If QM is true does free will exist?

Main Question or Discussion Point

I'm not sure where to put this so I'll start here.

If we accept the posits of the Copenhagen Interpretation, or accept that light is both a wave and a particle, how does this affect the debate about free will and predeterminism or doesn't it and why?
 

Answers and Replies

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,093
174
One may and may not worry more about the implications of the Many Worlds Theories. :biggrin:
 
One may and may not worry more about the implications of the Many Worlds Theories. :biggrin:
:biggrin: I'm not to worried personally, but it's a nice idea, if not exactly scientific.
 
Astronuc
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
18,542
1,684
If QM is true does free will exist?
Yes - that is the only possibility that explains the stupid things that I do. :biggrin:

that light is both a wave and a particle, how does this affect the debate about free will and predeterminism or doesn't it and why?
It doesn't.
 
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,093
174
What are virtual particles, and what does it mean to be virtual?
 
648
3
Demystifier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
10,451
3,233
If nature is fundamentally random (as QM suggests, but in no way proves), then free will does not exist.
 
There's a difference between random and chaotic, QM suggests that fundementally everything is not only random but chaotic too, ie totally without rules, even the rule of the random, if I roll a dice there is an equal chance of 1 to 6 coming up, in the quantum world, often no one even knows the number of possible states that could be involved let alone whether there are finite possibilities, or how the rules work if there are any?

Some physisists posit that the future and the past don't exist only a quanta in time, put that with a chaotic QM, you have the possibility of free will, if the past or the future are not cast in stone, in fact don't even exist except as memories or as a conception or hope, then you have free will right there, so if you take the premise to be true then free will would be a natural consequence of a truly chaotic system with no set past or future. Anything could happen and given enough time probably will.
 
Last edited:
Q_Goest
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,973
39
Hi Schrodinger,
I'd agree that in order for 'free will' to have any meaning at all, then the future can't be predetermined. But I think there's much more to it than that. Note that the future could be influenced by QM interactions, but if the human brain is strictly governed by deterministic mechanisms such as computationalism requires, then even if the future isn't determinate, all the thought processes the brain has certainly are. So in the coloquial sense, computationalism prohibits free will. This problem with computationalism has been cited by many, and I haven't seen any decent rebuttle.

What this says is that if free will is real, consciousness will need to incorporate QM. This problem with computationalism is just one of many.
 
1,986
5
If we accept the posits of the Copenhagen Interpretation, or accept that light is both a wave and a particle, how does this affect the debate about free will and predeterminism or doesn't it and why?
In my opinion it has no effect whatsoever.

The idea that our minds can be taken outside the realm of the wavefunction of the universe and above that being able to influence it is as absurd to me as the idea of some deity ruling the universe.
 
Last edited:
1,222
2
QM suggests that fundementally everything is not only random but chaotic too, ie totally without rules,
This post shows confusion, and uses the techincal term 'chaos' in exactly the wrong sense. To clarify:

Random: Doesn't depend on anything.

Chaotic: Appears random but actually depends on some small number (n < 10) of variables.

I will add that QM is irrelevant to the metaphysical question of free will. Quantum effects are confined to the submicroscopic domain outside of carefully controlled laboratory experiments.
 
Demystifier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
2018 Award
10,451
3,233
Quantum effects are confined to the submicroscopic domain
Not true. For example, superconductivity is a macroscopic quantum effect. In principle, every quantum effect can be realized at the macroscopic level as well, but in practice it is usually difficult to achieve this owing to the interaction with the environment that destroys quantum coherence.
 
This post shows confusion, and uses the techincal term 'chaos' in exactly the wrong sense. To clarify:

Random: Doesn't depend on anything.

Chaotic: Appears random but actually depends on some small number (n < 10) of variables.

I will add that QM is irrelevant to the metaphysical question of free will. Quantum effects are confined to the submicroscopic domain outside of carefully controlled laboratory experiments.
If a small effect on a microscopic scale such as a synapses tubuoles can be effected by the quantum(specifically QET) And enzymes in DNA use Quantum mechanical effects to more quickly find genes to replicate, aren't we seeing something at the x level that could given enough time effect the macro level.

In fact if you have probability a, given enough time couldn't the quantum turn it into probability b, then where is predeterminism? One single effect in the history of humans that should of been x becomes y, how does this effect the predetermined, particularly if there is no past and future? Since it's now on a track that can't lead to the predetermined, and it was truly random.

Also if there is no future or past, where does that leave causality anyway? slightly less well refined perhaps?
 
-I-
10
0
PHYSICS FORUMS
Quote From Sd01g
IMO Best saying ever

Sometimes it is best to step back from the equations and observe what is really happening.
 
144
0
This is from another thread talking about how freewill and determinism are affected by QM. Here are some definitions I got from reading the thread:

1) Determinism- QM's statically nature is, as random as it seems, is controlled by a hidden variable (something we can not discern at this time).

2) Randomness or pseudo freewill- QM's stastical nature is truly random and, therefore so are our choices.

3) Freewill- QM's statically nature is governed by something we control. Our will controls our decisions and therefore it will control which quantum paths to take. And as I said this would require something beyond the physical universe, call it what you will.

Both humans and computers with QRNGs (quantum random number generators) would not possess freewill but rather pseudo freewill.

So do humans have an organic QRNG?
Are my definitions suitable for this discussion? (If not please help redefine them)
Can an experiment (real or thought) be devised to test these definitions?
 

Related Threads for: If QM is true does free will exist?

  • Last Post
3
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Last Post
5
Replies
115
Views
16K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
3
Replies
53
Views
9K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
28
Views
4K
Top