Quote:
KnowledgeIsPower wrote
We can agree that there are regularities in nature that allow us to make predictions. The question I'm asking you is, are there any experiments you can perform that can prove that these things are controlled and aren't simply extremely large coincidences?
Let me put it simpler, what is the testable difference between a law that controls a coin to land 50 heads in a row versus a coincidence that there happen to be 50 heads in a row? What have you really explained with declaring that there is a law that gives 50 heads in row? With or without the idea of a law we can still make the predictions. It's completely superfluous.
|
I think that using known physical laws (yes, I know it is verbal shorthand) to model a situation and, from them to predict that there will be a 50 head run in the next 50 flips would disqualify that run as a coincidence. You are right that it might still really be a coincidence that the system behaved as though it was not a coincidence. Since we are not in the realm of proof and absolutes (that is mathematics), we can, as we must, work based on the probabilities and we will occasionally be wrong, say once every 10^100 times.