Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, ...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Aurino Souza on April 19, 2002 20:19:43 UTC

I was just trying to be funny!

That's what I thought at first. And you know what, the "true random number generator" at might be a joke too. I wonder what they would tell me if e-mailed them asking for a proof that their numbers are not pseudo-random.

I guess some people just can't tell jokes

Don't worry about it, your sense of humour is only surpassed by your bluntness :)

By the way, quantum mechanics is correct even if the source of the data is genuinely random; but, as you say, that in now way proves data is random.

The way I see it, the real problem is that quantum mechanics is correct even if the data is pseudo-random. In fact, I think quantum mechanics is correct even if the universe were just a huge collection of 9s (think Dilbert!)

Have fun,


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins