  The central question of this paper is: are deterministic and indeterministic
descriptions observationally equivalent in the sense that they give the same
predictions? I tackle this question for measure-theoretic deterministic systems
and stochastic processes, both of which are ubiquitous in science. I first show
that for many measure-theoretic deterministic systems there is a stochastic
process which is observationally equivalent to the deterministic system.
Conversely, I show that for all stochastic processes there is a
measure-theoretic deterministic system which is observationally equivalent to
the stochastic process. Still, one might guess that the measure-theoretic
deterministic systems which are observationally equivalent to stochastic
processes used in science do not include any deterministic systems used in
science. I argue that this is not so because deterministic systems used in
science even give rise to Bernoulli processes. Despite this, one might guess
that measure-theoretic deterministic systems used in science cannot give the
same predictions at every observation level as stochastic processes used in
science. By proving results in ergodic theory, I show that also this guess is
misguided: there are several deterministic systems used in science which give
the same predictions at every observation level as Markov processes. All these
results show that measure-theoretic deterministic systems and stochastic
processes are observationally equivalent more often than one might perhaps
expect. Furthermore, I criticise the claims of the previous philosophy papers
Suppes (1993, 1999), Suppes and de Barros (1996) and Winnie (1998) on
observational equivalence.
