Is Predicting the Future Possible and How Would it Affect Our Actions?

[Laevus]

Know what I figured out(?)...
Since the old days man learned to consider his action...I'ts very evolutionary gaining...
I can easily see how that would evolve into pre-sight already I can see some in myself...(small things like "what will happen today" "maybe this" "oh I was right"...)
Now the evolutionary end to this would be total presight...ie a person good at it will have advantages...
Now the funny thing is if I could calculate the future there would be infinite possible "ways" or "roads" or right out possibilities. Now along a few of those possibilities my hand would be able to move through a desk,a mug would flow through the room a person would self-ignite like magic only physicaly possible.
Ofc those possibilities are highly unlikely, but if one could see a high number of possibilities along some of them possibilities like these would exist.
Then by acting accordingly to one of those futures it could really happen...

Whole idea smells like DUNE, I know but still.

Sorry about spelling...

 

[FZ+]

Er... how would you deal with quantum randomness then?

 

[Dissident Dan]

quantum randomness...to that I say "Blah!"

There real that you can't 100% predict the future is because by knowing the future ahead of time, you can change it, thereby rendering the prediction null. You are a part of the system that you are trying to predict, so the act of prediction changes the system and makes the prediction invalid.

 

[Laevus]

I really need to read more before I post stuff like this...

I feel a bit out of my league please elaborate on quantum randomness...

 

[Laevus]

But arn't one predicting the future when one are thinking "I shouldn't argue with that guy, he knows more then me". Hadn't one thought(realized) that then one would have went and argued with him...

 

[Dissident Dan]

No, that's not predicting the future, that's making a decision about what to do.

Anyway, it is possible to make hypothethises about what will happen with supporting evidence, but you can never be 100% sure of this. And you definitely cannot be 100% sure of -everything-. The less interaction that you have with something, the more ability you have to make an accurate prediction. But you always have some level of interaction, no matter how minimal. And, even if you didn't, there's still the problem of the staggering, if not infinite amount of knowledge that you would have to use in your prediction, if you want 100% accuracy.

Quantum randomness is the idea that at super-microscopic levels, there is no reason why one particle moves this way or that. It is somehow left to "chance". I do not subscribe to that idea.

 

[Laevus]

Now this is interresting.
considering a decision != predicting you say...
Ive always thought that if you take a number of possible varibles and then make a prediction of what will result you'll get a number of different probabilities, and if you increase the number of varibles considered the outcome will be more probable.(which is what you say I see now)

And I don't mean 100% accuracy I'm saying that if you increase your ability to consider(predict I'm not giving up yet ) the result of your decisions then you would also be able to affect (in a aware way) your surroundings on a longer/larger scale(maybe even to the extreme).

Hmm I'm sure that made little sence...Ah well.

Thank for the heads up on randomness btw

[edit]

Quantum randomness is the idea that at super-microscopic levels, there is no reason why one particle moves this way or that. It is somehow left to "chance". I do not subscribe to that idea.

But if "chance" is 50/50 then objects wouldn't "do" anything it would cancel itself out no? Hmm that would fit with the idea of a unsymetric universe I quess ...
[/edit]