Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (7888)	9/8/2001 9:25:56 PM
From: cosmicforce	Respond to of 28931

The mathematical definition of random involves basically the definition you are giving, and I think, Cambel uses. Given that f(x) is a random function, then the output of f(x)can only be described by a probability distribution. Getting back to free-will and this definition of randomness, I have no problem with the mind's action distorting the probability distribution of outcomes. Even for something I think is practically certain, the output function can simply never reach a probability of 100% for THAT outcome (or even 0% for that matter!). 99.999999% or 0.000000001%, but not 100% or 0%. Because of the simply enormous number of states that I pass through each second, even the smallest systematic probability change produces such a distortion.