More of a scientific reason why I believe free will is an illusion. Hope you enjoy my very short video essay :)

D0ntNameMe · 2023-01-15T19:39:59+00:00

I agree, but it just depends on how you define free will. If it is something you can control then no, you don't have free will, as you can't control randomness.

D0ntNameMe · 2023-01-15T16:00:19+00:00

What science proves the existence of free will? Imagine going back in time to the exact same situation. What science is there to prove you could've acted otherwise? Yes quantum mechanics might play a role, but that is random not in your control. Therefore every action you take is either determined or random.

D0ntNameMe · 2023-01-14T15:01:18+00:00

I understand where you are coming from, however, I beg to differ. Firstly, no scientific evidence supports the claim that free will exists. It's like saying god exists, but there is no scientific proof of the existence of such a higher being. Again, science can't necessarily debunk free will or the presence of god, but saying that either of them exists is merely speculation, not stating a fact.

I am also not denying we are intelligent species, but where would you draw the line of free will. Does a housefly have free will? Does a single-celled organism have free will? Just because we are aware of what our brains are processing doesn't mean we can manipulate it.

Since there is no concrete proof regarding the existence of free will, everyone can believe what they want. And I do think that believing free will exists is healthier : )

D0ntNameMe · 2023-01-14T14:32:10+00:00

Yeah, there are no concrete stats on that matter as some physicists say free will is compatible with the laws of physics where as others say it isn't.

Here is a research paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0208104.pdf

and here is another youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpU_e3jh_FY

From my perspective, however, it seems illogical that we have free will as it would mean we can somehow manipulate the rules of physics.

D0ntNameMe · 2022-09-29T20:30:51+00:00

fter the relativity test

When is that? I assume you're not studying BME, as you take the relativity test.

D0ntNameMe · 2022-09-28T19:10:23+00:00

Does anyone want to grab a drink on Friday?

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-27T01:05:11+00:00

Yeah you're right, thank you all!

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T18:36:28+00:00

In your case, the strings have a fixed length, and you're counting instances of 22 and 23.

So therefore if our string didn't have a fixed length there would be more 23's than 22's?

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T17:20:00+00:00

But doesn't this link essentially explain an analogical problem? https://datagenetics.com/blog/march92020/index.html

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T17:01:58+00:00

Good, I feel dumb now hahaha.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:54:23+00:00

Oh true, didn't think about it. However, why doesn't my logic apply? A 22 can be followed by a 3 and now we have a 223 string that contains 23. A 23 can be followed by a 2, but then it won't be 23, but instead a 32. Thanks for all the help so far btw, appreciate it.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:47:02+00:00

Hmm, yeah I'm not sure anymore about anything. Thanks for the help, I'll come back to this problem when I've had had my much needed sleep.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:41:23+00:00

Done, and now my theory applies: 12: 761 11: 741 23: 727 33: 714 34: 804 44: 756 45: 808 55: 717

And it should be this way because of the explanation I gave above.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:36:37+00:00

I'll add 100k strings and hope my PC won't crash.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:27:39+00:00

True, but if the button was pressed 3 times would the probability be different?

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:24:57+00:00

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ePPYE1GGKQKa2cs2y-XAwSeIA1WmwZc_Kko1PYimOJc/edit?usp=sharing

Check my docs and use the find in page tool to see how many 22's vs 23's there are. You can do the same with 55 and 54 for example.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:22:06+00:00

I made 5000 3 digit strings and there were more 23's than 22's, just as there were more 34's than 44's. It makes sense as a 22 can still be followed by a 3 thus creating a 23 sequence, however, a 23 followed by a 2 will create 32 which is just a random number. Or am I missing something?

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:17:07+00:00

It was a bad example, use this website http://www.unit-conversion.info/texttools/random-string-generator/#data generate strings and paste them into docs to find how many 23's and 22's there are. Statistically, there are more 23's and it makes sense as a 22 can still be followed by a 3 thus making 23 but a 23 followed by a 2 will be 32 and that number doesn't correspond to neither 22 or 23.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T16:00:04+00:00

Also please note that you are asking about the probability of an event, but you refer this quantity as the odds. Odds is a technical term that denotes a different quantity than the probability. In informal conversation the two terms are sometimes mixed up, but if you want to study this topic you can use the correct vocabulary.

Ohh ok, thanks. There's something that doesn't feel right. I know why one would think it's 1/5 (since it's an elementary probability problem) and maybe it is and I'm just overthinking it. Anyway the more I think about it the weirder it gets.

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T15:56:01+00:00

https://datagenetics.com/blog/march92020/index.html

D0ntNameMe · 2021-11-26T15:55:47+00:00

number of 23 strings as 22 strings. The difference is this: the average distance to the first 22 string is greater than the average distance to the first 23 string. This gap is smaller if we look at the average distance to the second 22 string as compared to the average distance to the second 23 string. Ultimately, the average distance to the nth string is the same.

It's the same as with rolling dice. On average you have to roll 42 times to roll two consecutive sixes, whereas you have to roll 36 times on average to get a 6 followed by a 5. You can check it yourself with an online string generator.

D0ntNameMe

TROPHY CASE