>>12190522Also, I’m certain that if determinism exists, then determinism must be wrong in certain accounts.
First off, if all information is just determined from the start, with no retro-causality, then determinism can be wrong in some accounts. The spin of particles cannot be determined in any way before they are measured unless with contextuality and non-locality, but if we have two particles that are far away from any other source of information, that would require FTL signaling while the particles are entangled to communicate, then determinism cannot be true.
If retro-causality is true, then determinism fails in some accounts. If we push a thing into a black hole, it becomes ‘Unobservable’, and hence, information cannot be sent back in time from this Unobservable.
So, in both these accounts, with regular causality and retro-causality, determinism is not true.
