The Multiverse is a deterministic framework for quantum mechanics. It is completely compatible with it. A paradox can only occur if you think the single world universe of our senses is deterministic - which it clearly isn't.

## Advertising

My "definition" of free will is "the ability to do something completely stupid" - ie related to irrationality. A perfectly rational being would be completely deterministic, and in my mind has no free will. This certainly appears to be compatible with Conway's use of the term. It is usual to equate the choice of measurement by the experimenter as "free will". It is also certainly true that fixing the QM state vector, as well as the choice of measurement does not determine the outcome of the measurement. To say that the observed system has free will in deciding the outcome of the experiment is certainly a provocative way of putting it, but I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask the question of why we use the term "free will" to refer to conscious entities making indeterminate choices, and not for non-conscious entities. On an interesting segue on this matter is found in Roy Frieden's book "Physics from Fisher Information", where he talks about measurement as being a game in which the experimenter attempts expose as much information as possible about reality, and reality attempts to hide that information. The minimax principle this generates can be used to derive all sorts of fundamental equations, including the Klein-Gordon equation, a relativistic version of Schroedinger's equation. Cheers On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 01:30:00AM -0700, Pete Carlton wrote: > Greetings, > > I recently attended a talk here in Berkeley, California given by John > Conway (of 'Game of Life' fame), in which he discussed some of his > results with Simon Kochen, extending the Kochen-Specker paradox. He > presents this as the "Free Will Theorem", saying basically that > particles must have as much "free will" as the experimenters who are > deciding which directions to measure the |spin| of a spin-1 particle > in. > --I would replace his words "free will" with "indeterminacy", but > there is still an interesting paradox lurking there. > > A good online writeup is here: > http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~jas/one/freewill-theorem.html > > I wrote up my brief take on it, necessarily from a more philosophical > angle, here: > http://homepage.mac.com/pmcarlton/iblog/C1074759898/E263558720/ > index.html > and here: > http://homepage.mac.com/pmcarlton/iblog/C1074759898/E688049825/ > index.html. > > I have the intuition that a multiverse approach very readily dissolves > his mystery, but am not quite sure how to formally work it out. I > thought some people on this list might be interested, or have a ready > answer in hand - in particular, I'd like to know if this 'paradox' > really is a paradox in one or more of the multiverse conceptions > discussed here. > > thanks and best regards, > Pete -- *PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you may safely ignore this attachment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile) Mathematics 0425 253119 (") UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

**
pgpZqnpp4ial5.pgp**

*Description:* PGP signature