At first this may not sound like a God and science topic, but I believe the issue of randomness is at the essence of many philosophical discussions. My question is, does randomness truly exist?

As far as my knowledge goes, the idea of randomness is not based on reason. I don't know what everyone's definition of randomness is, mine goes something along these lines: if we define randomness as a simple mathematical function r = f(x0, x1, x2, ..., xn), for f to be a truly random function it must be able to produce any value for r out of the same values for x0 ... xn. But this is a paradox! You would have a situation where, say, f(a,b,c) is different from f(a,b,c), which goes against the very definition of what a mathematical function is!

It appears to me that the idea of randomness is a fallacy which stems from our ignorance of all variables involved in specific natural processes. Since randomness cannot be expressed mathematically, either it doesn't exist or the universe is illogical. Make your pick.

Now when people say, for instance, that biological evolution is a completely random process, what are they truly saying? That they are not able to measure all the variables involved, or that evolution is an illogical process?

What about freewill? Doesn't the idea of freewill imply a paradox?

What about quantum mechanics? Is particle behaviour truly random or is it simply the case that we can't have information about an event before it happens? That would make quantum mechanics a lot less interesting for those neo-mystics out there.

• QM example - yanniru - August 15, 2001 - 15:24 UTC
  • Excuse me for being picky - aurino - August 15, 2001 - 16:12 UTC
    • By your definition there is ni randomness - yanniru - August 15, 2001 - 16:54 UTC
      • So randomness really means "we have no clue"? - aurino - August 15, 2001 - 18:11 UTC
        • On this basis quantum mechanics is theistic - yanniru - August 15, 2001 - 20:18 UTC
          • Do you think Steven Weinberg would agree? (nt) - harvey1 - August 15, 2001 - 21:18 UTC
          • Not that fast! - aurino - August 15, 2001 - 21:20 UTC
            • Your definitions, not mine - yanniru - August 15, 2001 - 22:58 UTC
              • That's not what I said - aurino - August 16, 2001 - 14:07 UTC
• Why a myth? - harvey1 - August 16, 2001 - 15:04 UTC
  • Here's why - aurino - August 16, 2001 - 16:09 UTC
    • Aside: the problem with parapsychology - aurino - August 16, 2001 - 16:25 UTC
      • Probability creates order out of randomness - yanniru - August 16, 2001 - 16:52 UTC
        • It sure does - aurino - August 16, 2001 - 17:10 UTC
    • re: randomness - harvey1 - August 16, 2001 - 17:24 UTC
• False alarm - luis_hamburgh - August 20, 2001 - 03:15 UTC
  • Go for the Nobel - aurino - August 20, 2001 - 13:14 UTC
    • Busted! - luis_hamburgh - August 20, 2001 - 15:21 UTC
      • If I knew that... - aurino - August 20, 2001 - 16:17 UTC
        • Remark for Luis Hamburgh. - alexander - August 21, 2001 - 22:57 UTC
          • Thanks, Alex - harvey1 - August 22, 2001 - 00:55 UTC
          • Speaking of arrogance... - luis_hamburgh - August 23, 2001 - 04:25 UTC
            • Numbers - bladesinger - August 23, 2001 - 09:12 UTC
            • Luis - harvey1 - August 23, 2001 - 12:37 UTC
              • Oops - harvey1 - August 23, 2001 - 12:40 UTC
              • Harv & Alex - luis_hamburgh - August 23, 2001 - 21:25 UTC