# Does pure random exist?

I had this in mind for long so want to share it after reading the Infinity thread.

Its 3am here and i just get an hour to be on CE, plus i am using a foldable rubber keyboard as normal is not working...bear with me
.

Is pure random or unpredictable event possible, theoretically?

Yes, we can say tossing a coin, tossing ball on a numbered patch of ground, a person saying random numbers, nuclear isotope releasing alpha radiation in random directions. BUT

Theoretically, if it is possible to know the next number by calculating the next move. For example an equation is derived where a coin toss can be predicted by using an equation. This equation keeps in consideration movement, toss speed, blah blah. Then it becomes predictable. Just like physics question on force; if we push it with this much force, it will move that much. Or stream of digital data may seem random but is useful data when decoded with a formula.

I know this is not possible with everything practically. so then theoretically nothing is random. Even human actions could be predicted by previous inputs to the equation.

Ok, I asked this question to answer if "infinite is possible". Just like in the case of infinite, randomness depends on our perception and observation. Do you agree?

## Replies

• Ashraf HZ
Lol, "randomness" is probably the fulcrum of the whole theory of evolution π

Anyhow, regarding random generation in encryption schemes, no system is perfect. However, when Quantum Computing reaches mainstream, thats as close as you can get to generating random numbers!
• Dexter_Neo
Hmm Quite logical thinking........tell me diid u really plan those thoughts about randomness or they were just "Random" ?????

there r things which r random and will remain random.even if we drive a equation of "infinite " variables we wont be able to formulate an equation for "Randomness"
• xheavenlyx
Well me and my friend were talking stuff on science in our dorm room once. And the topic of randomness came (kinda randomly), he said this same thing above as stated above on my original post, and from there I thought about this a bit more..

HAHa, nice reply anyway, my thoughts were random (random science stuff)! They were BUT BUT, they were random because we dont have any formula YET to predict what is coming from our head, if somehow I can put all our conversations of that night with my friend in a supposed formula then it may be possible to predect the next topic, but this is not possible for now...maybe after computation gets faster, better, stronger π (maybe, i dont want to speculate yes or no now)

However, I agree what you have said about "there r things which r random and will remain random" because ultimately there will ALWAYS be a gap in our perception even if science advances. For example the classic theory of the buterfly effect.

If I rem correctly, present physicians are actually thinking of "discovering this formula" As Stephen Hawking puts it...its called the Grand Unified Theory!
Think about the storage man π. To know whether it is pure random, you have to define a universe set which is infinite. Where do you store that?

My take -
If you cant define it, how will you know that its out there

But, yes, I guess one can believe that its out there.
• Kaustubh Katdare
Gosh, you guys are simply great! Really good imagination going on here.

Let's say, I close my eyes and put my hand in a bucket full of marbles. I pick one randomly.

Next, I define the position of each & every marble with reference to a stationary point. I also define my position with reference to the same point. Then, probably I'll be able to come up with an equation to correctly point out which marble I pick under given circumstance.

The point here, in my opinion, is defining the references. I believe pure random ceases to exist the moment we bring in parameters. If my argument makes sense, we're coming back to the fact "everything is relative"!

Am I really making sense?
• prakash.athani
Randomness or unpredictability originates from the world of sub-atomic particles, that is microscopic world. We live in macroscopic world.Every event in macroscopic world is a superposition of all possible events in the microscopic world and my friends unfortunately microscopic world has a principle called Heisenberg' uncertainty princple.This principe means that the very act of observing a system disturbs the system under study and it is not a theriotical assumption.And according to Heisennberg unpredictability is inherent to system under study even in theory.
• xheavenlyx
@Biggie:
Next, I define the position of each & every marble with reference to a stationary point. I also define my position with reference to the same point. Then, probably I'll be able to come up with an equation to correctly point out which marble I pick under given circumstance.

The point here, in my opinion, is defining the references. I believe pure random ceases to exist the moment we bring in parameters. If my argument makes sense, we're coming back to the fact "everything is relative"!

Am I really making sense?
I love you man! Thats probably what I wanted to say but you said it in a very very eloquent way! Absolutely my point. Only a minor change; The moment you (can) define the arguments and parameters then randomness ceases to exist.

Randomness or unpredictability originates from the world of sub-atomic particles, that is microscopic world. We live in macroscopic world.Every event in macroscopic world is a superposition of all possible events in the microscopic world and my friends unfortunately microscopic world has a principle called Heisenberg' uncertainty princple.This principe means that the very act of observing a system disturbs the system under study and it is not a theriotical assumption.And according to Heisennberg unpredictability is inherent to system under study even in theory.
Wow!! This is so true too. I believe in this absolutely. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and the "Butterfly Effect" have interested me for sometime now. And I think they play a very deep role in the universe and our living, which science cannot YET measure/describe.

@kiddakaka

To know whether it is pure random, you have to define a universe set which is infinite. Where do you store that?
Why should a set be infinite for pure random? I mean when you can have a coin tossing randomness (set with 2 elements) whats there a need for infinite set? And why in the name of heaven, why ....Oh shit, ok, My brother just passed by and I asked his this questions...he simply said...Human mind is Pure random (for now) and computers aren't! Now I understand what you mean Kidakaka π Yes, in COMPUTERS it isnt possible (for now, in short read my next post).

If you cant define it, how will you know that its out there
I know you didnt exactly mean what it says here. But "It's always out there, till you define it." - xheavenlyxΓΒ© .
• xheavenlyx
Someone a while back gave an idea on Hack-a-day. Using a radioactive substance to generate random pixels on a webcam*, take that data and THEN randomly choose values based on that range! Nice no?

Well, theres one catch. Getting a radio active substance π heheh

Its not as difficult as we might think. You know those smoke detectors on the cielings of some office building, They can be used fairly easily. From how stuff works, " Inside an ionization detector is a small amount (perhaps 1/5000th of a gram) of americium-241. The #-Link-Snipped-# element americium has a half-life of 432 years, and is a good source of alpha particles."

*

How safe is it? from #-Link-Snipped-#:

As long as the radiation source stays in the detector, exposures would be negligible (less than about 1/100 of a millirem per year), since alpha particles cannot travel very far or penetrate even a single sheet of paper, and the gamma rays emitted by americium are relatively weak. If the source were removed, it would be very easy for a small child to swallow, but even then exposures would be very low because the source would pass through the body fairly rapidly (by contrast, the same amount of americium in a loose powdered form would give a significant dose if swallowed or inhaled)
*BEST SOURCE OF PROJECT (Also the Image is from there):

P.S: Sometimes its not neccessary to use any of this fancy, awesome radioactive stuff. Just increase the exposure level and/or change the brightness and see some random pixels on your screen! This may/may not work. you know what these are? Can be cosmic rays, or random particles (sub-atomic), or just electric interference.
• KINETIC_JOULES
xheavenlyx
Is pure random or unpredictable event possible, theoretically?

-------------------

Ok, I asked this question to answer if "infinite is possible". Just like in the case of infinite, randomness depends on our perception and observation. Do you agree?
To others, someone spouting out numbers (for example) is random and unpredictable, because the spectator does not know which number will come next; but to the being saying the numbers, it is indeed NOT random because their mind is calculating which number to say next.
So, to debate with your philosophy, "randomness" is indeed is possible, but at the same time not.
So, I cannot say whether or not I agree that is possible.
Am I making any sense?
• xheavenlyx
So, to debate with your philosophy, "randomness" is indeed is possible, but at the same time not.
So, I cannot say whether or not I agree that is possible.
Am I making any sense?
Yea, you are making sense π

Its the thing biggie said, everything is relative. Ans as you said, it exists and also not! depending where you are π

In a sense if I know the numbers I am saying it means its not random on the whole (as us humans can know, if I tell a scientists all the next numbers I am thinking of or something), thus the question remains will there ever be an event (or series of events) that are random and its IMPOSSIBLE to know the outcome, no matter how advance we are? (And yea, P.S: I am talking about events and numbers, not just numbers)

Is Emotions the answer? I dont know...you know BCI (brain computer Interfaces) are coming closer to reading our minds albeit very slowly.
• Jeanius
I'd post something insightful here, but there's a chance that doing so will spark a random set of events and blow my computer to bits.
• xheavenlyx
Who knows? It may be far worse. You computer evolving into an intelligent being, something like Matrix 4.
• KINETIC_JOULES
Jeanius
I'd post something insightful here, but there's a chance that doing so will spark a random set of events and blow my computer to bits.
LMAO! Maybe. . .
• gohm
Hmm, you must be careful, the TV show south park had a school Trapper Keeper that caused a lot of trouble once that happened...

xheavenlyx
Who knows? It may be far worse. You computer evolving into an intelligent being, something like Matrix 4.
• KINETIC_JOULES
Lmao "We must nuke imagination land!"
• MaRo
According to all my tries to write Random number generators they all fail! OK, Computers may be 100% predictable, According to my limited knowledge only the thoughts in our brain are the random thing.
• KINETIC_JOULES
MaRo
According to all my tries to write Random number generators they all fail! OK, Computers may be 100% predictable, According to my limited knowledge only the thoughts in our brain are the random thing.
So, you're saying that our brain isn't random? Well, we control out thoughts so it can't be random.
• MaRo
KINETIC_JOULES
So, you're saying that our brain isn't random? Well, we control out thoughts so it can't be random.
Yes, you can't predict what may happen in the next minute
• KINETIC_JOULES
But then you said our thoughts were random.
• xheavenlyx
Dudeee Kinetic! you are confusing yourself and others! lol

Computers may be 100% predictable, According to my limited knowledge only the thoughts in our brain are the random thing.
He said its random. Then I lost it after that... Goes like this:

MaRo: Only the thoughts in our brain are the random thing.

Kin: So, you're saying that our brain isn't random? Well, we control out thoughts so it can't be random. (Ed: He said they were random)

M@r0: You can't predict what may happen in the next minute. (Ed: Hence Random)

K!n: But then you said our thoughts were random. (Ed: He did! Maybe you missread "can't" as can)

Oh man everything's spinning...randomly...oh god am I ... going...crazyy[sub]Y[/sub]
• KINETIC_JOULES
I did miss read "can't" sorry, xhx!
• Kaustubh Katdare
I really want to see some good ideas flowing into this discussion. Hello!
• Ashraf HZ
If randomness does not exist, we'd know exactly want the other person is thinking. If so, there is no need to communicate with each other. If we know what is going to happen next, there is no need to test or discover things.

Engineers would then be unemployed, and life would end up being totally be monotonous and boring π
• KINETIC_JOULES
ash
If randomness does not exist, we'd know exactly want the other person is thinking. If so, there is no need to communicate with each other. If we know what is going to happen next, there is no need to test or discover things.

Engineers would then be unemployed, and life would end up being totally be monotonous and boring π
Wow. . . that took thinking. I do realize that now.
• Kaustubh Katdare
ash
If randomness does not exist, we'd know exactly want the other person is thinking. If so, there is no need to communicate with each other. If we know what is going to happen next, there is no need to test or discover things.

Engineers would then be unemployed, and life would end up being totally be monotonous and boring π
Ash, I believe we'd be able to tell what other person is thinking - only if we could, somehow, translate those electric pulses in our brain. Just wait for few years and you'll have to think twice before you think π².

I've been thinking on similar lines. Say, while playing chess, do you think your opponent's move is always random? π
• Mayur Pathak
The_Big_K
I've been thinking on similar lines. Say, while playing chess, do you think your opponent's move is always random? π
Yay! With some probability equations, I'm sure some one in future will plan the entire game. You make a move as per the plan. Every move will have, say, only 'x' possible replies. If you could some how interpolate these, you will already know what the other person's move will be. I think you could plan your next move on the basis of your conclusion. The randomness thus, will be eliminated. You would have already played the entire game in your mind.

I'm sure its possible. π
• Kaustubh Katdare
mayurpathak
Yay! With some probability equations, I'm sure some one in future will plan the entire game. You make a move as per the plan. Every move will have, say, only 'x' possible replies. If you could some how interpolate these, you will already know what the other person's move will be. I think you could plan your next move on the basis of your conclusion. The randomness thus, will be eliminated. You would have already played the entire game in your mind.

I'm sure its possible. π

Hmm. What I'm saying is, is it possible to define the next move out of 'x' possible moves? That's possible only if we had a crystal clear understanding of how we think under given circumstances.
• Mayur Pathak
I'm not sure how we do it. But its not impossible too. Think of a goal keeper trying to save a penalty kick. Is it possible for him to guess which direction to go every time?
• MaRo
@Mayur: that's right the random thing is human brain anything else depends on the brain output.
• Ashraf HZ
The_Big_K
Ash, I believe we'd be able to tell what other person is thinking - only if we could, somehow, translate those electric pulses in our brain. Just wait for few years and you'll have to think twice before you think π².

I've been thinking on similar lines. Say, while playing chess, do you think your opponent's move is always random? π
Ah, thats not what I meant biggie π Of course we can always use MRI techniques and neuro implants (with MEMS) to measure brain signals.

I meant it on a more general level. If I know what you think already before you even think it, then I dont need to communicate with you. I don't need to put sensors in your brain even.

Humans would not need to communicate with each other if there was no randomness π
• Mayur Pathak
ash
Ah, thats not what I meant biggie π Of course we can always use MRI techniques and neuro implants (with MEMS) to measure brain signals.
This is the proof. Randomness exist in humans. But what about electronic gadgets? Some times my mobile or even my laptop goes in random mode... doesn't interpret simple signals π

You are reading an archived discussion.

## AT commands

hi guys. how many of you are familiar about AT commands.i needed to know about the message sending and receiving message using AT command set.

## Hi

Hi all, Have a nice day, Regards, vinay

## Hello folks

Hello. Yes, I know it is Van Helsing and not Van Elsing... but somehow, the "H" got lost wile registering... If someone could change the mistake or have a hint...

## How to run a 32 bit application using a program in C

π first of all, hello everyone there!!! im glad to be a part of such an eclectic group of people..π there's a problem thats drivin me crazy : how do...

## Automating a MS Word Add-In

Hi Guys, I am working in financial firm. I would like to aoutomate the product. How it works? It is a add in which sits on word document, takes the...