As a criminal prosecutor, I found this to be good reading. It is fascinating to see how arguments were made and evidence taken back in 1931. You can read it here.

]]>

Here are some video files so you can listen to the action:

For instance, you drop a marble on the ground from 10 feet. Where it lands, and how and where it bounces all appear random. However, if you knew all the variables; that is, the exact amount of gravity, the air pressure and breeze at every point of the marble's descent, the exact texture of the ground where the marble first makes contact, along with complete information about everywhere it bounces, then you can make an exact prediction of where and how that marble is going to bounce.

Now, drop a bucket of marbles. Not only do you have to account for wind speed, variations in pressure, the texture and slope of the ground, but you also have to deal with the marbles bouncing off of each other. It is a nearly unimaginable amount of information leading to an even greater amount of calculations.

But let's assume you had all the information. All the variables. An unlimited amount of calculating ability. If so, you could calculate the exact speed that each marble would fall. Exactly where and at what angle each marble would hit each other marble. You could calculate all of it. You'd be able to accurately predict the exact position and motion of every marble at every point in time. In other words,

.... the level of apparent randomness of an event is inversely proportional to the level of information about that event.]]>