The logical impossibility of proving that indeterminism is true?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tade
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the logical impossibility of proving that our universe is indeterministic. Participants argue that, despite the potential for the universe to be indeterministic, it remains impossible to provide definitive proof due to the inherent limitations of experimental science. The conversation highlights the distinction between proving and falsifying hypotheses in physics, emphasizing that descriptive sciences can only disprove theories rather than confirm them. Ultimately, the topic is deemed philosophical and not suitable for rigorous scientific discourse.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of determinism and indeterminism in physics
  • Familiarity with the scientific method and its limitations
  • Knowledge of the philosophy of science
  • Awareness of the distinction between proof and falsification in scientific inquiry
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of quantum mechanics on determinism
  • Explore the philosophy of science, focusing on Karl Popper's falsifiability criterion
  • Investigate the role of experimental evidence in supporting scientific theories
  • Examine historical debates on determinism and indeterminism in physics
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, physicists, students of science, and anyone interested in the foundational questions of reality and the limits of scientific proof.

tade
Messages
720
Reaction score
26
One interesting question is whether our universe, our reality, is deterministic, or indeterministic.

And there's the idea that being able to prove that our universe, the physics, is indeterministic, is logically impossible. So, it includes whatever experimental ideas and results that one can possibly conceive and imagine, and the end result would still be that it is logically impossible to prove.

So the universe could be truly indeterministic, but we'll never able to prove it. And better not mistake this for poetic metaphysical imaginings, as this is hard logic.

So what do you think about this idea on whether its correct or not
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is impossible to prove something in physics. Descriptive sciences can only falsify.

This question is philosophical, meta-physics at best, which we do not discuss at PF. It never reaches a satisfactory end for all participants, and most of all, does not allow a criterion on when a discussion has actually ended.

I'm sorry, and as much as I would personally like to discuss such topics, we leave it to websites for philosophy.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and Bystander

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
8K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
13K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K