Quantum Report 2 (On Causality And Free Will)

Any macroscopic event is many microscopic events, some of which are causal and some of which are acausal, therefore an event not only can be simultaneously causal and acausal but probably must be. In normal observation, the acausalities will tend to balance out, negating themselves.

I present the notion that life bends causality and self-aware consciousness breaks it.

A lot of this will require having watched the previous videos in this "series." I was fairly tired and spoke verrrry sloooowly most of the time--sorry about that. It's tedious, but still worth your time, I hope.

Rosenblum and Kuttner
Copyright 2011 by Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner
Published by Ocford University Press, Inc.
198 Madison Avenue, New Your, New York, 10012
ISBN: 978-0-19-975381-9

QUANTUM
Einstein, Bohr And The Great Debate About The Nature Of Reality
Manjit Kumar
Copyright 2008 by Manjit Kumar
W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
500 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10110
ISBN: 978-0-393-33988-8

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• DynaCatlovesme
• Debunking
• Determinism
• Again
• comments
• quantum
• mechanics
• theory
• causal
• acausal
• causality
• trick0171
• Plank
• limits
• philosophy
• science
• will
• free
• chaos
• enigma
• double
• slit
• experiments
• complimentarity
• cat
• on
• hot
• tin
• roof

[skullcandy1916]

Make more vids.

[DynaCatlovesme]

@skullcandy1916 If there were any question that you are under the British equivalent of house arrest, the sheer number of your successful attempts to fail removes any doubt.

[IdaMiaDot]

21 thumbs down and 3 thumbs up?

WTF!? There must be people with multiple sock accounts... or something.

[pyrrho314]

@DynaCatlovesme : yeah, it's just a semantic point. When we speak of "causes" I notice we go between a classical assumption of what a cause is like, and a more general idea that is just about the aparent continuity of things, the before and after, and relation between them, whatever it is.

[pyrrho314]

in progress comments (ipc): QM does not say there is no causality, it merely says the phenomenon we call causality is not well modeled by the classical idea of "cause". Instead, it looks to be well modeled through probablism and conservation of energy.

[trick0171]

@DynaCatlovesme

Naw...I do appreciate the feedback...and am truly looking for something that I have not thought of on the topic. I had my hopes up from the first video and chat a while back. This particular vid does not really go against the premise that leads to the conclusion...and I really only commented due to you addressing me in the video with a misunderstanding of my premise.

I hope no offense was taken in my comments.

Take care,

'Trick

[DynaCatlovesme]

@trick0171 "...either way, holding a different semantic is not going to help your case. :)" Right back at you.

YouTube is very poorly designed for written exchanges, and nothing is more frustrating than trying to make a subtle or complex point in comments. It could even be called a pointless exercise.

[trick0171]

@DynaCatlovesme

The simplistic version: An event is a happening. If X happens, X is an event

If X comes about via a cause, it is a causal event. If X does not come about via a cause, it is an acausal event.

Either way I define my terms in my book, and either way, holding a different semantic is not going to help your case. :)

Maybe once I have my book out I will make some vids. I am not a very good orator (hence writing).

G'night