Uncertainty theory doesn't disprove fate?

[sigh hens]

From my understanding, uncertainty theory only says that we would be unable to measure the position and momentum of a particle with enough precision to predict its future. But this doesn't mean that the future isn't predetermined and that all particles don't act in a domino-like manner.

 

[Janus]

Actually, no. It is not just a matter of measurement, the particle doesn't even have a fixed position or momemtum.

 

[sigh hens]

ok, so I guess I need to further my understanding of the theory. Thanks

 

[dicerandom]

You might want to look into the "hidden variables" theory, I think that gets down to the heart of what you're asking about. There have been multiple versions of this same idea proposed over the years since QM was first concieved, and they've all been disproven to my knowledge.

 

[Ratzinger]

Don't think of Heisenbergs uncertainty in terms of a mearsurement disturbance. Position and momentum are simply not more accurate defined in nature than in Heisenberg's uncertainty allows. It's built into nature.