Lorraine,
I've copied your post and used it to start a new thread ... I'm pretty sure that was my choice:-) My question was simply about the difference between dimension 4 in QM vs dimension 4 in GR.
"Tom, Gary and others,
I studied physics at university. But I'm not suggesting for one moment that that gives me the right to comment, and that others who didn't study physics at university don't have the right, others who are concerned with different aspects of the nature of reality to me.
But I challenge those who take the philosophical stance that reality is like an idealized mathematical system to understand that they have in fact taken a philosophical stance.
They have chosen the philosophical stance that Vietnam was inevitable: none of the many millions of individual "choices" and outcomes could have ever been different. They have taken the philosophical stance that individuals don't matter because they have no ability to make a skerrick of difference to this idealized mathematical system: the rigid mathematical structure has no structural opportunities or openings whereby individuals could ever make any difference to inevitable outcomes in physical reality"
My personal objectives at the moment are simply to understand better the geometry of Hamilton and if possible extend that geometry to physical reality. The issue that you present is quite a bit beyond that. I tend to avoid subjects wherein I consider myself to be not competent.
I will simply ask one question and give my interpretation. Is there an experiment that can be performed that will distinguish between determinism and free will? I don't think there is. Remember, we can only empirically prove that something is false by presenting contrary evidence
If determinism were true then it would always produce the same result that 'free will' produces since 'free will' would be an illusion. Is there any experiment that can prove that determinism is false? I think science does not have the methodology to falsify the hypothesis of determinism.
If free will were true, then a choice must have a measureable effect on the outcome of an experiment. Any experiment must still produce a result that is consistent with physical laws. So it would be necessary to conduct an experiment and make more than one choice. The difficulty is that we do experiments with inanimate things that don't make choices. So somehow the experimenter must become part of the experiment. And the experimental outcome must falsify the free will hypothesis. So basically, an experiment with random choices must produce the same result as an experiment where the experimenter uses his or her free will as a part of the experiment. If these two experiments produce the same result then the free will hypothesis would be false.
To me, any other approach is not science.
Also, keep in mind that sometimes it really does not matter what choices you make, the outcome will be the same irrespective of your choices. For example, if a high school football team plays the super bowl champion, it makes no difference what choices the high school team makes, the outcome will still be a defeat for them. This does not mean the high school team does not have free will. It simply means that their free will (if they have it) will not affect the outcome of the game.
That's my two cents ...
Best Regards,
Gary Simpson