3 ms·
Interesting article. Thank you for posting. I have a very limited understanding of physics but two questions spring to mind: 1) Why is there little doubt in t
by starmole 12y ago
Interesting article. Thank you for posting.
I have a very limited understanding of physics but two questions spring to mind:
1) Why is there little doubt in the axioms, especially FIN? It requires the concepts of distance and time, either of which might not be applicable to the resulting property.
2) Why call the resulting property "free will" or "free whim"? As far as I can tell the proof is for the existence of an additional property to both the experimenter and the particle, but there is no real description of it. This is somewhat unsatisfactory addressed in the last paragraph, but really, why not just call it a "randomness" or "god" instead of "whim"?
- jamesaguilar 12y ago2. Because the property under description is qualitatively like what some people think free will is like.
- jamesaguilar 12y ago2. Because the property under description is qualitatively like what some people think free will is like.
- lisper 12y agoIf FIN were false it would be possible to transmit information backwards in time by transmitting it faster than light between a transmitter and receiver moving relative to one another.
- lmm 12y ago1. Current physics - and in a way it goes back to Descartes and the very first conception of modern physics, the idea that things happened for mechanistic reasons rather than mysterious temperaments. If information can travel instantaneously, doesn't that imply that distance and time are in some sense meaningless? Also, relativity + faster-than-light information implies causality violation, grandfather paradox and all of that. It's not "beyond all reasonable doubt", but standard physics seems to respect it as an axiom. 2. Because Conway likes attention.