, a void. Is the void also like randomness a non-thing? An abstraction of our intellect rather than a detectable feature of our Universe? Is the void simply that realm of being which we, as beings rooted in this Universe, cannot perceive? Does modern physics show us some of the peripheral aspects of the Universe which have their ground both within and without the Universe itself?

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Random vs predictable
Order vs disorder

These are two binary concepts which are closely related but not identical.

What is the nature of "random"? Is there such a thing? Does perfect randomness exist or is it always bounded by a measurable order? Is randomness always the result of ordered events that are simply not ordered with respect to some measurement of order? Is perfect randomness itself an order of precisely controlled order-avoiding behavior?

These questions impact how we think about how nature and/or God creates form out of...something else, a void. Is the void also like randomness a non-thing? An abstraction of our intellect rather than a detectable feature of our Universe? Is the void simply that realm of being which we, as beings rooted in this Universe, cannot perceive? Does modern physics show us some of the peripheral aspects of the Universe which have their ground both within and without the Universe itself?

Over many trials a random process can be predictable, such as a pair being the most common made hand in poker when dealing a 5 card hand, or 7 being the most common outcome in Craps. So how does that fit into this overall picture?

 

[`mud]

Randomness is not predictable within infinite boundaries.
The Earth and our Sun are prime examples,
along with all the other planets and their suns.
Remember...all coins have three sides, and infinite faces,
but one can't toss all of them, or see the landings,
especially if they land on their edges.
How many die does your `God` have ?

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Randomness is not predictable within infinite boundaries.

If you roll two die and add up the pips the predictable outcome will be that 7 is the most common outcome even after an infinite number of rolls.

 

[`mud]

How many die land on one of their twelve edges ?
Now and only then, would that be randomness.

 

[sealchan]

Over many trials a random process can be predictable, such as a pair being the most common made hand in poker when dealing a 5 card hand, or 7 being the most common outcome in Craps. So how does that fit into this overall picture?

That is what I was thinking of for randomness in the context of being bounded by order...the hands can be statistically predicted. It may also qualify in terms of the context of playing a card game as random but we understand that the shuffling of the deck is an ordered process. The reason that the cards and hands are seen as the result of randomness comes from the inaccessibility (intentional and intrinsic) of the information needed to predict the order of the cards.

So the randomness is within boundaries of order in two contexts.

 

[shunyadragon]

Random vs predictable
Order vs disorder

These are two binary concepts which are closely related but not identical.

What is the nature of "random"? Is there such a thing? Does perfect randomness exist or is it always bounded by a measurable order? Is randomness always the result of ordered events that are simply not ordered with respect to some measurement of order? Is perfect randomness itself an order of precisely controlled order-avoiding behavior?

As far as the macro world there is no such thing as 'randomness' much less 'perfect randomness.' What is observed is the diverse outcome of events based on fractal math described by Chaos Theory. The range of the outcomes of cause and effect in the macro world remains to be objectively observed and determined and precisely controlled by Natural Laws.

When you go to the micro world, which underlies our physical existence, science still describes a predictable pattern to Quantum events obviously underlain by natural laws, even though individual events appear random.

These questions impact how we think about how nature and/or God creates form out of...something else, a void. Is the void also like randomness a non-thing? An abstraction of our intellect rather than a detectable feature of our Universe? Is the void simply that realm of being which we, as beings rooted in this Universe, cannot perceive? Does modern physics show us some of the peripheral aspects of the Universe which have their ground both within and without the Universe itself?

The questions about 'how nature. and/or God creates form out of . . . or whether natural laws [non-things] under lie everything go beyond your assumptions of the above. The question concerning 'a void' has two alternatives; (1) The philosophical nothing that is the foundation of God's Creation. (2) A very natural Quantum World governed by natural laws that is eternal with our physical existence. Both alternatives are beyond our present knowledge of science, but there is evidence of a Quantum micro world beyond our physical macro world.

 

[sealchan]

How many die land on one of their twelve edges ?
Now and only then, would that be randomness.

This sort of randomness I think is due to the inaccessibility of the information needed to predict the result. Inaccessible, but not impossible. For all practical purposes, no one who wants to have fun would contrive to try and measure the initial conditions and the force applied to a die as it is being rolled. That might allow for some measure of predictability. There might be additional factors that make determining the outcome of the die roll additionally difficult to predict.

Now when it comes to understanding quantum events, that die roll is, by current science, defined as unknowable. We simply do not have a view to what, if anything, is behind the outcome so we cannot predict it. But there are other contexts in which an order is known to be behind a phenomenon, but its outcome is inaccessible due to the inability to sufficiently measure the system.

Randomness then is the result of an orderly process hidden by the "order-detector" due to issues of inaccessibility which may be incidental, intentional or based on a scientific principle.

 

[`mud]

Randomicity can't be counted ....in infinite sets.

 

[sealchan]

As far as the macro world there is no such thing as 'randomness' much less 'perfect randomness.' What is observed is the diverse outcome of events based on fractal math described by Chaos Theory. The range of the outcomes of cause and effect in the macro world remains to be objectively observed and determined and precisely controlled by Natural Laws.

When you go to the micro world, which underlies our physical existence, science still describes a predictable pattern to Quantum events obviously underlain by natural laws, even though individual events appear random.



The questions about 'how nature. and/or God creates form out of . . . or whether natural laws [non-things] under lie everything go beyond your assumptions of the above. The question concerning 'a void' has two alternatives; (1) The philosophical nothing that is the foundation of God's Creation. (2) A very natural Quantum World governed by natural laws that is eternal with our physical existence. Both alternatives are beyond our present knowledge of science, but there is evidence of a Quantum micro world beyond our physical macro world.

If I understand Chaos theory correctly...we could say that a system based on an irrational, iterative function would, under certain circumstances, give rise to chaotic behavior within defined zones (attractor basin?). So randomness is always "bottled".

The difference for quantum physics is that there is no apparent bottle except perhaps the Universe itself. So when we look at quantum randomness and indeterminability we are looking at the metaphorical bottle in which our ship, the Universe, is contained.

 

[`mud]

I somewhat agree with that assumption,
but...what constitutes the construction of the container ?
Where does the `void` begin, back to the Chaos of reality.

 

[sealchan]

Now on a similar note, I recall an old grade school conundrum which says that black and white are not "colors". I thought, if I operationally define (obviously not the words I used in grade school) color as that which can come from a crayon, this is not correct!

I am getting to the point of seeing randomness as an order in the sense that it is another useful crayon in our crayon box of "order control". In computer programming a method that returns a random number in a bounded range is a staple resource for creating unpredictable events (such as in a video game).

 

[`mud]

I can see your point, but I can't prove the bounds that have to exist for this example.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I think that complexity needs to be considered, in addition to chaos, randomness, etc.

The interaction of a few simple parts can create a chaotic system, or a complex situation, or a system that is both.

I suggest that a deity would have little problem affecting complex and chaotic systems to cause certain outcomes...outcomes that we with our limited ability to understand might say or improbable or impossible...especially if said deity can divert cause and effect...causing an unrepeatable chain of dice tosses by changing the rotational speed of a distant star, for instance...

 

[shunyadragon]

ignore this duplicate

 

[shunyadragon]

If I understand Chaos theory correctly...we could say that a system based on an irrational, iterative function would, under certain circumstances, give rise to chaotic behavior within defined zones (attractor basin?). So randomness is always "bottled".

I am not sure what you mean by an 'irrational, iterative function would?.' The basis for fractal math is the number of variables involved, and many if not most natural systems in the macro world there are many variables. Chaos Theory simply developed from non-linear math that predictably resulted in variable fractal patterns with distinctive patterns as you increased the number of variables. Actually the outcomes of roles of dice show a simple fractal pattern, Applied sciences have successful used Chaos Theory to make predictive models of complex natural systems with many variables. Weather predictions and climate models have been noted obvious successes. Genetic mutation patterns have also been extensively modeled using Chaos Theory. I recommend Chaos Theory by James Gleick as an easy read explanation on the level of high school math.

In the macro world variability of outcomes is objectively "bottled' by Natural Laws.

The difference for quantum physics is that there is no apparent bottle except perhaps the Universe itself. So when we look at quantum randomness and indeterminability we are looking at the metaphorical bottle in which our ship, the Universe, is contained.

I would not say 'no apparent bottle,' because at present all the patterns of behavior in the Quantum World are predictable even though the specific event outcomes appear to be random, indeterminacy, or or otherwise unexplained from the the scientist observer's perspective. It may be assumed that these predictable patterns are governed by natural laws, which science has not fully explained.

Actually the ultimate explanation is beyond our universe unless the universe you are describing is the greater potentially eternal physical existence that contains our universe, and all possible universes.

 

[sealchan]

Randomicity can't be counted ....in infinite sets.

I suspect there is a mathematical way to measure this, but I don't know if randomness is measurable. I think that in the Information Sciences there is a sense of information as order and there may be ways in which that is measured.

 

[sealchan]

I somewhat agree with that assumption,
but...what constitutes the construction of the container ?
Where does the `void` begin, back to the Chaos of reality.

The container is perhaps an emergent property as is the chaos/randomness itself from an underlying layer of parts in systemic interaction.

 

[sealchan]

I am not sure what you mean by an 'irrational, iterative function would?.' The basis for fractal math is the number of variables involved, and many if not most natural systems in the macro world there are many variables. Chaos Theory simply developed from non-linear math that predictably resulted in variable fractal patterns with distinctive patterns as you increased the number of variables. Actually the outcomes of roles of dice show a simple fractal pattern, Applied sciences have successful used Chaos Theory to make predictive models of complex natural systems with many variables. Weather predictions and climate models have been noted obvious successes. Genetic mutation patterns have also been extensively modeled using Chaos Theory. I recommend Chaos Theory by James Gleick as an easy read explanation on the level of high school math.

In the macro world variability of outcomes is objectively "bottled' by Natural Laws.

I would not say 'no apparent bottle,' because at present all the patterns of behavior in the Quantum World are predictable even though the specific event outcomes appear to be random, indeterminacy, or or otherwise unexplained from the the scientist observer's perspective. It may be assumed that these predictable patterns are governed by natural laws, which science has not fully explained.

Actually the ultimate explanation is beyond our universe unless the universe you are describing is the greater potentially eternal physical existence that contains our universe, and all possible universes.

My bad...I should have said non-linear when I said irrational. I not only read Gleick's book but I wrote a computer program from the footnote which gave the iterative equation to use that plotted the Mandelbrot set. I would spend hours adjusting the parameters to explore that interesting space!

The great problem with Chaos Theory from a technical point of view is that it "looks" like it can predict behavior but because of highly sensitive initial conditions...it can't. It can, perhaps, help map out phase spaces which "contain" the range of possible behaviors. All this begins to sound more and more like quantum physics only we have a sense of what is outside of the container (phase space) and how a system can escape that container.

I think we are thinking along the same lines here. Just quibbling over details perhaps. At least that is how I am reading your words.

I use the word 'container' here as a metaphor for the "boundedness" of what we observe as chaotic or random. Besides the statistical nature of the behavior, which is also a kind of order, there is the limited range in which the randomness is occurring...another sort of container. The metaphor is useful because when we think we use metaphorical relationships unconsciously. Explicitly calling out the metaphor may help in how we think about these things are realize unconscious assumptions.

 

[shunyadragon]

The container is perhaps an emergent property as is the chaos/randomness itself from an underlying layer of parts in systemic interaction.

The issue is not whether infinities can be counted, but whether they can be defined mathematically and used in math. The answer is yes. We can thank Aristotle for first defining infinities.

Infinities are defined as either actual infinities or potential infinities. Actual infinities are closed or completed sets of infinities, and potential infinities as open ended infinities without end such as a ray starting at a point and extending infinitely without boundary. Both of these infinities are used in math to describe our physical existence.