Fate?

[Iamdan]

I've always thought fate was an excuse people use when they are too weak to change their situation, but I was reading the dancing wu li masters (quite an interesting book) when a theory I read blew my mind.

 

 

 

Everyone knows that you can predict things such as moving objects. If you know the velocity, force, mass and friction of an object, you can know exactly where it will be at what speed at any time in the future.

 

 

 

Even now, trillions of objects are moving in the world, and with some information they can all be predicted. This means that five minutes ago, their position now was inevitable. This can go further and further back to the creation of the universe. Technically, this means our free will is an illusion and the ball was set in motion from the creation of the universe. Here's why:

 

 

 

Everything that goes on in our brain can be broken down to a subatomic level. Anything that can ever occur starts off with moving subatomic particles, which can hypothetically be predicted.

 

 

 

The thing is, one of the many contradictions to common sense in physics is relevant here: Both the position and momentum of a subatomic particle cannot be known to people. The accurate we get with one, the less accurate we get with the other. We can know the exact location, but we will have no idea about it's momentum. Nobody knows why, but that's just how it works. This also proves fortune tellers are quacks.

 

 

 

When you bring in that rule, we can't know that fate exists or not. We know that people cannot physically predict subatomic particles accurately, but we can't tell if they fall under the same laws as everything else in the universe. There is no reason why they shouldn't, but there is no way to prove it.

 

 

 

I had a theory that knowing the exact properties of a particle is impossible because it is influenced by other particles. This means it would be possible if we could monitor every particle in the universe and use complex algorithms to determine the momentum and position of all of them at the same time. Then and only then would we be able to determine the future.

 

 

 

Just like you can predict a probable outcome if you throw a ball at a certain speed, but to know for sure you have to know about the second ball hitting it which will change it's path.

 

 

 

I find it scary that there is a fair 50% chance that everything I do, think about and achieve could have been predetermined from the creation of the universe.

[Da Pirates]

that just hurt my brain :?

[Zierro]

I used to be big on fate, but there's this thing called the Double-Slit Experiment which really blew my mind and now I don't know what to believe.

[Cyco_Reborn]

That theory is rather obvious if you have a good, long, hard think about everything. It also helps if you can see into the future in your dreams, like me. :)

[Giordano]

Hmmm...I see what you mean, but I have a hard time understanding life into the equation. You're saying lifeforms and life are just the movements of sub-atomic particles moving and making reactions, etc...I just can't see life being so scientific though. Why can't 1 thing be a miracle of magic?

[ChaosFlames]

Glad i took ap physics B right now, I can pretty much have an idea as to what you're getting at.

 

 

 

Although it seems sorta far-fetched, its interesting nonetheless. Im not really big on fate though, so im kind of neutral atm as to your theory. :|

[llcoolguy972]

I've always found fate an interesting subject. Like if I'm fated to become a doctor, if I just piss around and don't go through college and med school, would it still happen? Would there be opportunities presented to 'correct' my path, or would I just wake up one day and be a doctor? But then the question of if I was actually fated to be a doctor or not is raised. Maybe I thought earlier events in my life were signs, but I misinterpreted them, and I was actually fated to waste my life waiting to become a doctor. Fate is very trippy, to say the least.

[klankaos]

No, he's saying that even your thoughts and decisions are fated. You won't KNOW that they're fated, but every motion you make is simply the reaction between subatomic particles in your brain causing other parts of your body to 'feel' or 'think'. Therefore, if we predicted the path of those subatomic particles, we would know exactly what would happen throughout your life.

[justin_m23]

I understand, and agree with what your saying. Although I think a lot of people are confusing your definition of fate with the Hollywood, "It's your destiny" sort of fate.

 

 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but here's what I think your saying:

 

 

 

Your saying that technically everything can be predicted, as every movement from an object or life form is a reaction from another. Essentially everything is just bouncing off one another, and with the right technology, this could observed and predictions could be made.

[Infi]

What does subatomic particles have to do with fate? Everything is completely up to you, your nerves send signals which make your brain operate and send blood to other parts of the body. Your thread is filled with 'what ifs' and hypothetical questions, you can't really take this seriously - no credibility present.

[Lenin64]

I've always thought fate was an excuse people use when they are too weak to change their situation, but I was reading the dancing wu li masters (quite an interesting book) when a theory I read blew my mind.

 

 

 

Everyone knows that you can predict things such as moving objects. If you know the velocity, force, mass and friction of an object, you can know exactly where it will be at what speed at any time in the future.

 

Yea, but if velocity and acceleration suddenly change, don't all your predictions go out the window?

[Iamdan]

What does subatomic particles have to do with fate? Everything is completely up to you, your nerves send signals which make your brain operate and send blood to other parts of the body. Your thread is filled with 'what ifs' and hypothetical questions, you can't really take this seriously - no credibility present.

 

 

 

Seriously.. If you don't understand the thread then don't post.

 

 

 

Moving particles causes nerves to send signals, everything stays at it's current state unless it's acted upon. It's not what if, it's logic.

 

 

 

Your saying that technically everything can be predicted, as every movement from an object or life form is a reaction from another. Essentially everything is just bouncing off one another, and with the right technology, this could observed and predictions could be made.

 

 

 

Yeah this is basically it.

 

 

 

 

Everyone knows that you can predict things such as moving objects. If you know the velocity, force, mass and friction of an object, you can know exactly where it will be at what speed at any time in the future.

 

Yea, but if velocity and acceleration suddenly change, don't all your predictions go out the window?

 

 

 

How can they change unless they are acted upon? If you throw a ball and somebody else throws a ball that collides with it, as long as you knew about the other ball you can precisely predict both balls path, as well as anything else they might hit.

[Nenga]

Sure throwing a ball in a straight line, another can change its course, then another ball can change it back. There are many possibilities to this.

 

 

 

Fate is the name humans give to the certain sequence of events. If it falls together like that it was fated to. Look at it from a different perspective though. Humans are the only 'intelligent' life on this planet. Now common sense would tell us that we are the odd ones out. Fate goes both ways, it could have been fated that we came to exist, thus proving fate, or it could be fated earth went on naturally and then we came along, thus disproving it.

 

 

 

Fate, god, destiny. The thing that makes them all alike is that they are all names we give to the possibilities of things that fell into place. There is no way to prove fate, or to disprove it. In the end its if you want to believe you have power over your life or not. Most people don't believe they have power over themselves and are happy.

[Saru Inc]

Glad i took ap physics B right now, I can pretty much have an idea as to what you're getting at.

 

 

 

Although it seems sorta far-fetched, its interesting nonetheless. Im not really big on fate though, so im kind of neutral atm as to your theory. :|

 

 

 

 

 

I'm in regular physics and I knew what he was talking about.

 

 

 

 

 

One problem: I know, at least for me, when I speak about fate or others, it's more mental than physical. If you know what I mean, 'oh it was fate that made us meet' no physics involved in that.

 

 

 

And also, what about the creation of new objects?

[Iamdan]

 

And also, what about the creation of new objects?

 

 

 

It's the same thing. Nothing can happen without a trigger.

 

 

 

To make a car, once you get past all the machines it comes from ideas which comes from moving particles. If a number of chemicals create something, it's still based on moving particles. How they came to mix is also based on moving particles.

[Rebdragon]

I've always clinged to the belief that fate exists, that all actions are predetermined by the laws of cause and effect, but at the same time no being but one at the level of the God of religion could ever utilize this fact to any end.

[l0rd]

If you were able to "predict the future paths of all the particles in the universe" why couldn't we change it. Is that not in itself free-will?

[Infi]

What does subatomic particles have to do with fate? Everything is completely up to you, your nerves send signals which make your brain operate and send blood to other parts of the body. Your thread is filled with 'what ifs' and hypothetical questions, you can't really take this seriously - no credibility present.

 

 

 

Seriously.. If you don't understand the thread then don't post.

 

 

 

Moving particles causes nerves to send signals, everything stays at it's current state unless it's acted upon. It's not what if, it's logic.

 

 

Umm, what? That's not 'fate' as you call it then, it's just the future. Fate is fictitious for those who choose to believe in it or not. Everything is going to happen, based on your choice. It is not pre-determined, but it occurs when it occurs.

 

If you were able to "predict the future paths of all the particles in the universe" why couldn't we change it. Is that not in itself free-will?

 

Exactly. But the OP is probably going to say that it was in our fate to change it. :roll:

[Iamdan]

If you were able to "predict the future paths of all the particles in the universe" why couldn't we change it. Is that not in itself free-will?

 

 

 

The decision to change it comes from moving particles. :lol:

[venomai]

Life is chaotic and ever-changing. It can't be predicted in the same way that we predict mathematical problems.

 

 

 

A car driving at a constant rate for x period of time may have a predictable outcome, but that doesn't mean we can predict the outcome of unfortunate accidents, missed turns, a required detour, picking up a hitchhiker, or anything else of the sort.

[Iamdan]

 

Umm, what? That's not 'fate' as you call it then, it's just the future. Fate is fictitious for those who choose to believe in it or not. Everything is going to happen, based on your choice. It is not pre-determined, but it occurs when it occurs.

 

 

 

It's ok, you don't understand it. Don't worry about it.

 

 

 

Life is chaotic and ever-changing. It can't be predicted in the same way that we predict mathematical problems.

 

 

 

A car driving at a constant rate for x period of time may have a predictable outcome, but that doesn't mean we can predict the outcome of unfortunate accidents, missed turns, a required detour, picking up a hitchhiker, or anything else of the sort.

 

 

 

I'm talking about it being pre determined, rather than being able to predict it. If you are going to argue a theory about sub atomic particles, don't argue about objects and people. I'm just using real life objects to help explain what's going on with the particles.

[venomai]

I'm talking about it being pre determined, rather than being able to predict it.

 

You wrote a fair bit about predictions. I'm not sure I see the connection...

 

 

 

If you are going to argue a theory about sub atomic particles, don't argue about objects and people.

 

What? Where am I arguing about subatomic particles? And why should a theory of subatomic particles not be applicable to macroscopic objects?

[justin_m23]

The mistake most of you are making is that you believe there are some things that are unpredictable. That is incorrect. Everything is can be measured and predicted, although a lot of those things would be highly impractical to measure accurately and reliably as too many factors would need to be taken into account.

 

 

 

But Dan's point is that its possible.

[Iamdan]

I'm talking about it being pre determined, rather than being able to predict it.

 

You wrote a fair bit about predictions. I'm not sure I see the connection...

 

I just stated some facts, I didn't mention anything about prediction until after I said "I have a theory..." The theory is impossible to prove or disprove until more is discovered, which is why there isn't much point debating it.

 

 

 

If you are going to argue a theory about sub atomic particles, don't argue about objects and people.

 

What? Where am I arguing about subatomic particles? And why should a theory of subatomic particles not be applicable to macroscopic objects?

 

 

 

I was talking about the behavior of particles determining macroscopic objects, it doesn't make sense to say the particle behavior is impossible because of your opinion on macroscopic objects.

[venomai]

The mistake most of you are making is that you believe there are some things that are unpredictable. That is incorrect. Everything is can be measured and predicted, although a lot of those things would be highly impractical to measure accurately and reliably as too many factors would need to be taken into account.

 

Sometimes the degree of certainty is not high enough to consider an event predictable. In such a situation, it becomes mere guesswork.

 

 

 

I just stated some facts, I didn't mention anything about prediction until after I said "I have a theory..."

 

Uhh... Read your original post again.

 

 

 

I was talking about the behavior of particles determining macroscopic objects, it doesn't make sense to say the particle behavior is impossible because of your opinion on macroscopic objects.

 

I'm confused as hell. What is my opinion on macroscopic objects, and where am I saying the particle behaviour is impossible?