Is the Real World Deterministic or Indeterministic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter somy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Real world
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the question of whether the real world is deterministic or indeterministic, exploring implications from physics, particularly quantum mechanics, and philosophical perspectives. Participants examine the nature of determinism, the possibility of experiments to test these ideas, and the implications of a deterministic universe on human experience and decision-making.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory
  • Philosophical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that determinism cannot be proven or disproven, framing it as a metaphysical issue influenced by quantum mechanics.
  • Others propose hypothetical experiments involving identical systems to explore randomness and determinism, questioning the feasibility of such experiments.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of assuming a deterministic universe, particularly regarding human agency and the predictability of events.
  • Participants discuss the philosophical implications of determinism, including the nature of causality and the role of randomness in physical systems.
  • Some suggest that if a deterministic universe exists, it might include loopholes for indeterminacy, potentially allowing for 'invisible corrections' by hypothetical simulators.
  • Questions are posed about the nature of atomic decay and whether identical particles behave deterministically or randomly.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on determinism, with no consensus reached. Some lean towards the idea that the universe may be indeterministic, while others defend the notion of determinism, leading to an ongoing debate.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the challenge of defining determinism and indeterminism, the dependence on interpretations of quantum mechanics, and the unresolved nature of philosophical arguments surrounding the topic.

  • #61
apeiron said:
No, more like a lot of vanity given that the Apeiron was the first model of a vague beginning!

Perhaps it would be considered contradictory (!), but as far as I understand Heidegger and Derrida, I think they take such notions much further, in better directions.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
VikingF said:
If random quantum fluctuations happened 13.7 billion years ago, then it could just as easily happen today, couldn't it?

This doesn't directly answer your question, but does describe how some scientists are viewing the multiverse and our ability to comprehend it.http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24239/
 
Last edited:
  • #63
fuzzyfelt said:
Perhaps it would be considered contradictory (!), but as far as I understand Heidegger and Derrida, I think they take such notions much further, in better directions.

Any references to what you are thinking about here? I've not come across vagueness-related approaches with these guys. In modern times, Peirce did the most developing (while Russell was the most vigorous at arguing against).
 
  • #64
Sorry, nothing particularly expressed as ‘vague’, but I was just thinking that there are some similarities that may or may not be helpful.

As far as I understand, following some of Heidegger’s ideas, Derrida writes of ‘differance’, where dichotomies exist in the blur of their boundaries.

A critical method encouraging plural interpretations, investigating hierarchies of antinomies, supplements, paradoxes, etc., suggests this is undermined by ‘irreducible incompleteness’, ‘originary synthesis’, a changing ‘aporia’ of potential, an ‘unresolvable indetermination’ of meaning. I said contradictory for various reasons, including that this is argued against ‘logocentrism'.

With some view to the topic, Deconstruction may be regarded as anti-determinist, but inevitable uncertainty has been mentioned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 155 ·
6
Replies
155
Views
7K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
2K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K