Can Knowledge of the Future Alter Its Course?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter x2thay
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Determinism Paradox
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of knowing the future in a deterministic universe, exploring philosophical and theoretical aspects of determinism, knowledge, and potential paradoxes related to time travel and decision-making.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant cites Laplace's deterministic view, suggesting that if a scientist could access a comprehensive formula of the universe, they could predict the future, leading to a paradox where knowledge of the future could alter it.
  • Another participant argues that if the universe is deterministic, then the scientist's brain is also deterministic, implying that the scientist would predict their actions and thus be unable to change the future.
  • A different participant draws a parallel to time travel paradoxes, suggesting that if time travel were possible, it would create contradictions, and proposes that such paradoxes could be resolved by rejecting determinism or the feasibility of complete knowledge of the universe.
  • One participant humorously notes the impracticality of creating a supercomputer capable of processing all necessary data, suggesting it would require an immense amount of energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of determinism and the nature of knowledge regarding the future. There is no consensus on whether knowledge of the future can alter its course, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight assumptions regarding determinism and the nature of knowledge, as well as the limitations of hypothetical scenarios involving supercomputers and time travel. These assumptions are not fully explored or agreed upon.

x2thay
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
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.
—Pierre Simon Laplace, A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities

Given a Universe abiding solely by deterministic laws, Laplace's reasoning seems to make perfect sense. So let us take this deterministic Universe and imagine within it a scientist to whom the, let us call it: the ultimate formula, was made accessible. So, being capable to plug this hypothetical formula into a supercomputer, all the past states of the Universe as well as the future states would be absolutely and precisely knowable to the scientist.
So here's where the paradox arises: imagine the scientist uses said supercomputer to know how the next minute will play out: literally see the future. When this future is made visible to the scientist, then he is, therefore, able to act in a way that will create a different future than the formula predicted, rendering it useless in that sense.

Comments.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The problem here is that if the entire universe is deterministic, than so is the brain, and so he will predict what he will do and not be able to change that.

If the brain is not deterministic, then the premise is false.
 
Hehe, this is similar to the paradoxes of time travel, like: if a time traveller travels back in time and meets and kills his/her younger self, then (s)he changes history, and will not travel back and kill himself, etc. These paradoxes are easily resolved if we just assume that time travel cannot be possible.
Likewise, Jaló's Paradox is resolved if either the universe is not deterministic or if it is not possible for beings within our universe to obtain all knowledge about the universe and calculate its future by such a supercomputer.
 
It would really suck to be the scientist who gathered all the necessary data, but, discovered a computer powerful enough to crunch the numbers would require all the energy in the universe to build.
 

Similar threads

Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
90
Views
12K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K