in its title and also the supporting argument for the thesis. Back of this informal and conceptually transparent argument is a substantial technical set of ideas that are explained in some detail but still not at a fully technical level in the remaining sections. The reader who is interested in under standing the general idea of the noninvariance claim I am making about deterministic causal models should be able to get the gist of the argument entirely from what is said in this introductory section. The first point is that the results come out of ergodic theory. What ergodic theory is is explained in more detail in Sections 2 and 3, but it is easy to give a simple and familiar example of an ergodic process. Consider coin flipping. For simplicity's sake, let the coin be a fair one. Then that process is ergodic. It is ergodic for two reasons. First, it is asymptotic ally stationary, which means that the probability distribution of what is happening is, in the long run, unchanged over time and, secondly, it has a unique asymptotic distribution that is independent of the initial starting distribution. For example, we might have agreed always to start with a head, or always to start with a tail, but this does not affect the asymptotic distribution. A slightly more complicated example of an ergodic process is a first-order Markov process, that is, a process in which what happens on trial n + 1 depends on what happened on trial n, where the dependence is a probabilistic one. The same two conditions obtain, namely, asymptotic stationarity and unique asymptotic distribution of states, independent of the initial distribution. (For general processes it is standard to require, for ergodicity, not just asymptotic stationarity but stationarity for all time. This slightly stronger condition will be used in the general definition given later.) The second concept is that of two ergodic processes being measure theoretic isomorphic. This means that their structure of uncertainty is the
[1]
Patrick Suppes,et al.
A Collection of Probabilistic Hidden-Variable Theorems and Counterexamples
,
1996,
quant-ph/9610010.
[2]
D. Ornstein,et al.
Statistical properties of chaotic systems
,
1991
.
[3]
P. Walters.
Introduction to Ergodic Theory
,
1977
.
[4]
P. Rosenbaum,et al.
Conditional Association and Unidimensionality in Monotone Latent Variable Models
,
1985
.
[5]
Irreducible Markov Shifts
,
1972
.
[6]
Patrick Suppes,et al.
The Transcendental Character of Determinism
,
1993
.
[7]
Giovanni Gallavotti,et al.
Billiards and Bernoulli schemes
,
1974
.
[8]
Patrick Suppes,et al.
Photons, billiards and chaos
,
1996
.
[9]
P. Laplace.
A Philosophical Essay On Probabilities
,
1902
.
[10]
Patrick Suppes,et al.
Voluntary Motion, Biological Computation, and Free Will
,
1994
.
[11]
Patrick Suppes,et al.
When are Probabilistic Explanations Possible
,
1981
.
[12]
D. Ornstein.
Bernoulli shifts with the same entropy are isomorphic
,
1970
.
[13]
P. Suppes,et al.
ON THE NOTION OF INVARIANCE IN CLASSICAL MECHANICS*
,
1955,
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.
[14]
P. Suppes.
The nature and measurement of freedom
,
1996
.
[15]
P. Suppes,et al.
Transformations of Systems of Classical Particle Mechanics
,
1953
.
[16]
Patrick Suppes,et al.
FREEDOM AND UNCERTAINTY
,
1997
.