By: Nadja Chavdarska
According to experts, whether our brains are mathematically inclined or not, the laws of physics encompass every aspect of our lives. Although we learn that biology concerns our very own existence and chemistry explains the reactions between the elements and the properties they are made out of–if it were not due to physics, those concepts would simply not exist.
When it comes to studying humanities and politics, it is engraved in human nature to want freedom and self expression. So, society explores these topics in forms of activism, encouraging free choice to where we have reached our modern democratic ways. Yet, in a way the mathematical concepts of physics seem to contradict these ideas.
For reference, in the world of quantum mechanics every little action and movement is predetermined. The potential velocity of an object sets its path, making its movements predictable. When you go on walks, or move your wrist while doing your dreaded math homework, in theory, you are not actually freely choosing to do those activities at that moment, they were chosen for you. This topic is supported by a number of successful physicists including Hossenfelder who refers to the concept of free will as “logically incoherent nonsense”, showing that from a rational viewpoint–choice does not exist. This interpretation of the universe using quantum mechanics is called superdeterminism. Even Einstein, one of the brightest minds in the physics world, supported this by using the analogy that if physics cannot explain ‘free’ will that would be the same as considering the earth as a freely-moving body that is not acted upon by any force which is an irrational statement.
The opposing argument to this is called indeterminism, which claims that the randomness of quantum mechanics makes it so that we experience one out of many possible outcomes as an effect of our actions, which would support the idea of free will.
Supporters of superdeterminism contradict this idea by arguing that in fact, there is a pattern to the apparent randomness that is observed in its principles. This was considered possible in the double-slit experiment started by Thomas Young. In the experiment, electrons are put through a surface with two vertical slits as suggested by its name. At first, the particles move through them in a seemingly random way. After some time, the particles show an evident pattern forming on the screen behind the surface which they came from.
Yet, frustratingly, even this experiment does not disprove the possibility of randomness even if it seems so. Even as groundbreaking as it may seem, there are many underlying details that render the experiment useless in providing evidence for disproving particle randomness, instead it highlights the quantum probability of the particles ending up in those places; so, the debate over free will has stayed undecided and hasn’t been proven due to the simple fact that there are still undiscovered mysteries in our knowledge of quantum mechanics.
Even still, the brightest physicists are yet to find these unknown variables and principles that exist within the laws of physics that prove or disprove its connection to our choices. For now, all we can do is simply observe our actions and wonder whether we really chose them, or if they were chosen for us by the laws that make-up our world and support our universe.
Comentarios