Does Randomness Exist?

[997GT3]

Even random, or pseudo-random rather, numbers generated by computers are calculated by an equation. Is there a such thing as randomness?

Aren't all things connected?

Wouldn't it be possible for an event on the other side of the world some 20 years ago and everything else (how we were raised; our past; our genes; our immunities; our environment; even the little molecules invisible to the naked eye; etc.) to affect our next actions and the way we see the world?

Does God know what we're going to do next by knowing all the variables to a huge equation and plugging them in? God even knows when we'll pray.

Is Free Will truly Free Will?

Free will is essential to Christianity in that we have to choose to accept Jesus Christ. Is it really "choosing"? Are some people pre-destined to accept Him on Earth and some later?

Please discuss.

[Bugmaster]

But what is meant by unknown or unknowable or or uncertainty or random. One could postulate that random means something caused by a factor outside of the known universe, God.

Sure, but as long as the laws of physics hold (and there are some very good reasons to think they do), there's absolutely no way to (for example) predict the position and the momentum of a photon at the same time -- at least, not within our Universe. There may exist other universes with other laws of physics, but I'm only concerned with ours for now.

QED is better at this sort of stuff, but, as far as I understand it, a photon is defined, in part, by the impossibility of predicting its momentum and position at the same time. Thus, if God manages to predict the momentum and the position of something at the same time, that object would not be a photon, by definition.

The evidence for this randomness is fairly solid; electron orbitals, radioactive decay, even the motion of gas particles -- these are things that can be readily measured and observed. And of course, the famous double-slit experiment demonstrates the wave/particle duality, which is also linked to the Uncertainty principle. Actually, now that I think about it, the X-Ray radiation emitted by black holes is also evidence for the ultimate randomness of quantum particles (I hope QED will correct me if I'm wrong).

I understand that it's very comforting to think of a world where "the basic properties of nature are perfect and ordered", but it's very likely that our world does not, in fact, work this way.

Note, however, that this doesn't mean that everything in our world is utterly unpredictable. For example, while we cannot know the exact position of an electron at any given time, we can be fairly certain that the probability of its location will form a spherical distribution around the hydrogen nucleus. And, while it's technically possible for a falling rock to tunnel itself to the moon, chances are that this won't happen, and that the rock will obey some fairly deterministic laws. Archimedes used this principle to throw unpleasant boulders at his enemies, and we use it to launch probes onto Mars. Quantum randomness is important on the quantum level, but, on the macro level, it tends to average itself out.

[McCulloch]

But what is meant by unknown or unknowable or or uncertainty or random. One could postulate that random means something caused by a factor outside of the known universe, God.

Sure, but as long as the laws of physics hold (and there are some very good reasons to think they do), [...]

The laws of physics depend on the time space continuum. The God hypothesis, being outside of time space, would also be beyond the laws of physics. So within the universe, certain things are unknowable at a quantum level. That does not mean that a god, if it exists, cannot know them.

[Bugmaster]

So within the universe, certain things are unknowable at a quantum level. That does not mean that a god, if it exists, cannot know them.

Yes, but this also means that a god can create a rock so heavy he cannot lift it. It's the same kind of a limitation. If you're willing to assume that the god can do logically impossible things, then yes, you're right.

[McCulloch]

So within the universe, certain things are unknowable at a quantum level. That does not mean that a god, if it exists, cannot know them.

Yes, but this also means that a god can create a rock so heavy he cannot lift it. It's the same kind of a limitation. If you're willing to assume that the god can do logically impossible things, then yes, you're right.

I don't quite know how knowing something about events inside a system from outside of the system is on the same level of impossibility as a logical impossibility. There cannot be a square circle, a rational root of a prime number or the simultaneous existence of an irresistible force and an immovable object. These are logical impossibilities. Knowing quantum events is not a logical impossibility.

[Bugmaster]

Knowing quantum events is not a logical impossibility.

Yes, it is. As I said earlier, the photon is pretty much defined by our inability to know its position and momentum at the same time. There is no way to discard the Uncertainty Principle without contradicting all the other equations that describe the photon.

The difference between a photon and square circles is that we could conceivably be wrong about the existence of photons; we cannot be wrong about the existence of squares or circles, by definition.

[McCulloch]

Knowing quantum events is not a logical impossibility.

Yes, it is. As I said earlier, the photon is pretty much defined by our inability to know its position and momentum at the same time. There is no way to discard the Uncertainty Principle without contradicting all the other equations that describe the photon.

The difference between a photon and square circles is that we could conceivably be wrong about the existence of photons; we cannot be wrong about the existence of squares or circles, by definition.

But not God's inability to know the position and momentum of a photon. One could postulate that God is the source of all quantum uncertainty, being outside of time and space and the rules of physics. Or does that sound too much like the old God-of-the-gaps?

[Bugmaster]

One could postulate that God is the source of all quantum uncertainty, being outside of time and space and the rules of physics. Or does that sound too much like the old God-of-the-gaps?

Quantum uncertainty doesn't mean that we don't know something at the moment; it means that there are certain things that cannot be known. It's the same difference as the difference between a really heavy rock, and a rock that's unliftable.

As to the source of the quantum uncertainty -- well, God made the laws of physics, so he's technically the source of everything, including quantum uncertainty...

[The Persnickety Platypus]

The evidence for this randomness is fairly solid

And what is this evidence?

You mentioned electron orbitals and radioactive decay. But what properties of these phenomena qualify them as random?

How can any phenomena lack causality?

[Curious]

So within the universe, certain things are unknowable at a quantum level. That does not mean that a god, if it exists, cannot know them.

Yes, but this also means that a god can create a rock so heavy he cannot lift it. It's the same kind of a limitation. If you're willing to assume that the god can do logically impossible things, then yes, you're right.

It is not logically impossible for an omnipotent God to create a rock so big he was unable to lift it. If the rock was so large that it occupied all available space then the limitation would be a spatial one rather than of God's power. In this case the word "lift" would cease to have meaning. As for the problem of God predicting radioactive decay, what would stop an omnipotent god from saying "They will all decay NOW!" while pointing his index finger and shooting out a stream of neutrons at the sample?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

So may I assume that there *is* no credible evidence for random phenomena, as no one has provided me with any?