RE: Oh no not another free will thread.
April 25, 2018 at 8:55 pm
(This post was last modified: April 25, 2018 at 8:58 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
(April 25, 2018 at 10:22 am)henryp Wrote:(April 24, 2018 at 9:09 pm)Hammy Wrote: Isn't that this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time
Apologies if I'm wrong. I'm not very science-y.
Is that what presentism goes with? That 'now' is a unit of planck_time?
No......... you keep confusing philosophy and science.
(April 25, 2018 at 1:26 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Your view that quantum randomness is just a failure of explanation seems to be contradicted by science.
No because I was talking on two different levels.
I accept the fact that it all seems acausal within science. I'm talking about my intuition that outside of science it isn't.
Quote:From Bell's inequalities we know that the underlying assumptions of such a view can't all be true (first citation), and that there is no way to improve the predictions of quantum mechanics by a significant amount (second citation).
That's interesting.
Quote:This seems to point to a deterministic conclusion that quantum randomness is real, and not just an artifact of this or that bit of ignorance.
Real within science. Science doesn't speak outside of itself. That wouldn't even make any sense.
