Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#8

spikethepony (08/26/2013) []
The way I see it, if the universe is predetermined by causality, than for whatever reason, I will continue to believe otherwise, as it is what I am destined to believe.
#10 to #8

chaosnazo (08/26/2013) []
Wrong
The reason is quantum physics, where very much of it is based on CHANCE.
Explaination incoming
In the 19th century, scientists used the idea of random motions of molecules in the development of statistical mechanics to explain phenomena in thermodynamics and the properties of gases.
According to several standard interpretations of quantum mechanics, microscopic phenomena are objectively random. That is, in an experiment that controls all causally relevant parameters, some aspects of the outcome still vary randomly. For example, if you place a single unstable atom in a controlled environment, you cannot predict how long it will take for the atom to decay—only the probability of decay in a given time. Thus, quantum mechanics does not specify the outcome of individual experiments but only the probabilities. Hidden variable theories are inconsistent with the view that nature contains irreducible randomness: such theories posit that in the processes that appear random, properties with a certain statistical distribution are somehow at work "behind the scenes" determining the outcome in each case.
The reason is quantum physics, where very much of it is based on CHANCE.
Explaination incoming
In the 19th century, scientists used the idea of random motions of molecules in the development of statistical mechanics to explain phenomena in thermodynamics and the properties of gases.
According to several standard interpretations of quantum mechanics, microscopic phenomena are objectively random. That is, in an experiment that controls all causally relevant parameters, some aspects of the outcome still vary randomly. For example, if you place a single unstable atom in a controlled environment, you cannot predict how long it will take for the atom to decay—only the probability of decay in a given time. Thus, quantum mechanics does not specify the outcome of individual experiments but only the probabilities. Hidden variable theories are inconsistent with the view that nature contains irreducible randomness: such theories posit that in the processes that appear random, properties with a certain statistical distribution are somehow at work "behind the scenes" determining the outcome in each case.
#25 to #10

thatslovesbanned (08/26/2013) []
What determines that chance that the 'unstable atom' will 'decay'
More specifically, what decides that 'X' will 'Y' instead of 'X' will 'Z'
More specifically, what decides that 'X' will 'Y' instead of 'X' will 'Z'
#24 to #10

spikethepony (08/26/2013) []
I understand the concept of quantum physics (if only at a basic level), hence the word, if. Basically, I'm speaking hypothetically.