Is it possible for free will to exist?

[Paul98]

The theoretical predictability of behavior doesn't negate "free will." It's a false dichotomy.

That's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about that what is going to happen to me in what I see as the future, in another frame of reference has already happened. It's not a theoretical prediction of a person's actions. It that all the actions that you or I are going to make have in fact already happened. It is already written in stone that I would be making these posts for what is my "now". Everything I do for the rest of my life in another frame of reference has already happened.

Now we may still have free will, I like to think that we do and quantum uncertainty might make it true. Because yes what I am going to do may already be written in stone. But that may be because of the decisions I make. What to someone else is now and me is the future is fine since the decisions to get to their "now" are still my own. To them all these things may have happened in the past but I still had to make the decisions and do the things that they see as happen in the past.

 

[dank69]

Who's time? Which clocks are correct? They can agree THAT the event's happen, but won't agree WHEN the events happen. If the person on the train calculates when each of the lightning strikes happen they get two different times. When the person at the station calculates it they get the same time. That is if the clocks are synchronized in their own frame of reference.

I said, "if the calculations are correct." That means, to me anyway, that their "clocks" are syncronized. How can one arrive at a correct time-based calculation if one's temporal starting point is not first determined?

 

[dank69]

That's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about that what is going to happen to me in what I see as the future, in another frame of reference has already happened. It's not a theoretical prediction of a person's actions. It that all the actions that you or I are going to make have in fact already happened. It is already written in stone that I would be making these posts for what is my "now". Everything I do for the rest of my life in another frame of reference has already happened.

Now we may still have free will, I like to think that we do and quantum uncertainty might make it true. Because yes what I am going to do may already be written in stone. But that may be because of the decisions I make. What to someone else is now and me is the future is fine since the decisions to get to their "now" are still my own. To them all these things may have happened in the past but I still had to make the decisions and do the things that they see as happen in the past.

Oh, but it is exactly what you are talking about here. There is no other reason to bring up the subject of relativity. If I witness a lightning stike that is 1 mile from me and 10 miles from you, it doesn't mean I know your future. I may know you will see a lightning strike in a few seconds if you happen to be looking in the right direction, but I don't know you will be looking in the right direction. And even if I did know you would be looking in the right direction, I don't know what your reaction will be or how it will otherwise affect you. Do I have no free will simply because the weatherman knew it was going to rain today?

Regarding viewing things in the past, you seem to think that because we know what George Washington did at specific points in time that he didn't have the free will to choose to do those things?

 

[Paul98]

I said, "if the calculations are correct." That means, to me anyway, that their "clocks" are syncronized. How can one arrive at a correct time-based calculation if one's temporal starting point is not first determined?

Ok lets say you synchronize all the clocks on both train and on the platform in the platforms frame of reference. This means that the clocks are not synchronized in the trains frame of reference. Same if you do it the other ways around.

 

[dank69]

Ok lets say you synchronize all the clocks on both train and on the platform in the platforms frame of reference. This means that the clocks are not synchronized in the trains frame of reference. Same if you do it the other ways around.

But you can calculate how out of sync they are at any point in time.

 

[Paul98]

Oh, but it is exactly what you are talking about here. There is no other reason to bring up the subject of relativity. If I witness a lightning stike that is 1 mile from me and 10 miles from you, it doesn't mean I know your future. I may know you will see a lightning strike in a few seconds if you happen to be looking in the right direction, but I don't know you will be looking in the right direction. And even if I did know you would be looking in the right direction, I don't know what your reaction will be or how it will otherwise affect you. Do I have no free will simply because the weatherman knew it was going to rain today?

Regarding viewing things in the past, you seem to think that because we know what George Washington did at specific points in time that he didn't have the free will to choose to do those things?

Once again you totally miss the point, and totally are missing the point. It's not about KNOWING what happened in the past or what might happen. It's about what IS happening and what HAS happened.

Ok so lets take your example we are both standing in the field, looking a single direction. A lightning strike happens, you see it first since you are closer, then I see it later. We can calculate when that strike happen with respect to us by using the speed of light and distance traveled. If we have synchronized watches we will both get the same conclusion about the time it happened. I will see it happen later since I am farther but since I also know that I will know when the strike happened.

What is happening on the train and platform isn't just people seeing things happening at different times but things actually happening differently. To the person on the train the lightning strikes happen at the same time. To the person on the train the lightning strikes happen at different times. Both are correct and both are equally real.


So lets look at George Washington, he can't make different choices than what he made in our "past". and please read the rest of that post, there is more about what I actually think.

How about instead of bolding the first sentence I write in these posts you read it all and respond to that.

 

[Paul98]

But you can calculate how out of sync they are at any point in time.

So? Who is right the frame where the strikes happen at the same time or the frame where the strikes happen at different times? Why would you want to have clocks out of sync?

 

[dank69]

Once again you totally miss the point, and totally are missing the point. It's not about KNOWING what happened in the past or what might happen. It's about what IS happening and what HAS happened.

Ok so lets take your example we are both standing in the field, looking a single direction. A lightning strike happens, you see it first since you are closer, then I see it later. We can calculate when that strike happen with respect to us by using the speed of light and distance traveled. If we have synchronized watches we will both get the same conclusion about the time it happened. I will see it happen later since I am farther but since I also know that I will know when the strike happened.

What is happening on the train and platform isn't just people seeing things happening at different times but things actually happening differently. To the person on the train the lightning strikes happen at the same time. To the person on the train the lightning strikes happen at different times. Both are correct and both are equally real.

No, you are the one not getting it. They perceive them differently. You keep interchanging the words happen and perceive and those two terms are not interchangeable.

So lets look at George Washington, he can't make different choices than what he made in our "past". and please read the rest of that post, there is more about what I actually think.

He could have made different choices and our history books would read differently now. Of course he can't change his mind now, he is dead.

How about instead of bolding the first sentence I write in these posts you read it all and respond to that.

Don't patronize me kiddo, I am trying to help you think correctly.

 

[dank69]

So? Who is right the frame where the strikes happen at the same time or the frame where the strikes happen at different times? Why would you want to have clocks out of sync?

They are both right. The strikes happened at the same time but one person perceived them at different times and the other perceived them at the same time. Nobody wants their clocks out of sync, they get out of sync in theoretical situations, and you must perform the necessary calculations to account for that..

 

[Paul98]

No, you are the one not getting it. They perceive them differently. You keep interchanging the words happen and perceive and those two terms are not interchangeable.

They don't just perceive things happening at different times they actually happen at different times based on frame of reference.

He could have made different choices and our history books would read differently now. Of course he can't change his mind now, he is dead.

except in another frame of reference he is still alive, so he is making the same decisions. This is not just someone seeing things happening that happened in the past. But in their frame of reference George Washington is still alive in their "now".

 

[Paul98]

They are both right. The strikes happened at the same time but one person perceived them at different times and the other perceived them at the same time. Nobody wants their clocks out of sync, they get out of sync in theoretical situations, and you must perform the necessary calculations to account for that..

We aren't talking about "perceived" differences we are talking about what is actually happening in each frame of reference. You think that the strikes happen at the same time in both frames of reference and one just perceived it different?

I def should have made this thread simply about "now" and time. I didn't think we would be discussing this.

 

[soulcougher73]

Once again you totally miss the point, and totally are missing the point. It's not about KNOWING what happened in the past or what might happen. It's about what IS happening and what HAS happened.

Ok so lets take your example we are both standing in the field, looking a single direction. A lightning strike happens, you see it first since you are closer, then I see it later. We can calculate when that strike happen with respect to us by using the speed of light and distance traveled. If we have synchronized watches we will both get the same conclusion about the time it happened. I will see it happen later since I am farther but since I also know that I will know when the strike happened.

What is happening on the train and platform isn't just people seeing things happening at different times but things actually happening differently. To the person on the train the lightning strikes happen at the same time. To the person on the train the lightning strikes happen at different times. Both are correct and both are equally real.


So lets look at George Washington, he can't make different choices than what he made in our "past". and please read the rest of that post, there is more about what I actually think.

How about instead of bolding the first sentence I write in these posts you read it all and respond to that.

All this fancy mumbo jumbo talk to descirbe perseption? That is all you are talking about. It doesnt change the reality that both strikes happened at the same time. And this free will futue stuff doesnt even fit into this discussion.

Are you on something? lol

 

[soulcougher73]

We aren't talking about "perceived" differences we are talking about what is actually happening in each frame of reference. You think that the strikes happen at the same time in both frames of reference and one just perceived it different?

I def should have made this thread simply about "now" and time. I didn't think we would be discussing this.

That is exactly what your video says is happening in this hypothetical situation. It says both strikes happen at the same time. So that is the info we are given.

The stationary guy sees this as he is well stationary. The person moving in the train moves faster into one light source and away from another light source. So she percieves them as different but that is only because she is moving. The fact still remains they struck at the same time.

Not sure what else you can draw from that. Its pretty simple really.

 

[Paul98]

All this fancy mumbo jumbo talk to descirbe perseption? That is all you are talking about. It doesnt change the reality that both strikes happened at the same time. And this free will futue stuff doesnt even fit into this discussion.

Are you on something? lol

This is just factually incorrect, this is the basics of special relativity. Nether the person on the train or the person on at the station has a preferred frame of reference. So no the "reality" that both strikes happened at the same time is only in the platforms frame of reference.

You seem to be stuck on the station being the correct frame of reference, when in fact it is no more correct than the trains frame of reference.

I'll try to make it easier to see, close the windows on the train so the only thing you see is is the lightning flashes. So you are standing on the train, everything is normal to you then two lightning flashes happen, one on one side then another on the other side. That is what actually happens on the train. It's not that you just perceive them happening at different times and they actually happened at the same time. In the trains frame of reference they actually happen at different times. This is frame of reference is no more or less real than the stations frame of reference.

If you would like to learn more about relativity there are good video's and websites for that. and I can answer any questions.

 

[Paul98]

That is exactly what your video says is happening in this hypothetical situation. It says both strikes happen at the same time. So that is the info we are given.

That they happen at the same time in the stations frame of reference is give... Continue to watch till the end of the video, it says exactly what I am saying.

The stationary guy sees this as he is well stationary. The person moving in the train moves faster into one light source and away from another light source. So she percieves them as different but that is only because she is moving. The fact still remains they struck at the same time.

Not sure what else you can draw from that. Its pretty simple really.

Moving and stationary is purely relative. the station is only stationary in it's frame of reference, in the trains frame of reference the station is moving.

What you are drawing from this is entirely wrong but it is how we thought the world worked before relativity.

Look at that video starting from about 1:10

 

[soulcougher73]

This is just factually incorrect, this is the basics of special relativity. Nether the person on the train or the person on at the station has a preferred frame of reference. So no the "reality" that both strikes happened at the same time is only in the platforms frame of reference.

You seem to be stuck on the station being the correct frame of reference, when in fact it is no more correct than the trains frame of reference.

I'll try to make it easier to see, close the windows on the train so the only thing you see is is the lightning flashes. So you are standing on the train, everything is normal to you then two lightning flashes happen, one on one side then another on the other side. That is what actually happens on the train. It's not that you just perceive them happening at different times and they actually happened at the same time. In the trains frame of reference they actually happen at different times. This is frame of reference is no more or less real than the stations frame of reference.

If you would like to learn more about relativity there are good video's and websites for that. and I can answer any questions.

OK so going by your logic they both perceive things differently but it is the truth to each individual. But what does that have to do with free will or future stuff?

 

[Paul98]

OK so going by your logic they both perceive things differently but it is the truth to each individual. But what does that have to do with free will or future stuff?

Edit: it is not just perception, but what is actually happening in each frame of reference.
Edit: and there is no universal frame of reference and no inertial frame of reference is better than another, there is no one correct answer for what is happening, it depends on frame of reference.

If what is happening "now" and in the future already determined, then are the decisions I am making "now" really my decisions if I can't change anything I do or any decision I am going to make.

 

[soulcougher73]

Edit: it is not just perception, but what is actually happening in each frame of reference.

If what is happening "now" and in the future already determined, then are the decisions I am making "now" really my decisions if I can't change anything I do or any decision I am going to make.

But they should be able to deduce that obviously they both cant be right. And the person who is stationary would have the best vantage point so his conclusion would have a lot more going for it. Hell he even deduces what he thinks the moving passagner will experience and he was right. Going by your video.

Still not following you on the whole "now" and "future" stuff. It doesnt even seem to fit into this discussion at all.

To put this whole thing plainly its all about percepetion as has been pointing out many times already.

 

[Paul98]

But they should be able to deduce that obviously they both cant be right. And the person who is stationary would have the best vantage point so his conclusion would have a lot more going for it. Hell he even deduces what he thinks the moving passagner will experience and he was right. Going by your video.

Still not following you on the whole "now" and "future" stuff. It doesnt even seem to fit into this discussion at all.

To put this whole thing plainly its all about percepetion as has been pointing out many times already.

Actually they both are right, you didn't watch the entire video, watch till the end. Stop thinking about a correct and incorrect frame of reference, they are both correct in their own frame of reference.

Best vantage point of what? His conclusion is no more correct than the person on the train. Why do you think that the person on the platform is correct and the person on the train is incorrect? When relativity states

"The laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion relative to one another (principle of relativity).
The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion or of the motion of the source of the light."

so on the train they are stationary in their own frame of reference. They are in the middle of the train light is moves at c from the front and back to the center of the train. Since they see the light at different times and they know light is moving at c. So they can calculate when each lightning strike hits and they will conclude that they happened at different times.

What you are saying is that relativity is incorrect, which is just wrong. Go learn about relativity, then come back to the discussion. Since you think you are correct you will just argue and argue since what I will say doesn't make sense to you.

I will try to make some simple points.
There are two frames of reference in this video the one from the platform, to the platform the train is moving. This is correct, what is also correct is that in the trains frame of reference the platform is moving. This is also correct. Movement is relative. It is easier to see if you have two spaceships.

Lets say you have two spaceships moving relative to each other. One space ships frame of reference is no better than the others. In one they see the other spaceship moving at some velocity. While in the other they see the opposite. Both are correct and both are equally real. In each frame of reference their own velocity is 0.

 

[Paul98]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity

http://video.pbs.org/video/2164065493 seems to be a good video of what I am talking about time wise that is.

 

[piasabird]

No such thing as free will. No matter how hard we want something, we dont have free will. We only have the ability to make a choice of what we can do. There are no genies to make you a millionaire, so you cant just wrinkle your nose and get your wish. Life presents us with possible choices and we have a moral agency to make a choice. Free will is not possible. Do you live in utopiaville or what?

 

[piasabird]

You do something wrong, they put you in jail or maybe they dont catch you today. If you get put in jail and dont want to be there, then you do not have free will. If you had free will you could walk out of your cell and go home.

Choices have consequences.

For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. There must be opposition to all things.

For every beautiful woman, eventually gravity and old age will win.

 

[sandorski]

Didn't read the link and only skimmed the thread, which seems to suggest the link has little to do with the Freewill issue. That said, the whole idea has always been confusing to me. Especially the argument that if there were an Eternal/outside of time/knowing past and future being, that Freewill could not exist.

The other arguments about how easily manipulable we are is interesting, but I'm not sure it negates Freewill as much as it just directs it.

Another interesting thing is how our minds make decisions before we are even aware of doing it. IIRC, there is a 5-10 second delay between making a choice and Knowing one made the choice. That doesn't quite sound right though, it might be milliseconds or something. At any rate, it is a very interesting phenomena.

One thing is certain, IMO, about the issue: We only can make the choices that we are aware of being available. IMO, the more Education and Knowledgeable we are, the more Freewill(if it exists) we can have.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Paul, you keep imposing requirements which don't exist. If the future determines the now then the now determines the past. Neither my perfect knowledge nor your decisions now affected your choices. Let's try again. The dinosaurs became extinct roughly 65 m.y. ago. If a civilization exists 80 million lightyears away, by what means would you suggest a past event observable in their future influence them? They might build a museum display THEN, but our past reality cannot influence their now which for then remain in an unknowable future FOR THEM. No aspect of the extinction can have any influence simply because the universe cannot have passed any information to their local space. That's the thing that's important, not if a 4 dimensional timeline exists in a 5 dimensional space. Until you can physically access the fifth dimension and observe the fourth, or have that passed down so you can see the future, nothing exists that can influence you.

 

[Paul98]

Paul, you keep imposing requirements which don't exist. If the future determines the now then the now determines the past. Neither my perfect knowledge nor your decisions now affected your choices. Let's try again. The dinosaurs became extinct roughly 65 m.y. ago. If a civilization exists 80 million lightyears away, by what means would you suggest a past event observable in their future influence them? They might build a museum display THEN, but past reality cannot influence their now. No adpect of the extinction can have any influence simply because the universe cannot have passed any information to their local space. That's the thing that's important, not if a 4 dimensional timeline exists in a 5 dimensional space. Until you can physically access the fifth dimension and observe the fourth, or have that passed down so you can see the future, nothing exists that can influence you.

I will say it again it isn't about knowledge of the future or the past. It's about the future, the "now" and the past have already happened.