Chance: Science or Philosophy?

[Charlemagne_III]

What exactly is the nature of “chance.” We use the word constantly and grasp its meaning, or so we think, but what exactly is it? Have philosophers or scientists ever tackled and described in depth what is meant when we say an event happened by chance rather than by necessity?

Your thoughts?

 

[Tomdstone]

What exactly is the nature of “chance.”

Chance has more than one meaning. Sometimes people say something happened by chance but it really did not. For example, suppose you are betting one million dollars on the number 7 on the Roulette wheel and your number comes up giving you a winning of 35 million dollars. Some people will say that was luck and it occurred by chance. But the fact is that if you knew in complete detail all of what goes into the mechanics of the Roulette wheel and you knew how much spin and thrust the croupier imparts to the wheel as he tosses the ball, then the outcome would actually be determined. Similarly with a die toss. If the number one comes up and you had bet on one, you win and most people would say that you were lucky. But if you had known the velocity and acceleration of all of the shakes, and the various properties of the die, you would have known the outcome. So the meaning of chance in this case is that we did not have enough background knowledge to foresee what would happen. The event has causes, but because there are too many factors coming into play, it is not possible for a human to predict the outcome in advance.
Some will claim that it is different with quantum mechanics and that uncertainty is an irremovable part of the real world at the submicro level.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

What exactly is the nature of “chance.” We use the word constantly and grasp its meaning, or so we think, but what exactly is it? Have philosophers or scientists ever tackled and described in depth what is meant when we say an event happened by chance rather than by necessity?

Your thoughts?

The mathematics of probability and statistics is a relatively recent development. Geometry and arithmetic, by way of contrast, go back at least two or three millennia.

Probability and statistics came about from the desires of gamblers to beat the odds when gambling. Gambling is old, but the disciplined study of it known as probability is relatively new, dating from about the middle of the 1600s.

Randomness is closely associated with probability. A long sequence of truly random numbers is one which is algorithmically incompressible, that is, there are no mathematical algorithms capable of yielding a shorter expression than the sequence itself.

In quantum mechanics, mathematical waveforms can come about as solutions of the Schrödinger equation. The eigenvalues of the solutions are the physical observables, things such as momentum, energy, frequency, etc. Those have always been considered to be things that can be detected by instruments and measured, and thus things that are real. The eigenvectors or eigenfunctions are known as representations. They give us pictures of where electrons are in space and time, but with a few experimental exceptions are generally thought of as unreal, something that helps us visualize things but something which we do not ultimately know with our senses.

Eigenvalues, observables, are always supposed to be integer values of physical quantities. Eigenvectors and eigenfunctions, representations, are either complementary complex valued vectors or the square roots of probability distributions in space. If you find the norm of the inner product of the eigenvectors, or if you take the integral of the product of the complementary eigenfunctions, you should always come up with the number one for a particle that actually exists.

Chaos theory deals with closely related sprays of trajectories associated with “the butterfly effect”. Since sprays of trajectories are inherently intractable, they are often re-expressed as fractal distributions in phase space.

Chaos theory deals with macroscopic objects, quantum theory with microscopic or nanoscopic objects. I cannot do justice to such topics in this post. You should look upon my post as more or less realistic physics babble full of words the meaning of which, if you do not understand them but google them, will help you to begin building a vocabulary which will enable you to begin grasping these topics.

 

[Gliggle]

Thomas Aquinas noted the universe is random, that chance, as you describe it, does exist. Many many years before we began to understand quantum physics or evolution, he argued that the universe is a mass of finite random effects caused by finite beings such as ourselves, but that even though this randomness exists, it is finite because it created by finite beings, so it’s effects can only be finite. Meanwhile, God himself is not random, and Gods effects are infinite. Aquinas also pointed out that because randomness is created by God, it is therefore good. See quite below:

“it would be contrary to …] the perfection of things, if there would be no chance events”.
(CG, Book 3, Chapter 74)

I have taken this from a really great science/philosophy paper which I recommend you read (link pasted below). I think you should be able to download the pdf from the link on the upper right of the page. Let me know if the link doesn’t work and I’ll find another link for you or email it to you.

arxiv.org/abs/1501.00769

 

[e_c]

classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.2.ii.html

Part 4 onward.

 

[puzzledtoo]

Science or philosophy? Could chance be both and not either or? These first few posts have explained how mathematics is involved with some chance or happenstance events such as with gambling therefore chance may be described as a part of science. Would it be philosophical to say the everything happens for a reason? Cause and effect? Though we may never be able to explain the reason(s) mathematically or any other way.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Chance has more than one meaning. Sometimes people say something happened by chance but it really did not. For example, suppose you are betting one million dollars on the number 7 on the Roulette wheel and your number comes up giving you a winning of 35 million dollars. Some people will say that was luck and it occurred by chance. But the fact is that if you knew in complete detail all of what goes into the mechanics of the Roulette wheel and you knew how much spin and thrust the croupier imparts to the wheel as he tosses the ball, then the outcome would actually be determined. Similarly with a die toss. If the number one comes up and you had bet on one, you win and most people would say that you were lucky. But if you had known the velocity and acceleration of all of the shakes, and the various properties of the die, you would have known the outcome. So the meaning of chance in this case is that we did not have enough background knowledge to foresee what would happen. The event has causes, but because there are too many factors coming into play, it is not possible for a human to predict the outcome in advance.
Some will claim that it is different with quantum mechanics and that uncertainty is an irremovable part of the real world at the submicro level.

So I gather from the above that you regard chance not as a thing or a force, but rather what we call an unpredictable unknown?

When we say a thing happened by chance, we don’t really mean that chance caused it to happen the way it did, but what we mean is that we cannot understand or predict why something happened as it did. Chance is really a synonym for ignorance of the predetermined?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The mathematics of probability and statistics is a relatively recent development. Geometry and arithmetic, by way of contrast, go back at least two or three millennia.

Probability and statistics came about from the desires of gamblers to beat the odds when gambling. Gambling is old, but the disciplined study of it known as probability is relatively new, dating from about the middle of the 1600s.

Randomness is closely associated with probability. A long sequence of truly random numbers is one which is algorithmically incompressible, that is, there are no mathematical algorithms capable of yielding a shorter expression than the sequence itself.

In quantum mechanics, mathematical waveforms can come about as solutions of the Schrödinger equation. The eigenvalues of the solutions are the physical observables, things such as momentum, energy, frequency, etc. Those have always been considered to be things that can be detected by instruments and measured, and thus things that are real. The eigenvectors or eigenfunctions are known as representations. They give us pictures of where electrons are in space and time, but with a few experimental exceptions are generally thought of as unreal, something that helps us visualize things but something which we do not ultimately know with our senses.

Eigenvalues, observables, are always supposed to be integer values of physical quantities. Eigenvectors and eigenfunctions, representations, are either complementary complex valued vectors or the square roots of probability distributions in space. If you find the norm of the inner product of the eigenvectors, or if you take the integral of the product of the complementary eigenfunctions, you should always come up with the number one for a particle that actually exists.

Chaos theory deals with closely related sprays of trajectories associated with “the butterfly effect”. Since sprays of trajectories are inherently intractable, they are often re-expressed as fractal distributions in phase space.

Chaos theory deals with macroscopic objects, quantum theory with microscopic or nanoscopic objects. I cannot do justice to such topics in this post. You should look upon my post as more or less realistic physics babble full of words the meaning of which, if you do not understand them but google them, will help you to begin building a vocabulary which will enable you to begin grasping these topics.

Thanks for your thoughts. I am truly baffled.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

“it would be contrary to …] the perfection of things, if there would be no chance events”.
(CG, Book 3, Chapter 74)

I’ll see your quote from Aquinas and raise you another.

“Whatever does not have a determinate cause happens by accident. Consequently, if the position mentioned above were true, all the harmony and usefulness found in things would be the result of chance. This was actually what Empedocles held. He asserted that it was by accident that the parts of animals came together in this way through friendship—and this was his explanation of an animal and of a frequent occurrence! This explanation, of course, is absurd, for those things that happen by chance, happen only rarely; we know from experience, however, that harmony and usefulness are found in nature either at all times or at least for the most part. This cannot be the result of mere chance; it must be because an end is intended. What lacks intellect or knowledge, however, cannot tend directly toward an end. It can do this only if someone else’s knowledge has established an end for it, and directs it to that end. Consequently, since natural things have no knowledge, there must be some previously existing intelligence directing them to an end, like an archer who gives a definite motion to an arrow so that it will wing its way to a determined end. Now, the hit made by the arrow is said to be the work not of the arrow alone but also of the person who shot it. Similarly, philosophers call every work of nature the work of intelligence.”(DV, Q5, A2)

 

[Charlemagne_III]

classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.2.ii.html

Part 4 onward.

Thanks for the reference to Aristotle, who is always (or almost always) a delightful read.

 

[buffalo]

In God’s universe there is no such thing as complete chance. He sustains His creation.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

In God’s universe there is no such thing as complete chance. He sustains His creation.

He sustains His creation by the fact that he knows in advance everything that will happen and allows it to happen. This omniscience leaves nothing to chance. By our ignorance we may assign many events to chance, but God knows what he has directed to happen throughout the universe. To God, there can be no such thing as chance.

 

[Tomdstone]

He sustains His creation by the fact that he knows in advance everything that will happen and allows it to happen. This omniscience leaves nothing to chance. By our ignorance we may assign many events to chance, but God knows what he has directed to happen throughout the universe. To God, there can be no such thing as chance.

That is Einstein’s view that God does not play dice with the universe. However, this claim is disputed by many adherents of quantum physics, who claim that indeterminacy is part of reality at the quantum level.

 

[buffalo]

He sustains His creation by the fact that he knows in advance everything that will happen and allows it to happen. This omniscience leaves nothing to chance. By our ignorance we may assign many events to chance, but God knows what he has directed to happen throughout the universe. To God, there can be no such thing as chance.

aka Providence.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

That is Einstein’s view that God does not play dice with the universe. However, this claim is disputed by many adherents of quantum physics, who claim that indeterminacy is part of reality at the quantum level.

I did not mean to imply that God is a determinist, whereas Einstein was.

Free will is not controlled by God, yet he is omniscient as to how it plays out and may well nudge us one way or another in certain directions, which is the doctrine of grace.

 

[Tomdstone]

The mathematics of probability and statistics is a relatively recent development. Geometry and arithmetic, by way of contrast, go back at least two or three millennia.

Probability and statistics came about from the desires of gamblers to beat the odds when gambling. Gambling is old, but the disciplined study of it known as probability is relatively new, dating from about the middle of the 1600s.

Randomness is closely associated with probability. A long sequence of truly random numbers is one which is algorithmically incompressible, that is, there are no mathematical algorithms capable of yielding a shorter expression than the sequence itself.

In quantum mechanics, mathematical waveforms can come about as solutions of the Schrödinger equation. The eigenvalues of the solutions are the physical observables, things such as momentum, energy, frequency, etc. Those have always been considered to be things that can be detected by instruments and measured, and thus things that are real. The eigenvectors or eigenfunctions are known as representations. They give us pictures of where electrons are in space and time, but with a few experimental exceptions are generally thought of as unreal, something that helps us visualize things but something which we do not ultimately know with our senses.

Eigenvalues, observables, are always supposed to be integer values of physical quantities. Eigenvectors and eigenfunctions, representations, are either complementary complex valued vectors or the square roots of probability distributions in space. If you find the norm of the inner product of the eigenvectors, or if you take the integral of the product of the complementary eigenfunctions, you should always come up with the number one for a particle that actually exists.

Chaos theory deals with closely related sprays of trajectories associated with “the butterfly effect”. Since sprays of trajectories are inherently intractable, they are often re-expressed as fractal distributions in phase space.

Chaos theory deals with macroscopic objects, quantum theory with microscopic or nanoscopic objects. I cannot do justice to such topics in this post. You should look upon my post as more or less realistic physics babble full of words the meaning of which, if you do not understand them but google them, will help you to begin building a vocabulary which will enable you to begin grasping these topics.

The trajectories of chaos theory are deterministic. The problem is the extreme sensitivity of the orbit to the initial conditions.

 

[Tomdstone]

I did not mean to imply that God is a determinist, whereas Einstein was.

Free will is not controlled by God, yet he is omniscient as to how it plays out and may well nudge us one way or another in certain directions, which is the doctrine of grace.

The interrelationship between causality, determinism, chance and free will is a complex one.

 

[o_mlly]

“An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes.”

Pierre-Simon Laplace, 1814

Laplace’s Demon – nothing happens by chance, is still argued by mathematicians and physicists today.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Probability and statistics came about from the desires of gamblers to beat the odds when gambling. Gambling is old, but the disciplined study of it known as probability is relatively new, dating from about the middle of the 1600s.

I expect you already know this. The mathematician Blaise Pascal was especially influential in studying gambling odds during the period you mention. It is speculated that his studies led him to develop the wager argument for the existence of God.

 

[cfauster]

This new essay is relevant: Randomness in Theological Perspective