Determinism - Is the playing field level ?

[studiot]

1 hour ago, martillo said:

As several ones posted, Quantum Mechanics definitely "knocked out" determinism in the universe. You would have to demonstrate the contrary.

I haven't been able to get to this question yet, with all the chaff.

 

Is prohibition a form of determinism ?

It determines what you can't do after all.

 

And QM prohibit an infinity of states to particles, waves and all sorts.

Even in Thermodynamics there are prohibitions such as in Caratheodory's version of the second law.

Eigenvalues, eigen states and eigenfunctions are all examples of discriminatory determinism,

as was H Ford's declaration

They can have any color they want so long as it's black.

 

3 hours ago, martillo said:

Seems I didn't get your point then...

Swansont keeps telling anyone who will listen and many who will not that Science in general and Physics in particular is about models.

Ever hypothesis, law, formula and so on needs testing, calibrating, with guaranteed known data and known results, outcomes etc.

The only such guaranteed data is in the past.

[iNow]

25 minutes ago, martillo said:

You also have to demonstrate that choosing is just an illusion of our mind.

This proves not only that you’re unfamiliar with the topic, but also that you haven’t paid attention to the resources already shared. We’ve known this is the case for decades, even if you personally did not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will#The_point_of_no_return

Edited November 9, 2023 by iNow

[martillo]

45 minutes ago, studiot said:

Is prohibition a form of determinism ?

It determines what you can't do after all.

 

And QM prohibit an infinity of states to particles, waves and all sorts.

Even in Thermodynamics there are prohibitions such as in Caratheodory's version of the second law.

Those prohibitions are not enough to make the physics of the universe completely deterministic. There still are nondeterministic processes which make it indetermined.

45 minutes ago, studiot said:

Eigenvalues, eigen states and eigenfunctions are all examples of discriminatory determinism,

as was H Ford's declaration

They can have any color they want so long as it's black.

Analogies not always work...

45 minutes ago, studiot said:

Swansont keeps telling anyone who will listen and many who will not that Science in general and Physics in particular is about models.

Ever hypothesis, law, formula and so on needs testing, calibrating, with guaranteed known data and known results, outcomes etc.

The only such guaranteed data is in the past.

Quantum Mechanics is then a big model in Physics and it tell us about uncertainty in the universe and so its indeterminacy. All the guaranteed data in the past is not enough to completely determine the future of some processes. That's why indeterminacy takes place.

Edited November 9, 2023 by martillo

[studiot]

18 minutes ago, martillo said:

Those prohibitions are not enough to make the physics of the universe completely deterministic. There still are nondeterministic processes which make it indetermined.

Of course there are. I never said the universe or anything else is completely deterministic.

18 minutes ago, martillo said:

Analogies not always work...

These are factual examples not analogies.

18 minutes ago, martillo said:

Quantum Mechanics is then a big model in Physics and it tell us about uncertainty in the universe and so its indeterminacy. All the guaranteed data in the past is enough to completely determine the future of some processes. That's why indeterminacy takes place.

But not everything in QM is indeterminate.

QM expressly says that an electron cannot have a principle quantum number of exactly 2.375.

 

It's not one side or the other ; all or nothing.

Edited November 9, 2023 by studiot

[martillo]

8 minutes ago, studiot said:

But not everything in QM is indeterminate.

I know that but if you have something that is partly determined and partly indetermined as a whole it is indetermined. 

36 minutes ago, iNow said:

This proves not only that you’re unfamiliar with the topic, but also that you haven’t paid attention to the resources already shared. We’ve known this is the case for decades, even if you personally did not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will#The_point_of_no_return

I already told you that what is presented there is about fast processes only that can be called intuitive ones. You must consider slow enough processes where rationalism is present before making a choice or decision. We already discussed about this in the other thread. I will not just repeat the discussion here.

[iNow]

21 minutes ago, martillo said:

I will not just repeat the discussion here.

Grateful for this