In considering "The Free Will Theorem Lectures" with Princeton University (and the John Locke Lectures?), I have made this addition:
(Various!Posted by Leonardo F. Olsnes-Lea 2011-07-05 03:30:40)
I think it requires complexity of heavier bodies of matter for free will to obtain.
The Free Will Theorem is presented by John Conway and Simon Kochen and the Wikipedia page has a criticism of them as a part of presenting The Free Will Theorem.
The url to it is this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_theorem.
Fx. a stream of photons of visible light can only do that much when speeding away from the Sun. There is no evidence that the stream of photons can change anything in particular, let's say direction, compensating for some gravity. See Einstein's relativity for gravity effects on photons.
Also, complexity should also be required for the decision for choosing between pleasure and relaxation and exercise and feeding and hunt. Although, these properties are only present with animals and ourselves, the humans.
So unless a bigger body is chosen and the choices are somehow explicated, I think "undetermined" is too weak for giving any plausibility to it or credibility for that matter.
I think, though, that the Dr. Dick Bierman experiments of Holland show that "monades" are likely to obtain in a fundamental way, in line with The Free Will Theorem by John Conway and Simon Kochen, rather than an unknown mechanism that may be impossible to find. This is a warning to future experimenters (the physicists).
The conclusion must be that a bigger system is effectuating the free will existing everywhere whether you call it God or some strange uknown super entity of the Universe / Multiverse or whatever.
Note: originally posted as http://blog.t-lea.net/#post232
Note2: you can also read about this on Static Display... on Facebook, it's an open group of mine.
Note3: THIS IS A BLOG and doesn't intend to live up to any Chicago Manual of Style or the very hard standards on supporting or relating material, also as I remain virtually without feedback from other people!
You know, some Blogger-format-f*cking again, by black on white background. Poor retardedness from them!
ReplyDeleteOn the Free Will Theorem, and Free Will, all in all, thoroughly proven, it's important to remember that Free Will lies *UNDER* science and NOT above it. Free Will or Determinism has absolutely no implication for science and the laws are of course held under the concept of "laws", because they are expected to never break!
ReplyDeleteAs laws of nature or principles, as correct description, of nature! (This is entered here as well! I think about entering it also to the primary Free Will Theorem where I've added the _neutral_ state to the Theorem of Conway's, thus remaking their Theorem to a new Theorem! This has first been added to Facebook moments ago!)
Free Will has also, traditionally, in Philosophy, been considered according to the notion of "agency" and that relating to the above... Please, mind your steps.
ReplyDeleteSo, over the earliest moments of Universe, iff. Big Bang Theory as true, then a bigger/heavier body of mass to transfer or induce life forms to display what we perceive as "Free Will". Not to say that Free Will doesn't exist, no, the other way, any origin to intelligence is now best seen in the human being, whatever the cause, jointly with the form of human being, being the most able predator and manager of the Earth, and having a cognition, that I say clearly displays Free Will, surely, one may say, sets intelligence firmly into future "as we build through time", sending these signals potentially out to other and better systems of life! Are we entering God therefore?
ReplyDeleteNote: This is not entirely placed right and certainly not with the Free Will discussion. As such, this little text should be parted into 3, Philosophy of Religion, Cosmology, and the Metaphysics of Existence, that fundamental question (in fx. Richard Taylor's Metaphysics book of 4th or 5th ed.). You can't simply insert this notice into any context in this form, it's a bit more complicated than that.
Hence my strict adherence to the "disciplines" of the academic subjects and the working on /the/ super-map of all, science, academic subjects and the rest!
ReplyDeleteI also warn against the abuse "of a given God Tube Model" (of theory) and a so-called God Tube Model can rather relate to early cosmology and the assymetry/symmetry-debates! Enjoy also!
ReplyDeleteSome people may think "determinism" enters science as such, but this is mistaken. Determinism is really the question of a theory as probabilistic or law-definite. As such, no question ever goes into science as "free will/determinism".
ReplyDeleteSome of the comments above and the main text too are transferred from the original place of writing, the whatiswritten777.blogspot.com .
ReplyDelete