🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #411

DETERMINISM 2: `Refutation' the second

#411
From: David Spurrett
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 10:49
38 lines
2685 bytes
DETERMINISM 2: `Refutation' number two.

o-----------------------------------------------------------------------o
|   This posting is part of a series of monomaniac diatribes.  Please   |
| email if you want to follow anything up.                              |
o-----------------------------------------------------------------------o
  
  I explicitly do not want to get all technical here, and certainly do  not
want to get involved in any of the truly vexed questions of the interpreta-
tion of Quantum Mechanics (QM).  The following argument is, however, fairly
simple, and to my knowledge  not especially contentious.  In  particular it
does not rely upon any assumptions about (non-)locality.  Here it is:
    
    Atomic-type  things,  for  example  Neutrons,  have things called `half
  lives' which are periods of time  over which half of any given  collecion
  of the type of thing in  question will `decay', or change into  something
  else.
    
    The QM description of things involves treating every Neutron  (sticking
  with our current example) as identical.  Indeed it involves treating them
  as `the same' to the extent, in effect, of regarding there as being  only
  _one_ (busy as a one legged man at an ass kickin' contest) Neutron in ex-
  istence.    To  repeat:  we  have  no  theoretical  reason  to regard two
  `different' Neutrons as different.  _BUT_ of any two, over the  half-life
  period, only _ONE_ will decay.
    
    From situations between which we have no reason to distinguish, we  get
  clearly _different_ outcomes.   Hence the  falsity of determinism,  which
  holds that the way the past was/present is necessitates a unique (and al-
  ready specifed/specifiable) future.
  
  Any thoughts?
  
o------------------------------------------o------------------------------o
| David Spurrett, department of Philosophy |  `I have seen the truth, and |
| University of Natal, Durban              |   it makes no sense.'        |
| email: spurrett@superbowl.und.ac.za      |              - OFFICIAL!     |
o------------------------------------------o------------------------------o
Technical Details
Message-ID: <spurrett.24.720960561@superbowl.und.ac.za>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ogicse!psgrain!ee.und.ac.za!shrike.und.ac.za!pc13.superbowl.und.ac.za!spurrett
References: <spurrett.18.720882738@superbowl.und.ac.za>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!ogicse!psgrain!ee.und.ac.za!shrike.und.ac.za!pc13.superbowl.und.ac.za!spurrett
From: spurrett@superbowl.und.ac.za (David Spurrett)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: DETERMINISM 2: `Refutation' the second
Message-ID: <spurrett.24.720960561@superbowl.und.ac.za>
Date: 5 Nov 92 10:49:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: superbow.spurrett.24.720960561
References: <spurrett.18.720882738@superbowl.und.ac.za>
Organization: University Of Natal (Durban)
Lines: 38
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc13.superbowl.und.ac.za