if you want to create a fully random system you 'must' eliminate all initial states to avoid predicted occurrences but then how to use a word like ""create"", to initialize a system like this. cause 'create' implies that there is a something has to begin and then the whole randomness would collapse or wouldn't so the 'event' that would initialize the system is the main key to know are the sequence of fellow events would be predictable or random. but i assumed here that random implies ""unpredictable sequence of events that have initiated from [unmeasurable/can't be fit into common pattern] 'created' event"".
in my opinion, bigbang is an 'created' event that initiated sequence of unpredictable events then by the time it's entropy lessen till it come to a state of wich it can be predictable and that allows us to deduce patterns[i mean maths]
but i think we can define time in terms of randomness getting less and less, but it's converse logical deduction because i used randomness to define time and time to define randomness :3
any thoughts, especially from chaos theorists?
bump is dump
Nope
>>8723182
It's the whole predetermination thing again. Plenty of smart people are convinced either way. You can't really know the answer though, so why does it even matter?
>>8723182
Quantum shit nigga
>>8723835
>You can't really know the answer though
proof?
>>8723182
Lots of people are too ignorant to see system and order, cause and effect. These people will never in their lifetimes learn to accept the consequences not merely for who they "were" when assaulted, but for who they "will grow big to be." But there's always more lives for them to grow up and accept responsibility.
I read a great article on this. Here it is: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/2134/1/randpred.pdf
The guy reviews multiple kinds of randomness and supplies a definition that works well on many subjects. Worth the read
>>8723182
holy shit is that bread going to eat SPACEMEN like we eat sandwiches?