/sci/ - Science & Math

>>16109012
>it's dictated by NOT FULLY KNOWN logic

>>16109016
How do you guarantee anything? If I drop a rock, I guarantee you it will fall on the ground. But if I flip a coin wanting to land on tails, I just go "lol idk I hope this works"?

everything either happens or it doesn't

>>16109017
>But if I flip a coin
The 50/50 head/tail prediction is obviously a flawed low IQ model to simplify reality because we can't comprehend the complexity of many variables working together towards a result that isn't exactly 50/50.

>>16109012
If you'd prefer you can think of probabilities as a measure of the uncertainty of our knowledge.

>>16109030
So probabilities are a type of patterns that our unconscious minds recognize but our conscious minds don't recognize? Or do we identify for example half the patterns and not comprehend the other half?

>>16109020
That is true, whether it's flipping a coin on tails or winming the lottery yet statistically you're more likely to win on tails than a ticket. The only problem is that probabilities are based on randomness and not logic, unless there is some logic involved yet we can't identify it.

>>16109033
Lmao that's not it. They are a measure of our uncertainty about things that haven't happened yet. You could argue that things are dictated by logic, that triangles will always have 3 sides, but that's deduction, we also have to take the other kind of logic into account, which is induction.

>>16109037
>unless there is some logic involved yet we can't identify it
Yes

>>16109012
>The universe isn't dictated by luck or randomness
LMAO

>>16109017
You can't guarantee any prediction because the future does not exist and is thus unverifiable. Although we have experienced things that occured in the present and are now in the past that have incredible reliability of reoccuring again, there is no way to preclude other unknown outcomes because our knowledge is finite.

To hold this position rigorously would be ridiculous because extrapolating the future from the present and future is incredibly pragmatic, but it is technically a falacy nonetheless.

>>16110940
the future does not exist

If someone gets in a rocket with a ten percent of light speed engine and leaves you here on earth they will exist in your future.

>>16110940
The future exists but is unverifiable.

>>16110940 #
>the future does not exist

If someone gets in a rocket with a ten percent of light speed engine and leaves you here on earth they will exist in your future.

>>16109012
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XhaKvQyHzeXdNnFKy/probability-is-subjectively-objective

>>16109012
Good motivation for Probability: The Logic of Science by Jaynes.
book is hard as fuck though.

>>16109012
i like your funny words magic man

>>16111033
Your toilet exists in your future because you need to travel space-time to get there. You're using jewish popsci verbal trickery to confuse the subject.

>>16111050
Don't be salty because your misguided statement got btfo.