Could the uncertainty principle and the idea of freewill be related?

Question:we hear that god is the alpha and omega, and knows all and how things will turn out. also we hear of freewill. how can both be true? if the uncertainty principle breaks down upon the act of observing....ok....somebody bail me out here. not sure what i'm going for.

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: we hear that god is the alpha and omega, and knows all and how things will turn out. also we hear of freewill. how can both be true? if the uncertainty principle breaks down upon the act of observing....ok....somebody bail me out here. not sure what i'm going for.

The act of observing is overrated in the uncertainty principle. Interaction is all that's necessary to collapse the wavefunction, not any kind of scentient observation. Here's what you need to know about it from a philosophy perspective:

There are two versions of the uncertainty principle. Weak uncertainty says that there are certain properties of matter that we cannot know at once. Strong uncertainty says that there is no fact of the matter about those properties and they are settled later at random, according to the probabilities of quantum mechanics. Shocking many, Bell actually came up with an experiment that proved the strong uncertainty principle. The consequence is that Bell proved the universe is not deterministic, but rather their is quantum uncertainty in the world.

Now quantum mechanics opperates at a very fine level. The theoretical uncertainty is miniscule. However, chaos theory describes the way any difference in initial conditions leads to a substantial difference at some point down the line. The weather is a classic example of something chaotic. The small uncertainty in, for example, the position and momentum of the individual particles that make up the atmosphere makes the weather a year from now not only unpredictable, but undetermined.

Generally, the more degrees of freedom in a system, the more likely it is to be chaotic. Most systems with more than 3 degrees of freedom are chaotic. Each neural network in the brain has about 100 degrees of freedom. Thus, it is almost guaranteed that the brain is chaotic. Artificail neural networks sometimes are not, but an organic neural network is almost certainly free, in the sense that chaos magnifies quantum uncertainty.

The will is the process of decision making, which is a brain function. That process is free, as in undetermined. Hence there is a sense that exists in the world in which the will is free. The only remaining question then is whether this sense of freedom of the will fits our conception of free will. I argue that it does. On this sense of free will, we are literally self-determining systems. Our free choices make future choices more or less likely. We are influenced by outside conditions and genetics, of course. We don't have Sartre's radical freedom, but still choices are, in a very real way, up to us. They are determined within the system that is ourselves. Our choices make us who we are, which in turn makes our future choices more or less likely.
This conception is also a sensible basis for some aspects of moral philosophy, in terms of accountability, but I won't go into that here.

As for the part about God knowing how all things will turn out, that is incompatible with Bell's theorem. Bell proved that omniscience is impossible. That won't stop believers in God from believing God is omniscient. I have some other arguments about that, but they wouldn't be effective for that purpose either, so I won't go into them unless specifically asked.

Hope that helps.

No.

You are mixing physics and philosophy.

When you do that you get nonsense like the movie "What The *&^% Do We Know?" and other New Age crap.

Based on what I have learned about this, God is all knowing. However, He gives us choices to accept Him and live a life pleasing to Him or not. This to me means we are accountable for our actions (freewill). However, if we know and have accepted the Lord Jesus Christ as our personal Savior, we then are able to expect to "hear" from Him and look for Him to direct our path. Perhaps you should give more definition to 'uncertainty principle' and your definition of freewill.

We do not 'know' that God is alpha and omega. This is a man-conceived idea. So the idea that 'something' knows how things will turn out is also man-conceived.

Research into sub-atomic physics (quantum physics/quantum theory) reveals that particles can 'decide' to be a wave or a particle seemingly at random, which philosophically speaking, makes the world of the sub-atomic appear to be a type of free will.

But perhaps not; the particle may make a 'choice' depending on the type of outcome required.

How about a universe that is neither 'fixed' or 'random' but reinvents itself milli-second to milli-second based on the best choice from all possible combinations
at the time? Something like a gigantic uncomprehensible chess game?

Cheers.

First God and free will.
The Creator is the still, unchanging center from whom emanates all the energy to keep the lights on in this universe. "Should I withdraw My hand...." the lights go out. Therefore He created not only space but also time. He stands outside his creation of time and is not subject to it. Therefore he sees the first and the last in a gestalt fashion, all at once. But remember, He is omnipresent, so the created realm exists within the creative realm.

We here in the physical universe are subject to time. We don't know how the movie turns out yet.

Now, to Heinenberg. He wrote in German. "uncertainty" is the word the English world has chosen, but in German the word he used is "inexactness".

And as much as I have for many years preached the doctrine of "you get what you expect to see" and "we create our own reality" and all that, you've got to remember that the world of quantum is not our world.

Meaning that these quantum guys are mathmeticians. "The act of observing" doesn't really apply to you and me, the act of observing has to do with them trying to home in on a slippery slope of statistical data. The more you know about THIS the less you know about THAT.

The reason is that they're not dealing with ping pong balls, they're dealing with waves of energy they can barely attempt to define.

What I'm trying to say is that yes, we have free will. And yes we can change our reality, but it must be done on a practical everyday level. Incremental changes are cumulative. Yes, we can "use The Force", for it is here to be used by us. But we humans are so clumsy, so ham-handed, that the uncertainty principle is of little use to us.

Darnit, spellcheck not working again. Hope it's not too bad.

EDIT: Bell proved that omniscience is impossible? Reminds me of something written on a bathroom wall:
God is dead -Nietzsche-
Nietzsche is dead -God-

My personal understanding is that ...there are no guarantees....otherwise it would not be a "freely willed" experience.
The starting point and the finish line do exist...and yet, we remain somehow....alive in this continuum.
--------------------------------------...

"You are given the Gift of the Gods.
You Create your reality according to your beliefs.
Yours is the creative energy that makes your world.
There are no limitations to the Self....except those that you believe in."

(Freely willed Love and Peace to You.)