I once read a physicist on this, in a newspaper, who said "if I didn't believe in free-will, then I wouldn't bother getting up in the morning." I thought that w

I once read a physicist on this, in a newspaper, who said "if I didn't believe in free-will, then I wouldn't bother getting up in the morning." I thought that was cute. I think the term free-will has clouded the issue a bit. Forget about free-will. Scientists, instead, normally talk about Determinism vs indeterminism, or nondeterminism in CS. These have a more precise definition than that other thing. The universe is deterministic if the outcome of events are completely determined by previous events. Or the universe is nondeterministic if the outcome of events are not certain, but follow a random distribution. As to the precise details of the speeds and distances etc, it is a thought experiment, swap the car for a rocket traveling past at 0.86c, if you like. Or instead of aliens deliberating all day, maybe they are more efficient than we are, and they make their decision instantly by flipping a digital coin powered by the perfectly nondeterministic quantum fluctuations of the vacuum.[0] For earth rocket man, there is a moment before the quantum dice roll when the decision is indeterminable, it's completely random. But at the same moment in the stationary frame, the fleet is already on it's way. Unless you wish to argue that a stationary reference frame is somehow more valid than a moving one, you have to accept that in the moving frame, the event of the dice roll has still not occurred and should be random, but how can it be random, if it has already happened in the stationary frame. Hence the paradox. I hope that cleared things up some? [0] The vacuum has an api: https://qrng.anu.edu.au/