It is the only question worth thinking about.  High five for posting this!

"What the mathematicians proved is this: if you have the slightest
freedom to choose the axes [in the representative experiment
involving the spin of a particle] and order of measurement, then
particles everywhere must also have the same degree of freedom. That
means they can behave unpredictably." 

Count me in here. I choose, therefore I am.  It ain't easy but it is
worth it!

--- In, "matrixmonitor"
> Here's the first part of the article, and then underneath, selected 
> quotes and summaries of the main points: [brackets, mine].
>  Free will - you only think you have it
> > > 04 May 2006
> > > Zeeya Merali
> > > Magazine issue 2550
> > > Underneath the uncertainty of quantum mechanics could lie a
> deeper
> > > reality in which, shockingly, all our actions are predetermined
> > > "WE MUST believe in free will, we have no choice," the novelist
> Isaac
> > > Bashevis Singer once said. He might as well have said, "We must
> > > believe in quantum mechanics, we have no choice," if two new
> studies
> > > are anything to go by.
> > >
> > > Early last month, a Nobel laureate physicist finished polishing
> up
> > > his theory that a deeper, deterministic reality underlies the
> > > apparent uncertainty of quantum mechanics. A week after he
> announced
> > > it, two eminent mathematicians showed that the theory has
> profound
> > > implications beyond physics: abandoning the uncertainty of
> quantum
> > > physics means we must give up the cherished notion that we have
> free
> > > will. The mathematicians believe the physicist is wrong.
> > >
> > > "It's striking that we have one of the greatest scientists of our
> > > generation pitted against two of the world's greatest
> > > mathematicians," says Hans Halvorson, a philosopher of physics at
> > > Princeton University.
> > >
> > > Quantum mechanics is widely accepted by physicists, but is full 
> of apparent paradoxes, which made Einstein deeply uncomfortable and 
> have never been resolved. For instance, you cannot ask what the spin 
> of a particle was before you made an observation of it -- QM says the 
> spin was undetermined.  And you cannot predict the outcome of an 
> experiment; you can  only estimate the probability of getting a 
> certain result..
> [next paragraph - QM works well but it's not complete; e.g. the 
> failure to unite QM with general relativity. "A radical change is 
> needed", says Gerard 't Hooft.].
> [next -'Hooft has been working on studying a "hidden" layer of 
> reality at scales smaller than the Planck length of 10-^(-35) meters. 
> The 'states" he investigates behave predictably according to 
> deterministic laws. 't Hooft has worked out a kink in his 
> calculations which gave him a negative energy . See 
> "Essentially, t'Hooft is saying that while particles in QM seem to 
> behave unpredictably, if we could track the underlying states, we can 
> predict the behavior of particles".
> "As enticing as 't Hooft's theory may be to physicists, it has an 
> unexpected and potentially frightful consequence for the rest of us.  
> Mathematicians John H. Conway and Simon Kochen, both at Princeton 
> University, say that any deterministic theory underlying QM robs us 
> of our free will".
> "When you choose to eat the chocolate cake or the plain one, are you 
> really free to decide?" asks Conway.  In other words, could someone 
> who has been tracking all the particle interactions in the universe 
> predict with perfect accuracy the cake you will pick?  The answer, it 
> seems, depends on whether QM's inherent uncertainty is the correct 
> description of reality or 't Hooft is right in saying that beneath 
> that uncertainty there is a deterministic order". "...are your 
> choices a matter of free will, or are they predetermined?"
>  "What the mathematicians proved is this:  if you have the slightest 
> freedom to choose the axes [in the representative experiment 
> involving the spin of a particle] and order of measurement, then 
> particles everywhere must also have the same degree of freedom.  That 
> means they can behave unpredictably.  However, if particles have no 
> freedom, as implied by 't Hooft's theory, the mathematicians proved 
> that you have no real say in the choice of axes and order of 
> measurement.  In other words, deterministic particles put an end to 
> free will (".
>  "Kochen and Conway stress that their theorem doesn't disprove 't 
> Hooft's theory.  It simply states that if his theory is true, our 
> actions cannot be free.  And they admit that there's no way for us to 
> tell. "Our lives could be like the second showing of a movie -- all 
> actions play out as theough they are free, but that freedom is an 
> illusion", says Kochen".
>  "Since the mathematicians believe that we have free will, it follows 
> for them that 't Hooft's theory must be wrong.  "We have to believe 
> in free will to do anything," says Conway.  "I believe I am free to 
> drink this cup of coffee, or throw it across the room.  I believe I 
> am free in choosing to have this conversation".
>  Halvorson [Hans Halvorson, philosopher of physics at Princeton] says 
> the debate really boils down to a matter of personal taste.  "Kochen 
> and Conway can't tolerate the idea that our future may already be 
> settled,", he says, "but people like 't Hooft and Einstein find the 
> notion that the univere can't be completely described by physics just 
> as disturbing.".
>  "For philosophers, both arguments can be troubling.  Quantum 
> randomness as the basis fo free will doesn't really give us control 
> over our actions," says Tim Maudlin, a philosopher of physics at 
> Rutgers. "We're either deterministic machines, or we're random 
> machines.  That's not much of a choice."
>   [last, Halvorson says]:, "There are very important questions to be 
> asked about free will, and maybe physics can answer them.".
> [end of article].

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email.

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to:
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to