[pokervintage]

[ QUOTE ]
randomness cannot emerge except as a perceptual mistake made by a finite being

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not meant as criticism but this sounds like doublespeak.

[ QUOTE ]
but if the scope is that big, and omniscience exists,everything that will happen, must happen, but the sequences would only appear random on a linear vector.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you also mean that everything that "can" happen, must happen?

Your argument sounds similar to the poster that said that nothing is truly random. I agree with that because in a physical world we cannot imagine true randomness in the strict definition of the word. But we are not talking about a physical world. We are speaking of a singularity. A place where physics does not apply. A place where events are not deterministic.

The event, the big bang, is not the issue. We can also assume that the result of the event, the big bang, was the only possible result. The random event of which I am trying to establish is the cause of the big bang. Certainly we do not know the cause, o.k. or even if there was a cause. I am again assuming that there was a cause. I am also assuming that the cause came from within. I guess we could argue that something like the singularity ran into a smaller amount of anti-matter and the result was a tremendous release of enregy resulting in the universe (not anyone's theory just a made up point). But the real point is that within a universe (and I believe that the singularity can be considered a universe) that is not bound by nor even responds to physical laws, randomness is (o.k. may be) possible.

Oh, one other thing. I am sure that you are a lot smarter than me so please show some compassion.
pokervintage