Hi Angelo, Saikat, & Tejinder,
Yes, my critique (and essay) is about what makes information into information as an answer to this question may give a clue as to whether nature at quantum level is random or not. I wonder if the following reasoning might make sense, and I would very much appreciate your answer.
In classical mechanics (in general relativity and big bang cosmology) particles only are the cause of forces, so here one has to assume the existence of virtual photons and gravitons to transmit forces between real particles. Though the emission and absorption of virtual photons and gravitons to communicate forces between real particles is supposed to be random so their energy fluctuates randomly, they nevertheless obey the Uncertainty Principle [UP] according to which a deviation in the energy of a particle may last shorter as the deviation is greater. This of course begs the question how its neighbors can know when to supply the particle in a timely fashion with energy so it can obey the UP. If in this, classical view, the communication between particles is random, then particles only exist to each other, physically, at the random times they absorb a virtual particle from each other, so they only are intermittently part of each other's interaction horizon, each other's universe. In contrast, if in a Self-Creating Universe [SCU] particles have to create themselves, each other, if they only exist to each other if and for as long as they interact, then to keep existing, they must keep interacting continuously. If in a SCU particles, particle properties ultimately must be as much the source (cause) as the product (effect) of their interactions, of forces between them, then real particles can be thought of as virtual particles which by alternately borrowing and lending each other the energy to exist, force each other to reappear again and again after every disappearance, so they create and un-create each other over and over again without violating any conservation law. As in this scenario the energy sign of a particle alternates, it is a wave phenomenon: the higher the frequency its energy sign alternates (its sign flipping every time an increase turns into a decrease and vice versa), the higher its energy is. Instead of saying that its energy fluctuates randomly, in a SCU a particle exchanges all its energy in every cycle so the UP is just another formulation of the Planck relation E = h v, with v the frequency the a particle oscillates, exchanges energy at.
It is the continuous energy exchange between particles by means of which they express and preserve each other's properties: preserving the status quo, this continuous exchange of energy aka information is too inconspicuous to be aware of, to assume its existence let alone identify it as the long sought-for 'hidden variables'. According to the UP, the shorter the distance is between particles, the higher the frequency they exchange energy at, the higher their rest energy is. So if the energy of a particle is the superposition of all frequencies it exchanges energy at with all particles within its interaction horizon, a frequency which depends on their mass, distance and motion, then a particle in its 'own' properties contains all relevant information about its entire universe, information which is refreshed in every cycle of its oscillation. Since E = h v states that energy is a quantity which is greater as its rate of change is greater and this rate, the energy of a particle varies within every cycle of its oscillation, then so does the (in)definiteness in both its position and momentum, that is, when we define the mass of a particle to be greater as its position is less indefinite (if the link doesn't work, see: www.quantumgravtity.nl, the chapter 'A definition of mass').
In this, fully quantum mechanical view, we therefore cannot predict the outcome of particle interactions because we cannot know in what phase the particles are in when they collide or interact, so the probability of quantum theory does not originate in randomness. Randomness only would appear if particle properties would be constant, intrinsic i.e., privately owned, interaction-independent quantities: if they only would be the cause of forces, interactions but not also their product. The present confusion comes from trying to understand quantum mechanics (things like the double-slit experiment) while clinging to outdated, classical notions, in particular the idea of causality: the idea that mass can causally precede gravity, which of course is nonsense.
Regards, Anton