I feel as if you bring this up again and again, and don't bother educating yourself in between. I highly recommend reading Bell's proofs, reading about Aspects experimental work, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriminal99
For every belief, there are infinite models of the universe that disprove said belief and are not mutually exclusive with the experiences that led the person in question to form said belief.
|
But often every one of these "infinite" models might share common features. Consider the data of an Aspect type experiment. There are no local causal "universes" that can consistantly explain these experiments.
With enough DIFFERENT experiments/experimental data, the subset of allowable universes that explain this belief gets smaller. It could very well be possible that there is only one consistant way of explaining the universe(by which I mean the totality of possible experiments), no one has proven otherwise to my knowledge.
Quote:
|
With this in mind, we can see that any potential disproof of determinism can be ruled out by categorizing it as a simple lack of information. One need not be a quantum physicist in order to do this.
|
This is not true. Bell has shown that there is no completely deterministic model that can explain the aspect experiment. Bell showed this using deductive reasoning.
Quote:
|
Well it is not hard to show that many kinds of non deterministic worlds do not make any kind of sense, or at least, they seem to contradict the idea that "A=A" therefore making deductive reasoning impossible and since our consiousnesses are dependent on this being true it is useless to try and speculate on the nature of such an enviornment, if it ever could or did exist.
|
What of the kinds of non-deterministic worlds that DO allow for deductive reasoning? There are many. This is a straw-man type argument.
-Will
