Not sure if this is just a moot point, but I'll say it because I'm genuinely curious to hear what people have to say. Anytime I hear theories like this, I feel wary of accepting it as an air-tight reliable outlook because of human limitations. Like, our understanding of quantum physics and all natural laws come from what we can percieve and measure, but there's bound to be phenomena which we can't percieve or measure (either yet, or ever) which limit our understanding of the universe. I understand that science is a constant process, and that we shouldn't jump to conclusions of any theories being "truth" because of this process, but anytime anything like this comes up, I'm always wary of the consequences that occur from all the people who DO dogmatically assert that it's undeniable, especially with how easily theories of predeterminism tend to enable unproductive, nihilistic outlooks. I don't necessarily see science as trivial pursuit because of our human limitations, but I feel like not enough people have learned their lesson about the consequences of eagerly accepting a "work in progress" as "ultimate truth".
Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
61–70 of 180 posts
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
For classical physics it's basically true[1]; see Laplace's demon. I recall also independently inventing determinism as a kid after I realized how easily I'd been swayed by external factors into buying one toy over another. For non-physical things, such as emotions and thought... well, we have no actual proof they're anything but physical. We just don't have proof that they're entirely physical, either. But the simpl…
When you imagine a red ball, where is that red ball physically? Not the atoms of the neuron configuration etc., but the plane of existence where you place the red ball.
I don't understand the question or how it relates to my comment, can you elaborate what you mean by "plane of existence"?
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
For classical physics it's basically true[1]; see Laplace's demon. I recall also independently inventing determinism as a kid after I realized how easily I'd been swayed by external factors into buying one toy over another. For non-physical things, such as emotions and thought... well, we have no actual proof they're anything but physical. We just don't have proof that they're entirely physical, either. But the simpl…
When you imagine a red ball, where is that red ball physically? Not the atoms of the neuron configuration etc., but the plane of existence where you place the red ball.
When my computer simulates a red ball bouncing on the floor, where is that red ball physically?
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you imagine a red ball, where is that red ball physically? Not the atoms of the neuron configuration etc., but the plane of existence where you place the red ball.
When my computer simulates a red ball bouncing on the floor, where is that red ball physically?
that's just binary rgb code that is reminding the mind of a red ball :)
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
A good quip, lol. But of course they would, because they must, because the feeling of control (that is: the unconscious belief in control) is just as intrinsic as the actual absence of control.
which in other words makes superdeterminism unfalsifiable, because any attempt to do so can be met with "it must have been that way"
That's why Sam Harris still uses his will to speak to various crowds that he has no will.
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you imagine a red ball, where is that red ball physically? Not the atoms of the neuron configuration etc., but the plane of existence where you place the red ball.
I don't understand the question or how it relates to my comment, can you elaborate what you mean by "plane of existence"?
When you imagine from your minds eye, that is a plane of some sort.
If we understood exactly where or how this plane exists and for whom, we could arbitrarily place objects and ideas in this plane. Eg force someone to think of a red ball bouncing, or pull imagined objects forcefully out of the plane.
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#67Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#68I have yet to see a subscriber of superdeterminism not look both ways before crossing the road.
A good quip, lol. But of course they would, because they must, because the feeling of control (that is: the unconscious belief in control) is just as intrinsic as the actual absence of control.
Or rather they must, because it was determined that they do.
And I'm sure sometimes, some of them don't look both ways for the same reason.
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#69This does make me wonder: how do we know that random quantum processes are truly random? This gets philosophical very quickly. But for our purposes: independent, uniform, etc. But how do we know there isn't another (earlier) way to observe the result in some fashion.
We don't. What we know is that we can't have all of 1. locality (no backwards causation / FTL information transfer) 2. determinism 3. counterfactual definiteness (unperformed measurements still have single definite results: we can talk meaningfully about what we would have seen had we done a different experiment) 4. QM gives correct predictions. Objective-collapse interpretations (like the version of Copenhagen descr…
My bet is on 1. backwards causation. Light takes the shortest path, by (virtually) taking all of them.
Similarly all paths to the future are taken and the present must agree with boundary conditions in the future.
Re: Does quantum theory imply the universe is preordained?
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand the question or how it relates to my comment, can you elaborate what you mean by "plane of existence"?
When you imagine from your minds eye, that is a plane of some sort. If we understood exactly where or how this plane exists and for whom, we could arbitrarily place objects and ideas in this plane. Eg force someone to think of a red ball bouncing, or pull imagined objects forcefully out of the plane.
Eg force someone to think of a red ball bouncing...
Indeed: put them in a sensory-deprivation tank and show them a video of a (possibly simulated) ball bouncing. Their existing network of neurons will do the rest.