Also No

Posted on by

No. Quantum probability has actual, real indeterminacy built in. And since the world is structured at its base on quantum phenomena, this would strongly imply that the cosmos itself also possesses this innate indeterminacy — unless you posit that QM is wrong (unlikely) or that somehow quantum mechanics has no impact at all on macro events ever (seems a bit fishy to me).

When I say that quantum mechanics has real indeterminacy built in, this isn’t quibbling or guesswork. It’s just a fact of how the universe works. There is no way in principle to predict, say, when a uranium atom will emit a photon due to radioactive decay. Even knowing every single fact up to that point about the entire universe, that photon’s emission would be by nature unpredictable in the very strongest sense of that word. There is nothing we could learn to tell us when it would occur, or even why. Again, this is not about not having enough information. There is no information that could allow us to learn this in advance.

So I’d disagree with this, and here’s why. I am convinced quantum mechanics is correct. To believe as Alex does, you’d have to assume that QM never has any effect on the macro world of any kind, which just seems a bit absurd since the entire universe is built on its actions. Note that it doesn’t take QM effects occurring on every interaction to invalidate these sorts of ideas — that they occur at all makes this view of probability suspect because it then becomes unreliable in general. Also I should be clear that doesn’t mean I think probability and statistics has then become unusable, but that I am negating the idea that probability is (only) a model of personal ignorance.