18 ms·

On [1], one interpretation of quantum mechanics says that the universe is the evolution of all possible future worlds through branching: http://en.wikipedia.org

by capisce 13y ago

On [1], one interpretation of quantum mechanics says that the universe is the evolution of all possible future worlds through branching: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation The other major interpretation would be that out of the possible futures one is randomly selected based on its probability. Determinism without branching doesn't seem like an option given the laws of physics, correct me if I'm wrong anyone?

aninhumer 13y ago
As I understand it, our current understanding of physics suggests a probabilistic system, but I don't think we know enough to assert that a deterministic model is impossible. This comment goes into more detail about what we do know: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7069261 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7069261 Also, if we were being obtuse, we can describe any (finite) probabilistic universe as a deterministic one with enough rules.
- Xcelerate 13y ago
  > As I understand it, our current understanding of physics suggests a probabilistic system, but I don't think we know enough to assert that a deterministic model is impossible. We're pretty close actually. Look up Bell's Theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem). It has been experimentally verified countless times and necessitates that "one is forced to reject locality, realism, or freedom". "Freedom" meaning something specific in a scientific sense. Rejecting the last one implies something called superdeterminism, which is basically just determinism (the "super" implies that everything that exists is deterministic; there are no random components). Gerard t'Hooft is one of the only legit physicists left who supports a superdeterministic theory. Almost all other physicists believe that a measurement of a quantum state collapses it into a random eigenstate. For me personally, were superdeterminism found to be true (although it's looking more likely that's not going to be the case) it wouldn't bother me in the slightest, and I don't see a conflict between determinism and free will. Imagine someone creates a movie. They decide the plot -- what happens and when. They decide the setting, the number of characters, and everything else about the movie. Then when you play the movie, everything that occurs is predetermined -- deterministic in a sense -- yet it was freely chosen outside the realm of the movie. I kind of view reality that way.

by capisce 13y ago

aninhumer 13y ago

As I understand it, our current understanding of physics suggests a probabilistic system, but I don't think we know enough to assert that a deterministic model is impossible. This comment goes into more detail about what we do know: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7069261 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7069261 Also, if we were being obtuse, we can describe any (finite) probabilistic universe as a deterministic one with enough rules.

Xcelerate 13y ago
> As I understand it, our current understanding of physics suggests a probabilistic system, but I don't think we know enough to assert that a deterministic model is impossible. We're pretty close actually. Look up Bell's Theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem). It has been experimentally verified countless times and necessitates that "one is forced to reject locality, realism, or freedom". "Freedom" meaning something specific in a scientific sense. Rejecting the last one implies something called superdeterminism, which is basically just determinism (the "super" implies that everything that exists is deterministic; there are no random components). Gerard t'Hooft is one of the only legit physicists left who supports a superdeterministic theory. Almost all other physicists believe that a measurement of a quantum state collapses it into a random eigenstate. For me personally, were superdeterminism found to be true (although it's looking more likely that's not going to be the case) it wouldn't bother me in the slightest, and I don't see a conflict between determinism and free will. Imagine someone creates a movie. They decide the plot -- what happens and when. They decide the setting, the number of characters, and everything else about the movie. Then when you play the movie, everything that occurs is predetermined -- deterministic in a sense -- yet it was freely chosen outside the realm of the movie. I kind of view reality that way.