Is the Universe Predetermined or Governed by Uncertainty?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the universe, specifically whether it is predetermined or governed by uncertainty. Participants explore concepts related to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, determinism, and the implications of quantum mechanics on our understanding of reality. The scope includes theoretical considerations and philosophical implications of these ideas.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, suggesting that if it were incorrect, the universe could be seen as predetermined since everything could be known from the Big Bang.
  • Others argue that the universe was viewed as deterministic before quantum mechanics (QM) and that this view has changed with the introduction of QM.
  • One participant posits that while the uncertainty principle limits our knowledge, it does not necessarily mean that the universe itself is not deterministic at a given moment.
  • Another participant challenges the idea that the uncertainty principle prevents determinism, questioning whether this is indeed true.
  • Some participants believe that the uncertainty principle is a fundamental limitation that cannot be overcome, likening it to a simulation where certain details are inherently unobservable.
  • There is a suggestion that the question of determinism versus uncertainty may be philosophical in nature, though others argue it is a fundamental property of nature that should be knowable.
  • One participant references historical debates in physics, suggesting that similar arguments have been used in the past to discredit valid theories.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on whether the universe is deterministic or uncertain, with no consensus reached. Some believe in the possibility of determinism, while others uphold the uncertainty principle as a fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the nature of quantum mechanics and determinism, with participants relying on differing interpretations of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and its implications. There are unresolved questions regarding the predictability of the universe and the limits of measurement.

tnadys
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I have always had a problem with the concept of "you can't know" and because of that I have always had a problem with the uncertainty principle. Because people much smarter than me have fought this issue longer than I have been alive, and I because am not really qualified to have an opinion I have a related question instead.

If the uncertainty principal is wrong and everything can be known since the big bang, doesn't that result in everything being predetermined. Is they a way to avoid this disturbing consequence without resorting to religion? Does physics give me an out, or am I left with two possibilities that I can't accept?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you are left with two possibilities you can't accept.

Pre-QM, the universe was considered deterministic (look up Deterministic Universe).
 
I don't necessarily "believe" in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
When trying to measure the observables of a system with electromagnetic radiation, the radiation affects the particles in such a way as to limit our knowledge of the particle's position and momentum. However, from what I understand, the particle still existed in a definite position in space with a definite velocity at a given moment of time.

Even if particles can act as waves, and waves "cannot have a definite position", I believe (or at least really hope, for my sanity's safety) that the universe's state in one point in time is definite. We just can't measure it through spectroscopy.
 
I always assumed the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle prevented the universe from being Deterministic, but, it that even true?
 
I just found the thread "Is everything deterministic" which covers this
 
scorpion990 said:
I don't necessarily "believe" in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
When trying to measure the observables of a system with electromagnetic radiation, the radiation affects the particles in such a way as to limit our knowledge of the particle's position and momentum. However, from what I understand, the particle still existed in a definite position in space with a definite velocity at a given moment of time.
No. As with you, proponents of this belief think that HUP is a limitation in measurement That we could, in principle, get better measuring devices, and in doing so, confine a system's uncertainty to an ever smaller volume/momentum.

This is not true. It is a phenomenon that holds independent of our measurement of the system.
 
Shouldn't this be in philosophy?

QM, IMHO, saves us from the depressing idea of superdeterminism. Regardless what interpretation you prefer, they all share the axiom that we cannot in principle know the outcome of quantum events. The future truly is unknown.

The HUP is a fundamental limitation on our ability to predict. It cannot in principle be gotten around. Imagine yourself in a computer simulation. You can see individual pixels but you will never be able to see anything smaller than a pixel because that is the basic building block of the system. Within the rules of the simulation, you can't see deeper than the simulation will allow.

Our simulation is quantized to Planck's constant, more or less. The "pixels" wander around but we can't look at them too close or else they get away.

"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
 
It seems to me that this is only philosophy if we don't and can't ever know the answer. If the universe is deterministic or not seems like a fundamental property of nature that in principle should be knowable. We will never be able to predict the future (to complex) either way, but we should be able to know if it is predictable.

This is not like "what is consciousness" where we can't even define the terms of the question. This is a simple well defines question that just happens to be hard.

PS. I watched a BBC documentary about the discovery of the atom. These same arguments (this is philosophy not physics) were used to discredit Boltzmann, until Einstein proved him right. For me at least this is the question in physics that I would most like answered. I would think there must be someone working on it.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K