I'm somewhat skeptical about determinism. But not because I have any problem with the philosophical implications, free will is impossible, determined or not, but because of the double slit experiment (and that alone).
The double slit experiment demonstrates one particle going through BOTH slits at the same time. Doing so by behaving as a wave of potential locations. If the universe was deterministic, wouldn't the particle have only one potential location and therefore only go through one slit?
Incorrect. Under the circumstances the particle behaves in a fixed way, which is to pass through both slits, one slit, or none. It never chooses which slit to pass through. It reacts.
I think you missed my point, but I'm not going to try to explain it in any further detail. Quantum physics hurts. mwilliams0 makes videos about quantum physics, he knows far more about it than anyone I've met (including my professors). I asked him "Does the double slit experiment suggest a non-deterministic universe?" In short, his answer was "the double slit experiment definitely suggests an element of "uncertainty" about the universe at very small scales." continued
Um, except that's an interpretation of the results that includes additional assumptions. Basically, what you aren't getting is that once "observed" there is a predictable outcome... just like there is before they are "observed." The causal effect of "observation" is definite. Therefore, nothing about it suggests nondeterminism. Simply that nature is different than originally assumed.
I'm not saying that the universe certainly isn't deterministic. I'm saying, it is not unreasonable to lend credence to the idea that randomness may exist at the quantum level.
But that conclusion is not based on the Double Slit experiment. The Double slit merely challenges the notion that was traditionally held that a particle can only occupy a single location at any given time.
That's not the only thing the double slit challenges. The fact that it is the act of knowing, not the act of measuring, that interupts the interference pattern indicates that there is a level of uncertainty, not just in our own minds, but in the universe itself.
No, that's entirely incorrect. It is the act of "observing" which means interrupting a particle with another particle. This is why they change behavior when observed, not because anyone knows about them.
No, actually. They have controls for that. For example, when doing the experiment with electrons, an electron can be detected through induction. They don't bounce other particles off it. The detector does affect the electron, but not in such a way that it destroys the interference pattern, that is, unless they record the data they recieve from the detector(s). continued
If you were to place detectors on both slits, even turn them on, but not record or observe their detections, so I am told, the interference pattern persists. Assuming this is true, I say that this is highly indicative of an uncertain universe.
3rd hand at most, this is what mwilliams0 and my professors have said. I have not heard the opposite despite my efforts to find a source that says just that.
Yeah, the thousands of miles between us also has a pretty big impact on dating. It becomes very expensive to fly from the South West to the East Coast and vice versa just to see a movie and have dinner.
Need more determinist meetings!
Gary travels the country and meets robots, a brand new series.
sweaterpuppies1 3 years ago
I'm somewhat skeptical about determinism. But not because I have any problem with the philosophical implications, free will is impossible, determined or not, but because of the double slit experiment (and that alone).
The double slit experiment demonstrates one particle going through BOTH slits at the same time. Doing so by behaving as a wave of potential locations. If the universe was deterministic, wouldn't the particle have only one potential location and therefore only go through one slit?
Libertarianist 3 years ago
Incorrect. Under the circumstances the particle behaves in a fixed way, which is to pass through both slits, one slit, or none. It never chooses which slit to pass through. It reacts.
burnvictim77 3 years ago
ya.. that's what I was gonna say.
miselaineeous 3 years ago
I think you missed my point, but I'm not going to try to explain it in any further detail. Quantum physics hurts. mwilliams0 makes videos about quantum physics, he knows far more about it than anyone I've met (including my professors). I asked him "Does the double slit experiment suggest a non-deterministic universe?" In short, his answer was "the double slit experiment definitely suggests an element of "uncertainty" about the universe at very small scales." continued
Libertarianist 3 years ago
Um, except that's an interpretation of the results that includes additional assumptions. Basically, what you aren't getting is that once "observed" there is a predictable outcome... just like there is before they are "observed." The causal effect of "observation" is definite. Therefore, nothing about it suggests nondeterminism. Simply that nature is different than originally assumed.
burnvictim77 3 years ago
I'm not saying that the universe certainly isn't deterministic. I'm saying, it is not unreasonable to lend credence to the idea that randomness may exist at the quantum level.
Libertarianist 3 years ago
But that conclusion is not based on the Double Slit experiment. The Double slit merely challenges the notion that was traditionally held that a particle can only occupy a single location at any given time.
burnvictim77 3 years ago
That's not the only thing the double slit challenges. The fact that it is the act of knowing, not the act of measuring, that interupts the interference pattern indicates that there is a level of uncertainty, not just in our own minds, but in the universe itself.
Libertarianist 3 years ago
No, that's entirely incorrect. It is the act of "observing" which means interrupting a particle with another particle. This is why they change behavior when observed, not because anyone knows about them.
burnvictim77 3 years ago
No, actually. They have controls for that. For example, when doing the experiment with electrons, an electron can be detected through induction. They don't bounce other particles off it. The detector does affect the electron, but not in such a way that it destroys the interference pattern, that is, unless they record the data they recieve from the detector(s). continued
Libertarianist 3 years ago
If you were to place detectors on both slits, even turn them on, but not record or observe their detections, so I am told, the interference pattern persists. Assuming this is true, I say that this is highly indicative of an uncertain universe.
Libertarianist 3 years ago
The key here is "so I am told." You are getting 4th hand interpretations that lead to mystical mumbo jumbo. I assure you, you are mistaken.
burnvictim77 3 years ago
3rd hand at most, this is what mwilliams0 and my professors have said. I have not heard the opposite despite my efforts to find a source that says just that.
Libertarianist 3 years ago
More to the point: can you cite the actual studies which confirm that "knowing" affects the behavior of the particles?
burnvictim77 3 years ago
softened robots! awsome
bwhahrhr 3 years ago
Haha man. All my books are in pristine condition except the ones I've lent out.
Rybot9000 3 years ago
Determining personality by food, awesome!
Rythsaad 3 years ago
You two should date.
lightspeed555 3 years ago
It'll never happen. I'm too skinny for him.. he likes his women round. Of course I'd be round if I was preggers! LOLOL
miselaineeous 3 years ago
LMFAO! That food looked delicious.
lightspeed555 3 years ago
gary mispelled your name in the comment section of the first part, so i couldn't find your channel. i'm glad that you commented!
marshvernet 3 years ago
Yeah, the thousands of miles between us also has a pretty big impact on dating. It becomes very expensive to fly from the South West to the East Coast and vice versa just to see a movie and have dinner.
burnvictim77 3 years ago
Gary has a hard time thinking "outside of the box". lol
miselaineeous 3 years ago
I find it is way harder to think while inside the box. ;)
burnvictim77 3 years ago
NO U
Libertarianist 3 years ago
Good to see you making more vids, BV77. By the way, did you ever find an animator for your pet project?
Peace.
logicaust 3 years ago