Is Randomness in Physics Truly Random or Just Our Uncertainty?

[.Scott]

Thank all of you for reply. I am new here and i didn't know where to post my question. i wanted to what do people exactly mean when they use the word RANDOM in physics.

I think there is one more think to say about "random" as it is used to describe physics - and I'll try to describe it as non-technically as possible. I will use a binary measurement as an example - a measurement that results in one of two results. A QM experiment can be set up where "locally" the result of the measurement is entirely unpredictable - as if a bit of information had been added to the universe completely unknown and unknowable to that measuring site. However, if the state being measure is entangled, then another QM experimenter a distance away may be discovering that same information.

Now if these two sites compare their results, each will see the others results as completely predictable - a copy of their own result.
But if they never compared results, each might think he had an original and unique string of random bits.

In general, there is no apparent "entanglement" and so there is no possibility on comparing results with another measuring site, and so QM measurements are commonly taken to be "random" in the "original and unique" sense of the term. Moreover, there are QM experiments that convincingly demonstrate that specific information about the results of future measurements is unavailable until the measurement is made - in that sense "random". But at this point we still don't know whether QM results are truly random in the sense that they are determined only by "luck" - or even ever determined by "luck".