Exploring the Boundaries of Free Will with Quantum Physics

In summary: Galaxies there. In this case, the choice of measurement setting would be based on a physical fact about the universe that is beyond the control of either Alice or Bob.
  • #1
black hole 123
36
2
this is probably not appropriate but i don't know where to ask. if classical physics was correct then everything would be predestined and we have no free will. quantum physics merely added "randomness" to it, our thoughts are not chaotic and random. can someone explain how this randomness can give rise to ordered thoughts and "free will"? i don't want to get into religious debates here...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Trying to avoid too much philosophy - it is not so clear cut and there is lots of stuff written on the subject - including these accessible resources:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quantum-physics-free-will/


In a nutshell - the forward path in QM is no longer deterministic.
This leads some people to think that some act of will may influence the probabilities.
However - a proper treatment requires a solution to the mind-body problem.
 
  • #3
black hole 123 said:
this is probably not appropriate but i don't know where to ask. if classical physics was correct then everything would be predestined and we have no free will. quantum physics merely added "randomness" to it, our thoughts are not chaotic and random. can someone explain how this randomness can give rise to ordered thoughts and "free will"? i don't want to get into religious debates here...
Classical and quantum laws cannot explain a true free will. Yet, they can explain an illusion of free will. For this, one probably needs a complex system in a regime somewhere on the boundary between chaos and order.
 
  • #4
A certain amount of free will is necessary in order to do science. If an observer cannot chose what measurements he makes, he cannot trust that he infers the correct laws.

In the context of QM, the idea that the observer may not have free will goes by the term superdeterminism. But as I wrote, it affects all of science (see also the Zeilinger quote at the end of the wikipedia article).
 
Last edited:
  • #5
First you need to understand what QM actually says. Although not usually pointed in discussions of QM, where they often tacitly assume its in some sense fundamentally random, in fact the theory is silent on it because we have interpretations that are deterministic like BM.

So the free will issue is exactly the same as it always was - which is as Demystifier said - true free will is a rather difficult issue - the illusion of it though can be explained.

Its an interesting issue, but it's a philosophical one, and not really science.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • #6
Try Penrose's work.
 
  • #7
I just wanted to point out that the phrase "free will" comes up in discussions of Bell's theorem (which is a proof that quantum mechanics implies correlations between distant measurements that cannot be realized using classical, non-quantum, means without violating Special Relativity). There, it isn't really a philosophical condition, and doesn't necessarily have to do with conscious human beings at all. Instead, it's a kind of independence assumption.

In an EPR type experiment, you have two distant experimenters, Alice and Bob. Each of them has a device that has a number of possible settings. A pair of particles is created at some location between Alice and Bob, and one particle is sent to each of the experimenters, who then perform a measurement using the device with the chosen device settings. The free will assumption amounts to something along the lines of:

For any property [itex]\lambda[/itex] of the twin pairs at the time of their creation, and for any pair of settings [itex]\alpha[/itex] (Alice's setting) and [itex]\beta[/itex] (Bob's setting), there is a possible run of the experiment in which the twin pairs have value [itex]\lambda[/itex] and Alice's setting is [itex]\alpha[/itex] and Bob's setting is [itex]\beta[/itex].​

So it doesn't actually involve Alice or Bob's "free will". What this assumption rules out is the possibility that the choice of [itex]\lambda[/itex] constrains the possible values of [itex]\alpha[/itex] or [itex]\beta[/itex]. The free will assumption seems pretty innocuous in this limited form. If Alice and Bob use some kind of random number generator to decide what setting to use, then that would satisfy the "free will" condition without saying anything about the nature of human consciousness--a robot can use a random number generator as well as a human can. If the free will assumption is false, then it implies that, in a sense, there are no random number generators, that any two supposedly random number generators produce results that are correlated in a specific way.
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
  • #8
stevendaryl said:
If the free will assumption is false, then it implies that, in a sense, there are no random number generators, that any two supposedly random number generators produce results that are correlated in a specific way.

The denial of free will in the context of discussions of Bell's theorem involves more than just saying that nothing is truly random. Instead of using a random-number generator, an experimenter could base his decision on some astronomical fact: Alice points a telescope toward some region of the sky, and counts the number of stars in her field of vision, and makes her decision based on that number. So for Alice's setting to be predetermined, it would be necessary for the entire universe to be arranged so as to force Alice to make a particular choice. That's not impossible, but it's very strange. So usually people assume free will in the sense of Bell's theorem, without meaning anything too philosophical about the nature of "free will".
 
  • #9
bhobba said:
Its an interesting issue, but it's a philosophical one, and not really science.
Yes. Thread closed.
 

FAQ: Exploring the Boundaries of Free Will with Quantum Physics

What is the connection between quantum physics and free will?

There is an ongoing debate about whether free will exists or if our actions are determined by physical laws. Some scientists believe that quantum physics may play a role in explaining free will, as it introduces an element of randomness and unpredictability into the universe.

Can quantum physics prove the existence of free will?

No, quantum physics cannot definitively prove the existence of free will. While it does introduce randomness and uncertainty, it is still subject to physical laws and cannot fully explain the complex nature of human decision-making.

What experiments have been done to explore the boundaries of free will with quantum physics?

There have been several experiments conducted to explore the potential connection between quantum physics and free will. One famous experiment is the Libet experiment, where participants were asked to press a button at a time of their choosing while their brain activity was monitored.

What are the implications of a connection between quantum physics and free will?

If a connection between quantum physics and free will is established, it would challenge our understanding of causality and the concept of determinism. It could also have implications for moral responsibility and the legal system.

Are there any limitations to using quantum physics to explore free will?

Yes, there are limitations to using quantum physics to explore free will. While it may introduce randomness and uncertainty, it does not fully explain the complex nature of human decision-making and the role of external factors. Additionally, the interpretation of quantum mechanics is still a subject of debate among scientists.

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
833
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
86
Views
10K
Replies
115
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
6K
Replies
36
Views
3K
Back
Top