"-predict v. 1671, a back formation from earlier prediction,
and borrowed from Latin praedictus, past participle of
praedicere foretell, advise, give notice of (prae-
before + dicere to say).
"-prediction n. 1561, borrowed from Middle French
prédiction, and directly from Medieval Latin predictionem
(nominative predictio) a prediction, from Latin praedictionem
(nominative praedictio) a prediction, premising, from
"-predictability n. 1868, formed from English
predictable + -ity.
"-predictable adj. 1857, formed from English
predict + -able."
Etymology taken from Barnhart's Concise
Dictionary of Etymology,
by Robert K. Barnhart,
Note how Doug's use of 'predicate,' 'predicable,'
and 'predication' as classical mathematical exegesis implies
Consider: classical single-event determinism vis-a-vis
quantum determinism (see probability);
classical single cause-effect
vis-a-vis ensehmble quantum c¤mplementary many
: Predict, prediction, predicate, predicable,
Classicists believe that they can use canonic, formulaic equations
to mathematically 'predict' future events.
They say, if we can discover which y=f(t) which fits our current
problem space, then we can use that equation to predict what
will happen in a closed monistic future.
However, is that mathematical supposition acceptable? We do
not agree that it is. Any y=f(t) depends upon environmental and
contextual ephemera to hold still, to remain constant. But all
ephemera are chaotic! Some change very, very slowly. Others change
rapidly. Most change faster than humans are capable of sensing.
Too, all change, all chaos to some extent affects all chaos.
So all change is massively parametric to greater and lesser affectings.
So can we predict? Only apparitionally. Systems which are
apparently mechanical offer us a modicum of predication. In general,
though, even those systems change chaotically.
In general, then, we cann¤t use OSFA
formulas to predict any event and depend perpetually on them
to be 'true.'
Prediction, you will hear, is a primary success factor for
science. If 'science' cannot predict, then there is no science.
This is why many folk have declared 'science' "dead."
In any sense of 'science' having general qua to predict state-ic
'events,' science was born dead. No one can, in general, predict
state-ic events, and to make matters even worse for science,
it will never be capable of predicting first occurrences of any
events, any truly unique, first time events.
So science lies when it claims it can predict. Science deludes
itself and others, and protects those delusions with more lies.
Classical science is pseudo science, folks!
Quantum reality simply disallows, disables any classical notions
of mechanical prediction as described above.
Better, quantum reality allows us to stochastically expect
To do that, though, stochastics, quantum~stochastics, require
massive ensembles of animate wave omnitorings.
To say something similar classically, "We must use sets
of data to calculate probabilities."
When we do that we are always limited to how far in futurings
we may stochastically anticipate similarities to what is happenings
nowings. Yet we are still limited. Quantum~stochastics, like
classical probability, cann¤t, have n¤ means to
anticipate omnique futurings which are unprecedented.
Think about it. To be able to predict, reality has to be 'certain.'
Won't you agree? But quantum reality is uncertain at all scales!
So when mathematicians say they can predict any meme, any future
'state,' they are simply liars. Take that to your mental
As Dirac said, paraphrased, "Only way we can depend upon
canonic predication is to assume reality doesn't change, to assume
reality is stable and immutable."
Bottom line: All prediction, due real ubiquitous
and unlimited scope quantum~uncertainty, is guesswork!
Doug - 5Jun2007.
Page top index.