free will

Several string theories have brought this into question, according to the mathematics. And some observational evidence also lends to suspicion.

Ratio of proton mass to the electron

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9033-another-fundamental-constant-accused-of-changing.html

Evolving speed of light

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/constant_changing_010815.html

 

Interesting stuff on the speed of light.

 

the laws being timeless and immutable doesn't mean that the effects are constant or that we have it all figured out. indeed, those two articles are simply fleshing out the understanding of those laws a bit more -- like going from newtonian gravitational models to einstein's general relativity.

if the speed of light started at one value and has ended up with another value today, then there'd be some reason for the change. what is the speed of light based on? is it the size of the universe? some kind of universal density of subatomic matter? interference? when (if) it gets sorted out, i doubt the answer is anything but some other deterministic equation.

 

Which "laws" are you referring to? These are just data points, fundamental data points to the structure of the universe.

The analogy of the Newtonian equations, such as his inverse square "law" of gravity, still works on a day to day basis. We know it is not actually "true" when objects are pressed to the speed of light or near a much much heavier object but they still work the majority of the time (the exact orbit of Mercury notwithstanding). (The exact orbit of Mercury was one of the experiments that lent evidence to general relativity.)

Which brings into question the literacy of colloquial terms such as "timeless" or "immutable."

That is the premise of the hypothesis coming from observational data and predicted by at least two versions of string theory based on Calabi-Yau spaces (folded dimensions on each point of normal space, basically).

I agree it is causal. I suspect it is based on the persistent energy field of empty space (the source of virtual particles and spontaneous electron-positron formations/annihilations), as all energetic "objects", including photons from distant stars and anything with mass, need a medium through which to propagate relative to other positions. This cosmological constant was originally proposed and discarded by Einstein but has enjoyed a resurgence in the past couple of decades. Alter the cosmological constant and you alter the propagation of energy through it (my untested hypothesis). But energy is of course also influenced in its travels by gravity and deflection by normal matter.

 

my basic point was that there are laws and those laws themselves don't suddenly change for no reason. they might describe "things" that change (the speed of light, cosmological "constants", etc) but the laws themselves don't. any alteration made to them is simply us learning more as we go.

back to gravity, there isn't a law of gravity that is newtonian and then some law of something else that contorts the law of gravity in certain circumstances. gravity is what it is and anything that helps to determine its affect on bodies is something we'd wrap into our description of gravity itself.

 

I guess my issue is with the terminology; laws, immutable, timeless. Nature has processes, humans make laws. And the idea relates to the values of some of the base components of those processes evolving with time.

I agree that gravity is what it is, but how do you represent it symbolically so that you can do calculations?

You can use Newton's simple gravitation equation and be mostly right to a few decimal places:


Or you can use Einstein's more complicated field equation and be slightly more right (as long as you are not on the quantum level):


Either "works" more or less. But they are not laws or timeless or immutable.

 

sure. language sort of fails in here. laws, forces, reality... whatever word you'd use...

sure. but those equations are merely our best guesses of what's actually happening at the time they were formulated. my belief is that what actually IS happening is truly timeless and immutable and our ability to see it gets better occasionally so we see another aspect of it and adjust our equations accordingly.

 

Nothing is set in stone. However destiny will always have it's way!
It is scary for people to believe that hey have no control over what they do in this lifetime. The belief in free will allows people to have control. If you believe everything is all planed out then nothing you do matters because you will end up in the same place you were meant to be in anyhow. I believe that you have some control over what you do but for the most part the choices you make will lead you to the same stopping point no matter what choices they are. I guess you can say I believe in destiny. I have had way to many coincidences happen that led to something happening that should by all rights never have happened because of the choices I made. One good example is how I found imonlyhuman. Neither of us was actively looking for the other. We live in different states. My dad got married to a woman who had a daughter who had a friend for years who happened to be related to imonlyhuman's family. It took almost 10 years of me going to my stepsisters house before I ran into her friend who happened to be related to imonlyhuman's family. She looked at me said I know you. I looked her laughed and said no you don't. She said then I know who you are related to. I said yep you are talking to her(my step sister). I am adopted so I doubt it. She went on the computer showed me imonlyhuman's picture and well you all pretty much know the rest. Tell me that was not destiny. Everything happens in your life for a reason. Even if it is to help someone else. Or at least that is what I believe!

 

Heh. Quantum destiny is random. Plug that one into a corner of your pentagram.

 

Done. Now can you please explain what Quantum destiny is? Tried to look it up but just like all the evil crap people associate with the pentagram, it made no sense to me. I was never very book smart.... maybe that is why I do not understand.