JH, >> It is my position that random events occur.>> as i said, events appear random to observers who either (i) ask "wrong" questions in quantum mech, or (ii) do not have sufficient knowledge in classical phenomena. e.g., with radioactive decay, >> in the decay or half life of the radioactive element and in quantum mechanical states>> "wrong" questions are, e.g., when (at what moment of time) a given nucleus decays? or, how many nuclei decay in so much time? correct questions may be: what is half-life of a nucleus? or, what is the probability distibution for the decay? if you ask a "wrong" question, you can't get a meaningfull answer, then you say "things happen at random".
>> Einstein, in responding to Bohr and Heisenburg >> it is heisenbErg.
at that time nobody, including bohr and einstein, were brought up on quantum mech, therefore it was quite humanly natural for them to ask questions that were "right" in classical mech, but turned out to be "wrong' in quantum mech. "right" q.m. is deterministic, however, for humans with everyday classical experience it may appear paradoxical, random or weird.
>> True randomness must exist if evolution (random mutations)happen.>>
here the system is perhaps substantially classical, so what a biologist calls "random" is not of a fundamental nature, but really means "i didn't follow in real time all the organisms, watching all gamma rays that hit them, and taking track of all quite reprodicible and deterministic mutations, therefore i have a choice (i) either i can say that i don't know anything, or (ii) i will describe these mutations in all these many organisms in terms of probabilities, etc.
don't confuse randomness of convenience in "complex systems" with (nonexistent) fundamental randomness. laws of nature are not random, but definitive and deterministic. |
