TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Is the world Super-deterministic or not?

If there was empirical evidence that showed that the world was indeed "Super-deterministic" (as defined by physicist John S Bell) thus void of free will, would you accept the evidence based on its validity or reject the evidence outright and why?

How significant would the ramifications of such knowledge affect science, philosophy, and theology?

See evidence at: http://temptdestiny.com and at: http://temptdestiny.com/science.html


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Dec 11 2012: Bell did not argue for superdeterminism. He argued against it.

    In his 1985 radio interview with renowned physicist Paul Davies, Bell said, "

    "There is a way to escape the inference of superluminal speeds and
    spooky action at a distance. But it involves absolute determinism in
    the universe, the complete absence of free will. Suppose the world
    is super-deterministic, with not just inanimate nature running on
    behind-the-scenes clockwork, but with our behavior, including our
    belief that we are free to choose to do one experiment rather than
    another, absolutely predetermined, including the "decision" by the
    experimenter to carry out one set of measurements rather than
    another, the difficulty disappears. There is no need for a faster than
    light signal to tell particle A what measurement has been carried
    out on particle B, because the universe, including particle A, already
    "knows" what that measurement, and its outcome, will be.

    The only alternative to quantum probabilities, superpositions of
    states, collapse of the wave function, and spooky action at a
    distance, is that everything is superdetermined. For me it is a

    His words, "there is a way" is not a statement of belief. It is the exposition of a loophole in the explanation of his famous theorem, now proven through a CERN experiment. The experiment that proved Bell's Inequality Theorem was undertaken only five or so years ago. (I think 1997).

    Ultimately, there will never be a way to use a double-blind study to know if the world is superdeterministic (that your presence is absolutely meaningless) and that you are just a part of a computer program and have no part in what happens to you.

    If a super-deterministic view were to go mainstream, I believe that there would be no way to put dangerous people in jail because they could reasonably argue that the computer program made them do it against their own will.
    • Dec 19 2012: The general assumption about absolute determinism is that it is understood to mean that all events are certain. However, evidence show that there are two causal agents, not one. This means that all events are either certain or uncertain dependent upon the type of selection made.

      Direct Selection-->of one Potential-->Choice
      Indirect Selection-->of more than one Potential-->Choice

      Two types of causal agents-->Two types of physical states

      ... Occam's razor.
      • thumb
        Dec 19 2012: What do you mean when you say "two causal agents"

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.