Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: Re: why FTL is illegal (wrt: free will).
Message-ID: <277@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Dec-84 20:39:34 EST
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.277
Posted: Mon Dec  3 20:39:34 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Dec-84 06:05:30 EST
References: <683@gloria.UUCP> <785@ariel.UUCP>  <148@lems.UUCP> <152@talcott.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 21

> > QM (if you believe it) is that the universe is *fundamentally* random; it
> > doesn't just appear random because we haven't looked in great enough detail.
> > 
> > So maybe this fundamental uncertainty is the origin of "free will."
> 
> 2)  QM is not necessary for your conclusion.  All you need is a *non-linear
> system*.  In a non-linear system, the tiniest local deviation can have
> serious global consequences.

But that just says that the universe just appears random because we haven't
looked in great enough detail.  If you assume 1) a deterministic and
complete theory of how the universe works, 2) 100% no exclusions complete
knowledge of the initial state of the universe, and 3) enough computing
ability to crank the model forward from that initial state, you can predict
all future states of the universe.

Of course, given that I know of no measurable scientific handle on what
"free will" means, I suspect the whole question is somewhat moot...

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy