As simple as possible to summarize the best way you can, first, please. Feel free to expand after, or just say whatever you want lol. Honest question.

  • Cethin@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    Which is precisely what we see.

    Yes, that’s what I said. Pure randomness expects points of higher and lower density, not pure uniformity, as we see, which implies it’s pure randomness.

    every scientific and mathematical field is based on the universe having consistent, ordered rules of operation.

    This has nothing to do with being random noise or not. In fact, random noise requires consistent ordered rules. If that isn’t the case then you get something non-random where the rules change to achieve desired results, which isn’t what we observe.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      I’m really not sure how you’re defining “randomness” then, or how that randomness precludes complexity and interconnectedness.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        If you throw a handful of sand, there will be almost no pattern to it, but if you look closely there WI be some points with more sand and some with less. You could find interesting looking things in this. When you look at the whole thing though it obviously doesn’t have a pattern to it, except what our brain may find because it tries to find patterns, even when there aren’t any.

        I wouldn’t call something that’s just noise complex. I guess it sort of is by definition, but not in a way that’s interesting. Normally when I think of “complex” it’s something that has a purpose to it, but we can’t identify easily, not something that’s easy to identify but has no purpose. It’s just a random distribution of matter with the rules of physics applied. It doesn’t create anything that seems to have any purpose.