PugJr Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Either luck can not exist in the form of rolling a dice or computers are truly random. Here I will explain: You throw a dice. It lands on a number. No! Thats not luck as someone could know the number before its even generated by looking at the physics of it. How hard was it thrown? Whats the gravity? Etc. etc. etc. OR You throw a dice. You do not care about what determines it to land on the number but accept it as random. Now the same exact thing can be applied to a computer. I process some code. I check how long it took to process the code. I use the 10th (Or some number to the right that can be 0-9 consistently random) digit to the right of the decimal. Now then, what determines how long it takes to process the code? Same thing (Just in a different form) as rolling a dice. Now how is this any farther from rolling a dice? Why is this considered not to be random? Actually, I believe that would be /more/ random than a dice as with our current knowledge, it wouldn't surprise me if we could figure out what number it will land on if we have all the variables needed (the dice). How do you determine it with the computer example I've given? Just one of those things I cant stand. Computers can randomize. (Unless there is something wrong in what I'm expressing.) As in reality, nothing is truly random, as everything must have to be predetermined by something to obtain that. You can not find anything completely random without any possiblity of being able to determine it prior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oni-kun Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Heh.. Brings back memories. Yes, your theory about nothing being truly random is indeed true (There are a limited amount of physics in the conviened universe) so what we inevitably have to call it is pseudorandom number generation. There are many well built methods such as iterating over Mersenne primes with a founded seed, but that's all you'll really get in the computer world. You can go farther and retrieve analogue voltage noise from an empty pin on a serial port, or what some have done generate numbers based off of atmospheric radiation. Random is a definition, how it is interpreted into logic can infinitely vary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadTechie Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 I'll keep this short as i am about to go to bed, easy solution change the meaning of random to "low predictability rating due to too many factors" SOLVED! as we're on the subject of predictability (well kinda) I remember a theory that suggested if you could calculate all the forces on every atom in the universe. you could in essence play all the actions forward at a slightly fast pace thus predict the future... The problems I see with this are not only do you need everything at once but anything used to do the calculations would have changing atoms and will then need to be re-calculated which then means its atoms have change thus it needs to re-calculated etc etc etc etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel0 Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Yes, your theory about nothing being truly random is indeed true [...] Since when did that become universally accepted in the scientific world? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salathe Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Since when did that become universally accepted in the scientific world? It didn't. Just another oni-kun-truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnoTheDev Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 This post is random! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oni-kun Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 It didn't. Just another oni-kun-truth. Aren't we cute, now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salathe Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Aren't we cute, now? The 'shy' smiley gives that effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cags Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 It didn't. Just another oni-kun-truth. Aren't we cute, now? I dunno about now, I've always been cute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnoTheDev Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 I dunno about now, I've always been cute. Really. Not from your Facebook profile picture! [attachment deleted by admin] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 Yes, your theory about nothing being truly random is indeed true You better let the people working in quantum physics know about this, they have it all wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oni-kun Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 Yes, your theory about nothing being truly random is indeed true You better let the people working in quantum physics know about this, they have it all wrong. It's all semantics, That first sentence was a Freudian slip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.