Does random really exist?

Plenty of  ponder-points here, to get you thinking:

http://cameroncounts.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/does-randomness-exist/

http://www.askmehelpdesk.com/advice/t-12733.html

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=246043


[Plenty more if you look.]


Let me explain why I started this thread.


The first link in particular presents a brief , but well-structured and well-explained examination of the phenomenon.
Points she raises I would have thought were worthy of comment from readers on this forum -- if only a knee-jerk reaction! 


The second link raises interesting and often thoughtful, detailed  discussion points that lend themselves as discussion catalysts here.


The third link offers some very challenging and interesting perspectives about random from physicists, and from those with an interest in physics.


I chose the links carefully to expose a range of views from different perspectives.


Given that roulette is generally thought to be based on random acts of the ball I thought players would have a vested interest in exploring random.

And given that "random" seems to underpin many of the bet selection methods already mentioned on the forum, I also thought a closer examination of random would be entirely appropriate.

Random exists enough for the casino to make a ton of money.
Good enough for me.

I believe Random exists otherwise we wouldn't consider it's non-existence.

I suggest both posters read the links provided...!!   

Look at bowling pins immediately after they have been.  The 1 pin can be slanted in hundreds of ways and moving at various speeds.  It can also be spinning.  It may hit the two or three or hit either wall and bounce back.  Each pin that is hit acts in the same manner as the 1.  By the time you get to the 7,8,9 and 10, the first six are flying about in probably one of millions of possible ways.

I know; I bowled; I watched it for years.

If you believe there is no random, then there is no wind in Oklahoma!

Now, the ball's initial touching of the 1 pin set off the random sequence.  No argument there.  It's what happens next that I call random.

Sam

I reckon, in bowls, the system is entirely deterministic.  Same as the ball movement on a pool table.  But the permutations are infinite because of the curvature and other factors (such as weight distributions and so on) of the objects involved.  the Terminator could figure it out.  Just my 2 cents worth.


MG - nice! 

Quote from: sqzbox on January 08, 2013, 04:12:15 AM
I reckon, in bowls, the system is entirely deterministic.  Same as the ball movement on a pool table.  But the permutations are infinite because of the curvature and other factors (such as weight distributions and so on) of the objects involved.  the Terminator could figure it out.  Just my 2 cents worth.


MG - nice! 

Is a bowl predictable? Then should a all (macro)psysics and that including a wheel be predictable.


Are there more than one randomness? A randomness which is not predictable due to lack of knowing, and a "pure" randomness which is impossible to crack how much we ever know.

True Random in B+M casinos.

Mickey Mouse Random Online.

<sigh>....  I really wonder from the posts thus far if anyone has actually read any of the links.

I posted them as the basis for further discussion!!

Oh well...

Random exists. But its not the big untamed monster its made out to be. It has virtual limits. Points it simply cannot pass in realistic time frames. Or pass rarely.

Once you identify one of these VIRTUAL LIMITS. You are no longer at its mercy. You play with a confidence, A knowing, that no matter what stings of numbers it throws up.

Its now in your arena, waiting to be conquered.

esoito

Yes, I did read as much as I could stand to read.  Mostly bloviation!!

It seems we are not answering the question as you want. I answered the question using the best example I could.  The ten pool balls are an excellent example, also.

The writings were a bunch of guys in a pissing contest.  That just leaves me bored. 

Let me give you an exaggerample:  My oak tree has one acorn hanging,way up high. I know it will fall and as it falls, it will hit numerous branches on the way down.  Each branch will give new direction, however slight, to the fall.   I begin setting "Red Solo Cup"s all around the base and for two hundred feel out from the base.  I number each cup form 1 to XXXXXX.  When that acorn falls, it will land it a cup.  (We are discounting the fact it may fall into a crack between the cups, but if it does, that crack was randomly picked.)  Tell me the above scenario is not possible or plausible!

Here are my thoughts about random:  It exists, it can be proven to exit and there isn't one tiny thing humans can do about it.

Was that good enough?

Sam

True story:  I saw an acorn fall and my dog Chester directly on top of his head.  What, if not random, caused Chester to be in the exact spot at the exact right time to be hit?

Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on January 08, 2013, 01:02:10 AM
I believe Random exists otherwise we wouldn't consider it's non-existence.

Maybe you are just playing devil's advocate, and not wishing to act contraire, but I think you will find that randomness never has a time of non-existence.  Everything you encounter from the roulette wheel is a normal activity of randomness.

In the above vein. if a discussion about non-existance prove existance, the what about Bigfoot?  The Loch Ness Monster?  God?  A winning roulette system?

"I never saw a purple cow.
I hope I never see one.
But I can tell you anyhow,
I'd rather see than be one."

Sam