The echoes of randomness
August 27th 2007 20:51
Some people tend to think that the world can be defined by models. Others, on the other hand, are there to proove all the time that the only model that works is randomness, and thus no model created will work all the time.
For the best, it will work until someone prooves it is wrong, following Popper..
So, the conclusion would be that the world is a sequence of random efects? Well, it can't be taken like this..you have just to consider that no model can be taken as the "final truth", since it can fall into contradiction tomorrow...
These effects of randomness are, in the point of view of the theory presented in this blog, the effects of the "finite dimension world" used for the developpment of models. No model developped 'till these days take an infinite quantity of inputs to define it's output (and i think we'll never get to it...). Thus, for any model, there will be dimensions that can influence the result, but are not used in the model.
This is the point where ramdomness gets in. Since there will allways be inputs disconsidered, the models will allways have holes, where statistics will show their importance...
but don't fool yourself, there is no randomness in the world. It's just your eyes trying to understand something that is actually infinite dimensional..
Why would you believe me in this matter? Well, you agree that some rules are not perfect, but we use them all the time: Newton's laws are not perfect, nevertheless try asking engineers to leave it...knowledge has been evolving like this for the last cenruty, and thanks to Mr. Hilbert and the maths he designed in the 50ths, i can imagine a way to understand the evolution of our world.
XXth century men used to have problems considering randomness in their analysis. I think we passed over this, and XXIst century men will have dificulty considering that "randomness" is nothing but something our mind created to avoid the infinty of causes every single fact has.
cheers. Uula
For the best, it will work until someone prooves it is wrong, following Popper..
So, the conclusion would be that the world is a sequence of random efects? Well, it can't be taken like this..you have just to consider that no model can be taken as the "final truth", since it can fall into contradiction tomorrow...
These effects of randomness are, in the point of view of the theory presented in this blog, the effects of the "finite dimension world" used for the developpment of models. No model developped 'till these days take an infinite quantity of inputs to define it's output (and i think we'll never get to it...). Thus, for any model, there will be dimensions that can influence the result, but are not used in the model.
This is the point where ramdomness gets in. Since there will allways be inputs disconsidered, the models will allways have holes, where statistics will show their importance...
but don't fool yourself, there is no randomness in the world. It's just your eyes trying to understand something that is actually infinite dimensional..
Why would you believe me in this matter? Well, you agree that some rules are not perfect, but we use them all the time: Newton's laws are not perfect, nevertheless try asking engineers to leave it...knowledge has been evolving like this for the last cenruty, and thanks to Mr. Hilbert and the maths he designed in the 50ths, i can imagine a way to understand the evolution of our world.
XXth century men used to have problems considering randomness in their analysis. I think we passed over this, and XXIst century men will have dificulty considering that "randomness" is nothing but something our mind created to avoid the infinty of causes every single fact has.
cheers. Uula
| 38 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
