LogFAQs > #926378984

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Everything is predetermined.
Eddv 08/21/19 8:56:20 PM #37:	foolm0r0n posted... Quantum mechanics proves particles fundamentally non deterministic (even if we don't fully understand them), but if each particles wave function collapsing result is part of the definition of the universe, part of the input to the calculation, then.... the universe is obviously deterministic. The only question is whether there's some insanely huge record of quantum particle measurement results that is driving the quantum interactions in the universe, or whether it's truly randomly determined in real time, unbeknownst to anything. At the highest levels, this is what the question is asking, which is sort of the fun thing about philosophy. You can attempt to answer this question with virtually no knowledge of the topic at hand. But even as you accrue knowledge and build a more completely picture and get a precise idea of what exactly is being asked...you still end up arguing about it in almost the exact same manner as the novice and along many of the same lines of division. For my part I believe in a 'hard but un-usefully opaque' determinism, much like the one presented by foolmo in the highlighted statement. --- Board 8's Voice of Reason https://imgur.com/chXIw06 <cite>Eddv posted [p:926378984] in Everything... [t:77953395]...</cite> <quote>foolm0r0n posted...</cite> <quote>Quantum mechanics proves particles fundamentally non deterministic (even if we don't fully understand them), but if each particles wave function collapsing result is part of the definition of the universe, part of the input to the calculation, then.... the universe is obviously deterministic. The only question is whether there's some insanely huge record of quantum particle measurement results that is driving the quantum interactions in the universe, or whether it's truly randomly determined in real time, unbeknownst to anything.</quote> At the highest levels, this is what the question is asking, which is sort of the fun thing about philosophy. You can attempt to answer this question with virtually no knowledge of the topic at hand. But even as you accrue knowledge and build a more completely picture and get a precise idea of what exactly is being asked...you still end up arguing about it in almost the exact same manner as the novice and along many of the same lines of division. For my part I believe in a 'hard but un-usefully opaque' determinism, much like the one presented by foolmo in the highlighted statement. --- Board 8's Voice of Reason https://imgur.com/chXIw06</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1