/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10904207]

despite quantum mechanics isn't the universe still deterministic?

If you have two universes with the same initial conditions the two universe will evolve in exactly the same way with the exact same quantum events that are supposedly random.

[Anonymous No.10904220]

>>10904207
We can't be sure either way. Not to mention it's a semantic argument at best. Anyone who really argues about this shit one way or another is retarded.

[Anonymous No.10904223]

>>10904207
You're asking if the initial conditions of the universe can be measured.

[Anonymous No.10904224]

>>10904207
That is probably only the case if you accept non-local hidden variables. But I still believe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory

[Anonymous No.10904246]

>>10904223
doesn't matter if it can be measured. we can just imagine it as two numbers separated by an equal sign such as x=x

for any operation you perform on one side of the equation the same operation performed on the other side will give you the exact same result for every possible operation. we don't have to know what's in x to know this is true.

[Anonymous No.10904283]

>>10904207
Well if the quantum events are truly random, then no, the two universes would not end up the same. But we don’t know if true randomness is a fundamental property of the universe, or there’s just hidden mechanisms that explain the apparent randomness.

Modern physics doesn’t say, but quantum mechanics and it’s assumption of randomness is the most accurate theory we have to explain and predict what we see on the smallest scales.

[Anonymous No.10904421]

>>10904207
>If you have two universes with the same initial conditions the two universe will evolve in exactly the same way with the exact same quantum events that are supposedly random.
Only until you make a measurement.

[Anonymous No.10904427]

>>10904207
>If you have two universes
You don't.

[Anonymous No.10904428]

>>10904224
No, he's talking about quantum effects not mattering, not a loophole for Bell's Theorem. What happens on the quantum scale doesn't necessarily have any impact beyond that scale.

[Anonymous No.10904432]

>>10904283
>if the quantum events are truly random, then no, the two universes would not end up the same.
For your statement to be true you would need to show the quantum level events make any difference to the end state of the entire universe.

[Anonymous No.10904441]

>>10904246
^This. I get the impression the rest of you are for some reason assuming quantum scale activity impacts anything else beyond that context. The entire reason normal physics works is because of the opposite assumption that the quantum scale events don't matter and instead end up coalescing into deterministic impacts on the rest of the world and its phenomena.
That's kins of the whole reason behind even making a distinction for quantum scale events in the first place.

[Anonymous No.10904450]

OP seems to be talking about quantum events being random vs deterministic, but now the topic somehow shifted to whether quantum events matter in the first place. Which is an incredibly stupid question. The fact that we can observe them occurring at all means they matter. We wouldn't be talking about them if they didn't matter, because we wouldn't even know about them.

[Anonymous No.10904458]

>>10904421
Well that's really the crux of OP's question. If you believe wave function collapse is real then you say it is not deterministic. If you don't (e.g. many worlds), then it is deterministic

[Anonymous No.10904462]

>>10904458
Nothing about wave function collapse is necessarily nondeterministic. Nothing about non-local hidden variables implies many worlds.

[Anonymous No.10904467]

>>10904450
They clearly don't matter in a number of common scenarios. The fact you can disregard them and use regular physics for almost any macro scale phenomenon tells us that. The fact we have a quantum scale at all tells us that. It's the entire point. The probabilistic weirdness stops mattering past certain conditions involving scale or temperature and instead the results start turning into classical results.

[Anonymous No.10904468]

>>10904462
>Nothing about wave function collapse is necessarily nondeterministic

I would call this "not believing wave function collapse is real" (or just complete nonsense)

[Anonymous No.10904476]

>>10904467
Cosmologists think quantum fluctuations when the universe was much denser were the seeds of large scale inhomogeneity in the visible universe today

[Anonymous No.10904482]

>>10904467
They matter in some scenarios, which should be enough to put an end to discussions of whether they matter at all. Quantum events led to this conversation occurring, which is an easily citable example of quantum events causing macro scale phenomenon. Regarding classical physics, It's almost like the average result of magnitudes of chaotic and probabilistic events tends to have an incredibly predictable outcome.

>>10904468
Something can be real without knowing all of the information that goes into the interaction.

[Anonymous No.10904485]

>>10904432
We're going to need a cat.

[Anonymous No.10904487]

>>10904482
From Wikipedia

>Collapse of the universal wavefunction never occurs in de Broglie–Bohm theory

[Anonymous No.10904495]

>>10904207
QM doesn't make claims of non-determinism or determinism. Read about the difference between QM and Interpretations of QM.

Some QM Interpretations claim non-determinism (ie, copenhagen) others claim determinism (ie, pilot wave)

[Anonymous No.10904517]

>>10904487
I took your example to be about quantum observation "wave function collapse" and not the universal wave function. What appears to be "wave function collapse" is consistently reproducible and observable, but the mechanism behind it is the question.

[Anonymous No.10904652]

>>10904207
Congratulations anon, you are beginning to understand that QM is a completely deterministic model, just with a different ontology than classical mechanics.

[Anonymous No.10904710]

Last night I dreamed that particles are just a Gaussian distribution of charge formed by the mediation of pressure between neighboring cells of charge. Each charge corresponded to a motion of the extracellular matrix of superfluid around each cell.

[Anonymous No.10905137]

>>10904487
And what happens when one observes the universe?

[Anonymous No.10905141]

>>10904495
Huh? Pilot wave has collapse, and is nondeterministic. Collapse can't be deterministic?

[Anonymous No.10905208]

>>10904207
QM and QFT is in some sense even more deterministic than classical mechanics. One of the assumptions in QM/QFT is the existence of the propergator/time evolution operator that ensures that any wave function will evolve uniquely. This is not the case with classical mechanics, see for instance Norton's dome (a system of classical mechanics with an infinite amount of solutions).