The discussion centers around the existence of true randomness in reality, exploring its implications in various contexts such as quantum mechanics, philosophical interpretations, and practical applications. Participants examine whether randomness is a fundamental aspect of nature or merely a reflection of our ignorance and limitations in knowledge.
Participants express a range of views on the nature of randomness, with no consensus reached. Some argue for the existence of true randomness, particularly in quantum mechanics, while others maintain that randomness is a reflection of our incomplete understanding of complex systems.
The discussion includes various assumptions about knowledge, measurement, and the nature of reality, with participants acknowledging the limitations of their arguments and the potential for hidden variables influencing outcomes.
No, but to me it suggests that it wouldn't be unreasonable to act on the basis that those phenomena are fundamentally deterministic at some level of awareness (unless doing so made one miserable.)BWV said:Does the fact that a deterministic model describes a system to the level of precision that we care about make the underlying phenomena deterministic to any arbitrary level of precision (which TRVE determinism would imply)?