Logic of chance

[josef rosenkranz]

DD Hi
Our debate in my thread "determinism vs. indeterminism" has burnt out but I'm glad to see that it has revived in this thread under another name.
The French have a saying :La meme Jeannette mais autrement coifee.
It's basic french ,need not to be translated.

Unfortunately, I don't know enough French to translate that. Neither, it seems, does Bablefish: "The same Sleeve-board but otherwise coifee."

What does it mean?

The debate here is going on in the high spheres of the creation of the universe, which is very interesting,but my impression is of speculative thinking, doubtfully related to the last theories of the physicist.

If the theory of Stephen Hawking who recognized that his,for long years assumption that information of black holes is going to vanish in nothing when the black hole has finished his radiation,is not true and the information wanders to other parrallel universes is right, then the debate about the creation of "our" universe becomes a "provincial" debate.

Hawking's theory has been quite famously disproven. The information is radiated out by the black hole, albeit in a garbled form. There is no 'parallel universe' involved in this or any other scientific theory. Perhaps you are confusing scientific fact for science fiction?

The rest of what you say is unsubstantiated conjecture, with a load of Bible-twisting thrown in to boot.

Now let's come down to our ordinary physical world.
I think it would be more interesting to debate about chance (indeterminism) in Physics,Biology,Sociology,Economy,Politics,even,why not, Meteorology and so on .
Such a debate I believe shall bring us back with no doubt to atheism.

All roads lead to Hell

O.k. Let's try to clear our problems one by one.
1) Not knowing french doesn't harm anybody,but you got me right: the
same Jeannette but otherwise hair dressed.
2) Hawking seems to be not your cup of tea because it's the second time you reject his theories.
Great scientist have oftenly had fierce opponents who either fought
about priority of a certain theory or denied the opponents theory alltogether.
It is known that Suskind a former co-worker of Hawking denied the "Hawking paradox" by maintaining that the information of the black hole is "smeared" on the space/time horizon.
It is true that after Hawking recognized his paradox as untrue and proposed the parallel universe solution many physicist opposed this idea.
Nevertheless the idea is still under research by famous physicist and as counterintuitive as it may be it is by no means considered as science fiction as you present it.
3) About my so polite betitled "unsubstantial conjecture" I dare say that
from a little bit of sense of humour nobody is known to have died of.
4) Now let's embark to the road of Hell.
Before we embark I would repeat what I have said in the thread of that nice "Moslem"who tried to convince us about the existence of Allah-God bless him,that I have already ordered a nice chair in the Hell just near to the Fire together with a load of tarr which will support the fire for the next 100 millions of years.
Members of that forum are invited to order the last chairs next to me.
Now let's visit first the Hell of Sociology.
If we take a just random example of behaviour of masses we can see how predictable social laws lead often to total randomly reactions of humans.So just begun revolutions.It's this duality of determinism and indeterminism of which I'm speaking.
Let's take the road to Economy Hell.
The actual world wide economic crisis speaks more than any theory how famous and hailed economists,like for instance this genius Allan Greenspan who seemed to know the future of the economy as 1+1=2
failed miserably in their predictions and one can seek for millions of causes and not find exactly why the Economy has plunged in such a big degree of randomness.
Again the same duality of prediction and chance.
Now Let's embark to Meteorology Hell.
There was a time when Meteorologists thought that by means of ultra computers they will be able to predict weather exactly for a span of a day.
It has proven as a dream never to come true because of the randomness of climatic factors.
I have no skill whatsoever in Meteorology but I dare to come up with this thought that the temperature on the face of the earth can not theoretically ever be exactly predicted, due to the second principle of termodinamics.
The dual aspect of determinism and indeterminism is felt dayly by us when we look to the wheather forecast then swear the Meteorologists as being lyers or idiots.