Probablility is 100 Percent of the Tme an Expectation of Coincidence.

Every outcome in probability is a coincidence. Every coincidence can me made into a mater of calculation of probabilities. Sooner or later every possible coincidence should occur. It seems to us humans that unexpected things happing when something else is happening is a coincidence is only a fallacy . Why shouldn't coincidences always be occurring. When it comes to our genes being replicated in all the cells in our body that certainly would not be a coincidence. It seems like a coincidence when you meet you aunt by accident as a tourist on the other side of the world? Well maybe not. Not a coincidence at all . If all the laws of physics and of the natural order of things can work in multiple locations and even beyond at great distances in the cosmos, then the probability says it makes perfect sense. As it happens everything else that happens that we don't consider to be any special type of coincidence is also just as much of a coincidence itself.

Simple Proof Shows Entropy Does Not Exist.

If Entropy or the tendency towards system decline exists as a law of nature, thermodynamics then that law of nature and definition has to be modified. My thinking is that the modification is to say limited entropy in fixed systems probably exists. The problem is the notion of the entire universe tending toward an entropic state does not have supporting data. Where do I find supporting data? I say there is at least , maybe at most 14 billion years of supporting data. That is 14 billion years of light transmissions to telescopes on and around the earth. The 14 billion light year distance is a bit of an absurd number since galaxies thought to be in the deepest cosmic field have structures that are exactly the same as much more "modern" galaxies much closer to the earth in light years. We can immediately extend the age of the universe knowing that deep field galaxies are seen after 14 billion years of light transmission because it might take a galaxy more than a few billion years to assume that form as it does with more modern closer galaxies. Aside from that problem of distances and suspected age of the universe as a discrepancy of science, entropy as a law of physics also finds itself in question. One should expect, if entropy is a rule and law of nature that a galaxy a few million light years from earth should have more indicators of entropy in longer term decline than a more ancient galaxy some fallaciously assume was quickly generated after the big bang about 14 billion years ago. That is absurd since the deep field is in all direction around us and not concentrated at some spot in the sky where everything could have originated. Entropy if it existed would mean that the laws of physics should be quite different in the deepest most ancients corners of the known universe especially if there had been a big bang. The familiar structures of spiral and barred galaxies we see at close range are visible in the dark field only there they can appear to be closer together. So if we want to prove that entropy is correct we must do the following: 1. We need to prove that the laws of physics and nature are not the same the further we go back in cosmic history. 2. we need to prove that more modern manifestations of physics has suffered a decline in regenerative traits over time such that we, if we assume we are the most modern phase of cosmic reality , are in an entropic decline more than more a more structured past. 3. We need to figure out why our laws of physics and our perceptions about mathematic order in our physical reality are able to regenerate themselves. 4. We have to have an experiment where not just a system declines but where laws of physics just stop working or work more intermittently. No such experiment exists. For a while cold fusion experimentation seemed to be something like that but more ongoing tests showed a tendency for labs to repeat results. Where can we find an example of a decline from which no regeneration of patterns was possible longer term? Not from the astronomical data we have going back some 14 billion years. The conclusion is the proof that astronomical data assuming the most distant galaxies and cosmic features are time gone by or even some sort of time machine where we look back into the distant past because there is no entropy in any of that data. What then is entropy? It can remain the second law of thermodynamics but has to be modified as defined. Entropy is a decline in a thermodynamic system one with set non regenerative reflexive properties. A bomb blows up. Energy is released and the bomb is not going to regenerate itself after the explosion to repeat the cycle. It maybe true that a star or a galaxy blowing up also might not immediately be able to regenerate itself. There can still be system entropy just not cosmic laws of physics progressive entropy.

Casino's have the edge, in the long run the house always wins. Probability in casinos is fixed. In their electronic slot machines the entire process of having odds and probability is simulated.

Nature, the regulating laws of nature, is the house of probability simulated or natural if you prefer. Nature also has fixed odds and those odds favor nature being what nature is. It is the casino and their electronic and mechanical games, even decks of cards, that simulate probability. Even if not simulated nature's probability and odds favor the house of nature. It is clear that the reason why chemists , physicists, biologists can repeat the same results in the same experiment by multiple scientists in multiple locations is quite simply because where the variables are limited the games are fixed. The fact that I can reproduce the results of so many experiments under the same experimental conditions as the original experiments tells us that the odds favor the house of nature. Now I get what Einstein meant by "God does not play dice with the universe." God's Casino is a place where the odds favor the house. I have started working out an entire 100 percent mathematics religion Where probability itself is God. I may end up building the world's largest casino house of worship that is 100 percent tax free as a religious organization. In both Japan and China their temples had in them a kind of game of chance which happens to be a very ancient ritual. If you pray to God you are trying to influence probability possibly. The odds are you would exist and that you won't.

If There Was 100 percent certainty in the Universe we would not need probabilty.

If There was 100 percent certainty in the Universe we would not need probability. Maybe there is 100 percent certainty?    Probability is an interesting concept which seems to pertain to assaying the future rather than analyzing the past. It is pretty clear that if we know what happened in the past everything that happened was 100 percent certain so long as memory is good.  What is the probability of getting 4 Aces in a poker hand verses what was the probability of having that exact hand in a particular hand?  It was 100 percent certain because the event occurred.  Probability of that 4 aces card hand is not possible to change after the event occurs.  You can speculate about other possibilities that never happened . Yes the odds would be what future probability would be except all the hands of cards ever dealt are now history and cannot be changed.  There fore the past is at least theoretically 100% certain even if we don't have a clear memory of all of it or any of it.    The future is completely speculative and that is where probability seems to become most useful.  Probability allows us to predict future outcomes at least to some degree.  If this becomes a principle of physics then if we look back in space and time with astronomy then the probability of any of it is irrelevant.

Conditional Probability and Cosmology go back in history a long long way. God is the ultimate slot machine?

The question is when it comes to God being the ultimate slot machine the question is whether that slot machine runs with simulated probability or real open ended probability?   Of course it is natural probability .  A mistake of physicists is in thinking that probability somehow has to be simulated the way we humans game it: 


http://www.openbible.info/topics/all_things_are_possible  And yes I am not the first one to make this observation.  "With God, Jesus, all things are possible."   That really is saying the same thing except when it comes to conditional probability we see much of it starting with gravity which has a very high level of probability of occurrence.  Gravity seems to rule the universe in a way that that it independently can become the catalyst of much greater things and systems.


http://www.openbible.info/topics/all_things_are_possible

Gravity would seem to be the primary cause of most empirical probability. What is empirical probability?

What is Empirical Probability anyway?    Empirical Probability is where the 2nd law of thermodynamics goes badly wrong.  Usually it appears that gravity is responsible.  My research, given the thermodynamic  radiometer proof that gravity's is the net input of energy into a system or conglomeration actually transforms the laws of thermodynamics in a way I never initially realized.  So then the 2nd law of thermodynamics is not only flawed and in need of  a law to replace it.  Entropy is really at severe risk of disappearing as a viable concept.  That is because simple convergence of energy at a point is enough to contradict the whole scientific concept of entropy.  Well what then is a point?  A point is the convergence of energy and we know that energy will not converge without mass being available as  a means of "inducting" it.  If we refresh the idea that mass and energy can be converted from one to the other then a point is simply energy plus mater know to be converted to energy under the right conditions.)  So like the summation equation from the new laws of physics I published years ago, E + M*=P such that E is free energy added to a Mass form of energy for the total energy of the entire system P which is our point.  Sounds way too obvious?   since I originally published that thesis I never got around to updating it with some sense that maybe Mass is not converted to just energy but maybe has other components or does not actually convert at all given the mass defect problem.  In which case E + M*** = P so it really does not mater except that it destroys Entropy as viable scientific concept. 


With the best of our labeling super novae's phenomenology seen in Hubble telescope photographs we see anything but entropy result.  We see bilateral symmetry.  That is still empirical probability. I actually reinterpret those photos as being the aftermath of giant collisions and not of dying stars because of that bilateral symmetry.  The issue being entropy is that the destruction of a star in a super nova is anything but tending toward entropy given that all too obvious symmetry which has almost the appearance of a mirror image to it.  What we actually see is a more orderly event where total destruction of an enormous entity is enabling empirical probability with an almost infinite discharge of energy and an almost infinite destruction of mater, system, perhaps even time and space. 


The gravitational center is being discharged but at the same time we see eddies forming in the aftermath at a cold distance from the center of discharge.  Entropy if it exists in the explosion  , the moment of explosion or the event of super nova is very short lived.  A super nova should be the ultimate entropy event?  The observed symmetry raises grave concerns for the future of the 2nd law of thermodynamics until I have modified it as :  "Empirical probability is the future of any thermodynamic system."  Now don't quote me on that yet.  I have not got the right semantics yet.  It took a long time to advance to the concept and nomenclature of Empirical probability from multi variable probability (which it still is) .  Maybe the correct term is Retropy. or Reretropy. Yes It is Retropy.  Lex Retropy to be exact.  Retropy means regrowth of a system because empirical probability is one of the basic dimensions of the cosmos.  It is because components of mass and of energy whether the same or different have inherent empirical probability as the nature of their structures which is why multi variable probability with the semblance of order in the cosmos is a basic dimension.  It is the component of reality that frames our reference.


Something that frames our reference is generic probability of energy and mass as energy but because of mass defect I suspect that really the core of what makes mater different from energy is the probability dimension.  This maybe the reason why energy has no effect in space until it is absorbed or interacts with mass.  That little key to the universe is a sub atomic particle I will call the Lexitrophe in a process of Lexitrophiphy. It is the cause of retropy and reretropy which the apparent entropy of retropy.  The only reason we have any frame of reference is because of Euclidean like points in space where mater and energy combine or where energy combines to form mater and where mater takes a form that leads to predictable probabilities like symmetry.

Empirical Probability Theorem , The Undoing of Entropy and the Undoing of the second law of thermodynamics.

Empirical Probability theorem:   Empirical Probability Disproves The Second Law Of Thermodynamics And Also Demonstrates That Entropy Is A Temporary Condition  And Not A Final End Point of System Energy Nor Dispersal.   The proof is actually very simple:  Empirical Probability makes predictability of systems discernible  in advance where as Entropy is unpredictable and wanting. 

One example is a simulating random number generator.  Of course there is nothing random about random numbers generated by a generator because to be truly random they have to pass the test of randomness.  It is uncertain that random numbers actually exist in nature outside of our human capacity to facilitate them?  Simulated probability differs from Empirical probability because Simulated probability is designed to have an element of entropy in involved where as empirical probability as discerned in nature lends itself to vast potential predictability based on conditional probabilities of multiple variables. When this is simulated with artificial probability in a computer or a slot machine the simulation emphasizes a lack of predictability otherwise every player would win the game.

Empirical probability gives us the ability to  make very good predictions on a lot of things before they happen.  If Entropy was where everything was bound to go then our ability to predict probabilities would be impossible.  It requires no complicated proof  except to say we would not be able to predict the weather , the motion of stars and galaxies if entropy was a real phenomenon.

Striking out the second law of thermodynamics or modifying it we also need to add a third or forth law of thermodynamics that gravity is a property of thermodynamics.  That is a different story found on my other sites including Gravity is Hot and The New Laws of Physics by Lex Loeb.