What Are the Implications of the Free Will Theorem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Demystifier
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Free will Theorem
Click For Summary
The Free Will Theorem posits that if humans possess free will, then the universe cannot be entirely deterministic. This implies that the existence of free will introduces an element of unpredictability in nature. The discussion highlights the theorem's potential tautological nature, suggesting that it may seem self-evident to those who grasp its implications. The conversation also references previous discussions on the topic, indicating ongoing interest and exploration of the theorem's consequences. Overall, the Free Will Theorem raises significant questions about the relationship between human agency and the deterministic framework of the universe.
Demystifier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
14,605
Reaction score
7,211
What do you think about
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0604079 ?

Let me explain how I understood it, but it is possible that I misunderstood something.
In simple terms, the theorem says the following:
If humans have free will, then the rest of nature is not deterministic.

But if you treat humans on an equal footing with the rest of nature, then this theorem can be further simplified as:
If there is free will, then something is not deterministic.

Sounds almost like a tautology, doesn't it?

But of course, every theorem can be viewed as a tautology by those who understand it very well.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks RVBuckeye!
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
First, I need to check that I have the 3 notations correct for an inner product in finite vector spaces over a complex field; v* means: given the isomorphism V to V* then: (a) physicists and others: (u,v)=v*u ; linear in the second argument (b) some mathematicians: (u,v)=u*v; linear in the first argument. (c) bra-ket: <v|u>= (u,v) from (a), so v*u . <v|u> is linear in the second argument. If these are correct, then it would seem that <v|u> being linear in the second...