# Talk:History of randomness

WikiProject Mathematics (Rated B-class, Mid-priority)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
 B Class
 Mid Priority
Field: Probability and statistics (historical)
WikiProject Statistics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or join the discussion.

B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject History of Science
This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.

## Untitled

It is surprising the Abraham de Moivre and The Doctrine of Chances are not mentioned here. Maybe later I'll figure out where best to fit them in. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

It is a question of who/what is a "big time" item. I had the lobbyists for many 18th century people contact me about getting into this article, I did not know which to include/exclude - just kidding. But in the end my focus was not to do a "history or probability theory" article, but on randomness in general. Given that even axiomatic probability theory ever so carefully avoids a definition of what a random sequence is, the History of probability needs to include M. de Moivre and Rev. Bayes rather than this article, not to make it too long, else many other contenders will have to get in too and it will get overweight. History of probability needs help anyway. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 20:58, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Few points I'd like to mention, which may or may not be incorporated into the article.

• There is a close connection between randomness and chaos. Chaos emerges in three or more-dimensional systems of differential equations. Weather forecasts and the three-body problem mentioned in the article are the examples of such systems possessing chaotic features.
• One of the major blows to the Newtonian deterministic view of the universe was the quantum mechanics, which incorporates inherent randomness through the wave function. Although Einstein claimed that “God doesn't play dice”, the modern viewpoint is that he actually does.
• Modern use of randomness is not limited to the use of randomized algorithms in computer science. In game theory, which studies interactions between objective-maximizing entities (such as individuals, firms, governments, etc.), the pivotal Nash theorem establishes the existence of equilibria in mixed strategies — that is, the strategies that randomize between actions. The interpretation of this fact is that in many situations apparent randomness and unpredictability of the behavior of people is not a “flaw” but instead the optimal strategy of behavior.
Many mechanisms are now designed to incorporate randomness. Examples: IRS randomly selects individuals whose tax reports will be checked; airport security are instructed to select random people for luggage check-up; police are supposed to randomize their patrol routes; subsampling for population surveys (eg. pre-election polls) is done randomly and with extreme care (in order not to introduce sampling bias); etc.

// stpasha »  17:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually Pasha I think your points are generally pretty valid and educational, but they are less historical than recent. In fact, the article on Randomness itself, rather than its history, is where such input is needed, for that article has a few low quality tags on top of it. A section on Chaos in the Randomness article can really help. And I think a mention of the game theory item is probably a good idea here if you just want to add a sentence at the end where I mentioned randomized algos. But if this article gets too technical and heavy, it will be a duplicate of the Randomness article, which is where teh real technical items belong. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Very interesting. And all in the course of a day! I don't work that fast. Xandar 20:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

According to [1] the “randomness” of digits of pi is still an unresolved conjecture in mathematics. Although in those few trillions digits that were calculated by supercomputers the digits have quite uniform distribution.  // stpasha »  22:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

That Wolfram source uses normal numbers that were introduced by Émile Borel after Venn's book. That was why I carefully said Venn presented a proof. But this is probably too much effort to bicker and I will just delete that later. History2007 (talk) 23:04, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

## Origin of the concept of entropy

The context for this sentence

Entropy is now widely used in diverse fields of science from thermodynamics to quantum chemistry.

may imply that that the concept of entropy originated with Shannon in 1948. The "now" may suggest that entropy was not used in the other disciplines before Shanon starting using it. The lead says this:

In the 19th century the concept of entropy was introduced in physics.

- Ac44ck (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The article says: "The term entropy, which is now a key element in the study of randomness, was coined by Rudolf Clausius in 1865". Hence the lede is correct in summarizing that. And given that the article says it was also studied by Boltzman, I do not think it is contradictory. But Shannon's work was seminal. I did, however, add a 19th century qualifier to that part to clarify it even further. History2007 (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

## File:Kolmogorov-m.jpg Nominated for Deletion

 An image used in this article, File:Kolmogorov-m.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests May 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kolmogorov-m.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)