Uncertainty principle vs destiny

In summary, the uncertainty principle prevents us from knowing the future of quantum events, but it is still possible to know the outcome of those events.
  • #1
tnadys
11
0
I have always had a problem with the concept of "you can't know" and because of that I have always had a problem with the uncertainty principle. Because people much smarter than me have fought this issue longer than I have been alive, and I because am not really qualified to have an opinion I have a related question instead.

If the uncertainty principal is wrong and everything can be known since the big bang, doesn't that result in everything being predetermined. Is they a way to avoid this disturbing consequence without resorting to religion? Does physics give me an out, or am I left with two possibilities that I can't accept?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes, you are left with two possibilities you can't accept.

Pre-QM, the universe was considered deterministic (look up Deterministic Universe).
 
  • #3
I don't necessarily "believe" in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
When trying to measure the observables of a system with electromagnetic radiation, the radiation affects the particles in such a way as to limit our knowledge of the particle's position and momentum. However, from what I understand, the particle still existed in a definite position in space with a definite velocity at a given moment of time.

Even if particles can act as waves, and waves "cannot have a definite position", I believe (or at least really hope, for my sanity's safety) that the universe's state in one point in time is definite. We just can't measure it through spectroscopy.
 
  • #4
I always assumed the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle prevented the universe from being Deterministic, but, it that even true?
 
  • #5
I just found the thread "Is everything deterministic" which covers this
 
  • #6
scorpion990 said:
I don't necessarily "believe" in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
When trying to measure the observables of a system with electromagnetic radiation, the radiation affects the particles in such a way as to limit our knowledge of the particle's position and momentum. However, from what I understand, the particle still existed in a definite position in space with a definite velocity at a given moment of time.
No. As with you, proponents of this belief think that HUP is a limitation in measurement That we could, in principle, get better measuring devices, and in doing so, confine a system's uncertainty to an ever smaller volume/momentum.

This is not true. It is a phenomenon that holds independent of our measurement of the system.
 
  • #7
Shouldn't this be in philosophy?

QM, IMHO, saves us from the depressing idea of superdeterminism. Regardless what interpretation you prefer, they all share the axiom that we cannot in principle know the outcome of quantum events. The future truly is unknown.

The HUP is a fundamental limitation on our ability to predict. It cannot in principle be gotten around. Imagine yourself in a computer simulation. You can see individual pixels but you will never be able to see anything smaller than a pixel because that is the basic building block of the system. Within the rules of the simulation, you can't see deeper than the simulation will allow.

Our simulation is quantized to Planck's constant, more or less. The "pixels" wander around but we can't look at them too close or else they get away.

"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
 
  • #8
It seems to me that this is only philosophy if we don't and can't ever know the answer. If the universe is deterministic or not seems like a fundamental property of nature that in principle should be knowable. We will never be able to predict the future (to complex) either way, but we should be able to know if it is predictable.

This is not like "what is consciousness" where we can't even define the terms of the question. This is a simple well defines question that just happens to be hard.

PS. I watched a BBC documentary about the discovery of the atom. These same arguments (this is philosophy not physics) were used to discredit Boltzmann, until Einstein proved him right. For me at least this is the question in physics that I would most like answered. I would think there must be someone working on it.
 
Last edited:

Related to Uncertainty principle vs destiny

1. What is the uncertainty principle?

The uncertainty principle, also known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, is a fundamental principle in quantum mechanics that states that it is impossible to simultaneously know the exact position and momentum of a particle. This means that the more accurately we know the position of a particle, the less accurately we can know its momentum, and vice versa. In other words, there will always be some level of uncertainty in our measurements of these two properties.

2. What is destiny?

Destiny, also known as fate, is the concept that events in our lives are predetermined and cannot be changed. It suggests that our lives are guided by a higher power or a predetermined path that we are meant to follow. This concept is often associated with religious or spiritual beliefs.

3. How are uncertainty principle and destiny related?

The uncertainty principle and destiny are two separate concepts and are not directly related to each other. The uncertainty principle is a scientific principle that applies to the behavior of particles at a quantum level, while destiny is a philosophical concept that pertains to the predetermined path of our lives. However, some people have suggested that the uncertainty principle could have implications for the idea of free will and the concept of destiny, as it suggests that there are inherent limitations to our ability to predict and control the future.

4. Can the uncertainty principle explain the concept of destiny?

No, the uncertainty principle cannot fully explain the concept of destiny. While it may have some implications for our understanding of free will and the limitations of predicting the future, it does not provide a complete explanation for the concept of destiny. The idea of destiny is complex and involves many different factors, including personal beliefs, societal norms, and individual choices.

5. Is there any scientific evidence for the existence of destiny?

No, there is currently no scientific evidence to support the existence of destiny. The idea of destiny is a philosophical and spiritual concept that cannot be proven or disproven by scientific methods. However, some people may interpret scientific principles, such as the uncertainty principle, as supporting the concept of destiny in some way. Ultimately, the existence of destiny is a matter of personal belief and cannot be definitively proven or disproven by science.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
351
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
4
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top