I Open Problem in S.R. Pre-Determinism: Unresolvable Question

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter greswd
  • Start date Start date
greswd
Messages
764
Reaction score
20
There are two sides to this argument, some believe that the framework of SR (excluding GR) implies strict, absolute pre-determinism (i.e. fate). Some believe otherwise.

This issue appears to be unresolvable.

As such, what is the open, unresolvable question that both sides of the debate revolve around?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
greswd said:
There are two sides to this argument, some believe that the framework of SR (excluding GR) implies strict, absolute pre-determinism (i.e. fate). Some believe otherwise.

This issue appears to be unresolvable.

As such, what is the open, unresolvable question that both sides of the debate revolve around?
This isn't just a relativity question - the debate started fairly shortly after Newton formulated the theory that became fully deterministic classical mechanics. It wasn't settled then for the same reason that it's still unsettled: No conceivable experiment can, even in principle, settle it.

Thus, it's a matter of philosophy not science, and as such is out of scope for Physics Forums. There's nothing wrong with the question - it just doesn't belong here so this thread is closed.
 
Last edited:

Thread 'A sufficient condition for integrability of equation ##\nabla g=0##'

In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
View full post »
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'

Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'

See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
View full post »

Thread 'Describing the Big Bang'

I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
View full post »

Similar threads

Question about "Rest frame of a photon" FAQ
Replies
19
Views
3K
I Three inertial particles: Separating the twins from the paradox
Replies
40
Views
4K
I How Does the Twin Paradox Apply to Light and Sound Waves?
Replies
48
Views
5K
Intergalactic Space & the Minkowski Diagram
Replies
14
Views
2K
I Measurement problem - will this work?
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Rigorous: Where is the Quantum System Prior to Measurement?
Replies
12
Views
2K
I Holographic Principle discussion in Sean Carroll's book
Replies
8
Views
3K
I Could Tim Maudlin's Views on Bell and QM Be Flawed?
Replies
37
Views
5K
Philosophy of Science: Discussing Maths, Physics, Mind, & AI
Replies
3
Views
3K
I What does Purcell actually say about electromagnetism and relativity?
Replies
32
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top