ngl, free won’t is the best concept I’ve heard of in a while

[neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org]

RE: https://infosec.exchange/@xenontechs/116690596634853495

ngl, free won’t is the best concept I’ve heard of in a while

[staticnoisexyz@infosec.exchange]

@neurovagrant made me laugh out loud

[timwardcam@c.im]

@neurovagrant Sadly it doesn't exist.

(There is no basis in physics for free will.)

[brouhaha@mastodon.social]

@TimWardCam @neurovagrant
It seems to me that if there aren't hidden variables, if quantum interactions have random, though probabilistic, outcomes, then that's a viable basis for free will.
Einstein statement of not believing that god plays dice with the universe has always bothered me for that reason.

[timwardcam@c.im]

@brouhaha @neurovagrant I think the practical approach is:

"Free will isn't a thing, because physics. However, it is not possible to predict how anyone, including yourself, is going to behave from first principles, so you might as well live your life as if free will were a thing - nobody would be able to tell the difference."

[ireneista@adhd.irenes.space]

@TimWardCam @brouhaha @neurovagrant it's honestly also ... we haven't really seen a formalization of what it would even be

[brouhaha@mastodon.social]

@TimWardCam @neurovagrant
I don't think physics has any basis for declaring there not to be free will. To the best understanding we have of quantum mechanics, the universe is not deterministic clockwork.
If you don't want to believe that quantum mechanics is a basis for free will, that's fine, but it doesn't prove that free will doesn't exist, or that free will is an illusion.

[timwardcam@c.im]

@brouhaha @neurovagrant Nobody has come up with a mechanism whereby conscious thought (whatever that is) can change the quantum choices that particles make.

[neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org]

I now finally understand that Windows error message, "Task failed successfully."