Determinism and statistics
Hello Rabbi Michi,
The central scientific claim in physics is that the laws of nature are deterministic. I would like to ask a few questions about this:
1) Is even the most complex and chaotic system, in principle, deterministic, and therefore predictable, and is it just our inability to assume all the data and all the interactions between them, and is statistics merely an expression of this inability?
2) What is the relationship between the laws and the probability that something will actually happen? In other words, just because the laws are fixed, does not mean that things will happen. For example, if given such and such data and a period of time, life may be created on a certain planet, there are still things that can go wrong, such as a comet colliding with it. And even if we assume that the comet went on a collision course a million years ago, additional variables can still be created along the way that were not there at the time of its departure, and therefore the laws of physics also determined that something can happen, there is still a possibility that it will not happen.
3) What is the relationship between the laws and the human soul and social and historical laws (e.g. the cyclical nature of nations)? In other words, free choice is not necessarily due to the determinism of physics in the brain. Is it possible to say this about the entire mental structure of man? And does physics affect social and historical processes (or laws), and therefore are they also deterministic?
I hope I didn’t ask too many things in one question 🙂
Hello.
- The laws of physics are deterministic, except in quantum theory (a selection will be discussed below). There, according to the accepted interpretation, there is randomness, but it is only on small scales (very small particles). Therefore, it is commonly thought that the inability to predict does not express anything but incompetence.
- The ratio is 1:1. What you call unexpected things (a comet) is also a result of the laws of nature.
- When a person’s choice is involved, it can of course change what happens in the world (unless you are a determinist). Therefore, laws that deal with events involving a person are laws of the apparent and not deterministic laws. But even there, of course, it is not about randomness but about choice. These are different things.
Thanks for the answer.
1) So statistics are our expression of incompetence? For example, when they say that a certain drug is useful in 70% of cases, it actually means that it is suitable for 100% of cases of the disease, but because we are unable to be precise in the exact characteristics of the disease, it actually only helps in 70% of cases (in fact, the 30% are actually subtypes of the disease in which the drug does not work)?
2) The first question leads to the second. It is clear that unexpected things are also subject to the laws of nature. The question is whether the result is subject. I will try to clarify the example. Let's say a person is standing in front of another person and pointing a gun at him. If we freeze the moment and examine the data (angle, wind speed, distance, stability, etc., etc., and assuming that we have the ability to measure accurately), we will come to the conclusion that the shot is supposed to hit the center of the second person's heart and kill him. Now the first person shoots, if nothing changes, the second person will die, but if in that same 0.02 seconds of the bullet's flight the wind (which is of course subject to laws) suddenly changes tinyly, and the bullet hits 0.01 mm to the right of the heart and does not kill the second person. Even in such a case, the argument that if we had unlimited ability, we should have predicted this in advance? And in the example of the comet and over large periods of time, with unlimited ability, would we also be supposed to predict what would be created over time that would cause, say, the comet to hit the planet and destroy the formation of life?
Hello. I have already answered both questions and it is clear from your words that you have understood the answer well. I do not see the benefit of repeating what I wrote.
N
If you ignore randomness (quantum, or something else if it exists and is unknown) and choice (and again someone can argue that there is a choice not only for humans and another will argue that there is no choice at all), and you will have information about all the particles in the universe (mass and speed), complete information about all the forces that exist (meaning you will know physics completely, even what is not yet known), and as unlimited computational power, you will be able to predict a future state (and also past states) at any time.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
