Timeline for Can the future theoretically be predicted through analyzing the exact patterns of the universe? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
32 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2018 at 14:19 | comment | added | Tyler S. Loeper | Read this: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/63811/… . This is a physics question. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 11:28 | history | closed |
James K Aify Mołot Rekesoft nzaman |
Not suitable for this site | |
| May 29, 2018 at 9:29 | answer | added | Daron | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 9:22 | answer | added | Hittfler | timeline score: -2 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 9:16 | answer | added | Nathan Smith | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:34 | comment | added | forest | @Kilisi But why do you say that? We can use knowledge to take advantage of existing possibilities, but we cannot make fundamental impossibilities possible. If negative mass does not exist, then we cannot go faster than the speed of light, period. If it does exist, then with enough knowledge, we may be able to make an Alcubierre drive for FTL travel. If I memorize the standard model of particle physics, will I be able to shoot muons out of my fingers with sheer willpower? That would be cool... | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:32 | comment | added | Kilisi | if you knew the exact details of the universe, nothing is impossible for you. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:30 | comment | added | forest | @Kilisi Not necessarily (unless you're Aleister Crowley). What if one of the details is "this is impossible"? I may know GR by heart, but that won't let me escape an event horizon! | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:27 | comment | added | Kilisi | If you knew the exact details of the universe, you wouldn't need to predict anything, you'd already be omnipitent | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:15 | answer | added | ArnoldF | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:13 | comment | added | forest | @Raditz_35 Indeed. I wrote an answer myself just so there would be at least one correct answer so answers that confuse such basic physics concepts as non-causality with quantum non-determinism and science with faith do not dominate, but even my answer was written in haste and does not contain anywhere near the level of detail available on Physics.SE! | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:12 | comment | added | forest | @JamesK Neither can I. It sounds like a physics question regarding the theoretical soundness of Laplace's demon, not a worldbuilding question. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:04 | comment | added | user3106 | This sounds more like a psychological question to be explored. And I don't think it holds; quantum uncertainty makes the universe nondeterministic. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 8:04 | comment | added | SZCZERZO KŁY | If you rewind 10 minutes when you started writing the question you wouldn't write it as you could rewind the time. You could rewind time so asking question on SE is pointless. Go out there ad use this force for good. To put that in that lion example. 9 times brain would go "run". But there would be time when brain would go "fight". | |
| May 29, 2018 at 7:41 | comment | added | Raditz_35 | After reading the horrific answers so far, I recommend taking this to the physics s.e. Sadly I personally don't have the time to discuss the details, and it's just a recommendation. Great threads with great answers exit there already btw | |
| May 29, 2018 at 7:39 | answer | added | forest | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 7:27 | comment | added | forest | You are basically asking if we have free will. The answer is no (although we have agency). | |
| May 29, 2018 at 7:09 | answer | added | Tim B II | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 5:56 | comment | added | Guran | I second the advice to look up the foundation series before building a world which hinges on future prediction. Your readers will certainly be familiar with it and if you are not, you might be discarded as (involuntary) plagiarism. (Sort of how you cannot build a fantasy world with elves and orchs without relating to Tolkien) | |
| May 29, 2018 at 5:52 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 29, 2018 at 11:28 | |||||
| May 29, 2018 at 5:35 | comment | added | James K | I don't see a "world building" aspect to this question. Perhaps you could edit to make that aspect clear. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 5:24 | answer | added | L.Dutch♦ | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 5:17 | comment | added | KernelOfChaos | So, it sounds like you're creating a deterministic universe, where you've collected enough data to make this particular problem solvable. It's just a guess, but I think at that point you've probably solved the "P = NP?" problem. You might want to watch this video to get an idea of how different that world would be from our own. youtube.com/watch?v=YX40hbAHx3s | |
| May 29, 2018 at 5:11 | answer | added | Green | timeline score: 9 | |
| May 29, 2018 at 4:38 | comment | added | NathanSullivan | @John Oh man, well at least I'm the first to bring it up on this site.....which is like saying at least I am the first man to walk on THIS crater of the moon, but oh well XD Regarding the simulation problem, that's when the term science fiction comes into play I suppose. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 4:34 | comment | added | John | In real life the issue you run into a is a perfect simulation of the universe could not fit inside the universe. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 4:34 | comment | added | Alexander | Scientifically - if universe is deterministic, then yes. If non-deterministic, then no. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 4:33 | comment | added | John | Terry Pratchett beat you to it in his novel "dark side of the sun", P-math is a means to foretell the future using precise probability calculations, however each equations takes weeks or months to prepare, but can predict a single individuals future with oracle like accuracy. (and often oracle like vagueness) | |
| May 29, 2018 at 4:25 | history | edited | NathanSullivan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| May 29, 2018 at 4:10 | comment | added | NathanSullivan | I'll check it out. I realize I made a bit of a mistake in saying unpredictable. I could obviously be wrong, but I do believe nothing is truly unpredictable in our universe, and I agree that we just haven't found the formula yet. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 4:06 | comment | added | Cadence | You mention "the unpredictable movements of the subatomic particles in the world around you, and in your brain itself" - my impression was that there's no consensus to what degree those are deterministic (but not predictable by current science) vs. truly random. Anyway, if you're interested in larger-scale "seeing the future", you might look up Azimov's Foundation series and its concept of psychohistory, which is basically that - predicting the future with psychology, sociology, and a dash of actuarial science. | |
| May 29, 2018 at 3:59 | history | asked | NathanSullivan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |