/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5918261]

As we know, there is no randomness in the nature (or at least it exists only in quantum physics), which means, that with enough data (like the location every molecule and its interactions with others) and computer strong enough, we could calculate anything, including future. And that would mean, we could predict every action, movement or even every thought of every human living today or in hundreds of years from now. Doesn't it deny existing of free will? If it is possible, we have actually no choice what we do or what we say.

[Anonymous No.5918279]

I have the same exact thought I know free will does not exist. It's only simulated due to consciousness. If there is no randomness in nature how could free will exist?

[Anonymous No.5918301]

what about chaos? does it say anything about the non deterministic nature of a process or just about the the instability of calculating a prediction for that process?

[Anonymous No.5918306]

>"if experimenters have free will, then so do elementary particles."
>-John Conway

[Anonymous No.5918311]

>>5918261
>Doesn't it deny existing of free will?

That depends on what you mean by free will, obviously.

[Anonymous No.5918334]

>>5918261
>And that would mean, we could predict every action, movement or even every thought of every human living today or in hundreds of years from now

No, we cannot, due to

>it exists only in quantum physics

Further, free will is meaningless in a universe where you cannot predict the outcomes of your actions. So in fact free will requires a deterministic universe to exist.

[Anonymous No.5918351]

Will the computer be able to predict its own actions?

[Anonymous No.5918365]

what's going on in this thread guys

[Anonymous No.5918378]

>>5918365

Arguing about determinism.

[Anonymous No.5918379]

>>5918261
I have thought that exact thought so many times, and I can't see a way to disprove it. Predicting the future is still impossible though, since we can never know everything about every particle in the universe, but the rest of my life (and all of my thoughts) is already determined.

[Anonymous No.5918436]

Yes, there is randomness in nature. The consequences of the randomness at the atomic scales (quantum) spread to the largest scales like a domino effect (wiki chaos theory). Look at turbulence in a stream of water for example, or the schrodinger's cat experiment.

However, in some really large scale systems, most of the complexity can be modeled via deterministic equations. Planets, a pendulum, a free falling object...

btw, we don't really know what happens in nature, we make a model, that is we use a series of rules (today, math) and with them we make predictions. If those predictions fit reality then our model is valid and accepted.

[Anonymous No.5918493]

>>5918261
The three-body problem and the failure of the PB-Theorem are refutations to your proposed thought experiment. Unless we are angles, with no fixed cognitive structure, there is no reason to suspect that we could predict every action in the future. Your post is a direct result of not knowing much about the foundations of mathematics, epistemology and science. I suggest reading some philosophy of mathematics, science or language so you don't make this blunder again.

[Anonymous No.5918496]

Isn't free will to far to go more like what it is beneath the surface, but really it's just an illusion?

[Anonymous No.5918591]

>>5918261

But you'd need a computer with infinite computing power, because of infinite variables.

>Randomness exist, deal with it

[Anonymous No.5918618]

>>5918261
>As we know, there is no randomness in the nature
Stopped reading right there.

Why the fuck do you morons post things like this on a science board? It shows that not only are you completely ignorant, it shows you will confidently lie to your peers in order to appear intelligent.

Go FUCK yourself.

[Talimar No.5918632]

Ok... so we have say... 700 million pointer readers that exist at any static moment or event. Which one moves first?