In the physical world, all events are determined, and what appears as “undetermined” is just our ignorance of the minutiae of physical influences involved. The principle is this: every physical entity will be have in the same way in the same context.
That's where QM indeterminism is unique, and it's not exactly the kind of indeterminism people think it is, and includes an element of ignorance, but not in the sense that we just do not know, but cannot know.
The indeterminism, in the case of QM, happens to be very precise. We know exactly the degree of indeterminism in quantum events—it is always a factor of Planck's constant. It has nothing to do with what we usually call randomness.
While I happen to think the math is right, and that mathematically it will never be possible to “measure” a particle’s position and it's momentum simultaneously, there is a mistake in assuming that all characteristics can be described exactly in terms of mathematics. For example, we know there is an exact ratio between the legs and hypotenuse of an isosceles triangle, or between the radius and circumference of a circle, but all such ratios cannot be expressed exactly, mathematically. There is also the little matter of Planck's constant. As important as it is, no one asks why it is. It is just assumed because it, “fits the phenomena,” but no one knows (or even asks apparently) the explanation for why that number and not another.
Interesting, too, is the fact all this "indeterminism" is very determinisitic--such as the half-life of racioactive substances.
Mostly thinking out loud here. Forgive my rambling.
Hank
That’s some very interesting rambling. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
My post was more of a tangent off on the subject of game probabilities, which is a different animal than the probability of one wave form collapsing out of all the possible wave forms an a quantum system.
Shuffling a deck of cards is very deterministic, it’s just impossible for the human eye and mind to follow the cause-effect chains that end up in the “random” shuffle.
Quantum mechanics is different than that.
Nevertheless, game probabilities are a good analogy in some respects, don’t you think?
Just as the chances of getting dealt 13 spades in a bridge hand is very remote (but possible), so outcomes of experiments in particle physics do allow for the occasional occurrence of a highly improbable event.
Or am I wrong to think that the analogy is apt?
you lost me. any geometric ratio can be expressed exactly, mathematically. what's an example of a "ratio that cannot be expressed exactly, mathematically"?