# Thread: Life .. Random or Determined?

1. Originally Posted by wildcat
A good post, Katsuni. Let us have a closer look at the numbers.

99 - (9 X 9) = 9 + 9 etc etc

Do you see random? I do not see random. The layout is a bit funny, on purpose, so that you can see the non - randomness better. It does not mean that the numbers are not non - random in the first place.
Note that this series of numbers is N*11 - N^2 = N*(11-N), which essentially means 11*11 - 11*11 = ...0
10*11 - 10*10 = ... 10*1 (funny how that is)
9*11 - 9*9 = ...9*2

This's no more complex than any other series of numbers to be honest, it's just an odd formula for writing a fairly strange looking ending result.

But yeah, on the point of "Numbers are not nonsensical by default" is true; the easiest way to see that is not by using such an example as this, but by converting to a different base (egypt and many other cultures before ours counted in base-3 instead of base-10). Despite the base 3 being used, the same basic concepts still applied anyway.

Nobody invented random numbers. There is nothing random in math.
Physics is based on math. If it were not so, it would be rendered nonsense.
Therefore physics is not random.
Well... not quite. Pi is a good example of randomness in math. Another one is 'e', used in most biological growth mathematics. They don't seem to make any sense to us, they don't repeat, and they're just... weird. No matter whot base counting system yeu use, assumming the use of only whole numbers.

Some calculations, especially once yeu get down to the quantum level, start going really really... 'interesting' as well. It's not that the math isn't random, it's that regardless of whot the occurance is, there's a consistant method of behaviour which can be reliably plotted out. It may look like a total jumbled mess of insanity by the time yeu've figured it out mathematically, but at least it can be plotted.

Math isn't random in and of itself because it's a system for describing whot is already known. It's like saying "Book" isn't random, because it uses 4 english letters! Well yeah... the reason why it uses 4 english letters is PROBABLY related to the fact that... yeu know... it's an english word >.>;;

Physics doesn't RELY on math so much... physics is just a description of whot already exists; the universe exists whether math and physics does or not. Physics is just a list of observations, and math is the recorded system used to quantify those observations. Nature itself can still be quite chaotic, but does so in a way that makes mathematical sense on the surface.

Whether the universe *IS* chaotic, or runs like clockwork... erm... we don't know. The whole quantum physics thing is showing us that there's some SERIOUSLY screwed up stuff going on... the proof that schrodenger's cat theory is actually TRUE, at least on a molecular level, is kind of mind boggling that something can literally exist in two completely incompatible states simultaniously until they're viewed, is just... gah.

There MAY be an explaination for this, that makes perfect sense, or... maybe there isn't. We don't know yet.

Math doesn't make the universe make sense, it just describes whot we know in a way that we can understand it.

Big Bang is beyond spacetime, therefore it is beyond physics.
Einstein talked about God, yes. But not of a Christian God. The Jewish God is the same as the Christian God.
Not... really. It therefore falls under the category of particle and quantum physics, as the "before the big bang" is actually whot M-theory attempts to describe, and it's still considered to be a form of quantum physics.

Physics just describes that which we witness, if it's possible for things to exist beyond space and time, the study of defining such would still be a branch of physics, though it'd probably be called something different due to existing outside of the boarder of infinity.

What was God to Einstein? What was Eintein concerned about? Physics.
So he needed an outsider, someone who is not, like everything else, dependent on physics.
It did not matter if it was a metaphorical figure, or not. Had he been a Hindu, he would have talked of a Brahman.
God came handy to Einstein, because God created distance. We need distance every time and again, to see better. If you look at too close you see nothing.
Mmm sadly the definition of 'god' here is exactly whot bothers me, one in which the name is used, but invoked not as a 'being of divine origin' but rather just as 'oh screw it I have no clue, it's magic'.

In other words, nothing existed before the Big Bang, nothing existed before time. There is nothing beyond spacetime.
Apart from God.
We have no disagreement, Katsuni.
Well I disagree with alot of the descriptions yeu used XD However, I do find it LIKELY that god could exist before spacetime's origin, there are alternate possibilities as well however, and the definition of 'god' doesn't neccesarily mean an actual INTELLIGENCE. Therefore, I don't believe in god in the traditional sense, but rather as a possible entity that may or may not even be self aware. And may not even be actually an entity, and may not even exist at all. The evidence suggests its' existance as plausible, and even likely, but it does not proove irrifuteably.

For the most part I do agree, I just disagree with the method at which yeu came to yeur conclusion ^.~

2. yes I guess it's a bit of both. It's random UNTIL determined(by us), the observer effect of quantum mechanics. The greatest minds of the world are trying to figure this one out and create a unified field theory.

3. Originally Posted by INTJ123
The greatest minds of the world are trying to figure this one out and create a unified field theory.
I'm not. I was working on the fun aspects of negative gravitational charged matter and energy, and some interesting aspects of dark matter, and was seriously considering taking some high end particle physics courses to do it.

Then... I realized I seriously don't care about the act of actually PROOVING it, I just wanted to play with the concept and theory. The whole messing with the math and number details is just boring.

4. Originally Posted by Katsuni
Note that this series of numbers is N*11 - N^2 = N*(11-N), which essentially means 11*11 - 11*11 = ...0
10*11 - 10*10 = ... 10*1 (funny how that is)
9*11 - 9*9 = ...9*2

This's no more complex than any other series of numbers to be honest, it's just an odd formula for writing a fairly strange looking ending result.

But yeah, on the point of "Numbers are not nonsensical by default" is true; the easiest way to see that is not by using such an example as this, but by converting to a different base (egypt and many other cultures before ours counted in base-3 instead of base-10). Despite the base 3 being used, the same basic concepts still applied anyway.

Well... not quite. Pi is a good example of randomness in math. Another one is 'e', used in most biological growth mathematics. They don't seem to make any sense to us, they don't repeat, and they're just... weird. No matter whot base counting system yeu use, assumming the use of only whole numbers.

Some calculations, especially once yeu get down to the quantum level, start going really really... 'interesting' as well. It's not that the math isn't random, it's that regardless of whot the occurance is, there's a consistant method of behaviour which can be reliably plotted out. It may look like a total jumbled mess of insanity by the time yeu've figured it out mathematically, but at least it can be plotted.

Math isn't random in and of itself because it's a system for describing whot is already known. It's like saying "Book" isn't random, because it uses 4 english letters! Well yeah... the reason why it uses 4 english letters is PROBABLY related to the fact that... yeu know... it's an english word >.>;;

Physics doesn't RELY on math so much... physics is just a description of whot already exists; the universe exists whether math and physics does or not. Physics is just a list of observations, and math is the recorded system used to quantify those observations. Nature itself can still be quite chaotic, but does so in a way that makes mathematical sense on the surface.

Whether the universe *IS* chaotic, or runs like clockwork... erm... we don't know. The whole quantum physics thing is showing us that there's some SERIOUSLY screwed up stuff going on... the proof that schrodenger's cat theory is actually TRUE, at least on a molecular level, is kind of mind boggling that something can literally exist in two completely incompatible states simultaniously until they're viewed, is just... gah.

There MAY be an explaination for this, that makes perfect sense, or... maybe there isn't. We don't know yet.

Math doesn't make the universe make sense, it just describes whot we know in a way that we can understand it.

Not... really. It therefore falls under the category of particle and quantum physics, as the "before the big bang" is actually whot M-theory attempts to describe, and it's still considered to be a form of quantum physics.

Physics just describes that which we witness, if it's possible for things to exist beyond space and time, the study of defining such would still be a branch of physics, though it'd probably be called something different due to existing outside of the boarder of infinity.

Mmm sadly the definition of 'god' here is exactly whot bothers me, one in which the name is used, but invoked not as a 'being of divine origin' but rather just as 'oh screw it I have no clue, it's magic'.

Well I disagree with alot of the descriptions yeu used XD However, I do find it LIKELY that god could exist before spacetime's origin, there are alternate possibilities as well however, and the definition of 'god' doesn't neccesarily mean an actual INTELLIGENCE. Therefore, I don't believe in god in the traditional sense, but rather as a possible entity that may or may not even be self aware. And may not even be actually an entity, and may not even exist at all. The evidence suggests its' existance as plausible, and even likely, but it does not proove irrifuteably.

For the most part I do agree, I just disagree with the method at which yeu came to yeur conclusion ^.~
Conclusion is not about a method.
It exists irrespective of what leads to it.

You know much. And you are a sharp thinker.
The series of numbers I gave is not more complex than any other series of numbers.
That was my exact point.

So we have a disagreement, after all.
I say random numbers do not exist.
Subject does not determine the object.

Every problem I have had, I have solved it with numbers.
Why?
Numbers are immutable.
Why?
They do not random.

5. Matter, dot like determined and absolutely localised objects or wave patterns spread through a discrete space time.

*ironic tone*

6. Originally Posted by wildcat
Conclusion is not about a method.
It exists irrespective of what leads to it.

You know much. And you are a sharp thinker.
The series of numbers I gave is not more complex than any other series of numbers.
That was my exact point.

So we have a disagreement, after all.
I say random numbers do not exist.
Subject does not determine the object.

Every problem I have had, I have solved it with numbers.
Why?
Numbers are immutable.
Why?
They do not random.
random numbers do exist, Pi. Irrational numbers...
Example: Give me the exact circumference of a circle with a diameter of 1 meter.

Answer: You can't using mathematics. Math does not equal reality, the equation will tell you the circle never ends(a microscopic gap exists according to math), however in reality we can simply see for ourselves that the gap does not exist.

7. Originally Posted by EcK
Matter, dot like determined and absolutely localised objects or wave patterns spread through a discrete space time.

*ironic tone*
You are more right than you can guess.

They say matter was hot and it exploded.
What nonsense.

A vacuum does not hot.

8. Originally Posted by wildcat
You are more right than you can guess.

They say matter was hot and it exploded.
What nonsense.

A vacuum does not hot.
Actually, i'm probably more right than you can guess.
I'm modest like that.

(you started it!)

9. Originally Posted by INTJ123
random numbers do exist, Pi. Irrational numbers...
Example: Give me the exact circumference of a circle with a diameter of 1 meter.

Answer: You can't using mathematics. Math does not equal reality, the equation will tell you the circle never ends(a microscopic gap exists according to math), however in reality we can simply see for ourselves that the gap does not exist.
Exactly.
The circle does not end.
This is what I said in the first place.

God does not have ten fingers.
We do.
Do we see beyond our ten fingers?

110 - (10 X 10) = 11 - (1 X 1)
99 - (9 X 9) = 22 - (2 X 2)

Round and round we go.

10. Originally Posted by EcK
Actually, i'm probably more right than you can guess.
I'm modest like that.

(you started it!)
Bonus points to EcK for PURE AWESOME XD

A vacuum does not hot.
Well 'heat' is just energy in the form of vibration. If it's a "true" vacuum, there's nothing to vibrate, hence no heat is possible.

So we have a disagreement, after all.
I say random numbers do not exist.
Subject does not determine the object.

Every problem I have had, I have solved it with numbers.
Why?
Numbers are immutable.
Why?
They do not random.
As yeu stated before, conclusion is not a method. The conclusion existed from the start; math and numbers are just a method of description of the conclusion. While the numbers themselves may technically not truly be random, that which they attempt to describe may very well be, which in turn can cause the numbers themselves to become a poor attempt at quantifying randomness... randominity... randomosity? Something like that.

There is, however, a case where numbers are never random: inside a computer. Love the term "random number generator" because... a computer can't do so. Every single time yeu see a "random" number from a computer, it's just created using a complex algorithm using a 'randomized' 'seed' to start with, for example the time on a clock, which will change constantly, making each time yeu press the button calculate a different answer. It's not random in the slightest, but if yeu don't know the process it's using the get the number, and don't know the starting input, it's close enough to LOOK random.

Some cases though, where it's forced to generate a random number with speed and limited processing power, this can become apparant that 'random' is anything but... check the RNG on an MMORPG, due to the issues of lag, and thousands of RNG's needing to be considered every single second at times, it's pretty obvious that it's not REALLY trying to hide its' "not really all that random"ness all that well.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO