In other words, is it possible that the state of the universe at an arbitrary point in time is not a direct function of the previous point in time?
2007-04-16 19:29:39 · 10 answers · asked by joshreeves0 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
For every action there is a reaction. Period! If not, we would not exist. The big Question is, if that's true, what started it all?
Well i guess that's why people turn to God? but then God had to be created at some point in time?
Geez, have i just gone and done it now!
Sorry people! x
2007-04-16 19:40:05 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Even though our collective experience loudly and invariably shows the universality of the cause and effect syndrome, it is too small and minuscule a sample (in the context of the vast space and time span that the Universe is) to draw any conclusive view as to the existence or otherwise of non-determinism in nature. Already, the Big-Bang appears to be singularity such that our cause and effect assumption fails to give us any clue as to the moment before.
2007-04-16 20:58:09 · answer #2 · answered by small 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
historic previous paints a photograph retrospectively so it assigns a reason for each result. even though it incredibly is selective and erroneous. particularly circumstances the reason for issues isn't accepted. particularly circumstances historic previous assigns the incorrect reason. because of the fact the asserting is going "the victors get to write historic previous". because of the fact of that historic previous incorrectly helps determinism. Determinism isn't accessible. First, there is uncertainty on the subatomic point. it incredibly is a longtime actuality of quantum physics. Uncertainty at any point ability uncertainty at bigger tiers. 2nd, in accordance with a distinctive poster right here, it is not accessible to renowned the two the area and speed of something. The extra you define one, the fewer you could define the different. as an occasion, a bullet vacationing in the path of the air. in case you realize precisely the place it incredibly is, it won't be shifting in any respect. in spite of if it incredibly is shifting, you in ordinary terms understand approximately the place it incredibly is. so which you would be able to no longer get the information for computing destiny events. Plus, the act of looking on the form impacts it. Google Heisenberg's Uncertainty concept and Shrodinger's Cat.
2016-10-22 09:41:33 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That really depends on the inaugrul defence of the universe within the give action to which it is trying or not trying to change or disperse at the certain point in time, regardless if the action is the same or in difference to the orevious and any future action.
2007-04-16 19:35:48 · answer #4 · answered by kissaled 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The next moment is always a product of the now. However once one knows what causes what - we then are able to choose new ways.
Freewill is knowledge and knowledge is freewill
2007-04-16 23:46:07 · answer #5 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Support? Strange choice of words. The Universe is one thing or not. It does not support anything.
The nature of nature is non-deterministic. Yes.
It is just our perception that makes it deterministic.
2007-04-16 19:37:49 · answer #6 · answered by Puppy Zwolle 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Id say it would be harder to show it supports non-determinism rather than just complex determinism.
2007-04-17 07:07:46 · answer #7 · answered by Clint 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nature has no sense of speaking
2007-04-16 23:07:57 · answer #8 · answered by Ututin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, everything is possible. Now you just need to prove it.
2007-04-16 22:53:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If determinism were true, how could you tell?
2007-04-16 19:38:01 · answer #10 · answered by eatmorec11h17no3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋