

You haven’t shown me any.
Clinically depressed, chronically online,
Socialist discordian statist for open science,
Independent journalism and gay crime.
My Communities:
!Independent_Media@lemmy.today — Independent world journalism news feed.
!indy_news_canada@sh.itjust.works — Independent news from Canada.
!wildfeed@sh.itjust.works — Trash. Global, diverse news, reports, blogs and listicles.
!art_alchemist_guild@lemmy.today — Ask, share, learn and show off with the most DIY of artists.
!cool_rocks@lemmy.today — For cool rocks.
!everyday_socialism@lemmy.ml — For everyday socialism.
I keep making communities. Please help.
This is my main account.
Other Me:
icytrees@sh.itjust.works
woad@lemmy.ml
Former Me:
ceedoestrees@lemmy.world
icytrees@lemmy.today
trash_goblin@piefed.zip
Land back. Do drugs.


You haven’t shown me any.


No, a lack of evidence for determinism is a lack of evidence for determinism.


Ever heard the phrase 1+1=3 for high values of 1? Equations “work” because numbers are abstract representations of value we assign.
We observe particles and forms of radiation we can’t explain the origins of or name literally everywhere we look, which is an infinitesimally, incomprehensibly small mote of the universe.


It’s odd to believe the universe is deterministic when physics experiments have observed particles that exist outside causality. Even the double slit experiment goes against causality, uncertainty goes against causality, even current particle experiments can’t prove deterministic causality. The prevailing scientific and philosophical findings are that universal, deterministic causality can’t be proved any more than the existence of god.


I’d start with Uncertainty: Einstein, Heisenberg, Bohr, and the Struggle for the Soul of Science. You sound like you’ve probably read A Brief History of Time - but there are edits in later editions and we’ve learned more since Hawking’s death.
Then: Rethinking Causality in Quantum Mechanics. And: Nothing, put out by New Scientist in 2013 — pretty cool, but doesn’t really deal with causality. I just liked that one.
Anyway, you’re arguing in favor of a deterministic universe, but as far as I know with my (limited) understanding, that’s more of a philosophical question that can’t be proved or disproved. We lack the ability to track every particle to its origin, and the inverse is a negative — and you can’t prove something doesn’t happen, only it’s likelihood.


Would you like to read a book? I could recommend several.


I think you missed my point. The same conditions, even in physics, don’t always produce the same result.


Yes. That’s why some people make different choices from people who are 99.99% biological matches who were raised in similar conditions.
Did anyone else see not a foot in a sandle, but Jesus’s weird dick hanging out of his robes?
You don’t even have to be nice to me.
It’s not OSHA, that’s for sure.
Someone hiding in my closet rings a bell every time I get off. Now I know why.
Nope. My married cousin got the anarchist ABC’s for her four year old who now proclaims “Anarchy is cake for dinner!” and no one can argue.
I’ve never felt so seen in my life.
I’m less enthusiastic about someone who can’t cite peer reviewed sources. Your arguments are anecdotal at best.
Astrophysics on a macro scale can only be predicted within a margin of error. Particle and light physics are less predictable. Source: Already posted them.