Randomness and discreteness

[picnic]

To me, randomness is very important, because randomness appears in quantum mechanics, and that has some implications about reality and religion IMO.

What is randomness? It seems to me that randomness is easy to define when there are discrete possibilities, and maybe it is difficult or impossible to define when there are not discrete possibilities?

Imagine flipping a coin 10 times. Imagine reality is every possible sequence of 10 coin tosses (kind of like a multiverse). If our observation is limited to only ONE possible sequence, how do we know if this sequence is a random variable? It seems to me that we can't be certain, but we can make a good guess. We know that only one possible sequence is all heads, but many possible sequences are 50% heads.

If the possibilities are discrete, then the multiverse of all possibilities has a finite number of threads of time. When the possibilities are not discrete, then the number becomes infinite. It seems to me that everything works better if reality is discrete.

I hope I explained my thoughts. I know random variables can be continuous, but I think they become less meaningful. It is harder to think about a multiverse of all possible threads of time, and then we are left with a mystery of why one observation happens instead of all the other observations.

Any thoughts?

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

To me, randomness is very important, because randomness appears in quantum mechanics, and that has some implications about reality and religion IMO.

What is randomness? It seems to me that randomness is easy to define when there are discrete possibilities, and maybe it is difficult or impossible to define when there are not discrete possibilities?

Imagine flipping a coin 10 times. Imagine reality is every possible sequence of 10 coin tosses (kind of like a multiverse). If our observation is limited to only ONE possible sequence, how do we know if this sequence is a random variable? It seems to me that we can't be certain, but we can make a good guess. We know that only one possible sequence is all heads, but many possible sequences are 50% heads.

If the possibilities are discrete, then the multiverse of all possibilities has a finite number of threads of time. When the possibilities are not discrete, then the number becomes infinite. It seems to me that everything works better if reality is discrete.

I hope I explained my thoughts. I know random variables can be continuous, but I think they become less meaningful. It is harder to think about a multiverse of all possible threads of time, and then we are left with a mystery of why one observation happens instead of all the other observations.

Any thoughts?

for some reason i got a scientology ad while reading this thread. i dont think this is random.

 

[picnic]

for some reason i got a scientology ad while reading this thread. i dont think this is random.

LOL - you never know I guess.

 

[Skwim]

To me, randomness is very important, because randomness appears in quantum mechanics and that has some implications about reality and religion IMO.

First of all, just what are these implications?

 

[picnic]

First of all, just what are these implications?

If we assume that the universe is only one thread of time, then it is almost like the particle is controlled by a metaphysical spirit that chooses how the probability wave collapses into an actual measurement. That is like freewill, cause and effect, past and future, etc.

If instead, we say that every possible measurement exists in the multiverse, then these problems go away. Everything becomes deterministic and constrained perfectly by equations. The arrow of time goes away. There is no need for a first cause or a god, because cause and effect go away.

The problem with a multiverse is that there are an infinite number of possibilities when the variables are continuous. However, there are a finite number of possibilities if the variables are discrete. The universe ought to be finite IMO, so that means the variables ought to be discrete.

 

[ScottySatan]

Random just means that all outcomes are equally likely. Most people mistake the word random for uncertain.

 

[Skwim]

If we assume that the universe is only one thread of time, then it is almost like the particle is controlled by a metaphysical spirit that chooses how the probability wave collapses into an actual measurement. That is like freewill, cause and effect, past and future, etc.

Sorry, but I have no idea of what this "one thread of time" is.
What particle?
Probability wave of what?
How are freewill, cause and effect, past and future like the collapse of a probability wave?


(You should be aware that a hefty segment, perhaps as much as 50%, of the interpretations of quantum mechanics don't buy into the collapse of the wave function.)

 

[picnic]

Random just means that all outcomes are equally likely. Most people mistake the word random for uncertain.

Hmmm. I'm not sure I agree, but I'm not sure I disagree either.

Random variables are not necessarily uniform distributions in the math of probability and statistics. There are normal distributions for example. Of course we could apply a function to the output of a uniform distribution to convert it into some non-uniform distribution such as a normal distribution.

IMO, random is hard to understand. I wonder if there is a philosophy devoted to the meaning of random? Statistics is really fascinating to me, because it confuses me so much. I think I understand statistics, but then I think some more and realize that I don't understand it after all.

 

[picnic]

Sorry, but I have no idea of what this "one thread of time" is.
What particle?
Probability wave of what?
How are freewill, cause and effect, past and future like the collapse of a probability wave?


(You should be aware that a hefty segment, perhaps as much as 50%, of the interpretations of quantum mechanics don't buy into the collapse of the wave function.)

Our brains comprehend reality as a sequence of events, and we imagine that earlier events in the sequence must somehow cause later events in the sequence. When we cannot comprehend a deterministic link between one event and the next event, then we imagine a choice was made by something like a spirit. A collection of quantum mechanical observations can be plotted to form a graph that we can determine, but the individual observations can't be determined. Why did this particular observation happen at this particular time?

So if we take the multiverse idea that everything happens, it seems to eliminate these philosophical problems. We no longer need to worry about what "random" means and why some particular outcome happened. But the multiverse idea works better when the possibilities are discrete, so that the universe of all possibilities is finite.

I'm not sure if you are getting what I'm saying now? I think it makes sense, but maybe it doesn't. It's not a fully developed idea, and maybe it doesn't actually make any sense.

 

[ScottySatan]

Hmmm. I'm not sure I agree, but I'm not sure I disagree either.

Random variables are not necessarily uniform distributions in the math of probability and statistics. There are normal distributions for example. Of course we could apply a function to the output of a uniform distribution to convert it into some non-uniform distribution such as a normal distribution..

Is there a mathematician in the house?

 

[Skwim]

Our brains comprehend reality as a sequence of events, and we imagine that earlier events in the sequence must somehow cause later events in the sequence. When we cannot comprehend a deterministic link between one event and the next event, then we imagine a choice was made by something like a spirit.

Don't know who your "we" includes, but when faced with an inability to establish a causal relationship rational people typically assume a lack of sufficient evidence rather than start postulating spirits.

A collection of quantum mechanical observations can be plotted to form a graph that we can determine, but the individual observations can't be determined. Why did this particular observation happen at this particular time?

So if we take the multiverse idea that everything happens, it seems to eliminate these philosophical problems. We no longer need to worry about what "random" means and why some particular outcome happened. But the multiverse idea works better when the possibilities are discrete, so that the universe of all possibilities is finite.

I'm not sure if you are getting what I'm saying now? I think it makes sense, but maybe it doesn't. It's not a fully developed idea, and maybe it doesn't actually make any sense.

No I don't. Have a good day.

 

[George-ananda]

It is harder to think about a multiverse of all possible threads of time, and then we are left with a mystery of why one observation happens instead of all the other observations.

Any thoughts?

I think the answer to that mystery lies in the fact that consciousness is fundamental and the material is a derivative of consciousness. Consciousness controls and creates Matter. It looks random to us because the big picture is beyond our grasp but it's all following the script of this play/drama of Brahman.

 

[picnic]

Have a good day.

You too. I have mood swings and right now I am up. I have a lot of ideas when I'm up, but some of those ideas may not actually make much sense when put under a microscope.

 

[picnic]

I think the answer to that mystery lies in the fact that consciousness is fundamental and the material is a derivative of consciousness. Consciousness controls and creates Matter. It looks random to us because the big picture is beyond our grasp but it's all following the script of this play/drama of Brahman.

Hmmm. There are lots of forms and instances of consciousness. Each human and many animals have consciousness. Then there are probably multiple personalities operating with each human brain that each have a consciousness.

So is there one reality or does each person's consciousness compete with every other person's consciousness in determining reality? Sometimes I have wondered if each person is alone in their own reality. So you are a phony person in my reality, and I am a phony person in your reality. I might not even exist as a phony person in the reality of some people.

 

[George-ananda]

Hmmm. There are lots of forms and instances of consciousness. Each human and many animals have consciousness. Then there are probably multiple personalities operating with each human brain that each have a consciousness.

There is only One consciousness called God/Brahman. Individual consciousness is a ray of God animating a finite form giving it only finite reach. All the various consciousness types you mention are all rays from the same One consciousness illuminating different types of finite forms making the consciousness appear in all the many ways.

So is there one reality or does each person's consciousness compete with every other person's consciousness in determining reality?

There is only One. What we experience is only the illusion of separate consciousness (Maya in Hinduism).

 

[Willamena]

Is there a mathematician in the house?

@LegionOnomaMoi

 

[Ben Dhyan]

To me, randomness is very important, because randomness appears in quantum mechanics, and that has some implications about reality and religion IMO.

What is randomness? It seems to me that randomness is easy to define when there are discrete possibilities, and maybe it is difficult or impossible to define when there are not discrete possibilities?

Imagine flipping a coin 10 times. Imagine reality is every possible sequence of 10 coin tosses (kind of like a multiverse). If our observation is limited to only ONE possible sequence, how do we know if this sequence is a random variable? It seems to me that we can't be certain, but we can make a good guess. We know that only one possible sequence is all heads, but many possible sequences are 50% heads.

If the possibilities are discrete, then the multiverse of all possibilities has a finite number of threads of time. When the possibilities are not discrete, then the number becomes infinite. It seems to me that everything works better if reality is discrete.

I hope I explained my thoughts. I know random variables can be continuous, but I think they become less meaningful. It is harder to think about a multiverse of all possible threads of time, and then we are left with a mystery of why one observation happens instead of all the other observations.

Any thoughts?

Randomness is a concept of the mortal mind that implies a relative perspective...a state of duality of the mind that arises when there is a observer and observed...

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Random just means that all outcomes are equally likely. Most people mistake the word random for uncertain.

Alas it is nowhere near that simple. For one thing, there isn't even one type of randomness. One of the most studied types, especially (and for obvious reasons) in computability theory is "algorithmic randomness" (with various types/tests of randomness, such as ML-random, falling under this definition). Another type of "randomness" is that of quantum physics (in particular, quantum mechanics). Here "random" is really "non-deterministic", but even this term is usually misunderstood (particularly as applied here). A quantum system prepared such that it's state-vector is an eigenvector of the observable applied will always yield a determined result. Moreover, randomness in quantum physics is much like that in statistical mechanics or probability theory more generally (in that, although indeterminism is intrinsic, the set of possible outcomes is generally known and can vary in terms of how many there are or how likely particular ones are). This brings us to probability and "random variables". "Random variable" is a misnomer: random variables are functions, not variables. They are "random" simply because they are described via probability distributions. Thus an idealized fair coin is "random" in that it has two (equally likely) outcomes, but loaded dice are just as "random". Any random variable that is normally distributed cannot have equally likely outcomes and for any random variable (including those normally distributed) that is continuous ALL outcomes have probability 0.
Randomness can be stochastic. It can be a measure of uncertainty or entropy (which, from an information-theoretic perspective are basically the same). It can be unpredictability. It can even be something that is epistemically deterministic and algorithmic(although such processes are better describe as pseudo-random; random number generators fall under this category).

In general, though, a random process will not have a set of equally likely outcomes. First because most random processes have can't be described in terms of the probability of outcome (non-uniformly distributed continuous random variables have outcomes that are all 0 yet not all equally likely; actually, the distinction between discrete and continuous is largely a property of undergraduate level probability theory before measure-theoretic probability is learned, but even in measure theory distributions of variables that have outcomes all equal to 0 are not typically uniform, meaning they don't have equal outcome probabilities). Second because probabilistic phenomena in general are not uniform. Third because this definition can't apply to most phenomena and processes we would like to call random (it is enormously restrictive). Finally, it has little philosophical or pragmatic benefits (it can't be incorporated into a Bayesian interpretation of probability or similar interpretations, and corresponds to a small subset of random distributions for frequentists; the pragmatic issues are related but also include the inapplicability of uniformly distributed random variables for most applied purposes).

 

[Rick O'Shez]

There is no need for a first cause or a god, because cause and effect go away.

Cause and effect seems to be a property of space-time, and we don't even know if it even existed prior to our universe coming into being.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Cause and effect seems to be a property of space-time

Spacetime allows for causal paradoxes by its very existence. The most well-known such paradoxes are called closed timelike curves (CTCs).