Re: Who's Burden of Proof?

Glenn wrote:
> I simply don't like words being put
> in my mouth.

Sorry about that. Nothing intended.

> I used the term random, I meant the term random, which means
> basically, based upon probability.

Ok. The point I was trying to make is that often when people see the word
random they think of unguided or uncaused. However, the term as you use it
does not attempt to say anything about causation.

> A quantum measurement, say the polarization of a photon is by utterly
random
> when compared with the flip of a coin. It is not determined, if you use a
> vertical polarized filter, exactly half the photons will pass the filter
and
> half will be absorbed as long as the polarization angle is 45 degrees to
the
> vertical or the filter 45 degress to the polarization. You can't tell
which
> photon will pass and which won't. That makes it indeterminate and
> non-forseeable for individual events. I can forsee that 50% will pass but
> can't tell if the next photon will pass or not.

The other point I was trying to make that relates to the process of mutation
and selection is that often ontologically indeterminate events are assumed
to be uncaused. But this is a metaphysical assumption not a scientific
assertion.

Steve Petermann
Received on Sun Nov 30 10:16:08 2003