3 ms·
Would you care to answer the question directly after the one you answered? Attributing quantum phenomena to randomness also makes no falsifiable predictions.
by kerkeslager 7y ago
Would you care to answer the question directly after the one you answered?
Attributing quantum phenomena to randomness also makes no falsifiable predictions.
In fact, asserting quantum phenomena are caused by pure randomness is equivalent the assertion that no prediction is possible.
- dragonwriter 7y ago> Attributing quantum phenomena to randomness also makes no falsifiable predictions. “Any research effort will find no deterministic explanation” is, I suppose, falsifiable, but mostly I agree; randomness as explanation is the absence of an explanatory hypothesis, not a substantial hypothesis.
- kerkeslager 7y agoMy thinking on this is basically, hypotheses don't have to be falsifiable, but they aren't very useful if they aren't, because you can't design an experiment to test them. Neither the determinism nor nondeterminism hypotheses are falsifiable, so there's no reason to prefer one over the other right now. However, non-determinism will never be falsifiable, whereas determinism is only currently non-falsifiable because a plausible, testable mechanism has not yet been hypothesized. So while there's no reason to favor determinism as something we believe, there's reason to favor it in research, because research has the potential to yield further information.