Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

I didn't manipulate anything.

You just did by posting this comment. We are now entangled as well as everyone who sees this.

But this was always going to happen, predicated on events already in motion.

Yupp. No such thing as free will.

Edit - Prove me wrong.

I think just like space/time free will is most easily understood as an emergent phenomenon.

[deleted]

[removed]

Conways game of life is technically deterministic, but it's also true that if you have certain states there are multiple ways you can get to the same state. There are ways things can be both determinism and practically impossible to predict.

And unpredictability does not imply freedom.

Maybe but it's pretty close in my book.

Pretty close to 1 does not equal 1. This is r/science provide evidence to support the existence of free will or accept that you have no cause to believe in it.

Edit - Actually no, 1.9999... only equals 2 if we assume that infinity exists. If we have a limited number of "nines" the equation does not equal 2.

So to make the claim that 1.999 recurring equals 2 you would first have to prove the existence of real infinity, not just a theoretical/mathematical infinity.

Pretty close to 1 actually DOES equal 1.

Google it.

Yes, but not free will does not equal free will right?

Nor does theoretical mathematics provide any evidence to suggest that free will exists. Or am I wrong?

Edit - Actually no, 1.9999... only equals 2 if we assume that infinity exists. If we have a limited number of "nines" the equation does not equal 2.

So to make the claim that 1.999 recurring equals 2 you would first have to prove the existence of real infinity, not just a theoretical/mathematical infinity.

> Edit - Prove me wrong.

Oh, I could. But I don't want to.

I wish you would/could... Well played.

But not until it’s observed.

Edit: dammit!

Where is your evidence for hard determinism?

You're looking at this from a dualistic lens. It doesn't have to be either no free will or completely free will... Just like freedom of speech doesn't have to be completely free or completely censored... It's on a spectrum Perhaps we have some limited form of agency which is deterministic and yet unpredictable/undecidable Basically. If we copy pasted this universe and observed how the two would evolve over time. We would expect them to remain identical, because that's what deterministic means yet we would not be able to predict human behavior. As close to free will as it gets without involving the supernatural and the idea of a soul that is immaterial...

Free will may as well exist since it wouldn't matter if it didn't.

As a lay summary, they show that if there was an equivalent to the 2nd law of thermodynamics for entanglement, then you could use 2 copies of states to create 3 copies of states. However, that would violate the no copy principle, and other mathematical axioms. Therefore, there is no 2nd law of entanglement.

Note, they also show that you could get a 2nd law if there exists a macroscopic amount of new entanglement being fed to the system.

"I argue like a five year old and think it is a mic-drop."

Uh, dude. It was a joke. Because "I don't want to" is along the lines of exercising free will. Get it?

I think we're all well aware that there is no empirical test of free will. There's nothing to argue either way. So I was making a funny, you see?

Eesh.

[removed]

>It's on a spectrum Perhaps we have some limited form of agency which is deterministic and yet unpredictable/undecidable Basically.

If you have to do what the diceroll/random number generator/coin flip tells you, you do not have free will. You have random will. Sure if you redefine free will to mean not free will you can have all the free will you want...

There is nothing to argue? Great take here on r/science...

I see your point. I think what I meant is that free will and having agency aren't mutually inclusive. You can have agency and no absolute free will .

Sure. Agency is just the state of being active. Any robot, machine or stone rolling down a hill has agency.

The issue is that we are all just small portions of the big machine or lifeform of the universe. You can imagine us as individual blood cells within the body of the universe. The universe programmed our brains bound by physical determinism and set us off.

We are only experienceing what the universe set in motion eons ago.

Do you understand what unfalsifiable means? There is no scientific test for free will.

Acknowledging what is beyond the scope of science is indeed appropriate for r/science. But I'm thinking you're just a troll.

[removed]

[deleted]

[deleted]

So what you are saying is we have free will because we can't predict what action a person might make?

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]