Intelligent Design Mind Physics

Do quasars provide evidence for free will?

Spread the love
Quasar with dusty torus
artist’s cross-section of a quasar/ESA/NASA, the AVO project, Paolo Padovani

Possibly. They certainly rule out experimenter interference:

Quantum particles appear to behave randomly when measured. But what if there is no free will? In that case, the physicists were fated, so to speak, to set up the experiment to achieve a certain set of results which might appear to them to be random. But that was fated too.

Koberlein explains, “It’s often said that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, but it’s really information that can’t travel faster than light. We can send each other telegrams or text messages, but never faster than the time it takes for light to travel between us. In a small lab, light has plenty of time to travel back and forth across the room while the experiment is being set up, so perhaps small bits of information bias the “random” aspect of experiment before it’s even done.”

That explanation might not seem very convincing if the random results appear time after time. But it would be a good thing to take the physicists out of the picture, so we can be surer. More.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

See also: Does Brain Stimulation Research Challenge Free Will? If we can be forced to want something, is the will still free? (Michael Egnor)

Is free will a dangerous myth? (Michael Egnor)

and

Is AI creating the conditions for Marxist revolution? An analyst looks at the conditions then and now
Last summer, we noted Karl Marx’s eerie AI prediction; he felt that capitalism would fall when machines replaced human labor. While today’s market economy doesn’t seem in a hurry to fulfill either prediction, some see artificial intelligence as enabling a comeback of his theories.

2 Replies to “Do quasars provide evidence for free will?

  1. 1
    vmahuna says:

    The failure of Marxist THEORY is that even before the end of the 19th Century, the world had seen the rise of The Third Class.

    That is, Marxism assumes that “modern” society is controlled by the struggle between Capitalists (who own stuff but make money from money) and Proletarians (hourly wage FACTORY workers. Farm hands are NOT Proletarians). This struggle is Dialectic, that is there are ONLY 2 sides which can produced only ONE outcome.

    See the authoritative documentary by M. Python:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ9myHhpS9s

    But a New Class emerged: the Managers. Managers are NEITHER Workers nor Owners, meaning that The Struggle is THREE-sided, since Managers are in it for PERSONAL power and wealth, regardless of what happens to either the hourly workers or the big investors.

    If you want a modern example, the people who run the US Veterans Administration MANAGE the VA for the benefit of the MANAGERS of the VA, patients and taxpayers (Capitalists?) be damned.

    Marx lived long enough to see the rise of Managers, but had no idea how to work them into his Dialectic Struggle. Lenin and then Stalin also had no idea how to control the Managers, although Stalin, and later Mao, denounced and executed Wreckers pretty much at random to “put the fear of God” into the surviving Managers.

    So, you can automate whatever you want about decisionmaking in large organizations. But the Proletariat (assembly line workers) is being replaced by AI, not AIDED by AI. And the Capitalists don’t understand or care what the AI is doing as long as return on investment is high.

    The ONLY folks who both understand how the AI works and how to control it are The New Class: the Managers.

  2. 2
    Latemarch says:

    vma,

    See the authoritative documentary by M. Python:

    Heh!

    They will never entirely remove the cubicle worker because managers just love to look over a sea of cubicles. It’s a marker of their power like money is a marker of wealth.

Leave a Reply