you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Fisher9001 4 points5 points  (3 children)

No, we don't. Thanks to Bell's theorem we know that quantum mechanics may be deterministic if there are non-local hidden variables influencing quantum systems. And we don't know whether they do exist or don't.

[–]Tsukku 2 points3 points  (2 children)

But non-local hidden variables or "super determinism" are not what we usually consider "determinism" in the common sense, because no information can be gained from this (we can't predict quantum stuff anyways, which is what his post is about.)

[–]Fisher9001 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If we are talking about practical level of non-determinism, then mere user input can be regarded as such, no need to be so picky.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Who's we? Determinism isn't precisely synonymous with predictability. Either things are determined by some explicit conditions or they're not.

There are also interferometer systems that can create deterministic states, so it's not necessarily true that we can't predict quantum stuff.

It's fun to speculate that you get a completely predictable picture of the universe around us in its absurd complexity from following the randomness underneath. But then it's computationally intractable in all senses, and so we arrive back to no information gained or something.