/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11338359

580KiB, 2040x1715, 4chan_vtuber.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Does quantum mechanics BTFO determinism?

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 06:44:54 2020 No.11338359 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11338445 >>11338455 >>11338678 >>11338724 >>11338735

Is the probabilistic nature of the wave function proof of the existence of "true randomness" in the universe, or is it just a reflection of the limitations of science? Pseuds keep trying to tell me QM disproves determinism, but I'm not so sure.
Pic unrelated.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 07:37:35 No.11338420 Report

Quoted By: >>11341700

No. QM and the wavefunction are not probabilistic. Some "interpretations" associate probabilities with the wavefunction. However, there is no consensus on the matter of interpretations. Despite that, there is no scientific reason to believe in determinism.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 07:57:10 No.11338445 Report

Quoted By: >>11340035

>>11338359
QM is completely deterministic up to the point where you want to measure something. What happens then is probably random.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Determinism.png, 625KiB, 1036x2498

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 08:06:01 No.11338455 Report

Quoted By:

>>11338359

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 11:26:30 No.11338678 Report

Quoted By:

>>11338359
According to the copenhagen interpretation yes, but we don't know that that's the correct one. It only falsifies hard/newtonian determinism, which isn't always what people mean when they say determinism. In arguments about free will for example, determinism is brought up to point out the relationship of the mind and causality, not to say that everything is predetermined.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 12:02:43 No.11338724 Report

Quoted By:

>>11338359
Practically speaking, if you want a truly random number, then you can get one through a measurement of something on a quantum level. This is fundamental. It doesn't disprove determinism, necessarily, but according to some, it do.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 12:11:38 No.11338735 Report

Quoted By:

>>11338359
it does btfo determinism in the usual sense (i.e. cause and effect are determined by probabilistic wavefunction collapse, tunelling, etc.), but does not btfo superdeterminism in the sense that the collapses might be predetermined since the birth of the universe

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 21:30:52 No.11340035 Report

Quoted By:

>>11338445
*provably

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jan 2020 21:37:44 No.11340053 Report

Quoted By: >>11341693

It only seems non-deterministic due to gaps in our knowledge which was Einstein's position and none of you here could even suck the old kikes dick in terms of intellect.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jan 2020 07:48:27 No.11341693 Report

Quoted By: >>11341931

>>11340053
And Niels Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger's positions were the opposite. Are we reducing science to 'my favourite scientist can beat up yours'? Or do you have a reason to believe Einstein was right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jan 2020 07:52:44 No.11341700 Report

Quoted By: >>11341711

>>11338420
>there is no scientific reason to believe in determinism.

Care to elaborate?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jan 2020 08:06:29 No.11341711 Report

Quoted By: >>11341721

>>11341700
On what? Do you have a scientific reason to believe in determinism?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jan 2020 08:14:01 No.11341721 Report

Quoted By: >>11341925

>>11341711
Well, all of our models and theories sort of rely on interactions that are deterministic, in that we can predict them, and the more accurate our knowledge is, the more accurately we can predict the result. The Copenhagen Interpretation claims a non-deterministic aspect of quantum mechanics, but you seem to reject that. So I'm asking you why you don't believe in determinism, if the one broadly accepted, potentially non-deterministic approach to physics is wrong, then why propose that determinism isn't the most reasonable view?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jan 2020 10:38:00 No.11341925 Report

Quoted By:

>>11341721
All our fundamental theories are deterministic, but determinism usually refers to our actions (as we perceive them) being deterministic. None of these theories account for our perceived decisions or consciousness in any way. So in my opinion they say nothing about determinism.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 29 Jan 2020 10:42:16 No.11341931 Report

Quoted By:

>>11341693
>Or do you have a reason to believe Einstein was right?
Everything on the macroscale is perfectly deterministic. Why would that result from a nondeterministic foundation? Thats Einsteins whole argument.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches