Spooky action at a distance

Does quantum mechanics disprove materialism once and for all?

Other urls found in this thread:


read Bordiga.

Why am I not surprised

I don't understand enough to care. Books are hard.

maybe learn some quantum theory before parroting quotes you don't understand.

Yes. The Bell test experiments experimentally demonstrate that local realism is false. Insofar as materialism* is an instance of local realism, it is false.

This, however, is a negative result. It can not be used to support the validity of any specific alternatives to materialism.

*It is possible to adopt a definition of "materialism" that is explicitly nonlocal, and such a "materialism" would not be disproved by quantum mechanics. But nonlocal hidden variables are so bizarre that this would strain the common meaning of "materialism."

Einstein was a Schopenhauer fan.

Not historical materialism.

please tell about these experiments

Not exactly materialism, but rather determinism specifically.

it disproves determinism, and when it comes to materialism read hegel for refutation of false dichotomy between idealism and materialism

Lel the arrogance of the scientific present

Why do you think it would. There's no requirement for materialism to be local. If you don't like non-local materialism, you can believe in the many worlds interpretation instead.

Idiots who think quantum uncertainty somehow allows for the existence of free will or any other kind of spooky magic really annoy me.

Many worlds is a deterministic interpretation when you look at all possible branches simultaneously. It only appears non-deterministic from the viewpoint of an observer on a particular branch.

Fuck yo spooky action. The EmDrive points towards a hidden variable. Your probabilistic model can suck a dick, determinism4lyfe.

Quantum mechanics is material, is it not?

Blanqui already covered this.
Good thing philosophy's dead and we progressed onto scientism and materialism.
Well this is right at least.


what the fuck

reddit tier intellectualism tbh

But it's not supposed to be deterministic.

People who think quantum mechanics disproves determinism are scientifically illiterate.

All natural phenomena have concrete principles that govern their behavior. Just because we haven't isolated those principles in regard to quantum mechanics doesn't mean they aren't there.

Last 3 seem a little anthropomorphic. Almost like humans project themselves into absolutely everything from superstrings to society as a whole. You wanting the world to "obey" "laws" doesn't mean you know a thing about science.

thank you



How does the existence of quantum randomness that you don't control give you free will any more than a universe of general relativity that you don't control?

Neither do. Which brings us to the deepest question in all political theory: the meaning of freedom and autonomy.

could you be even dumber than reddit?

Did you read his rules for his wife?

zizek has written about this exact problem extensively. no, quantum psychics does not "disprove" materialism, you idiot.

honestly, what do you even think materialism is?

Outcomes > Ultimate freedom

If I believed otherwise I would be a rabid ancap.

You're conflating causal determinism with free will (which is somewhat related to the issue).

Materialism is garbage tbh. Read some Hegel. I promise that whatever some trot told you about German idealism is wrong. It isn't the same thing as Platonic idealism.


What's the difference? In a deterministic universe free will is illusory (if important to human psychology)

it's because zizek figured out "materialism" is just transcendental idealism.

It's both the deepest problem and almost everyone has a superficial if not outright nonsensical handle on it.

Free will has multiple interpretations, but almost all are related to causal determinism. It can be argued that general causal indeterminism would also make free will nonsense, how can you act freely when you're totally cucked by "effects" having no real relation to "causes" you try originate?

What deep take do you want? Free will is important to the mind but ultimately doesn't exist. We can't totally take the position that free will doesn't exist in practical applications otherwise there would be no way to have a society but we can to an extent (ie. extravagant vulgar punishments of criminals are pointless, they should be rehabilitated or contained)

So it's a vestigial, folk psychological illusion aka spook? And one that clouds rational judgment about the greater outcomes for the species? Then just suppress that part of the brain once we can target it with high selectivity, which will have the outcome of improving all other outcomes.
So it's like what rational religious apologetics has been reduced to these days? "The plebs need it so it's good for intellectuals to just kinda pretend we don't find it ridiculous most of the time".

It's not my fault that you don't know the definitions of basic words. Look them up in a fucking dictionary.

"Principles", "govern", and "behavior" are all impersonal words that can be applied to non-human occurrences.
If it's been true for literally every other field of scientific study, then it's almost certainly true for quantum mechanics.


We literally can't know
The mainstream interpretation is that everything whose action is around h (Planck constant) is nothing but a spooky, but extremely powerful and consistent, mathematical construct whose physical manifestations are impossible to describe otherwise

Quarks are a mathematical construct, matter (notably anything NOT an electron) as a wave is a mathematical construct, and in particular, their probabilistic representation is definitively a mathematical construct

The smug physicist answer to "but what does this mean ???" is "lol I don't know, I just do the maths and compare to what the experimental results

Quantum physics are very well understood notably due to how easy it is to make measurements and how powerful the maths being it are, but it's in itself nothing more than a very sophisticated model applied to results

Dimensionless constants pop up all the time (like Spin), and it's almost impossible to give them a physical meaning rigorously

The topic was asking if dialectical materialism was deterministic. The nature of matter ultimately defines the nature of dialectical materialism, thus if the universe is deterministic as opposed to probabilistic, so is dialectical materialism. Whether it's "supposed to be" is meaningless; as always, matter is the cause, not the consequence.

So in your actual everyday life you approach things with hard determinism? Bullshit.

seriously, if you say that you act as if free will doesn't exist in everyday life you're a god damn liar. The illusion of choice is a basic, absolutely required part of the human thought process. Like really if you think my example is stupid please present how you think hard deterministic thinking would work

Also I'm either a brainlet who just doesn't get it or the only one to notice that this was a joke topic based on the 'spooky action' gag

EM Drive is a meme. Don't expect much.

Fallacy of composition. You would need to prove that humans are deterministic.

You're begging the question by assuming we make choices. If determinism is the case then obviously everything you've ever experienced has been determined including your understanding of muh free willy.

Hey so like um, feel like telling us the answer if u goan act so high and might?

My 3 cents minus 1 cent: it's all the same. Free will is like determinism, and all the theories are equivalent. Something like Spinoza's God (=Nature) is the case with infinite attributes. Hence everything possible exists and our experience exists because there's no reason for it not to.

Basically like the muh retarded clique and rorty where buggy ol pal "is time" except IRL at the ultimate level there is no you and there is no time. But there's no ultimate level either which is why it's all equivalent.

I think this would be something like Hegel/the ziege where free will is choice where neither coheres enough to conquer the other: you choose what is determined, but in the end you aren't really making choices either. While all of your choices are determined, but there's actually no time hence no causality. Actually this immediately defeats choice too.

I'm trying to build ontological communism where there's no teleological problem because the unity of capital and labor (and all things) is transhistorical since there's no time in which capitalism can develop (but there's no unity either since there are no things and no space for them to occupy). Fuck I'm about to be called so retarded.

Last thought: this is sort of like Plato's souls idea where we choose to come here but forget and then when we learn we are remembering. But in reality we're just incarnations of being-nothing going through the motions because there's no limitation on what nothing can be. Or like how Baudrillard says there aren't lucid dreams, believing you're in control is part of the dream. The world is like that. Just my seven cents minus a nickel no raging bull me please

*beige where tree thrill is meh-learnin-ism

If anything, stuff like 'spooky action at a distance' and the limit on the speed that information can travel only give further credence to our universe being digital in nature.

That or Neoplatonism is correct.
I would be happy with either system tbh.

physics is literally the most stupid thing there is

That's the point… We don't make choices, but we need to feel like we do. The fact I need to eat or die is determined too, that doesn't make it true. I really don't see how the human mind could operate without the illusion of choice and I see you also didn't present any way.

Care to explain how it isn't?
We already have very accurate models for predicting the deterministic evolution of a quantum wavefunction. The non-determinism arises when that wavefunction collapses, but many worlds gets around that by branching at those points.

predictable. let me explain in language you can understand then: you might as well have said "things are like stuff". you also might want to look into the problem of induction for that other thing you did.

well, at least you actually TRIED to think about it.

in principle unreachable by any conceivable experiment postulated counterfactual alternative timeline experimental results can have no physical content/meaning.
why are you so attached to the idea of determinacy?
How about learning what muh wavefunction actually is?

these people are merely autists, Howard.

Better turn off your computer and connect using something not engineered by physics, then. Tit.



Quatum physics are not necessarily "random", it's an speculation.
The world of QP is best expressed by a strange form of mathematics involving something that resembles a generalization of probability theory.

Usually in statistics you use numbers between zero and one to express probabilty. You can add the prob of events, multiply independent intersecting events, etc always yielding values within that range.
Eg, 0.5 = 50% chance, and two coins being tails is 0.5 * 0.5 = 0.25 = 25% chance
This math is used in probability because it's good describing the interaction of "random" events, where "random" just means events we don't know enough about. If you flip a coin and don't tell me, then it's as good as random still to me.

Instead quatum states are expressed in linear combinations of zero and one using complex numbers.
This type of math works as an extended type of probability theory, It's very common in math that there are extensions and generalization, like how the real numbers genaralize integer quantities, matrix multiplication generalizes multiplication, group/ring theory generalizes arithmetics, and Lebesgue spaces are a gargantuan generalization of metric product-spaces.
But it's literally just a mathematical representation that describe quatum states and interactions, a subset of which is just a mathematical representation of random occurrences.

Merely a constraint on our knowledge due to the nature of observing it and interacting with it. This means it's as good as random to us.
Just a mathematical description of the nature of our observations.

The math fits the idea that quatum states are "random" (in an extended form), but this might or not be so.
We just live withing constraints of that knowledge, which can plausibly be eternally insurmountable.

Free will autists never stop being cringeworthy do they

Well maybe yeah the drive itself is a meme. What's important is the theory behind it.

If there can be no uncertainty even at the most basic level of matter, and there are no transcendental properties or entities at play (like materialism says), it follows that all that is, is matter, and can be reduced to deterministic models. Thus, things composed of that matter are reducible to deterministic models too, unless somewhere between the subatomic particle scale and the human scale a transcendental property or entity comes into play.

So for my argument to be a fallacy of composition, you need to deny materialism. Are you up for that, boyo?

Free will would require uncertainty of outcome at the human scale of size, which in turn depends on uncertainty on subatomic particle scale of size, like I mentioned above. I know some folks don't like it when physics gets mixed with metaphysics, but if we're assuming materialism to be true, them's the breaks.

How is it avoiding the question? If you think deterministic thinking is possible (about the self) then please tell me how

Unitary time evolution is completely deterministic. That determinism is the whole reason why it's possible to move a qubit state around the Bloch sphere in a controlled manner by applying carefully timed sequences of excitation pulses. The only point at which it is non-deterministic is when an observation is made and the wavefunction collapses into an eigenstate of the measurement operator.

Your whole manner of arguing makes me think you're just here to troll and don't actually know anything about the topics being discussed.

You would have to prove that quantum mechanics has macro effects.

Applying the logic of quantumfags, you could make a perpetual motion machine and infinite air conditioner if you had some filter that only allowed molecules moving above a particular speed through it.

You've just described Maxwell's Demon. Go and read about information theory, or just be lazy and read the wikipedia page.

I knew it had a name, I just couldn't remember it.

The point is that the reason Maxwell's demon won't work is the same reason I am skeptical of quantum mechanics and the same reason statistics works.

Quantum mechanics is very, very well verified by countless experiments all over the planet. You can be skeptical of various interpretations of those results, but the maths works in every case which has thus far been tested.

My point was about the macro level. A better analogy would be a casino. Yes, the individual gambler might win $100,000,000 in one night, but the casino doesn't give a shit about individuals, what matters is that the games over all, over the course of many months and many gamblers will take in a reliable profit.

Quantum mechanics has yet to demonstrate that all this uncertainty and action and so on doesn't just balance itself out. Sure, quantum mechanics might allow faster than light communications or whatever when human intentionality uses it, just like radiation was just some crap until radio was inventented or soundwaves was some crap until animals evolved to sense them and create meaningful noise.

Yes, maybe there are Tralfamadorians out there who provide the intentionality with their UWTB, but until they are found or something else is demonstrated about quantum mechanics, then there is no reason to believe we are all puppets on spooky strings.

It may not be possible for you, or perhaps anyone to imagine a wholesale change to thought resulting from neuro-architectural engineering from the first person, but that's world's away from making it logically impossible. You are aware of how the socialized mode of production is supposed to work right?

It's a deterministic evolution of probability densities, not of classical trajectories. It represents an idealization of the lowest knowledge about the system, measurement increases knowledge, it doesn't destroy it.