tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post9158982393468166078..comments2024-03-27T19:47:13.475-07:00Comments on Dark Buzz: Big-shot defends superdeterminismRogerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-60432395274102653872013-04-04T20:30:40.769-07:002013-04-04T20:30:40.769-07:00Wait, how can you be against free will AND causali...Wait, how can you be against free will AND causality. Isn't cause and effect the usual argument against free will?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-90174232190853260002012-08-31T04:56:48.190-07:002012-08-31T04:56:48.190-07:00See http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/352...See http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/35218/why-do-some-physicists-believe-that-scalable-quantum-computing-is-possibleCraignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-65247694166395310892012-08-24T04:48:24.256-07:002012-08-24T04:48:24.256-07:00See http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chap...See http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter3-19c.html<br /><br />"Everything is foreseen, yet free will is given."Craignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-28877678361176402002012-08-22T15:36:18.491-07:002012-08-22T15:36:18.491-07:00Free will and causality are so thoroughly ingraine...Free will and causality are so thoroughly ingrained that it would take some strong evidence to convince me otherwise. I don't see any evidence at all against these concepts. I am not sure it is even possible to have an experiment that disproves free will.Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-15016477652564629582012-08-22T13:53:21.964-07:002012-08-22T13:53:21.964-07:00Also, the view that quantum mechanics is determini...Also, the view that quantum mechanics is deterministic and its probabilistic aspect is only because of the 2nd law of thermodynamics would explain why quantum computing can't work in the real world.Craignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-12906203554304363432012-08-22T10:58:27.291-07:002012-08-22T10:58:27.291-07:00Why don't you agree with Stenger in being agai...Why don't you agree with Stenger in being against free will and causality?Craignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-17659462865406389082012-08-22T10:11:22.632-07:002012-08-22T10:11:22.632-07:00http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/void.h...<a href="http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/void.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/void.html</a><br /><br />Stenger goes too far with that argument. He is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/free-will-is-an-illusion_b_1562533.html" rel="nofollow">against free will</a> and <a href="http://blog.darkbuzz.com/2011/10/stenger-on-einstein-causality.html" rel="nofollow">against causality</a>. I cannot agree with that.Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-77698866161600464962012-08-22T09:05:54.796-07:002012-08-22T09:05:54.796-07:00See the chapters 8 and 11 in this book: http://www...See the chapters 8 and 11 in this book: http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/void.htmlCraignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-44575114023800831852012-08-21T11:49:01.809-07:002012-08-21T11:49:01.809-07:00Thank you. I didn't figure this out on my own....Thank you. I didn't figure this out on my own. I learned this from reading Victor Stenger's writings. He explains this all in detail. If you want to understand quantum mechanics in a "nonmagical" way, he's one of the best writers. <br /><br />He's one of these atheist skeptics or debunkers, who puts religion in the same category as magic and witchcraft. While I certainly don't endorse Victor Stenger on this, he's right on the money with his explanations of modern physics.<br /><br />Of course, there is room for many different types of interpretations of QM, as long as it's consistent with experiment. They can all be right. Just pick the one you are most comfortable with.Craignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-9990496688296735062012-08-21T11:35:54.089-07:002012-08-21T11:35:54.089-07:00You make some excellent comments. Yes, a theory ca...You make some excellent comments. Yes, a theory can be probabilistic while the underlying physics is deterministic.Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-88141898175906878842012-08-21T09:35:24.044-07:002012-08-21T09:35:24.044-07:00I think the best way to understand QM is to watch ...I think the best way to understand QM is to watch it backwards in time. Then it's deterministic. It's only probabilistic when viewed forward in time.<br /><br />It's just like Thermodynamics. It's a probabilistic theory describing deterministic actions.<br /><br />The main feature of QM is the wave structure of matter, which makes it different than classical mechanics, not its probability aspect.Craignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-48336846742986508242012-08-21T09:19:22.178-07:002012-08-21T09:19:22.178-07:00That's funny. If a regular non-Nobel laureate ...That's funny. If a regular non-Nobel laureate scientist would have posted that there, it would have been closed as argumentative. At least that's my experience with other stack exchanges.Craignoreply@blogger.com