Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!
From: Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen@t-online.de)
Date: 02/16/03
- Next message: Scott: "Password Checker"
- Previous message: Johan van der Galien: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- In reply to: Johan van der Galien: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- Next in thread: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- Reply: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 23:59:12 +0100
Johan van der Galien wrote:
>
> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net> wrote in message news:<3E4F2C17.9070408@null.net>...
> > Johan van der Galien wrote:
> > > 1) Can someone find flaws in my proof?
> >
> > Yes; the difference of two independent uniform
> > distributions is *not* a uniform distribution.
> > So it is no surprise that your test of that
> > incorrect hypothesis did not confirm it.
>
> You seem to have not read my internet article very well. Because I
> have taken into account that the delta-values have not an
> equidistribution or uniform distribution as you call it. I have
> calculated the Chi-Square accordingly (see Table 2 of my internet
> article). But what do you think about the randomness of a sequence of
> delta-values from two random files containing hexadecimal numbers.
> These delta-values are of course also random, in a sense that no
> (known?) deterministic process can predict better than change what the
> next number of this sequence will be, albeit they have no uniform
> distribution.
>
> The URL to my internet article by the way is:
> http://www.home.zonnet.nl/galien8/quantum/quantum.html
Chi-square is one but also a rather crude statistical
test for deviations from randomness. No 'practical'
tests are able to 'prove' randomness in the rigourous
sense of the word. If a distribution is not uniform,
then by definition values with higher probability
(according to the distribution) have a better chance
of occuring.
BTW, statistics is often an instrument abused by
pseudo-sciences. For bizarre works, see e.g.
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/
M. K. Shen
- Next message: Scott: "Password Checker"
- Previous message: Johan van der Galien: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- In reply to: Johan van der Galien: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- Next in thread: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- Reply: Douglas A. Gwyn: "Re: Proof that Quantum Mechanics is not random!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|