What if the universe is purely governed by random chance, and

>>9091062
Randomness doesn't exist, and chaos is unknown order.

>>9091062
Okay

Imagine you breathe in air and you live today. Imagine that happens twice. You might think there was a pattern. But if I flipped it a third time. Etc. Get it?

>>9091064
Chaos is fundamentally unknowable order and therefor undistinguishable from randomness.
Any talk of deterministic order in chaotic systems is metaphysical, and thus for brainlets.
Chaotic systems become uncorrelated from starting conditions in finite time.

>>9091118
Our universe's building blocks is made from order. Everything has a path. Chaos is just a way for morons to explain the things they don't understand.

File: 1501934495790.jpg (676KB, 798x1199px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 798x1199px

>>9091142
>an entire subfield with research groups at every uni worth its salt
> just a way for morons to explain the things they don't understand

>>9091183
Chaos:

ˈkeJɒs/, noun

'Complete disorder and confusion.'

And there are people paying good money to learn something that is - in your view - 'complete disorder and confusion'. Seems like another meme course to bleed students of their money to me.

Everything in the universe is like code - it has a DNA of what it's meant to do and how. Chaos makes no sense.

>>9091191
We don't have infinite computing capability anon.
We make assumptions and approximations

>>9091195
>We don't have infinite computing capability anon.

Never said we do, on the contrary. The universe is finite and so are the things within it, meaning there is also a finite amount of information.

>>9091142
wasn't that what Einstein said 80 years ago and then got BTFO'd by quantum mechanics?

>>9091196
Let me rephrase that - we have very limited computing capability

>>9091199
We do at the moment, but in a few hundred years... who knows. Everything will become known, and chaos won't exist.

>>9091203
what are we even arguing about

>>9091205
The fact that you're a brainlet

>>9091209
you're mom XD

>>9091105
read roy baskars transcendental realism and youll see how laws do not depend on humes constant conjunction of events but are an underlying generative model. laws are not regularities but invariances.

>>9091196
>>9091191

what hes saying is that you dont get that the term chaos in science and math isnt about describing how the world is but solving difficult problems and making inferences from the overcomplicated systems we find difficult to understand as you have said. what you're arguing is purely semantics and using dictionary definitions is naive.

>>9091211

i am mum?

>>9091183

I keep seeing her being posted. What is her name?

Chaos just means that an output changes greatly based on small changes to the input.
Thats not the same as true randomness.
In answer to Op i have two thoughts
1 within the multiverse there are all possible laws of physics therefore yes on one level because the "laws" of physics are not omniversally true they have been or can be "disproven"
2 really though this just seems like a typical skeptical line of thought much like the evil demon or brain in a jar scenarios
It is useful only to show that the nature of knowledge is based upon the preponderance of the evidence rather than pure proof.

>>9091191
What proof do you have that the universe's code doesn't have a good old #define true rand() < 0.99999 with lots of nines in it?

Just admit it, science will never grasp the true nature of reality.

>>9091062
Okay, imagine a big ball made of coins.

Each coin flips about every second or so. If it lands heads, it moves 1 unit to the left. If it lands tails, it moves 1 unit to the right.

The ball will maintain it's shape for quite a while, and will still behave like a ball. But after a long time, it will spread out and no longer be ball-like.

There's your probability vs cohesion, and your entropy in one.

I don't believe that a perpetual machine already exists but saying that they are impossible because of the first law thermodynamics is just retarded to me.

>>9091386
sure it exists, all you have to do is create an environment without gravity, friction..

>>9091354
whats that mean/

theres no such a thing as random, random is a merely human concept, universe is determinist.

actually randomness is predictable so we could just create a new law that takes the randomness into consideration

>>9091197
Yes.

But really, he had a problem that the observed value, the value found when "collapsing the wavefunction" was random. I never understood what the big deal was, yes specific events are random, but the distributions are not.

The distributions (we call them wavefunctions) are mathematical objects just as any other, and we can operate on them and do all sorts of stuff with them to great accuracy. So in that way if we think of the building blocks as distributions, rather than definite values, then everything seems ok to me.

>>9092285
What if it isn't? How could you tell the difference?

Simply because something happens x number of times in a similar scenario doesn't (necessarily) mean that it always will.

>>9091062
whats with these idiots always come here acting like they're reinventing the wheel

>>9091064
>>9091118
>>9091142
>>9091191
>>9091195

Yeah, I think we are kinda starting to pick at the nature of something that most people call 'god.' I have personally seen things that raise interest in the way things fall into place. Life, the world, and the universe that surrounds the entity of ego that is 'me' is perplexingly curious. These bodies are weird. It's weird to experience this. What makes this go?

I'm inclined to posit that perhaps humanity has a purpose that many people haven't even considered. Maybe we're worker bees that are taking part in something that 'is' and we don't realize it. Sorry for rambling!