Posted: Oct 13, 2017 8:05 am
John Platko wrote:
It should be obvious why List's paper was about Free Will, ...
That is, any two histories that coincide up to time t are identical in their entirety; so the world history up to any point in time t fully determines its continuation. Indeterminism is the negation of this thesis.
But List discarded the fine grained difference that allowed deterministic physical histories to end up in different agential states and then tried to claim it was some property of agents, without ever specifying that property or justifying it.
In short he called coarse-grained states "identical" over a small interval when they were clearly not identical over a larger interval and his selection of intervals was arbitrary. That's a form of cherry picking. We expect that sort of thing from Client Change deniers but what is it doing here?
John Platko wrote:And, there was a feeling of: how does all this branching history stuff connect to reality and real physics?
There was that too, but mostly there was a felling of how does all this get us to free will?
John Platko wrote:I'll let the readers of your many comments about the many world class scientists whose work I presented in this thread and others judge if you were disparaging them or not.
I read them as criticism of your attempts to present physics / physicists as supporting your vague notions of free will rather than a criticism of actual physics or physicists. Join the dots!