Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 265 posts

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#51

Post by placebo »

jstanley wrote: post #47
placebo wrote: post #44

Consider the possibility that whether the future is predetermined or not has nothing to do with free will. The persistence of the notion of free will seems to be an attempt to reconcile a feeling of what seems to be a very real, conscious and subjective "me in here" vs, what seems to be an objective, deterministic "world out there". This division is necessary for science to exist. But what if there is a deeper truth…

> Consider the possibility that whether the future is predetermined or not has nothing to do with free will. If free will exists, that would seem to imply that people can make decisions that affect their future. Wouldn't free will therefore imply nondeterminism? I agree that notfreewill does not imply determinism.

I think a better way out of the trap of the free will vs. determinism question is to really dive not into the question of whether or not we have free will, but of who exactly is asking the question. What exactly is this me that's supposed to have this thing we call free will.

The first change in my perception of this question was many years ago when I read Raymond Smullyan's piece "Is God A Taoist" - I think it's definitely still worth read:

http://www.mit.edu/people/dpolicar/writing/prose/text/godTao...

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#52

Post by adrianN »

joycian wrote: post #49
raxxorrax wrote: post #48

Ah, the age old question where it doesn't matter if the answer is positive or negative at all. Since it is opinion time: I do think that we posses free will whatever the definition might be. There are enough know non-deterministic processes. I also think consideration of randomness vs determinism isn't sufficient to find an answer.

Can you supply a non-deterministic process, where the non-determinism is fundamental and not a way to quantify a lack of information about the system?

Anything that is best described by quantum mechanics.

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#53

Post by coleifer »

joycian wrote: post #49
raxxorrax wrote: post #48

Ah, the age old question where it doesn't matter if the answer is positive or negative at all. Since it is opinion time: I do think that we posses free will whatever the definition might be. There are enough know non-deterministic processes. I also think consideration of randomness vs determinism isn't sufficient to find an answer.

Can you supply a non-deterministic process, where the non-determinism is fundamental and not a way to quantify a lack of information about the system?

The big bang/creation

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#54

Post by enkid »

adrianN wrote: post #52
joycian wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you supply a non-deterministic process, where the non-determinism is fundamental and not a way to quantify a lack of information about the system?

Anything that is best described by quantum mechanics.

That's only according to some interpretations of quantum mechanics. (I.e. Copenhagen) Other interpretations, such as Many Worlds or Pilot Wave are deterministic.

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#55

Post by joycian »

adrianN wrote: post #52
joycian wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you supply a non-deterministic process, where the non-determinism is fundamental and not a way to quantify a lack of information about the system?

Anything that is best described by quantum mechanics.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism

What do you think of ideas like this then?

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#56

Post by csomar »

joycian wrote: post #49
raxxorrax wrote: post #48

Ah, the age old question where it doesn't matter if the answer is positive or negative at all. Since it is opinion time: I do think that we posses free will whatever the definition might be. There are enough know non-deterministic processes. I also think consideration of randomness vs determinism isn't sufficient to find an answer.

Can you supply a non-deterministic process, where the non-determinism is fundamental and not a way to quantify a lack of information about the system?

Yep. That's the question. Some quantum processes are indeterministic. However, one might ponder if it is because of ignorance of the inner-workings on the said process.

One also might conclude that non-determinism is ignorance or lack of information. It is an unanswered question as far as I know.

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#57

Post by joycian »

enkid wrote: post #54
adrianN wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything that is best described by quantum mechanics.

That's only according to some interpretations of quantum mechanics. (I.e. Copenhagen) Other interpretations, such as Many Worlds or Pilot Wave are deterministic.

Many worlds is deterministic, but not in the same sense that people might think of, right. The evolution of the wavefunction (which never collapses like in Copenhagen) is deterministic, but in any given world, random draws are appearing.

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#58

Post by emma69 »

Hey Guys I am starting my career and my graduation will be finishes in december , so i want to make a good resume suitable for my profession. There are many resume services . the blog i read about resume services of company and scholars on https://www.hiration.com/blog/two-page-resume-format/ This is the professional blog i read last week. if there is any other resume services then please let me know.

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#59

Post by wallace_f »

This maybe is a question more about our egos than about the universe (which we do not just exist in, but are the most intricate part of). But is it even very much possible to begin to answer it?

What I mean is this: The idea of choice is a human concept, which seems to be made to be illusory by the fact that, for the most part, our universe is deterministic in nature.

But even in the case the universe is wholly deterministic, as the article's hidden variables theory proposes, then our choices would still be attributed to ourselves.

So in that case, what created ourselves is the big bang. And what created the big bang? Is it even possible to answer that?

The nature of time and the universe is not something that is understood. We understand a lot more than our ancestors due to the scientific method and the spread of the tolerance of Enlightenment-era ideals which allow its pursuit, but that seems to give the illusion that we understand the nature of our universe well-enough to answer these metaphysical queations.

Perhaps we are just in a bubble that is a kind of Sagan's Flatland. Perhaps we are some insignificant random combination of patterns, or perhaps not. We have no idea what we are. But I dont believe our ownership of our choices is refuted by a universe without randomness.

Re: Photons, Quasars and the Possibility of Free Will

#60

Post by coldtea »

>Of course, randomness isn’t the only thing necessary for free will

Not only that, but randomness and determinism are equally against the (casual) idea of free will.

Free will, as commonly understood, means there's an "extra layer of abstraction" between the universe (material objects and their relationships) and me. What people called "soul".

It's not just that our decisions (will) are random instead of predetermined by a cascade of material interactions.

Note that if one presumes a soul, free will is then not an illogical impossibility. It's just an extra layer of abstraction: it can decide based on our material-timeline-history (our interactions with the universe and others), but it's not absolutely bound by them (in the way a deterministic brain would be).

A soul, in that sense, is like when a protagonist in a movie breaking the fourth wall. They exist in the world of the movie, but they have some footing outside of it. (Of course in the case of the movie, the breaking is scripted).

Post reply on HN