Determinism in Coin Tosses: Does It Mean We Have Free Will?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bland
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Determinism
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the concept of determinism in coin tosses and its implications for free will. Participants agree that while quantum physics exhibits indeterminate behavior, classical mechanics suggests that coin tosses could be predictable if all variables were known. However, the discussion highlights the impossibility of knowing the exact position and momentum of every air molecule involved, challenging the notion of macroscopic determinism. Ultimately, the conversation concludes that the relationship between determinism and free will is more philosophical than scientific, with no definitive tests available to explore this matter.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and its principles
  • Familiarity with classical mechanics and Newtonian determinism
  • Knowledge of philosophical implications of free will
  • Awareness of Roger Penrose's theories in "The Emperor's New Mind"
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the relationship between quantum mechanics and determinism
  • Explore classical deterministic behaviors emerging from quantum mechanics
  • Read Roger Penrose's "The Emperor's New Mind" for insights on consciousness and free will
  • Investigate philosophical discussions surrounding free will and determinism
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, physicists, and anyone interested in the intersection of determinism, quantum mechanics, and free will will benefit from this discussion.

bland
Messages
150
Reaction score
44
My personal belief if you will is that we have free will. Anyway my question relates to the so called deterministic behaviour of a coin toss as opposed to a quantum decay.

I think that we all agree that quantum physics displays truly indeterminate random behaviour. However I have heard it stated many times that even though there is quantum randomness at the micro level, at the macro level objects display normal Newtonian determinism.

My question relates to an example that is often given of say a coin toss. Apparently a coin toss displays determinism in principle because if we knew everything about the coin and we knew everything about every single air molecule and so forth that we would in principle be able to predict the coin toss which is fundamentally not possible with nuclear decay.

However, this bugs me a lot because I do not see how even in principle the coin toss could be determined due to the fact that even though there may be multi trillions of air molecules involved, we are still in principle not able to know the position and momentum of any of them. So how can the coin toss be used as an in principle argument for macroscopic determinism.

And this follows that the behaviour of the human being cannot be determined and therefore we do have free will due to the same reasons that the coin toss cannot be determined in principle.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are right that the determinism in macro level objects is only approximate. It is impossible, even in principle, to know the position and momentum about every air atom and every coin atom exactly.

As to the relevance of that observation to "free will". I see no possible scientific test to address the matter. So it's more philosophy than science and not proper subject matter for discussion here.
 
jbriggs444 said:
As to the relevance of that observation to "free will". I see no possible scientific test to address the matter. So it's more philosophy than science and not proper subject matter for discussion here.
Jbriggs has it right.
I'm closing this thread, although a more focused discussion about how classical deterministic behaviors emerge from the underlying probabilistic theory of quantum mechanics would be a reasonable topic (There are already some discussions along these lines in the QM subforum, where I'm moving this thread).

If you want to explore the relationship between QM and free will (but not here! please!) you could give Roger Penrose's "The Emperor's New Mind" a try... just be aware that a fair summary of the reviews would be "interesting, but profoundly unconvincing".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
10K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 112 ·
4
Replies
112
Views
16K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
13K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K