Scientists Discover a Self-Replicating Protein Structure, And It Could Have Built The First Life on

[Sherlock Holmes]

I think I understand the issue you're having.

You don't know what "random" means

No, the issue is that you are unable to cite a source that states chaotic systems are not deterministic.

Randomness is a perceptual thing, it has to do with SCALE. Things that seem random at one scale may be distinctly non random at another.

(This is why we have a Law of Large Numbers).

Let's be specific and apply math to the question. First of all, we need a measure. "How random is it"? Such measures exist. There's lots of versions of them. Renyi spent half a lifetime studying the asymptotes of those measures.

Randomness is not a "property", it's an assumption. The assumption lets us do a little convenient math, which is to say, description of relationships.

The assumption is whether the system is deterministic or not, whether it be random or chaotic follows from that.

Now tell me this:

Is the roll of a pair of dice "random", or is it chaotic?

That depends on whether it is deterministic or not.

How about this: if you put a ball at the very top of a mountain and it starts rolling downhill, is the direction random or is it chaotic?

That depends on whether it is deterministic or not.

If you have a qubit that collapses, is the final state random or is it chaotic?

That depends on whether it is deterministic or not.

 

[scruffy]

No, the issue is that you are unable to cite a source that states chaotic systems are not deterministic.

I just gave you half a dozen, little troll.

You think you're smarter than Hausdorff and Renyi?

Go read the Wikipedia article, then come back and apologize

The assumption is whether the system is deterministic or not, whether it be random or chaotic follows from that.

That depends on whether it is deterministic or not.

That depends on whether it is deterministic or not.

That depends on whether it is deterministic or not.

You're being an ass.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I just gave you half a dozen, little troll.

You think you're smarter than Hausdorff and Renyi?

I read each of the two links you gave me:

https://sayanmuk.github.io/lecture9.pdf

Topological phases in discrete stochastic systems

arxiv.org

Guess what? the word "chaos" is absent from each of them.

 

[scruffy]

I read each of the two links you gave me:

https://sayanmuk.github.io/lecture9.pdf

Topological phases in discrete stochastic systems

arxiv.org

Guess what? the word "chaos" is absent from each of them.

Are you serious?

Now you're just being an idiot.

Stop with the bullshit, 'kay?

No one has time for silly word games.

If you think the roll of dice is deterministic, then PREDICT THE OUTCOME.

If you can't do that, STFU and stop with the idiotic word games.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Are you serious?

Now you're just being an idiot.

Stop with the bullshit, 'kay?

No one has time for silly word games.

If you think the roll of dice is deterministic, then PREDICT THE OUTCOME.

Neither random nor chaotic systems are predictable. I explained this to you already that chaos is unpredictable but not random, why do I understand this better than you...

If you can't do that, STFU and stop with the idiotic word games.

Temper, temper.

 

[scruffy]

Neither random nor chaotic systems are predictable. I explained this to you already that chaos is unpredictable but not random, why do I understand this better than you...

Temper, temper.

No, it's simple failure on your part.

And lack of understanding.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

No, it's simple failure on your part.

And lack of understanding.

If as you say, "chaotic systems are not deterministic" then why is it that I can find no credible web sources that make that claim?

You are the ONLY person making the claim, am I wrong to be skeptical in this situation? Why accuse me of being at fault when I am simply politely asking for some corroboration?

 

[scruffy]

If as you say, "chaotic systems are not deterministic" then why is it that I can find no credible web sources that make that claim?

You are the ONLY person making the claim, am I wrong to be skeptical in this situation? Why accuse me of being at fault when I am simply politely asking for some corroboration?

You have a fundamental lack of understanding of what constitutes a random variable.

It is beyond my capacity to educate you.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

You have a fundamental lack of understanding of what constitutes a random variable.

It is beyond my capacity to educate you.

That's far from the only thing that's beyond your capacity it seems.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

A question has arisen: are abu afak and scruffy actually the same individual masquerading as two distinct personas?

 

[ding]

A question has arisen: are abu afak and scruffy actually the same individual masquerading as two distinct personas?

Possibly. It's a non-zero probability.

One thing is certain though, scruffy's posting of technical information is a trojan horse of sorts. He's trying to establish subject matter expertise but his inability to logically discuss it in any detail and his obvious shooting from the hip style without any basis of fact proves he's not. Couple that with how he loses control when he's caught red handed being wrong about something (i.e. chaos is not deterministic and everything is alive) it's pretty obvious he's a poser.

Another thing that is certain is that Apu couldn't write a coherent logically sequenced paragraph to save his life, That boy is illiterate.

 

[ding]

You have a fundamental lack of understanding of what constitutes a random variable.

It is beyond my capacity to educate you.

Ok, so while you are answering the question if chaos is deterministic or not, go ahead and include a discussion on what constitutes a random variable. Prove me wrong by logically discussing this in great detail. And while you are at it, it would be great if you could write it articulately in a paragraph discussion format. Show off that big brain of yours.

 

[abu afak]

A question has arisen: are abu afak and scruffy actually the same individual masquerading as two distinct personas?

Are you and EMH the same poster?
What about Godists Jesus ding and ChemEngineer?

`

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

"Hi, I'm an expert in the mathematical analysis of stochastic systems, covering many phenomenon that involve random behaviors and chaos and I work with artificial neural network theory too, I'm happy to share my expertise with people here so if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask, I'm delighted at the opportunity to help people here."

"Oh, that's interesting, I'm no expert but do wonder if chaos and randomness are the same thing?"

"Only a dumb creationist would ask such a stupid question".

Oh, well, erm. well how about this, are chaotic systems deterministic?"

"Of course not, only a fool would even ask that question".

etc etc etc

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Are you and EMH the same poster?
What about Godists Jesus ding and ChemEngineer?

`

How about you - are chaotic systems deterministic? do you know?

 

[scruffy]

Are you and EMH the same poster?
What about Godists Jesus ding and ChemEngineer?

`

Creationist circle jerk.

 

[scruffy]

"Hi, I'm an expert in the mathematical analysis of stochastic systems, covering many phenomenon that involve random behaviors and chaos and I work with artificial neural network theory too, I'm happy to share my expertise with people here so if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask, I'm delighted at the opportunity to help people here."

"Oh, that's interesting, I'm no expert but do wonder if chaos and randomness are the same thing?"

"Only a dumb creationist would ask such a stupid question".

Oh, well, erm. well how about this, are chaotic systems deterministic?"

"Of course not, only a fool would even ask that question".

etc etc etc

If you'd like an education you can pay me for it.

I haven't worked for less than $50 an hour since 1984, so we'll call that the going rate.

 

[abu afak]

How about you - are chaotic systems deterministic? do you know?

More philosophic gibberish to obscure coherent discussion. (just google your question)

Do you have any evidence for god or not? Any against Evo?
the answer is of course, NO.
So we get EXTENSIVE Smoke and mirrors: irrelevant and vaguely tangential deflections.
You're a verbose and disingenuous bore unable to post truly relevant/responsive info.

`

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Do you have any evidence for god or not? Any against Evo?

Yes, the universe is evidence for God.

Do you have any evidence or reasons for believing that the universe was not created?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

If you'd like an education you can pay me for it.

I haven't worked for less than $50 an hour since 1984, so we'll call that the going rate.

That's cheap, no wonder you post as you do.