Uncertainty Principal and calculating the future :p (Question)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in predicting the future, particularly in the context of creating a supercomputer capable of such predictions. It highlights that quantum mechanics fundamentally challenges the notion of a deterministic universe, suggesting that precise predictions about future states are impossible. Participants note that while classical physics posited a predictable universe, quantum mechanics introduces inherent unpredictability, making it impossible to know the exact state of a system. The conversation also touches on philosophical aspects of free will and determinism, emphasizing that these concepts remain contentious and unresolved. Ultimately, the consensus is that there is no way to circumvent the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics.
Supaiku
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Wouldn't it be neat if you could build a computer good enough (ignore this current day impossiblity) to hold and calculate everything you need to be able to tell the future? Obviously (um... right?), there's also more physics we need to figure out before we could actually be able to do somthing like that (again, ignoring that the computer couldn't be made).

Well, I think that ideas pretty neato. But the other day a friend of mine mentioned something called the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal. Somthing about not being able to tell the exact location and momentum of an election at any given moment or somthing like that. And I guess that pretty much screws that theory up if you wanted to be really uber-precise with it.

Anyways, I was wondering about that and If it does in fact screw somthing like that up and if there are any theories on how to um... get around it or somthing?

I'm just a senior in hichschool (AP Physics... ) so I'm sort of hoping for general concepts sort of explination.

Can anyone do that? Or maybe just point me in the direction of an 'advanced physics for dummies' website/book or somthing? Or just a good place to start? :-p
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you are right. Quantum mechanics prevents you to built such a computer. Imagine every thing you can principally create a super-computer like that. That implies your future is determined. Not only your future, your mind and your thought also determined. That means you have no control of yourself, which obviously not true.
 
You have very accurately hit the nail on the head with QM.

Classical scientists - Einstein being the most notable and most vocal - believed fundamentally in a deterministic universe. A universe where, in theory at least, if you knew exactly where every molecule in a system was and where it was going, you could, again, in theory, predict both the past and the future states of the system.

The revelation that QM brought to the universe - that it is impossible in principle (let alone in practice) to determine the exact state of a system to an arbitrary level of precision - was one that shook Einstein's world, troubling him deeply til his dying day.
 
"That means you have no control of yourself, which obviously not true."

Alas, this is not obvious at all, though it's certainly an undesirable concept to accept.

Just because you think you are reading this of your own free will doesn't mean it hasn't been the culmination of a set of deterministic chemical/atomic events.
 
vincentchan said:
Yes, you are right. Quantum mechanics prevents you to built such a computer. Imagine every thing you can principally create a super-computer like that. That implies your future is determined. Not only your future, your mind and your thought also determined. That means you have no control of yourself, which obviously not true.


I deffinatly appears that way. But then again we don't completely understand time, which I think is key to being able to say that for sure (there could be more).
I don't think it's clear that things arn't pre-determined. If it were that wouldn't be such a philosophical topic with so many theories.

So part of the question is answered, how about the other part? Any theories - accepted or not about how to get around this or why it might not be true?
And it seems like it's just a problem as far as DETERMINING the state of things, so it seems like it doesn't actually discount the possiblity of a certain future... This isn't exactly a philosophy forum so maybe we should skip the second part of what I just said.
 
Last edited:
No, there's no way of "getting around this". This is how the universe is. It is probabilistic and non-deterministic. In short, there is no way to pre-determine stuff to an arbitrary level of accuracy, and this is not because of some technical inability.
 
Supaiku said:
Somthing about not being able to tell the exact location and momentum of an election at any given moment or somthing like that.

Yes of course, QM is the nemesis of every political scientist.

Whoever said elections were predictable?
 
and QM is the love of all open minded scientists
 
FUNKER said:
and QM is the love of all open minded scientists

Huh?
Darned word limits[/color]
 

Similar threads

I dont understand how to calculate percentage uncertainty?
Replies
13
Views
25K
B Predicting the future of a deterministic universe
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Progress In Calculating The HLbL Contribution To Muon g-2
Replies
0
Views
2K
Current and Future AI Threats to Humanity and the Human Response
Replies
10
Views
4K
A simple uncertainty question about height.
Replies
3
Views
1K
A very basic question about Heisenberg Uncertainty
2
Replies
76
Views
6K
I Quantum Mechanics as a Probabilistic forecast of reality
Replies
21
Views
2K
Programs How Do REUs Shape Future Astrophysicists?
Replies
5
Views
2K
High Schooler confused for future career
Replies
4
Views
2K
I want to help Physics education. What should I do?
Replies
48
Views
837

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top