Randomness in causality physics only exists when we have a lack of ability to measure all possible parameters. — Christoffer
That is what is questioned by the Del Santo article. — Banno
The notion that the universe is determined fails. — Banno
"If the initial state within an arbitrary system was completely specified, it would evolve into a unique state at any given time point". — fdrake
That is what is questioned by the Del Santo article. — Banno
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.07411.pdfProblem is that it's inaccessible to non-members. — Christoffer
That's absurd... no competent physicist would even attempt such a thing. They would use a demon.The standard philosophical prejudice is that given an accurate enough account of the position of the box and a given ball, a competent physicist will be able to tell us which of the bins across the bottom the ball will land in. — Banno
why assume that we could have infinite information about our measurement... — Banno
That determinism of implication doesn't hold for almost every phenomenon because we know it's practically impossible to completely specify the input state that lead to its emergence. — fdrake
What remains of Laplace's demon as an ontological thesis when it's rendered merely a hypothetical? We can't feed almost every system into its defining implication. So what systems are left? — fdrake
As he concludes, the value of the article is in showing that there is an alternative to determinism within classical physics; not in showing that it is true. — Banno
But epistemology isn't everything. — Kenosha Kid
The difference is that states corresponding to some measurement (e.g. momentum) are multi-valued, which means that trajectories through phase space are also multi-valued. — Kenosha Kid
It would be good to know just what "cause" and "causation" mean, or how understood in this context. And whatever in the world is a metaphysical discovery about causation"?however limited, does speak to a metaphysical discovery about causation. — Hanover
Knowledge is everything to Laplace's demon. If such a state of knowledge is impossible in some circumstances, Laplace's demon couldn't function as described in those circumstances. We already know it is impossible in most circumstances. — fdrake
If we were to observe that process, the measurements would come from the sampling operator, not from the deterministic evolution of the distribution. — fdrake
for instance, unless something other than gravity was acting. — Kenosha Kid
The standard philosophical prejudice is that given an accurate enough account of the position of the box and a given ball, a competent physicist will be able to tell us which of the bins across the bottom the ball will land in.
And in this sense the path of the ball is determined.
But of course no one could determine the final resting place of the ball. Even the smallest error in the initial positions will be magnified until it throws out the calculations.
Anscombe wrote this in a time of only nascent chaos theory, which could only serve to amplify her point.
The notion that the universe is determined fails. — Banno
Russel, On the notion of CauseAll philosophers, of every school, imagine that causation is one of the fundamental axioms or postulates of science, yet, oddly enough, in advanced sciences such as gravitational astronomy, the word "cause" never occurs.
This article was written by a simpleton — turkeyMan
You're new. You will need to present more than this barely articulate drivel should you wish to receive responses here. — Banno
But of course no one could determine the final resting place of the ball. Even the smallest error in the initial positions will be magnified until it throws out the calculations. — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.