If the universe is deterministic and you know your own future, could you change it?

Even if computers got powerful enough to factor in every minute detail possible, there would still be unseen factors that contribute to indeterminacy.

A great book by James Gleick called Chaos details a lot about the Butterfly Effect and unpredictable systems. It really helped me to understand this kind of stuff.

Knowing the future leads to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomb's_paradox
Someone (a god or a supercomputer) tells you what you're going to do in the next 10 minutes. The prediction has to take into account your reaction to this information. You can figure that out, so you might to something contrary just to prove the predictor wrong. HIS prediction then has to take THAT into account.
This leads to infinite regress.

Therefore perfect knowledge of the future is impossible to obtain, UNLESS you are somehow forced to do what's been predicted. This is determinism in the strictest sense and completely does away with chaos theory, free will, and quantum mechanics.

Those are deterministic. I.e. if you start in the exact same configuration, it will behave exactly the same each time. It's just really hard to model.

order/chaos exponential curves & the unsolved navier-stokes problem is relevant here. so you can to some degree - but control is illusory. but you can still act. so all you can really control is yourself. our freewill is limited to the realistic parameters of this dimensional existence but we can still act, however illusory.

But you CAN'T know or reproduce the exact same configuration. Hyperion is chaotic.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperion_(moon)
If you knew its position to sub-atomic dimensions and it velocity with comparable accuracy, you'd have no idea of its orientation a month or two from now.

Some systems are determinate -- but only in classical Newtonian Mechanics. (When I was a kid I was impressed by the Arisians in "Doc" Smith's Lensman books. They could tell a man that 5 years from NOW he'd be getting a haircut and the barber would have accidentally cut him in such-and-such a spot. Their computations included the fact that the guy would be really busy during those years and would have entirely forgotten the prediction until he was nicked.)

But that future is already formed by you knowing your future.

I think it's like the halting problem. If you take into account a set of future conditions, there's another condition outside of this set that you didn't account for.

In other words your ability to reason exceeds your ability to understand.

>my tiny brain won't allow me to fully understand the concept
>it's bullshit

y=control x=time
by living closer to the present moment you will find greater opportunity here instead of building castles in the sky, only to have them washed away by the tides of time. you can predict further into the future if you please, but the further along the x axis you travel the higher the risk of unseen factors knocking down your "plans" quickly rises.

No because it would be predestined that you'd learn of your future and change course.

the outcome of the deterministic function itself is a variable and will change the state of the system. it's impossible to take it into account, because this will be an infinite recursion.
it's only possible to determine the state of the system from outside of that system.

>But we also know for a fact that our universe is not deterministic
It's deterministic, but it has no future, so nothing to know until it happens.

>supercomputer
Your future is 42.

Can you not think about white monkey for the next 5 seconds?

solved it all, eat shit

>Just cause we might be unable to ever make perfect measurements means that reality as a whole is non-deterministic
Think about what you say for more than 10 seconds

>if you start in the exact same configuration, it will behave exactly the same each time.

I stand by my "only if classical" statement. Hidden variable models have been ruled out.
Results of an experiment can only be known probabilistically. It some cases that's good enough. In chaotic systems, like the weather or Hyperion, deviations will inevitably appear and grow.

If no one -- not even Laplace's Demon -- can compute the future to any arbitrary "distance" in time, I'd call that non-deterministic. Events of a nanosecond from now are highly probable. The further you go, the fuzzier things get.

>Not taking a detour to go round the nipples
One job

>Results of an experiment can only be known probabilistically
To us it might be probabilistic but we are inside the system and trying to predict the system. That doesnt mean that the system as a whole is probabilistic just that there might be a limit on the knowledge attainable while inside of it.

Many worlds is the only sound model, and it's deterministic.

>Many worlds

>But we also know for a fact that our universe is not deterministic, even though brains are for the most part.
brainlet detected

Many world is literally some made up mumbo jumbo to make autists who desperately yearn for order feel more comfortable. Hollow ramblings that aren't even science

Relevant: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace's_demon#Cantor_diagonalization

It doesn't mean that it isn't probabilistic either. We just can't know, every statement about the whole system is metaphysics.

That said, a system in which I can have free will and be able to create is obviously the better one, so I'd rather think it is probabilistic. Choose your metaphysics wisely, it's good for your mental health.

Well, reality agrees with me, that's what matters. What you yearn for is a question.
Also, quantum order is nothing like classic order, get education.

Absolute determinism is equivalent to the 4-dimensional "block universe". It extends from the Big Bang (or before) to the Heat Death (or after) and every event in space-time is embedded within, like objects in Lucite.
You're imagining entities who can "stand outside" the block and inspect any point -- though they can't change anything.

I can't prove such don't exist, no more than I can prove the universe isn't 10 minutes old, created complete with fossils, memories, and old starlight. You can't prove it the other way, so it's a philosophical dead-end. The only "evidence" either way is Occam's Razor. Why assume invisible somethings which can "stand outside"?

You would think you second guessed but the 'universe' already knew you would. Ergo you will never know.

> +Dimensionally

Yea not really anything thats provable however there isnt a need for "something" to stand outside and look at the system for the system to be deterministic.

>>reality agrees with me
>t sean carroll brainlet fan

The physical world is the convergence of all our wills combined. The collapse of the state of the physical world to the running one is because we interacted with it.

Determinism works in the thin regime of the world that has been forged to behave in a certain way by an engineer or a human being. Complex systems and open systems lack determinism due to their interaction with agents of will and consciousness.

Causality is a slight approximation of what is going on since we are not only existant on this time-instant. Our will and consciousness extends through time. The reality we are experiencing is the attachment of our etherical body to the physical world.

>tried to change it
The events leading to the "try" were already predetermined. I.e the synaptic potential that made you think and know can trace its direct cause back to the big bang. The saddest thing is that humans don't actually think and follow a completely unmovably predetermined course in relation to the rest of the universe. Basically what brainlets call fate.

>wills
>The collapse of the state of the physical world to the running one is because we interacted with it.
I cringed irl. At least finish your pop-sci video.

>That said, a system in which I can have free will and be able to create is obviously the better one, so I'd rather think it is probabilistic.
A probabilistic universe doesn´t allow for free will either. Thoughts spawning out of sheer chance or a causal chain results in the same outcome for you: an inability to will your own will.

Only a hypothetical all-powerful, all-knowing Creator, the originator of everything, could possess original will.

>When you have high verbal IQ but low spatial IQ

>think everything tv tells to think
>indoctrinated
>believe in free will
Imagine being this delusional. Everything you do is literally designed even if you have a supernatural soul that makes supernaturally indeterministic choices.

it could only be possible to accurately know your own future if that wouldnt lead to you changing it which is as good as impossible

No, but you can tilt it.

two possibilities:
The future you would know would be one that you couldn't or wouldn't change.
The future would instantly change the moment you started witnessing it.

>If you knew its position to sub-atomic dimensions and it velocity with comparable accuracy, you'd have no idea of its orientation a month or two from now.

This is what pop-sci actually believes

>Some systems are determinate -- but only in classical Newtonian Mechanics.

You need to learn about Hamiltonian mechanics.

>Lol, if double pendulums and three body interactions aren't deterministic how is the universe.Study phase space boy

you have no idea what the utility of phase space is if you think it that double pendulums and three body interactions are non-deterministic.

It's like you hear the words "non-analytic" and think that "analytic" means "deterministic"

If you know your future, all actions you may take to change it are already taken into account.

In some cases because of this it is impossible to know your future, for example if you do just the opposite of what it determined. In this case every result would make itself untrue in the moment you know about it.

On the other hand someone outside of the universe can know the future, if the universe is deterministic. Problem is, that the universe is not deterministic, as far as we know.

If you are falling off a cliff It is pretty clear you will drop to the bottom.