Quantum Suicide

[Partinobodycula]

I suppose that I could have given this thread a somewhat less dramatic title, but I decided to go with something that would get people’s attention. I also could have gone with a title having to do with free will and predestination, because that’s really what this thread is about, but that wouldn’t have been nearly as attention grabbing. So I went with the Quantum Suicide thing. I’m also not sure if this is the correct forum, but seeing as how there is no science forum here, this seemed to be the most appropriate location. After all, it does have to do with free will, predestination, and salvation.

I’m not sure if everyone is familiar with the concept of quantum suicide, so let me see if I can explain. Quantum suicide is a thought experiment that emerged from the Schrodinger’s Cat paradox. In Schrodinger’s Cat we put a cat in a box with a device set to detect the decay of an unstable atom. If the atom decays, a device is triggered which breaks a vile of poison, killing the cat. If the atom doesn’t decay then the cat escapes unharmed. According to quantum physics, until we open the box and look inside, the cat isn’t either dead or alive, but it is in fact both dead and alive at the same time. This is exactly what quantum physics seems to show. In fact quantum computers are based upon this strange quantum behavior. Quantum computing relies upon a system being in two opposite states at the same time. Like our cat being both dead and alive.

Now this is where quantum suicide comes in. Suppose that I decide to commit sucide. I load a revolver with six shells, put the gun to my head and pull the trigger. Lo and behold, the gun misfires. I mumble a few words about my rotten luck, put a new shell in that chamber, put the gun to my head, and pull the trigger again. Well wouldn’t you just know it, the gun misfires again. What are the odds of that happening? So once again I reload the gun, put it to my head and pull the trigger. Can you guess what happens? Yup, it misfires. No matter how many times I try, something will always prevent me from dying. So just what is going on here?

Well according to quantum physics, when I put the gun to my head and pull the trigger, there is a very good probability that the gun will go off and I’ll be dead. But there is also a very slight possibility that the gun will misfire and I’ll survive. According to some interpretations of quantum physics, just like with the systems in a quantum computer, both of these things actually occur. In most realities the gun goes off, and I die. But there will always be a small number of realities in which the gun misfires and I survive. The problem is, that I will only be aware of those realities in which I survive. As far as my consciousness is concerned, the realities in which I died no longer exist. Thus I will always survive. I can choose to try and kill myself, but quantum physics assures that I will never succeed.

Now from my perspective as the one attempting to commit suicide, it might appear that I am predestined to survive, but it’s not really a matter of predestination, it’s just the nature of quantum physics. I will always survive. But what does this have to do with free will and salvation?

Well we all make choices in our lives, and some of those choices ultimately lead us down a path to our eternal salvation, and some of those choices lead us down a path to our death. But if quantum physics is correct, then we will never be aware of those paths which lead to our death. The only paths of which we will ever be aware, are the ones that lead to eternal life. We have free will. We can choose whichever path we like, in fact, according to quantum physics, we choose them all, but the only ones that remain, are the ones in which we survive.

So if quantum physics is true, then God both predestined our salvation, and gave us free will, at the same time. We choose every path, but the only ones that survive, are the ones that lead to Him. We can choose a path that leads to hell, but we will never get there. God created the world in such a way that He could give us free will, and He could assure our salvation, both at the same time.

So whadd’ya think? Can we have both predestination and free will?

 

[OscarsMama]

.

I think that you are trying to logically explain God. I have tried that a ton of times. It never works. You can never get an answer that feels right.

But…

Did God MAKE us to be predestined toward salvation with him? Yes, I believe he did. Did he also give us the choice to turn away from that? Yes, I believe he did. He will always take us back if we turn back to him, but if we turn away and never look back, then it is our choice. I do not believe that we are BOTH predestined and free will. We were made for salvation and destined for salvation, but anything along the path ie: our choices, can turn us away from that.

That is not the same thing as the cat. The cat in the box didn’t have a CHOICE. He was in a box. There was poision, etc. We are NOT in a box. We are in the world. Despite what many think: the world is NOT a box, NOT a fish bowl, NOT a pot of boiling water, etc. It is the world. Our choices make our path. God cleared a path to himself at the beginning, but allowed us the ability to get off of it. The cat can’t say “um, let me out.”

To many, my answer might seem simple or kind of lame. But I have spent many many hours :compcoff:thinking up all this stuff (just like you!! ), but the simple answer is the best one.

 

[OscarsMama]

Oh yeah, what is a “solipsist”???

 

[farpinho]

Oh yeah, what is a “solipsist”???

It’s the belief that anything outside your own mind is unsure (the only thing you can be really sure about is what’s inside your own mind).

 

[Gods_Peace]

It’s the belief that anything outside your own mind is unsure (the only thing you can be really sure about is what’s inside your own mind).

That must be scary

 

[Partinobodycula]

That must be scary

You might think that it would be, but it’s not. Solipsism gives me a great appreciation of life, and those with whom I share it.

People also tend to think that a solipsist would be a bit egotistical and self-righteous, but that too is far from true. At least in my case.

I consider life to be a gift, and both its triumphs and trials to be embraced as such.

 

[Alberti_Devoveo]

I’m not sure if everyone is familiar with the concept of quantum suicide, so let me see if I can explain. Quantum suicide is a thought experiment that emerged from the Schrodinger’s Cat paradox. In Schrodinger’s Cat we put a cat in a box with a device set to detect the decay of an unstable atom. If the atom decays, a device is triggered which breaks a vile of poison, killing the cat. If the atom doesn’t decay then the cat escapes unharmed.

Yes.

According to quantum physics, until we open the box and look inside, the cat isn’t either dead or alive, but it is in fact both dead and alive at the same time.

Not really. The Schroedinger cat thought experiment was an idea to that we do not know the state of a particle (experiment) until we test it. And by testing it, we destroy the states is could have been in favor for the state it is in (with some influence from the testing apparatus). The cat is not both dead and alive, but could be either dead or alive. Distinct difference that needs to be made.

This is exactly what quantum physics seems to show. In fact quantum computers are based upon this strange quantum behavior. Quantum computing relies upon a system being in two opposite states at the same time. Like our cat being both dead and alive.

No. Quantum computing relies on the fact that superposition holds: any two orthogonal eigenvectors and be summed to make a new eigenvector. A quantum computer will have, essentially, an infinite number of states to possibly be in.

Now this is where quantum suicide comes in. Suppose that I decide to commit sucide. I load a revolver with six shells, put the gun to my head and pull the trigger. Lo and behold, the gun misfires. I mumble a few words about my rotten luck, put a new shell in that chamber, put the gun to my head, and pull the trigger again. Well wouldn’t you just know it, the gun misfires again. What are the odds of that happening? So once again I reload the gun, put it to my head and pull the trigger. Can you guess what happens? Yup, it misfires. No matter how many times I try, something will always prevent me from dying. So just what is going on here?

I would say the pin is the problem.

Well according to quantum physics, when I put the gun to my head and pull the trigger, there is a very good probability that the gun will go off and I’ll be dead.

Classical physics says that, not quantum physics. In fact, once you have more than 2 to 5 particles interaction, you are no longer dealing with quantum physics. When you have large numbers of particles (in the billions and above), you have a classical system. Quantum physics deals with atomic particles, once you step past that you are, by definition, not dealing with quantum physics.

But there is also a very slight possibility that the gun will misfire and I’ll survive.

Statistics and mechanics, not quantum physics.

According to some interpretations of quantum physics, just like with the systems in a quantum computer, both of these things actually occur.

As far as I am aware, quantum mechanics is not the branch of science that deals with multiverse theories.

In most realities the gun goes off, and I die. But there will always be a small number of realities in which the gun misfires and I survive. The problem is, that I will only be aware of those realities in which I survive. As far as my consciousness is concerned, the realities in which I died no longer exist. Thus I will always survive. I can choose to try and kill myself, but quantum physics assures that I will never succeed.

Unprovable circumstances. There is no way to verify it, so it cannot be anything more than a hypothesis.

Now from my perspective as the one attempting to commit suicide, it might appear that I am predestined to survive, but it’s not really a matter of predestination, it’s just the nature of quantum physics. I will always survive. But what does this have to do with free will and salvation?

Assuming pre-destination works and that it is not the more likely case of a malfunctioning gun. Which still does not matter, since quantum physics, as stated above, does not deal with macroscopic materials.

Well we all make choices in our lives, and some of those choices ultimately lead us down a path to our eternal salvation, and some of those choices lead us down a path to our death. But if quantum physics is correct, then we will never be aware of those paths which lead to our death. The only paths of which we will ever be aware, are the ones that lead to eternal life. We have free will. We can choose whichever path we like, in fact, according to quantum physics, we choose them all, but the only ones that remain, are the ones in which we survive.

Actually, I believe classical physics, relativity, and astrophysics say that we cannot be aware of the future because of causality. Since there is only one and only one reality, then we cannot possibly choose all paths except for the ones in which we survive, especially since people die.

So if quantum physics is true, then God both predestined our salvation, and gave us free will, at the same time. We choose every path, but the only ones that survive, are the ones that lead to Him. We can choose a path that leads to hell, but we will never get there. God created the world in such a way that He could give us free will, and He could assure our salvation, both at the same time.

Whether quantum physics is true or not, God exists outside of our time-space manifold, so He does indeed know where we will go. And he gave us free will to choose where we go. And he gave us a finite life-time to make this choice.

So whadd’ya think? Can we have both predestination and free will?

I think your theory is a bunch of nonsense since you do not understand quantum physics at all. They are contradictory ideas, so we cannot have predestination and free will.

 

[Partinobodycula]

I think that you are trying to logically explain God. I have tried that a ton of times. It never works. You can never get an answer that feels right.

As a solipsist I always try to explain things logically. It’s my nature I suppose.

It’s also in my nature to have faith and acceptance. Faith, that if their is a God, that He will have more in the grace to forgive, than I lack in the faith to believe. And acceptance of whatever my fate may be.

I realize that my attempt to logically combine free will with predetermination may seem a bit labored, and not be aesthetically pleasing to many. But I do not advocate it as any real truth, simply as an interesting observation. The kind that many of us are prone to make, and so I thought that I would share it. For those of who enjoy pondering such things.

 

[Touchstone]

Not really. The Schroedinger cat thought experiment was an idea to that we do not know the state of a particle (experiment) until we test it. And by testing it, we destroy the states is could have been in favor for the state it is in (with some influence from the testing apparatus). The cat is not both dead and alive, but could be either dead or alive. Distinct difference that needs to be made.

I believe that is quite incorrect. The concept of superposition is not a “could”, but the combination of “is”. Dead and alive in the same sense at the same time. That’s why quantum physics is so mind-bending – as you have it, it’s not problematic at all. Quantum superposition is the principle that a particular, or part of a system, exists in all theoretically possible states, at the same time. It’s only when a particular resolution is required by outside factors that superposition collapses into a discrete state for the particle. But when in superposition, the particle exists in all possible states simultaneously (hence the name!).

On the Copenhagen Interpretation, at least (and even in other interpretations, this reduces to semantic nuances), the cat IS dead and alive at the same time, if it is in superposition.

No. Quantum computing relies on the fact that superposition holds: any two orthogonal eigenvectors and be summed to make a new eigenvector. A quantum computer will have, essentially, an infinite number of states to possibly be in.

Note that this is an adequate refutation of the distinction you made just above. The reason you can combine eigenvectors is because the electron (for example) in question doesn’t cease to exist, but continues to exist in superposition, that is, it exists in all possible states. If you doubt that implication, just consider the negation: if superposition is just the possible states an electron could exist in, the electron does not exist in superposition, as “could” is a hypothetical construct. In superposition, the electron exists, but as diffused array of all possible states. It’s actual across all those states, not “non-existent” until some event forces decoherence, and, on that model, the electron “coming into existence again”.

Classical physics says that, not quantum physics. In fact, once you have more than 2 to 5 particles interaction, you are no longer dealing with quantum physics. When you have large numbers of particles (in the billions and above), you have a classical system. Quantum physics deals with atomic particles, once you step past that you are, by definition, not dealing with quantum physics.

The whole point of the Schrödinger’s Cat thought experiment is that quantum events can have macroscopic effects. That’s why Schrödinger deployed a geiger counter triggering a hydrocyanic poison. That is a quantum even (the isotope decay event) triggering macroscopic, large scale results.

And I think it’s misleading to say that at macros scales we aren’t dealing with quantum physics. We are always dealing with quantum physics, at any and all scales. It’s just that as the scale increases, the probabilities quickly grow to produce regularity and reliability that we treat as macro-physics. Again, this is a profound point from Schrödinger. It’s all quantum effects, but probabilities coalesce at “human scales” such that this is not readily apparent.

As far as I am aware, quantum mechanics is not the branch of science that deals with multiverse theories.

Quantum mechanics is THE catalyst for other universes in science. There have long been conjectures about external universes, apart from quantum physics, but no physical model requires or entails such, regardless of our inability to ever verify or falsify such a conjecture. But the “Many Worlds Interpretation” (MWI) entails the forking of whole universes rather than wavefunction collapse, which is the view under the Copenhagen Interpretation. MWI posits quantum decoherence instead of wavefunction collapse, and this means that for each resolution, whole worlds divide across all possible states of resolution. MWI may not be the right interpretation, but as a mainstream interpretation, it entails the existence of uncountably many universes, with uncountably more being forked with every new moment of macroscale change and interaction.

Assuming pre-destination works and that it is not the more likely case of a malfunctioning gun. Which still does not matter, since quantum physics, as stated above, does not deal with macroscopic materials.

See above. This is misleading, if not outright wrong.

Whether quantum physics is true or not, God exists outside of our time-space manifold, so He does indeed know where we will go. And he gave us free will to choose where we go. And he gave us a finite life-time to make this choice.

Doesn’t “outside” entail a space-time context? “Outside” and “before” are not meaningful except within a space/time context!

I think your theory is a bunch of nonsense since you do not understand quantum physics at all. They are contradictory ideas, so we cannot have predestination and free will.

I am not sure what Partinobodycula is advancing here, and suspect I wouldn’t agree with it if I understood. But this set of “corrections/clarifications” you are offering serves only to make things more confused and dislocated from quantum theory.

-TS

 

[Partinobodycula]

I think your theory is a bunch of nonsense since you do not understand quantum physics at all. They are contradictory ideas, so we cannot have predestination and free will.

Forgive me if I do not answer each of your points individually. Suffice it for me to conclude that you are not a fan of MWI. (Just between you and me, I’m not either)

If I had been posting this on PF I would have tried to be more technically explicit. Still I do believe that the scenario does hold, allowing of course for opposing interpretations of QM. I do of course concur that the most likely cause of the misfire lies with the pin.

I have no desire though, to argue the merits of any particular interpretation of QM. I’m content to leave it to the readers of this thread to decide for themselves. They’re a fairly intelligent lot.

I posted this only with the hope of fomenting consideration and discussion, and so I sincerely thank you for presenting an opposing point of view. As for my not understanding quantum physics at all, I’m sure that Richard Feynman would probably agree with you, and so who am I to object.

 

[yellow8yellowM]

As far as my consciousness is concerned, the realities in which I died no longer exist. Thus I will always survive. I can choose to try and kill myself, but quantum physics assures that I will never succeed.

I’m pretty sure that this has been tested empirically. People died.

 

[Partinobodycula]

I am not sure what Partinobodycula is advancing here, and suspect I wouldn’t agree with it if I understood. But this set of “corrections/clarifications” you are offering serves only to make things more confused and dislocated from quantum theory.

-TS

Touchstone, you know, I’m really not too crazy about the whole Quantum suicide thing myself, and I’m certainly not going to test it. I’m content in knowing that I’ll find out soon enough. But like Schrodinger’s cat, it makes for an interesting thought experiment, and does hold some intriguing implications for the conflicting ideas of free will and predestination.

Oh and thanks for taking the time to respond to AD’s post, I just wasn’t up to it.

 

[Partinobodycula]

I’m pretty sure that this has been tested empirically. People died.

Yes they have, but I haven’t. The quantum suicide thought experiment says nothing about whether other people can die in my reality, only that I can’t. So until I do, the hypothesis remains valid. At least for me.

 

[FurtherSuntime]

Yes they have, but I haven’t. The quantum suicide thought experiment says nothing about whether other people can die in my reality, only that I can’t. So until I do, the hypothesis remains valid. At least for me.

Well if the thing doesn’t work and the hypothetical subject is still sitting there saying I guess it didn’t work …whats the difference if it did and now the hypothetical subject is in the new dimension only thinking in error it did not work ?

IOW…even as a fictional play…how could the new dimension be even 5 minutes in difference apart from the old dimension…? unless theres control buttons which include all kinds of preparations.

Even so…if its valid and an altogether new recognizable and similar dimension, buildings, cities, streets…the subject will already be there…if not the new dimension is contrived with buttons again…so really even as a fictional story where the bank robber goes down and buries some marked money and then carries out the plan two weeks later…either the world is dealing with two robbers or the robber has merged with the original in the new dimension & is sitting there having never accomplishing the act for infinity as the cops pull up the driveway. Is the significance and relative circumstance of all, in the marked money buried for two weeks seen…