Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Doctor Stochastic
Thank you so much for all the explanations and examples!

I agree with you on the difficulty in finding true randomness; notoriously, the software function used to generate a random number doesn't. Wolfram made a note of that under the problem 10 link. The only math I've seen that would be a fair toss of the coin is Chaitin's Omega.

The research I've done thus far has focused on information theory and molecular biology and therefore my emphasis has been on algorithms. But the subject of algorithms brings in Chaitin, so I wanted to be more comfortable with the game rules and terms - to continue reading with comprehension. Thank you so very much for all your help and your patience!

4,616 posted on 01/11/2003 10:52:23 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4611 | View Replies ]


To: Alamo-Girl
The only "truly random" systems (currently) seems to be based on quantum mechanics. On the other hand, one does not need "randomness" to do either probability or statistics (or physics either.) For example, Champernowne developed the number .110111001011101111000.... (in base ten though) which contains every k-bit pattern with probability 1/2^k. (One concatenates the integers.)
4,617 posted on 01/11/2003 11:09:42 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic ( Even God cannot change the past. - Agathon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4616 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson