It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Xtraeme
As I said before it's really very easy to define an empirical test to examine the notion of "free will."
Do something you would never do. It's really that easy.
Is it really just that easy though? Would he normally have decided to do something he normally never does if he were never told that the act of doing something he would never do? Say he does now do something he normally would never do, that act is now predetermined by following out an "experiment" that you proposed he should carry out.
I was descusing the topic? Not once did i call you a name or in fact go off topic? I mearly pointed out you flaw in thinking when it came to the topic as you did ask for some understanding of it coreect?
Topic : Does probability really Exist : Yes it does
or in fact go off topic
I gave a logical reason as to why it does, yet you question it ? and call me an arggant xxxx ??
are you that imature?
Now, doesn't such a question as that kind of disprove free will?
You never touched my problem of variables in determining probabilities.
no it does not, Because people mix up free will with being alive..
You see once you are "alive" your reality becomes somewhat like a factal.. in that all choices are possible but still based on rules "being here"
So lets look at flipping a coin again because its the bases of the topic
and here are some factors also..
Why flip a coin? Because its a simple way to show logic.. what is logic?
Logic is a outcome that can be predicted and equated in reason and reality as we are "logical beings"
what would happen if i flipped a coin in space?
pretty long odds on getting an outcome dont you think? IF ANY
why does a butterfly have 2 wings? It was the logical outcome of the system we was made by "logic"
The logical outcome of flipping a 2 sided coin will always be 50/50 no matter what, Yes the paramters of "flipping" the coin can come into play but then you change the paramter of or the use of probibilty it self
Originally posted by eight bits
There is a lovely account on the border between objectivism and subjectivism carved out by a physicist named Jaynes. You build your model of whatever by accounting for the factors you think are important, and fill in the rest with a probability distribution (the one "closest to" uniform and independent trials possible, given the factors you have accounted for).
...
And when are you done with tinkering? Maybe never. But if your latest model holds up for several lifetimes, then it is probably good enough for most purposes.
There is real learning about physical reality there: why is something that works so well still not correct? What additional factors need to be taken into account? Answering such questions is not "mechanical." It takes genuine novel scientific work to carry out the plan.
So far as I can see, you never get an answer from this system as to what probability "really is," nor what "the probability" of any event takes on as a value. Probability is only the molasses which holds the current model together, and fills in its gaps.
If your not alive, then there would be no free will, so it is kind of a requirement is it not?
Since when
This doesn't explain the variable of say, force in toss.
If I have the coin with the heads side up and I put little force into the toss, would the probabilistic outcome be the same if that variable changed and the force became greater with each subsequent toss? Is that variable taken into account or not? What if the force and frequency was varied itself throughout the experiment, would that affect the probabilistic outcome compared to one iteration where the force and all other variables were constant?
Good example for the problem at hand in my opinion. As there would be no side in space for the coin to land on, what is the probability then? That new variable would need to be taken into account as you imply it would be. Same coin, different variable, different outcome that prevents a 50/50 probability as there would be nothing to finalize that landing of one side.
I think you need to explain that better, please.
How would it always be 50/50 though if new variables change the parameters of the experiment and thus it's outcome?
Huh, you piqued my interest. I gather you're referring to E. T. Jaynes? Do you remember which paper / book he originally discussed this in? Sounds like he's worth reading.
Yes and no
because you are bound by being alive
Does not require one as the force will always be the same, thats why we have gravity.
That would make the argument invalid as you would be trying to "unbalance the outcome to begin with to prove a point"
The problem is i REMOVED probibilty from the equation
you can not flip cions in space ; )
Logic is inherently and cosimcaly a given.. Ok when you do 1+1=2 that is a logical math equation ok? now doing that is the same as nature making a butterfly with 2 wings or say the sun or i dunno human with 2 arms.. its the most "logical" outcome thats why we have shapes its based on LOGIC.. because logic is a word we use to describe things we understand and that we are made from/by ect..
1+1=3 on the other hand is not logical but it does have a meaning in chaos, that is based on scale "quantom physics" ect..
Because the paramarters you are dealing with is a coin with 2 sides being fliped.
If if fliped a dice what is the probiblity of it landing on a 6? ; )
you see it all changes not because of the force or any outside thing its more to do with the sides of the object not so much the forces.
as i said if you start to change the method in what you wish to apply probiblity aka flipping in space the math totay changes so you can not appply the given math to the given problem at hand.
its a basic way how to predict or work out an outcome
its a sum basicaly. dont think to deep into it.
Probiblity is real and can be used in many ways as pointed out by the fellow
Black jack is a good example 2 colours red and black ; )
if you start to focus on the suite it makes the probiblity of the next card harder to work out as you just added another veriable to the equation, hearts, dimonds, ect ect
Hope that helped
However, an ambiguity remains in setting up a prior on a continuous parameter space because the results lack invariance
under a change of parameter; thus a further principle is needed.
So probability works by ignoring all other variables except the two sides of the coin?
Yep
Its that simple
Let me just add we use the coin thing because in math its like asking what is 1+1
its the most basic way to describe probability
Originally posted by merkava
reply to post by Xtraeme
You seem to be an expert in this subject.
Can you tell me how is it possible to predict 6 numbers that are gona come out in a Lotto draw from 1-49 balls?
keep asking why and you will for ever be looking for answers