If you believe in randomness, you actually believe in magic.

1. 66

   ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

   I find that people who think that the world and consciousness just emerged out of an accident don't realize what that means. It shows a lot of ignorance.
   
   First of all, nothing in your body, not even the strands of your hair is random. Each was caused by some genetic programming, the food you eat, your state of health etc.
   
   The reality is the ecosystem is not random as well. All aspects of nature is linked to each other like some kind of perfect masterpiece.
   
   The world was shaped by cosmic conditions as well. They didn't just accidentally form randomly and we got lucky. It is part of a cosmic system that repeats in various levels of reality.
   
   The idea that we randomly emerged from space with no rhyme nor reason is actually unsubstantiated. Everything about the universe and the earth as well as us seems to be following a kind of system.
   
   To believe that we emerged out of this orderly system without any cause,no primary force is like thinking we magically appeared from thin air. Like "poof!"
   here we are abracadabra!

   replyreport
   1. 55

      killedbyapandaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      ive got to say that I, for one believe completely the views that you are expressimg although i have viewed your feed and i have to say that I, for one see you as an intolerable human being, and ill tell you for why! all your blogs and forums are about depressing and sad topics which are misleading and uninformative! Sam Birch Out! X

      replyreport
      1. 66

         ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         and who are you? I can't even begin to understand your context. But thanks for reading my blogs and forums because i have no idea who you are and frankly don't care what you think.

         replyreport
2. 58

   Beelzedadposted 13 years ago

   This might be better suited for the Religion forum as it appears to be based on beliefs.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      yes, randomness is logical indeed and that should go on to science and education. Like yes, please math means nothing. Go peddle your 50s ideas in the the 50s sciences...oh that's right it doesn't exist.

      replyreport
3. 67

   superwagsposted 13 years ago

   This shoud be in a religious forum if you're going to make an irreducable complexity argument, this hypothesis was disproven years ago - look it up.
   
   Although I had an experience of it on my way to work this morning; I saw a car with the registration plate "G427 EDY". Imagine that, of all the cars in the world, I happened to see that one - one in a billion surely?

   replyreport
   1. 65

      StarCreateposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Love it!  even more amazing is I actually saw one that had a completely different set of numbers at the same time.  Coincidence?  I think not...

      replyreport
      1. 67

         superwagsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         That truely is remarkable. We're are being guided by a higher power for sure...

         replyreport
   2. 66

      ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      what was disproven? Oh...you mean the Intelligent Design thing. I wasn't talking about it. Things are caused by things. They don't just RANDOMLY happen. Now is there a mind that is arranging everything, I don't know. I just know NOTHING is random. It's all probabilities but definitely everything is caused by something, like a chain of events.
      
      
      If you think your beliefs are random, you're wrong. They were shaped by your experiences. They were sculpted not only by your choices but also the mentors that you've had. It is not random that you believe in randomness. People who believe in randomness need to few lessons on modern-day physics and causality.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         superwagsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Then who are you saying believes in randomness and what's your point? I don't know of anybody who believes that things are just here because of random chance.
         
         I thought you were going to give the irreducible complexity argument about all things have to stem from a creator because of how complex they are. I'm glad that's not what you're saying.
         
         Causality is key to any of the natural sciences, particularly physics.

         replyreport
         1. 66

            ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            There are people here who like to use science but then believe that includes that life just Randomly appeared, like poof! Life! what a happy accident. earth is here. wow...magic oh look what a coincidence. Earth.  Earth is a product of a pattern that can be observed in varying scales in the arrow of time.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               superwagsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Oh right, apologies for initially biting your head off, I thought you were a devil-dodger who was about to tell me that it was all because of some higher purpose...

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  She'll get to that. Giver her time..

                  replyreport
                  1. 66

                     ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Unlike you, I know what the topic is. I don't mix god mythology with physics. oh right, that's because you can't tell them apart. You actually inspired this post. You think you're talking science but you really are battling a shadow with your sword. Goodluck with that. you're the one causing the shadow mister, turn on more lights or don't be in the middle of the wall of the light. Then you'll see that the shadow is just the shadow of not having too many lights on up there.

                     replyreport
                     1. 58

                        Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        You have shown many times a very poor understanding of physics, if any understanding at all. Funny you should say that.

                        replyreport
4. 75

   skyfireposted 13 years ago

   Numbers generated by algorithm are not random as they follow set of procedures for finding the finite number. Randomness is just concept for the things which don't appear in order.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      true, it appears random until you observe the pattern. the pattern usually reveals itself in varying scales of time or measure as in the case of the grain forming a shape if a cone.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      But algorithms can use things like thermal noise (thought but not proven to be random) as input.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Noise. it is only noise if it is irrelevant to the data being measured. It depends on what you are measuring. What is noise to one scientist is valuable to the next.
         
         
         You do know that in the olden days of genetics, they used to throw out the membrane thinking they are not relevant to genetic studies. Yes, now they know that a cell CAN survive without genes but can't without membranes. What is junk to one scientist is the holy grail of another.  Point being, noise is relative to what is being observed.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Cecilia, your ability to willfully  ignore science always astounds me. I suggest you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generation

            replyreport
            1. 66

               ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Ignore science? read what you posted:
               
               A random number generator (often abbreviated as RNG) is a computational or physical device designed to generate a sequence of numbers or symbols that lack any pattern, i.e. appear random.

               replyreport
            2. 66

               ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               you however do not read current science:
               
               "After looking very deeply at Ramsey Theory and Frank Ramsey's life work I have come to the conclusion that randomness does not exist for systems having an order of complexity greater than R4."
               
               http://www.bestthinking.com/articles/so … ess-exist-

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Whatever you say, Cecilia. Whatever you say.

                  replyreport
5. 63

   Daniel Carterposted 13 years ago

   Nicely stated Cecilia. Skyfire's two cents is just as insightful.
   I like it. I think I'll stick around and observe for a while.
   

   replyreport
6. 84

   Pcunixposted 13 years ago

   In fact, we don't know if our physics is random or deterministic.
   
   Speculations abound, but until we have a full understanding of physics, either one is possible. I would say that the weight of evidence does seem to be leaning toward randomness at the particle level.
   
   So, as usual, you are at odds with current scientific understanding.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      No, I do know for a fact that the CURRENT scientific direction since the 1980s is that NOISE is actually a fractal of the larger context. They repeat constantly but in larger scales. Randomness is no longer the trend. That's only for scientists who have no working theory.
      
      "For centuries, fractal-like irregular shapes were considered beyond the boundaries of mathematical understanding. Now, mathematicians have finally begun mapping this uncharted territory. Their remarkable findings are deepening our understanding of nature and stimulating a new wave of scientific, medical, and artistic innovation stretching from the ecology of the rain forest to fashion design."
      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/hu … nsion.html
      
      There is even biological mathematics where you could either get lost in the deepening of the complexity or observe pattern. Either way, you face is a fractal of a pattern set by your genes. It is not random that is arranged that way.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         superwagsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         For anyone interested in fractals and regular roughness, this is a beautiful talk by Benoit Mandelbrot (the so-called godfather of fractals). Recently deceased, actually. He's essentially presenting theory that he worked on from the 80s, but recorded last year.
         
         http://www.ted.com/talks/benoit_mandelb … hness.html

         replyreport
         1. 66

            ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Geez, I've posted that ten million times and talked about it. Goodluck having them click that.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               superwagsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Haha! It's worth a try! It really is a beautiful talk.

               replyreport
      2. 84

         Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         We aren't talking about genes or fractals. 
         
         All that I disagree with is your certainty.  We don't know what drives particle physics, so the apparent randomness could be deterministic, of course.  Either way, it is interesting.

         replyreport
         1. 66

            ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I am and you are not.
            
            Fractal geometry includes physics. The illusion is it is random, because we have not observed a pattern. After all particles are only particles because we measured them as such, but in truth they are not units but paths of energy, of force. So the measurement is the problem, not the pattern. The pattern already exists. pull space push. - 0 +. It exists in galaxy and black hole pairings. It exists between man and woman. It exists in the solar system as the sun and jupiter. It exists in particles. fractals. repeating patterns that is the underlying cause of the order of the universe.
            
            It is no longer about whether is it random or not. But how to find the pattern, how to measure it.

            replyreport
            1. 58

               Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Nice word salad.

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I liked the man and woman part.  It makes me go all gooey inside.

                  replyreport
                  1. 63

                     Daniel Carterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Wait. You can go gooey inside? That doesn't sound like you.
                     

                     replyreport
               2. 66

                  ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  what is content for most people is word salad to you.

                  replyreport
                  1. 84

                     Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Really?  Where ARE the Cecilia groupies today?

                     replyreport
                  2. 58

                     Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Evidently.

                     replyreport
      3. 58

         Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         
         
         It only took a half dozen posts before you turned to fractals. A new record!

         replyreport
7. 66

   ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

   whatever I say has research backing me up. not just some delusional claims of randomness and wow happy accident we are alive.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Oh, absolutely. I can hardly count the things I have learned for you, like there is no such thing as an integer, that myths create reality and now that science has proven a deterministic universe.
      
      I'll be watching all your posts closely to learn more important things.
      
      Of course I have to do that: it is predestined.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         turn on more lights in the room upstairs PC,
         an integer is a mathematic symbol for an abstract. the integer is a unit of measurement to count apples, speed, time, neurons, lights on, lights off. it is not ONE THING. But ofcourse for you an integer is this thing you can touch confusing absolute value with absolute things.
         
         and myths are really part of of evolution as a species.
         And also the fact that there is an underlying order to chaos does not mean it is deterministic, but quantum. do you know what that means? DO YOU?
         it operates on probabilities and the probabilities are chosen by what? DO YOU KNOW? Do you know what quantum means?
         
         
         Protecting your world view of randomness only keeps in you the dark. there is no direction towards an understanding. That is not science, that is cluelessness.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, Cecilia, I do know what quantum means.  Of course I and everybody else is surely wrong and I breathlessly await your truth.
            
            Does it have something to do with myths or the hidden values between integers?  Do tell us!

            replyreport
            1. 66

               ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               No you don't. It's just like me saying I know how to cook a rabbit. I can claim it, but then I have no evidence. None whatsoever. No links, no sources, no citations. Just words like gobledegook, nonsense, and more demonstrations of idontknowisms.
               
               (hidden values? seriously, reconsider reading again)

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm awaiting your teachings, Cecilia.  Just as I mistakenly thought that 0 and 1 could be integers and equally erroneously thought that reality wasn't formed by myths, I am waiting to have my false learning wiped out by the true facts from you.
                  
                  I am the grasshopper, Master.

                  replyreport
                  1. 66

                     ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     once again your comprehension is off by ten books. is that how you understand jung? that myths created reality? goodluck with that shadow. Maybe you'll get it one day. like peter pan did.

                     replyreport
8. 66

   ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

   *snore*
   
   goodluck with your coincidence theory PC.

   replyreport
9. 66

   ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

   I'm having lunch. Is there anyone here with more obsolete arguments? no one other than PC? ok, bye.

   replyreport
10. 66

    ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

    "Yet another view is that numbers are just abstractions from physical magnitudes. John points out that different units lead to assignment of different numbers to the same measurement. Rosen argues that it is doubtful to think that numbers are part of the real world. There are infinitely many numbers but there isn't an infinite amount of any quantity in the real world."

    replyreport
11. 66

    ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

    "My claim is that number is very much like color. Because we live in a world full of discrete and movable objects, it is very useful for us to be able to extract number. This can help us to track predators or to select the best foraging grounds, to mention only very obvious examples. This is why evolution has endowed our brains and those of many animal species with simple numerical mechanisms. In animals, these mechanisms are very limited, as we shall see below: they are approximate, their representation becomes coarser for increasingly large numbers, and they involve only the simplest arithmetic operations (addition and subtraction). We, humans, have also had the remarkable good fortune to develop abilities for language and for symbolic notation. This has enabled us to develop exact mental representations for large numbers, as well as algorithms for precise calculations. I believe that mathematics, or at least arithmetic and number theory, is a pyramid of increasingly more abstract mental constructions based solely on (1) our ability for symbolic notation, and (2) our nonverbal ability to represent and understand numerical quantities."
    
    http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwfkt … HAENE.html
    
    go ahead. tell me again that numbers 0 and 1 are absolute.

    replyreport
    1. 84

       Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       No, no.  I USED to think that integers and logical 0 or logical one were real, but thanks to you, I now know that they do not exist at all.
       
       It's also a great comfort to know that Pan and the other gods are still running around somewhere because myths create reality.
       
       I can't remember what other amazing but true things I have learned from you, but this latest one makes me understand that it was predetermined that I would learn.
       
       What you haven't explained yet is whether it was Star Goat or Zeus who laid it all out to begin with.

       replyreport
       1. 66

          ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          yes and gods can be disproven using nand gates, if we don't measure what sentience is, because we have. goodluck.

          replyreport
          1. 84

             Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Oh, thank you: I forgot about sentient rocks and stuff.  Another mind awakening moment I owe to you.

             replyreport
             1. 66

                ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                oh that's better than I can prove gods don't exist if we assume that all parameters like sentience, data storage and even encoding are known and especially known by you. ANd it is not a fallacy because we are not measuring sentience or defining them.
                
                like you are right because you say so. thats what it means.

                replyreport
                1. 84

                   Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                   Of course. That is why I have abandoned my previous position.  I am now almost a believer.
                   
                   My only problem is that you have left me in limbo with this "myths create reality" stuff. Is it Zeus I am supposed to worship or Thor? What about Star Goat - I don't think you have made that clear.
                   
                   As soon as you straighten me out, I'll proceed as indicated.  Will I need an altar? They frown on open fires in this community; I'm not sure about slitting throats and stuff.  I do hope its not Quetzalcoatl  - I really don't think they'll let me do human sacrifice.

                   replyreport
                   1. 66

                      ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                      i have already given you the citations, PC. but then what did you say "i read fools"...sure. tell that to Oxford and MIT that their deans are fools.

                      replyreport
                      1. 84

                         Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                         Which ones were they, Cecilia?  The ones who said zero doesn't exist or the ones that said consciousness is a "mystery"?
                         
                         Or is it some one who says that myths create reality? 
                         
                         It's so hard to keep track when you impart so much amazing knowledge at once!
                         
                         But, now that I know that it was all predetermined, I see that it had to be. It is your place to teach us lesser beings, so please continue.
                         
                         Zeus or Thor or.. ?

                         replyreport
                         1. 66

                            ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                            yes the ones who write textbooks for mathematicians, metapsychology and cosmology.
                            
                            chaisson, jung, kaplan, dawkins, penrose etc.
                            
                            
                            as for zues and thor, when there is a lightniing storm, walk on a puddle and see if you don't start believing in these powers.

                            replyreport
12. 66

    ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

    lunchtime

    replyreport
13. 66

    ceciliabeltranposted 13 years ago

    you want to worship lightning bolts, that's your prerogative. call them Zues, if you want. just don't peddle your fallacies in a forum.
    you really need to understand metaphor. my daughter who has aspergers  gets it. she's six. you can too.

    replyreport
    1. 84

       Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Oh, it's all metaphor? 
       
       You didn't say that.  So, I need to INTERPRET what you say?
       
       That's hard, because I don't have the benefits of your intelligence.
       
       So, what does "Thee is no such thing as zero" really mean?
       
       How about that word salad you tossed out earlier. Was that metaphor?

       replyreport
       1. 66

          ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          no, it means that zero is not an absolute thing. it is a beginning of measurement of value, of units. if it is zero, then it doesn't signify that nothing exists before that, only that the thing being measured cannot be measured beyond 1.
          
          if that still is not clear after I have boringly repeated myself, then i suggest you buy the book and make kaplan rich.

          replyreport
          1. 84

             Pcunixposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             I love it.
             
             How many elephants in your sink again, Cecilia?

             replyreport
             1. 66

                ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                zero measurement of elephants. but elephants exists in the zoo.
                
                
                and what was the temperature yesterday? zero. does that mean no heat? NO.
                
                
                we should move to another thread because you are already fixated on not randomness but numbers.

                replyreport
       2. 66

          ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          and you don't need to interpret what i say because i am already interpreting the metaphors for you. but then, you are once again talking of gods in the subject that is not religion, being absolutely consistent in your behavior as an atheist.
          
          you cannot seem to comprehend genre. in 1st grade, you will get a B, in genre comprehension. B for beginning. Mind you my 6 year old got an S, which means, she is secure in the knowledge of fiction from non-fiction.
          
          I didn't have to explain to her that zero=infinity, she figured it out for herself,or that negative numbers get smaller in value as they move farther away from zero.
          
          she also said, mom, I think G-d is not a person, it's a symbol for everything, even beyond infinity. (she got that from the beginning and the end, and she knows that numbers begin and end with 0=infinitity) She has asperger's. she's 6. she got it. some people still don't and they no longer have an excuse.

          replyreport