Good post.
Interestingly while the examples definitely have an element of randomness, the randomness is not completely random. 😁
By that I mean that the laws you described are probabilistic and so the outcome of the 'random' events is biased towards certain values.
The role of a dice is truly random with equal probability for each outcome.
But my understanding with particle physics is that scientists use maths to predict probabilities.
In that sense maths do describe reality.
It may be just that reality is uncomfortable for our small mind. 😀
The roll of a dice is random only abstractly. A real dice will always only have one outcome. Unless you don't believe in causality!
When you haven't got tools to measure each individual element that will determine the outcome, then you pull back and measure averages during many throws of the dice. That's what happens with quantum physics: I think we just haven't got the right tools yet, so we're only seeing a fuzzy picture and can make only broad generalizations.
Hi irelandscape, thanks for the comment.
I am trying to argue that scientists are using math to predict only the time-averaged probabilities of individual random events.
Each random event is the fundamental physical reality and not the time-averaged values. We don't yet have the math to predict when individual events will happen.
However, the weird part that I don't understand yet is just why do these random events, when time-averaged always come to the same values?
You nailed it!