Hey all,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Since first learning about Emmy Noether's proof that time invariant laws of physics imply conservation of energy, I can't shake the idea that this istheargument against the notion of free will. Here is my argument:

By Noether's first theorem, whenever the laws are invariant in time, energy is conserved where those laws govern.

The universe's laws have so far been observed to be time invariant.

Brain states are the superposition of all the smaller individual energy states.

Transitions from any one brain state to another is just the transfer of energy.

Since it's energy transfer, it is conserved and obeys a completely causal relationship.

QED no free will.

Additionally, for there tobefree will, wouldn't the laws of physics have to beconstantlychanging, inside each and every one of our heads for each free will action to actually be free will? Any time they aren't changing then the system is deterministic and there couldn't be free will.

Thoughts, comments... has anyone seen this argument before? Thanks,

Jacob B

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Free will and Emmy Noether's theorem of time invariant systems

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**