Ok, this is going to start out easy, but get progressively more complicated.

[NuclearNed]

SKIP ALL THIS CRAP AND START READING MIDWAY THROUGH THE POST WHERE IT SAYS "START READING HERE"

Whether or not this turns into a series of questions depends on the general consensus of ATOT. Hang in there, these questions are going somewhere in particular. Lets just say that I had an interesting line of thought tonight. Since my knowledge of quantum physics is negligible, I'm sure that it will break down at some point. I'm just curious to see how far it actually goes...

1a. Lets say that you have two atoms that will react with each other if they are within a certain proximity. These two atoms are the only things that exist in the universe, so there is nothing else in the universe that can influence them in any way. These atoms are moving towards each other at a steady pace and will soon reach the distance at which they will react. The reaction occurs with a defined result.

1b. Lets say that there are two atoms in exactly the same scenario as 1a, except that these atoms are in a mutually exclusive universe of their own. When I say exactly, I mean exactly: their electrons are in exactly the same locations relative to the nuclei, their spins are exactly the same, their paths and velocities are exactly the same, etc. There are no differences, period.

Question 1: Will the reaction in scenario 1b differ in any way from that in 1a?

Question 2: Lets say that there are 3 atoms in the scenarios above instead of just 2. Are the outcomes still exactly the same?

*** START READING HERE - JUST FORGET THE STUFF ABOVE ***
Ok, screw the question/answer format I was attempting. Let me just cut to the chase so people can poke holes in it.
Its obvious to me that I don't know what I'm talking about, but it was an interesting line of thought I had the other night. Lets see if I can adequately put this in words:

Suppose that within infinitely small intervals of time we can completely accurately predict the behavior of an atom/molecule/particle given all the outside forces that are acting upon it.

For the sake of the discussion, let me coin a phrase: "macro-stimulus". What I mean by macro-stimulus is the entirety of all forces that affects an atom/molecule/particle.

If it were possible to have knowledge of the "macro-stimulus" acting on a particular particle, the behavior of the particle should be completely predictable within an infinitely small time slice.

(this is that part of the discussion that gets kind of weird)
Since our brains are composed of an enormous number of atoms/molecules/particles, if it were possible to have knowledge of the "macro-stimulus" simultaneously acting on them all, the behavior of all of them should be completely predictable.

Therefore, free will is an illusion. Every decision we make is the only possible outcome that could happen.

 

[irishScott]

wouldn't think so, but I'm sure some chaos therorist could counter me.

 

[Gibsons]

I've got a nagging feeling I'm wrong (Quantum theory isn't something I claim to understand well), but I'll go ahead and say the reactions will be identical.

 

[jjones]

I wouldn't have any idea. I have trouble spotting molecules, let alone atoms.

 

[NuclearNed]

Originally posted by: irishScott
wouldn't think so, but I'm sure some chaos therorist could counter me.

Just for clarity - the way I read your response is "the reactions in 1a and 1b would be identical". Is that correct?

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed

Originally posted by: irishScott
wouldn't think so, but I'm sure some chaos therorist could counter me.

Just for clarity - the way I read your response is "the reactions in 1a and 1b would be identical". Is that correct?

Yes.

 

[NogginBoink]

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says that you cannot set up two pairs of identically positioned atoms as posed the the question. The question is void.

 

[deepred98]

yes, dunno why, just seems like a trick question

 

[Eeezee]

You stated that the reaction is a defined result and that the reaction is known to happen at exactly a certain proximity. Therefore, scenario b will have the same results as scenario a.

Your question was just worded wrong is all. If two atoms interact in real life, there is no certain way to know exactly what will happen. We only have probabilities of the likely results. Given two atoms, usually you'll just get an electromagnetic interaction, causing them to scatter. A "reaction" between two random atoms almost never happens if they're just moving toward each other. Given enough energy you can collide them, but you require equipment to maintain these high velocities (otherwise they just radiate energy and slow down).

Hell, what's to say that a virtual particle doesn't materialize out of the vacuum of space and mess with the reaction in scenario a before disappearing again? This is allowed in quantum mechanics.

 

[NuclearNed]

Originally posted by: NogginBoink
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says that you cannot set up two pairs of identically positioned atoms as posed the the question. The question is void.

Just for fun, lets pretend each scenario occurs in its own mutually exclusive universe. Also lets pretend that I'm God, so I can indeed set up the scenarios identically.

 

[Luthien]

Been a long time since physics, chemistry, organic chemistry and other pertinent sciences but I am pretty sure that there would be absolutely no difference in the result.

But, you say will the "reaction" be different. To that I would say yes but nothing measurable accept theoretically and that being negligible negligibility, lol.

If you had a trillion atoms instead of two it might be a measurably different "reaction" I would guess just tossing out ideas, the result being the same though.

 

[Biggerhammer]

Assuming that these atoms are in perfectly identical situations, I would lean towards an identical outcome.

 

[NuclearNed]

bump for morning folks, plus addition of question 2

 

[VTHodge]

Let me try to rephrase this in a more simple matter.

We have 3 particles: X, Y, Z
And a "reaction" that is a function of the positions of X, Y, Z
(EDIT: . . . and/or velocities X', Y', Z')

Q1 asks if given reproducable values for X and Y, would the results be reproducable?
Q2 asks if given reproducable values for X, Y, and Z would the results be reproducable?

The answer is a) if the reaction is truly predicatable, then the results are reproducable OR b) if the reaction is NOT truly predictable, then the results are NOT reproducable. You made up the reaction. Pick which assumption is accurate (a or b) and there you go.

 

[gerwen]

Are they to react on a chemical level, or a nuclear one? I'm not sure if the distinction matters, but it might.


The end result would be the same in all cases. Whether or not all the particles involved followed the exact same paths to get to the end result would be questionable. AFAIK electrons don't actually move in orbits around a nucleus, akin to a planet around the sun. Even if it's initial position could be set, i don't think you can predict the particles exact behavior based on a known initial position.

Damn, now I'm off to google to find out what the current model of the atom looks like.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
bump for morning folks, plus addition of question 2

Nvm...misunderstood the question.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: NogginBoink
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says that you cannot set up two pairs of identically positioned atoms as posed the the question. The question is void.

Bingo. Wave mechanics and quantum mechanics do not allow your scenario.

You would be fundamentally changing the physics principles behind atoms and electrons and therefore changing the physics behind them. No way to know what woudl happen.

 

[NuclearNed]

Originally posted by: DaShen

Originally posted by: NogginBoink
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says that you cannot set up two pairs of identically positioned atoms as posed the the question. The question is void.

Bingo. Wave mechanics and quantum mechanics do not allow your scenario.

You would be fundamentally changing the physics principles behind atoms and electrons and therefore changing the physics behind them. No way to know what woudl happen.

See my response to NogginBoink above. Basically, I am saying that the two scenarios occur in two discrete mutually exclusive universes, and that I am God and therefore can guarantee that both scenarios are completely identical.

Granted, my grasp of quantum physics is almost non-existant, but I don't think your objection will make any difference as my line of thought is revealed in this thread. And at the same time I realize that where I am going with this has a flaw somewhere, so maybe the objection you raise is it.

 

[mfs378]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
Whether or not this turns into a series of questions depends on the general consensus of ATOT. Hang in there, these questions are going somewhere in particular. Lets just say that I had an interesting line of thought tonight. Since my knowledge of quantum physics is negligible, I'm sure that it will break down at some point. I'm just curious to see how far it actually goes...

1a. Lets say that you have two atoms that will react with each other if they are within a certain proximity. These two atoms are the only things that exist in the universe, so there is nothing else in the universe that can influence them in any way. These atoms are moving towards each other at a steady pace and will soon reach the distance at which they will react. The reaction occurs with a defined result.

1b. Lets say that there are two atoms in exactly the same scenario as 1a, except that these atoms are in a mutually exclusive universe of their own. When I say exactly, I mean exactly: their electrons are in exactly the same locations relative to the nuclei, their spins are exactly the same, their paths and velocities are exactly the same, etc. There are no differences, period.

Question 1: Will the reaction in scenario 1b differ in any way from that in 1a?

Question 2: Lets say that there are 3 atoms in the scenarios above instead of just 2. Are the outcomes still exactly the same?

In case 2, each of the two atoms is in their own universe?

Quantum mechanics doesn't say anything about parallel universes. I think what you want is string theory.

 

[Luthien]

I am guessing but I think this is a question that will end up involving chirality and the superimposing of molecules or the inability to do so when they are chiral / mirror images of each other. So, that if you have a reaction that seemingly only has one possible outcome it can actually have two that are mirror images.

 

[irishScott]

In answer to question 2: Yes they will be identical.

 

[DaShen]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
See my response to NogginBoink above. Basically, I am saying that the two scenarios occur in two discrete mutually exclusive universes, and that I am God and therefore can guarantee that both scenarios are completely identical.

Granted, my grasp of quantum physics is almost non-existant, but I don't think your objection will make any difference as my line of thought is revealed in this thread. And at the same time I realize that where I am going with this has a flaw somewhere, so maybe the objection you raise is it.

In this scenario, again, you have fundamentally changed the physics of the "universe" created from ours. There is no way to tell you what the physics in such a universe would act like, unless you gave us the constructs of that said "universe". You haven't. You are asking us what the construct would be fundamentally, and by changing the physics, we can not tell you.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: irishScott
In answer to question 2: Yes they will be identical.

actually if you know anything about quantum physics then you would know that the aeoric syptulmation triglycericating promulgationation zyretrifulcation is one and the same as the hyperbolic vociferous detrimentational ocillation!!

 

[gerwen]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed


1b. Lets say that there are two atoms in exactly the same scenario as 1a, except that these atoms are in a mutually exclusive universe of their own. When I say exactly, I mean exactly: their electrons are in exactly the same locations relative to the nuclei, their spins are exactly the same, their paths and velocities are exactly the same, etc. There are no differences, period.

I think here is the problem. Electrons aren't simply particles. They also have the wave-particle duality. To specify that it has a definable position, path, velocity, and spin is to assume that it is a particle only. An electron is basically both particle and wave, so its location and momentum are impossible to pin down.

I can't really find the words to say this:
Within the bounds of how accurately the starting conditions can be stated, the result can be predicted with the same accuracy.

Thus the reaction will always have the same result. At least as far as we can tell.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: irishScott
In answer to question 2: Yes they will be identical.

actually if you know anything about quantum physics then you would know that the aeoric syptulmation triglycericating promulgationation zyretrifulcation is one and the same as the hyperbolic vociferous detrimentational ocillation!!

But the phosphorescent decay of the centricarbonatonic forces and the subsequent irradiation of the surrounding anti-quarks would yield a difference in parabolic electronucleonic tention and thus screw whatever the fvck you just said.