/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5045364]

Hello /sci/ I'd like to borrow your expertise for a matter:

Is there any reasonable interpretation of Quantum Mechanics that would disprove the notion of cause and effect (for human decision-making, particularly)?

Recently a classmate (theology, lol) of mine cited the Quantum Eraser experiment as justification for Libertarianism. I think he's mistaken, but as I'm not that knowledgeable on the subject I'd like to make sure.

This isn't a philosophical question, but can anyone who understands superposition thoroughly tell me whether or not it even remotely implies cause and effect do not apply on the quantum scale?

Also those manga studybooks are surprisingly good.

[Anonymous No.5045385]

First you have to precisely define causality.

Causality based on counterfactual statements obeying both cause-precedes-effect and Lorentz invariance is ruled out by Bell's theorem, so you can read about that if you're interested.

Don't see what the fuck this has to do with libertarianism. If you're thinking about free will, it's fiercely disputed what that even means, and it's certainly not science.

[Anonymous No.5045397]

>>5045385

I don't mean to talk about free will, I mean to ask you about my classmate's point on quantum physics.

He's essentially saying that superposition proves that things can happen without being caused, ergo the mind's properties can be uncaused.

I'm just asking if there is anything in quantum mechanics that happens without being caused by something else. That is causality.

[Anonymous No.5045401]

>>5045397
Maybe he's talking about randomness. In quantum mechanics, given the initial conditions of an experiment we can only calculate the probability of each outcome, not what outcome actually happens.

[Anonymous No.5045410]

>>5045364
>2012
>using naive babby teir quantum mechanics
>not using quantum field theory

[Anonymous No.5045436]

>>5045401

I'd have to ask him but it sounded like he meant the brain had processes whose outcomes completely unrelated to previous states, not that it was just impossible to predict the outcome of those processes.

I may have misunderstood something important here but does randomness imply that the previous states of a system has no bearing on the final state of the system?

And if so, could those effects manifest on a macroscopic level?

[Anonymous No.5045442]

>using physics to justify human behavior

similar patterns for completely different reasons.

[Anonymous No.5045500]

>>5045364
/a/ actually had a serious discussion on learning those subjects through those books

[Anonymous No.5045521]

>>5045500
seems interesting
archive link?

[Anonymous No.5045527]

>>5045436
>does randomness imply that the previous states of a system has no bearing on the final state of the system?
The previous state still has a bearing on the final state of the system. Different initial states give you different probabilities for final states.

[Anonymous No.5045531]

>>5045521
dude, that was way back like a year or two ago. im not gonna dig through foolz

[deleted No.5045627]

>>5045527

Thanks, that pretty much answers it. Said classmate was literally saying that any given current state of the brain was irrespective of any previous state and/or the state of its environment. (which sounds retarded, because it is, but I just wanted to make sure I wasn't talking out of my ass) A brain-state having any probability would be sufficient to disprove his notion.

>>5045500
That's retarded. They're great for supplementary study since they're mildly entertaining, but they really don't replace a proper textbook. Then again, it's /a/.

[Anonymous No.5045650]

>>5045627

Wait stay in this thread for a sec. My girlfriend might enjoy those since she loves science and is a little bit into anime and manga. You're saying they're kinda decent? She would appreciate the novelty more than the utility, but I'd like to buy her one.

Do you recommend them? It would have to be Physics or Math.

[sage No.5045683]

>>5045650

Yeah they're pretty good. I've only read through the calculus one completely, as well as part of the physics one. It's basically a graphic novel of a bunch of word problems strung together by mild plot and glossary explanation. Helps with intuition of the concepts imo. There's some practice problems but as I said, not as in-depth or formal as a text book. There's more books than the ones in the pic, as well.

They're good supplementation for studying, but if you already have a mastery of the topic it's kinda redundant as the plot is merely a device for introducing concepts. I liked what I read, helped to keep studying from being so rote.

I've seen some at Fry's, there's dl's around too.

[Anonymous No.5045684]

>>5045531

>foolz
/＼＿＿／＼
／ ／ ヽ :: ＼
| （●）, 、（●）、 |
| ,,ノ(、, )ヽ、,, |
| ,;‐＝‐ヽ .:::::|
＼ ｀ニニ´ .:::／ N-NO THANK YOU
／｀ー‐--‐‐—´´＼
.ｎ:n ｎｎ
nf|｜| | | |^!n
ｆ|.| | ∩ ∩|..| |..|
|: :: ! } {！ ::: ::|
ヽ ,イ ヽ :イ