Our lives are already set,.. it's called Fate

Hey all,

I just had this thought for a while and I thought I would share it with everyone. I myself am a very sober unreligious person, I don’t believe in any higher power I don’t believe in any kind of superstition. Instead I believe that everything is caused by the laws of physics. I believe in evolution, but am not sure how it all started,… as in how all of a sudden all this mater appeared,… or perhaps it has always been here.

In any case my beliefs that everything is caused because of these laws of physics brought me to the conclusion that everything chemical, biological etc is also caused by these laws (a chemical reaction is simple the forces of the atoms and molecules doing their math). This made me think a bit more about this, and I came to the conclusion that because everything is controlled by these laws, these set rules, you can’t change the course of action of any of these reactions. Anything you do, anything that happens, follows these laws. Even human thoughts, which are merely nerve cells sending and recieving impulses, are controlled by these rules.

So basicly what I am trying to say is that there is such a thing as “fate” or “The supposed force, principle, or power that predetermines events”. Which basicly comes down to the fact that we can not control our own lives,… everything and I mean everything that happens is already set.

Any other thoughts on this?

Greets,
Timothy

p.s. I know this is a very strange post,… but I just thought I’d share this :slight_smile:

>Any other thoughts on this?

I think quantum physics blew a hole in this a while ago :slight_smile:

check out the ‘clockwork reality’ ideas from a few centuries ago. LOL

http://www.dontveter.com/notes/notes.html

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SkyWriter on 2002-03-26 09:14 ]</font>

i believe fate is set by an idividual.

we choose everyday how we will live.
we don’t, however, have the privledge
of choosing how our use of free agency
will be received by others.

once we act, there is a guarunteed reaction.
that’s unchangable.

we form patterns and habits throughout
life that do, at times, limit our ability to make free choices.
but we author our own destiny.

i believe in Diety as well.

Well, if even our thinking is controlled by these laws, we’re definately doomed.
but if that’s the case, why don’t we all think the same thing? it seams that these laws also give us room to make our own thoughts. Human evolution is based on the simple principle that we are constantly trying to find the edge between the region where we can think of our own stuff and the laws of physics. pretty depressing actually. Our only hope is that along the way of finding this edge, we also find a way to CROSS this edge. who know…

strange post? NAAAAAAHHHH

Roel

It’s posts like that that make me realize Kib knows “things”…

The man’s on-the-ball.

The man’s intelligent.

The man’s neat, orderly, and oftentimes logical.

No wonder he’s my role model. :slight_smile:

Jason

Well, I believe in God. And freewill.

But even if I didn’t, here’s what I’d say to that:

The universe is non-deterministic. I.e., you cannot derive an exact future state by analyzing the present state. Quantum activity will not take place the same way twice, even given identical starting conditions. It is, essentially, random. What that means is that, on a macro level you are correct: the laws don’t change. But on the quantum level, things vary and cannot be predicted. How much of your thinking and that of every other sentient being has been influenced by the vagaries of the quantum fluxuation of the atoms in your brain?

We’re all sitting on a big fat random number generator, and it could go any way at any time.

On the other hand, some fairly recent math (last two years or so) has demonstrated that consistent, reproducable patterns can arise within random systems, so maybe we were “fated” to be here regardless of the quantum uncertainties.

Which is it? Is it either one? As I believe in God, I figure that one of these days I’ll get to ask that question and get a good answer from the Architect of the system.

As I’ve had too much to “smoke” today, I’ll share my farked up thoughts… I personally believe that we create our own realities, in that whatever we hold to be true is true for ourselves…

If you believe in God, the old guy made the world. Maybe you believe in evolution… you’re right too… Or maybe you’re convinced the Mayans were aliens…

In the end… we each have to live our own lives… no one lives it for us… (unless a pod person took over your body).

My personal favorite saying when someone comes off to me with some straight up bullshit… “That is your reality, my friend… not mine…”

Very interesting discussion. I am not religious, but I believe that religion provides a means by which people can both structure and justify their existence. The presence or absence of religion, however, does not imply that morality, or moral behavior, is any less important - I see them as entirely separate entities. Morality is what guides us toward civility.

As for fate, I agree with the comments regarding the quantum nature of events. There are general laws (like Newton’s third law), that define the rules of the game, as it were, but there is much variability that can occur as these laws impose their respective constraints. In fact, on a quantum level, it’s impossible (according to current theory) to know all the variables involved, since the precise measurement of one, will obfuscate any of the others.

Generally, then, things will happen a certain way. But within this process, there is a great deal of random variation. Take the way a tree grows, for example. We can simulate natural phenomena like this using mathematical algorithms (like fractals), but at any given point along a tree’s growth cycle, what determines the exact angle at which a newly-formed branch will grow? Once you work the human factor into the equation, the variation jumps exponentially. A previous poster mentioned the whole notion of human interaction, which in many cases, is impossible to predict.

It might be interesting to think of this variability as sort of a ‘jittered sampling’ of reality along a curve that defines the general laws of physics.

Ohhh, Philosophy :slight_smile:

Well, this is very interesting question. Unfortunately question cannot be retrieved by means of pure logic.

What I mean is that you cannot affirm that, since everithing is ruled by the law of physics and these rules are strictly deterministic then the Universe is strictly deterministic and everithing is set from the Big Bang (or whatever).

This impossibility to affirm comes from the imperfection of human brain which cannot completely grasp the law of physics in their whole complete meaning and cannot, hence, affirm that they are deterministic in first place.

Quantum physics is interesting and ‘stochastic’ problem is that it is not intrinsecally stochastic, is our model that is stochastic because we cannot came out with a deterministic model explainig every phenomena.

Really bad news is that we cannot state if the deep roots of physics are ineherntly deterministic or stochastic, we can only came out with decent models which behaves fairly well.

What I can assume is that, to this issue we can extend what good old Kant assumed for God’s existence.

After having analyzed that no single proof of the existence of God given before him was faulty he stated that God’s existence can be postulated only on the ethic plane.

I could affirm that you can only postulate and not demonstrate that there is a deterministic ‘fate’, and you can do this only on the ethical plane, not on the sensible or logical plane.

My 2 cents.

Stefano

P.S. Kib, your exams were so bad??? :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: S68 on 2002-03-26 10:11 ]</font>

i choose to be religiously agnostic. neither believing in anything, or not believing in anything.

i accept that i am a mear mortal. mankind is not the greatest being. we can reason? so what, reasoning cannot necessarily defend us from the forces of destruction by things that cannot think or reason (nature, for instance).

the only thing true are solid facts, and things that can be felt or seen. none of the beliefs ever established (even evolution) have been airtight enough to warrant unabashed faith in them.

so by accepting that i cannot comprehend much around me, i have been able to come into a better sense of awareness of myself and the things around me. i don’t believe, but i have many more ideas. i taste all the religions, all the cultures, all the explanations. by not binding myself to a single solid “answer” for things i can’t comprehend, i have opened my mind to so many things that are helpful to my soul and actuality.

it is not good enough to believe. you must believe in the reasons you have for that belief. and limiting yourself is a bad thing. believing that you can possibly comprehend the state of the world, well, that is probably the downfall of mankind in the coming ages.

i encourage to try the agnostic route just for about 6 to 12 months. scrap everything you believe. rebuild your foundation that creates you as a person. you will come back to your old opinions and ideas with such a broad mind you will be able to see the flaws and pitfalls of your original conceptions.

as for fate…

how can we tell? it doesn’t matter if we are being controlled, because if we are we don’t know it. so isn’t the fact of establishing the presense of a greater controlling force counterproductive? what good will it do? we will not necessarily be able to see how our lives will be changed, so this won’t effect our daily living. we will still be living the same way we always are…

i hope that makes sense. SOME kind of sense.

Very Profound.
So what you’re saying is that even if it’s true
that everthing that happens is predetermined
We would still have to proceed as if it weren’t.

Speaking of Physics and stuff, Iv’e been following the construction of a sattelite called Gravity Probe-B that will attempt to directly measure the curvature of space-time arround the Earth! It will also look for something called a “frame dragging effect”. They think that as the earth rotates, it drags the fabric of space-time around with it. Like if you put a spinning ball in a bucket of water.

The project’s been in gestation for decades.
It’s scheduled to launch this October.
The particulars of the instrument are incredible. It’s a set of 4 near perfect gyroscopes that will be put into orbit. Once set spinning the they could theoretically keep going for eons on momentum alone.
http://einstein.stanford.edu/

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: rwv01 on 2002-03-26 11:05 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: rwv01 on 2002-03-27 03:45 ]</font>

hmm. Just wanted to add my “This is what you should do” argument into the mix.

Do whatever YOU want to do.

hey kid how old are you?(!!)

On 2002-03-26 10:59, Green wrote:

Do whatever YOU want to do.

no, try this: Think about what YOU want to do, and do the opposite.

Well, I DO know one thing and it is my motto:

You are only old when you are dead.

Think about it.

Ciao for now!

Curtis

I did a project on this a while ago… for math believe it or not. Basically we were researching fractals and something called chaos theory,

which basically states that the universe is not deterministic, since the smallest change in any one of the variables in a complex system (like the n-body equation) creates huge differences in the final calculation.

Since it is impossible to gain exactly precise measurements, only very good approximates, everything that is remotely complex (I’m thinking human brain falls into this category) is as good as random (for now.)

fate doesnt exist either
in the universe theres only 3 numbers : 0, infinity, and -infinity
so there’s either and INFINITE number of posibilities or 0(not -infinity though).
a universe is either 0 or INFINYNTELY or -INFINYNTELY big
time is also the same
and matter
but this brings me back to one of my theoryes i made up while watching futurama: How many parallel universes are there?
since universes are infinyntely or -infinyntely big then someone would need to move at warp 10, which is an infinynty number of lightyears/-infinyntaly seconds to get to another parallel universe

but anyway,

THE END IS NEAR

ps sory about all this crazy shit im talkin bout but im REALLY REALLY bored


THE END IS NEAR
Mute Invert

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: muteinvert on 2002-03-26 14:56 ]</font>

It doesn’t follow that because our biology is governed by universal physical laws that the entirety of our lives, decisions, actions, and thoughts are predetermined, other than in the most mundane way (e.g., anyone born will die). How does the fact that my neurons function according to an understandable chemical process determine what I think? It may determine HOW I think, but not precisely what I think. If it did, should not all of us think exactly the same thoughts, since our brains are all fundamentally the same?

If you go too far down this road you may end up in a sort of Leibniztian paradox where you believe everything that happens was bound to happen simply because it DID happen. But the fact that one event occurs and not another doesn’t imply a predetermination.

C

i dont believe in fate, rather destiny… laws of physics do apply and control everything except spirituality… your soul, if u belive in it, is destined for something higher… none of us know what has and what is going to happen… life could be a dream, its knowing its a dream, thats when u can control your “fate”…

Here’s a question for all of you physicists and out there who believe that everything popped into existance a few billion yeas ago. Do you know what the odds are that everything came into existance in a condition where life could exist? Here’s just a few of the conditions that if just one was slightly off life could not exist.

  1. Galaxy type
  • if too eliptical: star formation would cease before sufficient heavy element buildup for life chemisty
    -if too irregular: radiation exposure on occasion would be too sever, and heavy elements for life chemistry would not be avaliable
  1. Supernova eruptions
  • if too close: life on planet would be exterminated by radiation
  • if too far: not enough heavy element ashes would exist for the formation of rocky planets
  • if too infrequent: not enough heavy element ashes would exist for the formation of rocky planets
  • if too frequent: life on the planet would be exterminated
  • if too soon: not enough heavy element ashes would exist for the formation of rocky planets
  • if too late: life on planets would be exterminated by radiation
  1. White dwarf binaries
  • if too few: insufficient flourine would be produced for life chemistry
  • if too many: planetary orbits would be disrupted by stellar density; life on planet would be exterminated
  1. Parent star distence from center of galaxy
  • if further: quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient to make rocky planets
  • if closer: galactic radiation would be too great; stellar density would disturb planetary orbits out of life support zone
  1. Number of stars in planetary system
  • more than one: tidal interactions disrupt planetary orbits
  1. Parent star birth date
  • if more recent: star would not yet have reached stable burning phase; stellar system would contain too many heavy elements
  • if less recent: stellar system would not contain enough heavy elements
  1. Parent star age
  • if older: luminosity of star would change to quickly
  • if younger: luminosity of star would change to quickly
  1. Parent star color
  • if redder: photosynthetic response would be insufficient
  • if bluer: photosynethic response would be insufficient
  1. Surface gravity
  • if stronger: planets atmosphere would retain too much amonia and methane
  • if weaker: planet’s atmosphere would lose too much water
  1. Incliation of orbit
  • if too great: tempeture differences on planet would be too extream
  1. Axial tilt
  • if greater: surface temperature differences would be to great
  • if less: surface temperature differences would be to great
  1. Rotational period
  • if greater: diurnal temperature differences would be too great
  • if shorter: atmospheric wind velocities would be too great

Here are some factors with actual numbers

  1. If the strong nuclear force was .3 percent stronger or 2 percent weaker the universe couldn’t support life

  2. The expansion of the universe must be accurate to within 10 to the 55th, as in 10 with 55 zeros following it, otherwise life wouldn’t exist

There are many, many more variables, more than we even understand, and if even one of them was off life couldn’t exist. By the way, all that information came from a book called “The Creation Hypothesis”. This evidence alone is proof enough for a belief in some sort of higher being.

Another thing, the infinite possibilities theorem that explains away the huge improbability of life forming randomly by saying the universe expands and collapses infinite times and in at least one of them the conditions for life will be right can not possibly be correct. Every measurement we make shows that their isn’t enough mass in the universe to collapse it, that the universe is expanding, and that the rate of expansion is actually increasing! The universe can not collapse in on itself if it continues to expand at a faster and faster rate.

If you do not have any beliefs about some reason to this life, that everything is an accident, then you should live in fear of disaster striking. Just recently an asteroid passed by the earth, very close to it (in astronomical terms) and wasn’t spotted until it had passed the Earth. (Actually I think someone here pointed it out).

There is also the possibility, I only have a vague recollection of this acticle, but recently it was proposed that it is possible for a super-Higgs buson (I think) to appear and stop all light dead in its tracks and everything would be dark, forever. That would also mean no more radiation from the sun, or any where else.
And how can you explain the occurence of matter anywhere? According to the very basis of physics, the Standered Model, matter should not exist. Matter and antimatter should have been created in exactly equal amounts during the Big Bang and they should have totaly cancelled each other.

Also, if their is no god, no reason for our existance, then why do you bother being a moral person? There isn’t any reason to be moral. If I didn’t believe in God then I would never act like I do. You should only care about yourself. If you want to steal, then go ahead. If you want to shoot someone you don’t like, then its fine. There is no reason for any moral system if there is no god.

Goo


I hate my stupid computer!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Goo on 2002-03-26 19:36 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Goo on 2002-03-26 19:38 ]</font>