However there is now a century of detailed experimentation which shows that those Laws cannot (yet) be applied to all circumstances to achieve a single outcome. — Gary Enfield
Chaos theory isn't really about disorder. Chaotic systems are completely deterministic, but extremely sensitive to their initial state and any perturbations. If gravity, for instance, was chaotic, an object of 1 gram might happily rest on the surface of the earth while one of .99999999 gram might be catapulted toward the sun. — Kenosha Kid
In quantum mechanics it is not possible to derive a single outcome from a given cause but it is possible to derive a single cause from a given outcome. At least that's how I understood Kenosha Kid's claim that QM is backwards deterministic. — litewave
Gravitating many-body systems are chaotic in the technical sense. — SophistiCat
I didn't know that . — Gary Enfield
In quantum mechanics it is not possible to derive a single outcome from a given cause but it is possible to derive a single cause from a given outcome. — litewave
Determinism can be true only if everything has a cause but the belief that everything has a cause is based on inductive reasoning but inductive reasoning falls short of the the level of certainty required to keep determinism afloat. — TheMadFool
A current advocate is Fritjof Capra, his pearl of wisdom is ; "cognition is a reaction to a disturbance in a state". — Pop
At face value, your comment is misplaced as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle does not comment on the presence or absence of determinism/materialism. It merely states that there is a measurement problem in one particular circumstance - where it is necessary to determine the precise speed, location and mass of a single sub-atomic particle at any point in time. It says that you can do some measurements accurately but not all, as the act of measurement would change one or more of the parameters.
That is all it says, so it can apply whether or not a circumstance demonstrates the presence or absence of determinism. — Gary Enfield
We may regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes.
Werner Heisenberg’s “uncertainty principle” challenged centuries of scientific understanding, placed him in direct opposition to Albert Einstein, and put Niels Bohr in the middle of one of the most heated debates in scientific history. Heisenberg’s theorem stated that there were physical limits to what we could know about sub-atomic particles; this “uncertainty” would have shocking implications.
and that the seemingly impossible connections between particles communicated at over 10,000 times the speed of light, is a case in point, by seemingly breaking several Laws and Principles. Science cannot now deny the reality of these events and it has simply accepted that this is now a reality without explanation — Gary Enfield
LaPlace's style of physical determinism was torpedoed by the uncertainty principle. That’s the short version. — Wayfarer
Tychism (Greek: τύχη, lit. 'chance') is a thesis proposed by the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce that holds that absolute chance, or indeterminism, is a real factor operative in the universe. This doctrine forms a central part of Peirce's comprehensive evolutionary cosmology. It may be considered both the direct opposite of Albert Einstein's oft quoted dictum that: "God does not play dice with the universe" and an early philosophical anticipation of Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
In an article published in The Monist for January, 1891, I endeavored to show what ideas ought to form the warp of a system of philosophy, and particularly emphasized that of absolute chance. In the number of April, 1892, I argued further in favor of that way of thinking, which it will be convenient to christen tychism (from tyché, chance). A serious student of philosophy will be in no haste to accept or reject this doctrine; but he will see in it one of the chief attitudes which speculative thought may take, feeling that it is not for an individual, nor for an age, to pronounce upon a fundamental question of philosophy. That is a task for a whole era to work out. I have begun by showing that tychism must give birth to an evolutionary cosmology, in which all the regularities of nature and of mind are regarded as products of growth, and to a Schelling-fashioned idealism which holds matter to be mere specialized and partially deadened mind. - C.S. Peirce, "The Law of Mind", 1892.[2] — Wikipedia
That is all it says, so it can apply whether or not a circumstance demonstrates the presence or absence of determinism.
— Gary Enfield
Of course it does. — Wayfarer
But the ‘uncertainty principle’ applies to just those purportedly fundamental constituents of reality - those very ‘items’ which LaPlace assumes nature is ‘composed’ from. It completely torpedoes that notion of determinism, holes it beneath the water line. — Wayfarer
I think that is as succinct a statement of determinism as you’re likely to find. — Wayfarer
The whole point about physical determinism, is that the rules which govern the motions of atoms govern all else. — Wayfarer
QM, as with the rest of physics, respects the light speed limit. It follows from time dilation, which is fact rather then theory. What we are seeing here is a new phenomenon rather then communication. — Pop
Sadly, I cannot see how your replies clarify what your point is. Perhaps you could say it more clearly or directly? In saying this...
That is all it says, so it can apply whether or not a circumstance demonstrates the presence or absence of determinism.
— Gary Enfield
Of course it does.
— Wayfarer — Gary Enfield
Yet in recent years younger scientists have tried to argue that true randomness does exist in the world due to the findings of Quantum Mechanics. — Gary Enfield
Just because the Laws of Physics & Chemistry cannot predict 100% what some sub-atomic particles will do, it does not mean that the underlying reality of existence is either deterministic, non-deterministic, or a combination of the two. The Uncertainty Principle is merely a comment on our ability to predict. — Gary Enfield
the Laws of Physics only seem to apply determinism in certain specific circumstances. — Gary Enfield
Just because the Laws of Physics & Chemistry cannot predict 100% what some sub-atomic particles will do, it does not mean that the underlying reality of existence is either deterministic, non-deterministic, or a combination of the two. The Uncertainty Principle is merely a comment on our ability to predict.
— Gary Enfield
But that is a contested point. It is called the 'epistemic intepretation', as I understand it. There are other interpretations which claim that that there really is no existent particle designated as an electron until the measurement is made. That is what all the bafflement about the 'collapse of the probability wave'. — Wayfarer
The laws of physics are held to be the fundamental laws of the whole Universe by physicalism, with everything else being derived from, or supervening, on them. And physicalism is a very influential attitude. — Wayfarer
The announcement today from CERN about the discovery of a new, previously undetected, force in nature, exerting a mysterious influence of unknown origin - could be the... — Gary Enfield
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.