On Fri, 04 Jul 2025 15:04:09 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Martin Harran
<
[email protected]>:
On Thu, 03 Jul 2025 08:16:25 -0700, Bob Casanova <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2025 16:21:37 -0500, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by RonO <[email protected]>:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/06/250622225927.htm
There was that April fools piece on quantum entaglements and sheep, but >>>this article about researchers creating truely random numbers using >>>quantum entangled photons. You can likely sign in with your cell phone >>>and be lulled to sleep by random sheep counting.
Interesting; thanks! I'd always been taught/understood that
true randomness - zero correlation - is impossible to
achieve; it looks like that, too, was an incorrect
evaluation of reality
I was under the impression that randomness e.g. in atomic decay, has
been recognised in QM from the earliest days and is often given as the
single biggest challenge to determinism.
True, at least AFAIK; I overgeneralized. But this is
apparently about creating a random (zero correlation) string
of numbers for math applications, which would seem difficult
to implement by derivation from physical events such as you
mention. Of course, I may simply not be imaginative
enough... ;-)
--
Bob C.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)