/sci/ - Science & Math

Cool non sequitur, bro,

>>5187926
non determinism does not necessarily preclude free will.

Only at the quantum level.

The brain works at the molecular level. Any randomness there cancels its self out.

Sorry, but you're just a glassy eyed automaton just like everyone else.

>>5187932
Just think about it for a change.

>>5187940
Well yes but it points in that direction.

>>5187941
There is actually some evidence that suggests that brains operate on a quantum level as well as the molecular.

>>5187944
>Just think about it for a change.
Good advice, you pompous shit. Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise. Lack of determinism =/= free will. Your post is bad and you should feel bad.

>Well yes but it points in that direction.
No, it doesn't. If anything, it points at randomness.

>>5187926
But time is linear. Free will does exist however. OP is a half-faggot. Bi I guess.

>>5187955
Cool ad hominem. I don't want to discuss with you or your giant ego.

>>5187959
>Cool ad hominem.
There was no ad hominem, you fucking clown. My arguments were:

>Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise. Lack of determinism =/= free will. Your post is bad and you should feel bad.

>Well yes but it points in that direction.
>No, it doesn't. If anything, it points at randomness.

>I don't want to discuss with you or your giant ego.
Feel free to argue against my points then instead of dodging them like the intellectually dishonest faggot that you are.

>>5187955
Also read your profile jackass, you might enjoy it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_incompatibilism#Pessimistic_incompatibilism

>>5187967
Oh just shut up. I'm done talking with you.

>>5187969
>your profile
What?

>>5187972
If you're unwilling to respond to my points then maybe you should stop responding to me at all. Your attempts at evasion are embarrassing.

>>5187988
Ok.

>>5187949
Yes and roger penrose is a fucking quackhead. Maths =/= scientific integrity.

lol you guys are such aspies

>>5188018
le upvoat XD

>>5188026
>implying i don't actually own a unicorn

>I have a box in which a unicorn would fit

>Therefore there is a unicorn in there

>>5188026
reported for add homiman god y is everyone so imirture?

>>5188023
Pourquoi parlez-vous français?

>>5188035
Uhm, oui, j'aime lave les legumes. My french is a little rusty.

>>5188051

did u just say something about nuts

>>5188065
No, I admitted my love for washing vegetables.

I don't get what OP means by non-linear.

It is always linear in your reference frame. Spacetime is locally euclidean. That is a property of manifolds.

Has nothing to do with non-determinism. Non-determinism occurs most the time in QM, but some times QM gives completely deterministic results, even for things like electrons.

Experiment would suggest that the classical world as a limiting case of quantum mechanics is highly deterministic.

Just because non-determinism can occur in the quantum realm does not at all imply that the classical realm is non-deterministic.

Also, the free will issue can't be answered with physics or anything for that matter so let's move on.

Free will is a problem of philosophy and metaphysics, not science.

We don't know enough to answer the question so that's why only tards (Sam Harris,etc.) come to a conclusive answer about this age-old question.

>>5188098
respect for giving an actual answer

>>5188070

Don't we all

>>5188142
We do, actually. See http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Free_will_%28solution%29 .

>people still believe randomness exists

>>5188026

>Unicorns are imaginary creatures
>Therefore if I imagine there is an unicorn in the box, there is

>>5188260
Yes, and it is imaginary.

man op you're a goddamn idiot

>>5188242

>Hasn't done physics past highschool.

>>5188142
>only tards (Sam Harris
I like you.

>>5188273
you really believe in true randomness

ok

>>5188271
@ honeyman!!!

>>5188281
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_indeterminacy
Then :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem

>>5187926

what the fuck do you mean by that, you cant just speak about time, like its separated from everything else. The universe is like a machine. Everything needs everything for it to lead to a point in the future universe.

If you were to reverse time and go, lets say, 1 day into the past, and wait until the time you initially left back into the past, then you would end up at the exact same place. Everything is linear if you take the concept of time travelling into account. And it only needs to make sense theoretically to be true, because its such as simple concept.

than i guess time is linear and deterministic.

>>5188303
>The universe is like a machine
Is it? Is it really?

Also even subjective experience is non-linear. Not that that's a good point but yeah.

>>5188311
>Also even subjective experience is non-linear.
You mean qualia?

>>5188295
read both those yourself maybe

>>5188295
NO SIR, EVIDENCE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED ITT, THIS IS /SCI/, THE OFFICIAL 4CHAN THEOLOGY BOARD. I SUGGEST YOU FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH THE RULES: RULE 1: THERE SHALL BE NO EVIDENCE
RULE 2: THERE SHALL BE NO EVIDENCE

>>5188311

>subjective experience is linear

What does that even mean?

>>5188326

non-linear i mean ofc

>>5188317

Are you talking to yourself?

Did you even read the wiki pages?

>>5188311
>Also even subjective experience is non-linear

i guarantee that my subjective experience is linear.

>>5188326
Well when you sleep time virtually loses it's meaning.

When you have fun time goes on fast.

When you are in pain every second seems to last forever.

That's what I meant by subjective and yes I realize it's a weak point. Just something to chew on.

>>5188303
Time travelling also means space travelling.
You cannot take a linear approach to time. Say you go back 1 day but retain your position. You would be out in empty space because the Earth is moving 67000 mph around the sun, and God knows how fast compared to some other localization.
Stop saying time is a simple concept. IT may very well be simple to SOMEBODY but not humans.

We have finally reached the troll line.

QUALIA UNTESTABLE HYOPTHESIS AUTISM RAGING CONSCIOUSNESS POP SCI GRASP OF SCIENCE IGNORANCE IS BLISS BLAH BLAH BLAH

>>5188319

I lol'ed out loud.

It's been a while.

>>5188337
that doesn't make it non-linear

>>5188337
Jesus fucking Christ...

>>5188363
Are you kidding me. What would then?

>>5188356
My qualia is telling me you are a fucking samefag.

>>5188337
That's seriously the dumbest shit I've ever read on this board.

>>5188295

Just putting this out there, but there do exist quantum mechanical systems that have 100% deterministic outcomes of measurement.

It isn't all randomness, it is all quantum mechanics.

That is how it should be said.

>>5188375

>implying qualia exists

guys guys, what if quantum mechanics is entirely deterministic, but we just don´t understand how.

>>5188402

>>5188368
linear?

not not linear, did you pass arithmetic in 1rst grade good sir

>>5188402
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory
Some people believed that our ignorance was the cause of us having to use probabilities, but :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem

>>5188412
You clearly don't know the difference between subjective and objective.

>>5188402
Yes it fucking is based on causality. The whole feyman equations and wavefunctions stem from an incompatability within meausuring position and velocity. It is pseudoscience, ultimately; but like Columbus before us we are in a conflux of bad science and sheeple following popular science journals and teachers who really don't know their arse from their elbow.

How does randomness imply that you get free will.

You do not control randomness

>>5188434
Either you can control acts and they are non-random or you can't and they are pseudo random. The notion of there being any "real" random is counter-intuitive.

>>5188439

I just want to point out that, even if there are quantum effects in the brain (that may be non-deterministic), you have no (conscious) control over it.

So bringing quantum mechanics into the field doesn't imply free will.

>>5188430

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

0/10.

>>5188457
And yet we think.

>>5187941
No one is a glassy eyed-automaton. Your actions are based on the neural networks that define who you are. This automaton is you, thus it only acts the way you act. Although you act accordingly to the atoms and electrical impulses that were already predetermined.

>>5188413

There is still the possibility of a non-local hidden variable theory to make qm deterministic.

Bell's inequality doesn't rule them out.

Not my cup of tea, but a small minority physicists take that shit seriously.

>>5188488
You realize what you just said makes absolutely no sense at all, right?

>>5188500

I don't think he does...

>>5188508
>>5188500

>implying he has a choice in realising if what he said makes sense

>>5188500
I just realized I sounded like a complete idiot. I truly beg your pardon.

>>5188486
If only I was trolling, friend.

>>5188427
apparently subjective memory is not linear

no memory of mine is non-linear

therefore I have no subjective memory

therefore I am not human

therefore I have no soul

therefore I am not authorized to participate in this theology discussion, for I am a creature of the mothafuggen devil

therefore I shall now go to bed because this is retarded shit.

On a side note I just stepped out of my dark apartment into the sunlight. My eyes burn and yet I walk to my mailbox in my PJs to collect my weekly check from my mom.

Did I not make a free choice good sirs?

HRM HRM HRM HRRRRRM.

>>5188540
You could not have done otherwise.

>>5188540
No that choice was pre-determined

>>5188539
We're talking about experience and not memory my good sir.

Hey people

we don't know if we have "free will" or not, we don't know if what we do is any different from what that rock in space does following its rules

Out of interest: can any of the people arguing in this thread explain what "non-linear" even means in this context?

>>5188549

Ah. But my eyes hurt me did they not? Yet I walked. Is it because I need her money? No.

I make her pay me rent to sleep in my bedroom now that her and my dad are fighting again. Women need to respect my dwellings.

Did she not choose to take my room? Did my dad not choose to start drinking heavilly again?

>>5188574

But because everything else follows rules, we can assume we do as well.

>>5188574
Actually, the phenomenon is well-understood.

I just realized what the problem is. Free will is a term that has no meaning in reality. We are basically arguing about semantics because someone failed to define the word properly.

>>5188584

non-deterministic basically. Its completely useless to use this wording but op started it for some reason.

why is /sci/ always fantasizing about QM and deterministic neurons. But when one guys says functionality is at the molecular level in attempt to disregard sources of randomness, you forget about Brownian motion and other sources of signal dependent noise that inherently result in non-deterministic behavior.

Amateurs

>>5188613
the action of deciding that you are performing your actions at free will is predetermined. Mindfuck.