Quantum Preordainment

[bored_teen]

Has anybody heard of a theory about quantum preordination? I have some ideas, but I'm not entirely sure that they're new. I remember thinking about String Theory before I ever knew it was an established idea, and I want to make sure this isn't the case this time around.

 

 

Actually, come to think of it, is preordination even a word? The spell check says it's not, but I never liked spell check. If it's not a word, substitute predestination.

[Klaynos]

I think what you're looking for is:

 

"Is quatum mechanics deterministic?"

 

And the answer is....

 

We don't know. Not the best answer I know, but that's where we are

[swansont]

It also ties in with hidden variables. And the answer is again, no.

[bored_teen]

well, let's assume that we fully understand the location of each particle in the universe, and each particle's relationship to other particles. knowing all this would allow us to predict the future. if we can predict the future, it must already be set, correct?

 

also, i meant preordainment, not preordination. i'm pretty sure preordination isn't a word.

[iNow]

well, let's assume that we fully understand the location of each particle in the universe, and each particle's relationship to other particles. knowing all this would allow us to predict the future. if we can predict the future, it must already be set, correct?

 

But, since we cannot ever know the position of every particle in the universe with a great enough level of precision, the future cannot be deterministic.

 

It's like saying, "what if gravity were repulsive, could we do blah blah blah?"

 

 

Sure. If you suspend the rules of physics, you can do damned near anything you want.

[bored_teen]

you and i, heck, MANKIND might not be able to measure that. but just because we can't doesn't void the possibility. we'd only be breaking the laws of physics if we were able to measure it; we aren't able to measure it, which means we can't tell the future. it doesn't mean that the future isn't preordained.

 

also, how would we break the laws of physics if we could measure that? do you mean because of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

 

EDIT: if a mod sees this, would they please change the thread title to "Quantum Preordainment"? please and thank you.

[iNow]

also, how would we break the laws of physics if we could measure that? do you mean because of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

 

AFAIK, yes.

 

http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/208/jan27/hup.html

This uncertainty leads to some strange effects. For example, in a Quantum Mechanical world, I cannot predict where a particle will be with 100 % certainty. I can only speak in terms of probabilities. For example, I can only say that an atom will be at some location with a 99 % probability, and that there will be a 1 % probability it will be somewhere else (in fact, there will be a small but finite probabilty that it can even be found across the Universe). This is strange.

 

We do not know if this indeterminism is actually the way the Universe works, because the theory of Quantum Mechanics is probably incomplete. That is, we do not know if the Universe actually behaves in a probabilistic manner (there are many possible paths a particle can follow and the observed path is chosen probabilistically) or if the Universe is deterministic in the sense that I could predict the path a particle will follow with 100 % certainty.

 

A consequence of the Quantum Mechanical nature of the world is that particles can appear in places where they have no right to be (from an ordinary, common sense [classical] point of view)! This has interesting consequences for nuclear fusion in stars.

 

 

 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/

One striking aspect of the difference between classical and quantum physics is that whereas classical mechanics presupposes that exact simultaneous values can be assigned to all physical quantities, quantum mechanics denies this possibility, the prime example being the position and momentum of a particle. According to quantum mechanics, the more precisely the position (momentum) of a particle is given, the less precisely can one say what its momentum (position) is. This is (a simplistic and preliminary formulation of) the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum. The uncertainty principle played an important role in many discussions on the philosophical implications of quantum mechanics, in particular in discussions on the consistency of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation, the interpretation endorsed by the founding fathers Heisenberg and Bohr.

 

More explanation available at both links (and others).

Edited November 19, 2008 by iNow

[Klaynos]

I suspect iNow's links and quotes will cover this but it's important to note that the principle of not knowing where a particle is is NOT about our measurement but about any observation (and therefore interaction) with/on/of that particle, by ANYTHING else.

[Severian]

I should point out that (if quantum mechanics is correct) while the universe is not deterministic, it is stochastically deterministic. That is, the path down which the universe travels is decided by a set of random numbers and given the set of random number required for each measurement, the outcomes are fixed. Since the numbers are random, you have no control over them, so quantum mechanics is also not compatible with the classical notion of free will.

[pioneer]

Determinism is a question of degree. For example, there is uncertainty in the position of the electron within a hydrogen atom. However, I know it is attached to that hydrogen proton, to form that specific thing, we call the hydrogen atom. We know the big picture is determined even if all the tiny details are not. In spite of constant uncertainty at the tiniest level, it is still certainly a hydrogen atom. That hydrogen atom doesn't become suddenly different or uncertain, even if the tiniest aspects do this.

 

Physics is preoccupied with the tiniest things and details and forgets other laws of science tell us the deterministic containment. Chemistry, is deterministic. We know lead will not suddenly term into gold, or the steel structure of the building will not suddenly disappear, turn into jello, or appear over there. But as we get smaller and smaller we are not so certain. But the summation of all this tiny scale uncertainty has containers.

[Ophiolite]

I Since the numbers are random, you have no control over them, so quantum mechanics is also not compatible with the classical notion of free will.

I am sure you felt compelled to say that.

[Severian]

I am sure you felt compelled to say that.

 

No, it was just a random post.