On 9 December 2013 20:56, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

>  On 12/8/2013 4:36 PM, LizR wrote:
>  On 9 December 2013 07:41, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>  On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>          >> Determinism is far from "well established".
>>>  > It's a basic assumption in almost every scientific theory.
>>  In the most important theory in physics, Quantum Mechanics, no such
>> assumption is made, and despite a century of trying no experiment has ever
>> been performed that even hinted such a deterministic assumption should be
>> added in.
>  I believe the two-slit experiment hints that QM is deterministic by
> implying the existence of a multiverse.
> Wasn't it you, Liz, that pointed out this was circular.  Everett assumes a
> multiverse in order to make QM determinsitic.
> I did say something like that, didn't I? [insert embarrassed emoticon

I think I was saying that it was too strong to say that QM "follows the
principle of determinism" (or something like that) because it appears to be
indeterminate and only becomes deterministic thanks to Everett. However,
the two-slit experiment does *suggest* the multiverse as a valid
explanation, in that any other explanation requires other principles to be
violated (causality, locality...)

I think I was attempting to position myself between John and Jason - to say
that determinism is reasonably well established, but only as a result of a
long and winding process of experiment, conjecture and so on.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to