Is there true randomness in the universe?
In: 80
Maybe. There are arguments for and against.
I, though not an expert, think that the ones where there is randomness are more convincing.
Randomness would exist and emanate from quantum mechanics. Without too much detail, an interpretation in which superposition does not have pre-set values before measurement seems to be the best at explaining some aspects of reality right now, and in this interpretation, superposition collapsing into a measure is truly random (not predefined, predictable, or directly caused by a past state)
Explaining is a good part of it, makes a model more trusted, but it needs predicting power for us to be certain.
However the math itself is a bit beyond me so I am not well equipped to provide you the right arguments for and against true randomness existing within superplsition, only some guidance.
I’d suggest you look up how polarizing filters appear to violate the math for models in which quantum states are pre-defined, but not violate the math for models in which superposition is the actual state of the particles.
But mind that this is an extremely volatile field and anything you learn may be corrected, challenged, or fade out in popularity by next year if not proven through experiment and/or predictive power.
That is the simplest I can explain that, the following is more in depth, and less clear as this is my limited understanding.
Last year, local realism was disproven. My understanding of how is limited, and the following may be riddled with me misunderstanding a very complex topic, so please grain of salt on the following.
Locality means that nothing can influence a distant system faster than light can travel. This would mean reality happens at the speed of light, so when we look at the sun, we aren’t just getting the information of how it looked 8 minutes ago, that is how it currently exists in our reality. If the sun dissapeared, we would still feel its gravitational pull for 8 minutes from its perspective, it would still exist from our pov, and that pov is not less or more correct tha the sun’s.
Realism means that quantum particles do not have a set value before being observed (true randomness, as discussed before)
Local realism being disproven means that they can’t both be true at the same time in our universe.
This leads to 3 possibilities:
1. Locality and realism are both wrong: thiis is the least likely but coolest option, it would mean FTL information transfer is possible AND usable by people. If we are very optimistic, this could mean instant communication between long distances in space, as well as time travel. (By default, anything that can go FTL leads to some type of time travel)
2. Realism is true, locality is false: This would mean there is no true randomness, but that reality is simumtaneous anyway. This has interesting implications in time travel, but using it for practical reasons is less likely, this is the scenario I understand the least though so I may be missing the possibilities.
3. Realism is false, locality is true: This means no FTL travel or communication even if we figured out how to manipulate quantum entanglement and superposition, but it still leaves interesting implications on quantum computing, and philosophically speaking perhaps free will. (This is also true for scenario 1)
Latest Answers