/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7660769
Do you know how much shit was already made 1 second after the big bang? I'd say freeze it 10^-30 seconds after, or less.

>>7660769
What is quantum mechanics?

>>7660769

The act of recording the position of a particle will introduce some uncertainty to its velocity. The act of recording its velocity will introduce some uncertainty to its position.

>>7660791
This. OP is either underage, drunk/stoned, or generally ignorant.

In the first case, get the fuck out. Come back when you get to college.

In the second case, get the fuck out. Come back when you sober up.

In the third case, read Schrodinger's "Science and Humanism" lectures.

>>7660791
velocity.

>>7660832
You're forgetting the 4th case. Where OP goes to a /sci/ archive (like warosu) and selects old posts from 2010 to shitpost on /sci/ and see who gets baited/butthurt

A human can do none of those things. Not individually not when combined. Your definition of "free will" is based on some theoretical omniscient being, which humans most certainly are not. Humans are being of very limited perspective and whose consciousness are bound to the flow of time. As such the concept of "choice" is very real and very relevant. From our perspective we are beings of limited knowledge and particular options and thus meaningful decisions. From an omniscient perspective, "options" and "decisions" were just an illusion of time and artifacts of the linear human thinking process, but we aren't omniscient, are we?

It is not merely the actuality of Platonic free will which is obliterated by determinism, but the very concept of such an interpretation of free will is meaningless to deterministic creatures. It's like you're holding a fragile bubble and watching it popped when a pin is introduced, constantly fearing that your bubble is going to pop even though the pin has been in the universe for all of time.

>2. With enough knowledge of the state of the system (our universe) and with a big enough computer, we could predict the future ( or all possible futures, given random behaviors of particles)
It is impossible to get comprehensive knowledge of the universe. Not just uncertainty and entropy are in the way, but the limitations of motion and vision will forever give humans a narrow field of view no matter how many tools we build. Likewise it is highly dubious to assume a device built within the universe could simulate the universe with such ease and fidelity that it can actually predict its outcomes. Even in order to predict something so relatively simple as a human brain would require something more efficient then the human brain and that raises ethical questions like "why are you wasting that on predicting something less than itself instead of being a human brain but better?"

>>7660769
>le determinism maymay

>>7660771
This fucking guy lol. How the fuck is that buzz word even relevant here?

>>7660769
That is dumb as shit
1. We don't know that step 3 is true
2. You haven't defined free will
3. The computer would also have to simulate itself to accurately predict the future, and the simulate computer would also have to simulate itself, leading to an infinite recursion, you wouldn't be able to predict shit.