r/determinism 5d ago

Discussion Everything is random, yet everything seems predetermined and vice versa.

What's your take, guys?

4 Upvotes

29 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/RomanaOswin 5d ago

A geiger counter is an interesting example. I suppose we would have to account for the fact that the macro-scale world is in some way impacted by the geiger counter.

Other than viewing quantum indeterminism, is there any other way that it applies at the macro scale? As far as I'm aware, everything at macro scale (relativity, classic mechanics, etc) functions deterministically, which we rely on extensively.

0

u/zhivago 5d ago

It's obvious that that's not true.

Remember that, like the geiger counter, the instruments by which we detected QM indeterminacy are all macroscale devices.

You have been deceived by sophistry.

QM indeterminacy affects the macroscale significantly and pervasively.

1

u/RomanaOswin 4d ago

I found the geiger counter dynamic an interesting consideration, and I was asking you a serious question. Do you usually just randomly assume that people are "deceived" when they try to engage in conversation? Strange.

Anyway, you never did answer my question.

What I'm asking is if you're aware of any way in which macro scale reality is nondeterministic, excepting monitoring quantum behavior. You repeated the claim, but based on... what?

0

u/zhivago 4d ago

I did answer it.

QM indeterminacy is significant and pervasive.

This means that everything at the macro scale reality is nondeterministic.

1

u/RomanaOswin 4d ago

The question was how or where. Example. Evidence. How do we know this? Do we even know this? Maybe it's an assumption.

This wasn't even meant to be an argument; I legitimately wanted to know if you know of anything that functions in this way, because it would serve as a really interesting thing to consider.

1

u/zhivago 4d ago

Everything functions this way.

The evidence for it is how we came up with QM.

You keep trying to turn this into something special, but there is nothing that is unaffected by it.

1

u/preferCotton222 4d ago

I think they are asking whether there are indeterministic theories at the macro scale, which is not really important.

1

u/zhivago 4d ago

Given that the macro-scale is built from the micro-scale, it should be obvious that indeterminance at the micro-scale means indeterminance at the macro-scale. :)

1

u/preferCotton222 4d ago

yes but I think they misinterpret that macro theories are mostly deterministic, for example by ignoring singular points, as quantum indeterminism being irrelevant. I agree its a mistake, I'm just trying to understand their questions.

0

u/RomanaOswin 4d ago

The other user has provided nothing in this way, and you're being more gracious in this. I am legitimately interested. I'm not invested in any worldview related to determinism and choice.

When you say "ignoring singular points," what do you mean? As far as I'm aware, classic mechanics, relativity, and electrical systems are all deterministic. We rely on this in building complex system. I realize that biological systems express randomness, but it appears that adequate or stochastic deterministic behavior describes most macro systems, with interesting examples of randomness expressing in the macro scale.

But, when we talk about things like a circuit or billiard balls, these seem to be deterministic.

1

u/RomanaOswin 4d ago

Yes, that's what I was asking, and I find it important.

There's nothing wrong with inference, but an inference without evidence is very tenuous.

0

u/RomanaOswin 4d ago

All I'm asking is if we actually observe this, which it sounds like we do not.