Skip to main content

Destiny

      I am sure you have heard this topic discussed endlessly. Free will versus everything we do being pre-destined. I am going to write about it from a scientific perspective. It may not be right exactly but well, what’s the harm in imagining it. So, what is destiny? Destiny is the prior arrangement of what might happen in the future. In the divine sense of the word, God takes a huge book in the sky and peeps over the book whenever a child is born, and scribbles on the book what is going to happen in the poor chap’s life. This is not my version of destiny. My version of destiny is dependent on whether the laws of physics are probabilistic in nature or not. I will give an example.
      Suppose you take a beam of electrons and pass it through a narrow slit. It will diffract and form an interference pattern. A priori one cannot predict where a single electron is going. Hence we think of the electron beam as a probabilistic wave which, in a probabilistic manner gives the interference pattern. Now, time for a gedanken. Imagine the electron at the slit. When it reaches the slit, is it in one place or not? Forget for the time being, that we cannot see or observe it. precisely. So, is it in one place ? Yes of course, because no object can occupy more than one place at the same time. So, the position is actually fixed at each instant. Our inability to observe that position without changing it is what makes us believe that the position is uncertain. So, in other words, left to itself, the electron will choose a path based on its history of movements. Since each electron has slightly different histories each of the electrons will go in a slightly different direction and hence you get a interference pattern. Wow, I don’t know how many laws of physics I have broken in the past few sentences but you get the logic behind the argument, I guess. The logic is, our inability to observe a single electron with precision does not mean that the path of each electron is not deterministic. It is deterministic.
      Another example is of radioactive decay. It is supposed to be random. A beta particle or other radiation is emitted seemingly in random fashion. My question here again is, do we understand the sub-atomic world very accurately ? No, obviously not. We do not even know whether we have the full list of all the elementary particles. What we have is a list which is correct in the limit of our experimental accuracy. For instance, let’s say there are eight different types of protons, and they differ in their masses due to the presence of different types of ‘weirdons’. Let’s assume that each ‘weirdon’ weighs 10-8 g and our experimental setup has a least count of 10-6 g. So, can we ever find the ‘weirdons’ ? Obviously no. Besides, there is no ‘theory of everything’ yet which can explain the entire phenomenon in the universe. Hence, we can conclude that our knowledge is incomplete. Given this fact, if you consider the radioactive decay problem, is it random because we cannot predict it with any accuracy, or is it truly random ? If it is the former case as I assume it is, then we are all screwed.
      Now, consider what might happen if physical laws are actually deterministic. At the time of big bang (btw, is that deterministic), the configuration of all the fundamental particles and energy, can help us in predicting exactly what the configuration would be in the next instant and so on till the time you are reading this post. Now where is our free will then ? What I am going to do next or what is going on in my mind, is wholly dependent on what the configuration was in the previous instant and that depends on its history so on and on till we get to big bang. So there is no control in our hands. The fact that we exist was already written in the initial configuration of the big banged universe. It is similar to animal development. Given the same genome, it always develops in a particular shape and size. There are environmental effects which provide some variation, but in the case of evolution of universe, we don’t even have an external environment. Then what ?
      Do you see any fallacy in the logic ? Can any theoretical physicist enlighten me and let me know where I am going wrong ? I am pretty scared to think that I am not as free as I always thought I was.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

My Shawshank Redemption

      I submitted my thesis today, and strangely I feel sad. I do not feel happy or even relieved. When I started my PhD, I thought by the end of it, I will feel like Norgay or Hillary and be on top of the world. I thought it would be a great success, and something never attempted before. But alas, all I feel is what Andy Dufresne might have felt like after escaping the Shawshank prison. My whole PhD has been nothing but a prison for my scientific spirit, incarcerated for all the wrong reasons. The writing of the thesis has been nothing less than Andy's escape from prison, crawling through 200 metres of sewerage. At the end of itall I feel is, "Well... I am free, now I have to bathe and cleanse my system to start afresh". Those are my thoughts exactly. At this end of the PhD, I feel like a fool undergoing all the stupidity and mediocrity. What meaning is left in PhD, I wonder.       I am sick and tired of it, and I do hope the damn thing gets accepted. Well, even if it i...

Alien Invasion

      I was watching another alien invasion movie today. And I feel that this whole Martians/venusians or Alpha centaurians are vulnerable is a big problem with the whole genre. I believe that no civilization can really discover space travel without first discovering the secrets of health and disease. And if they have discovered that, then it is only a matter of time before they realize that they dont need huge machines and energy expensive robots and exoskeletons etc. All that they will do is send an earth-rover initially equipped with a small biological specimen collector/analyzer and find out the genetic makeup of earthlings. Once they do that, they will obviously realize that humans are susceptible to a lot of diseases. They dont need to understand english, they dont need to communicate with us (who the hell except us wants to anyway ?). It is our (rather Hollywood's) stupidity to think that Aliens would come to Earth and stand before us and in a comma...

Theory of Love

      This post has also been a long time in coming. I firmly reject the stupid notion that our emotions are anything other than chemical reactions occurring in the brain. So having all the hocus pocus of 'souls' and spirits etc out of the way, we can concentrate on the chemistry of neural activity. And when speaking of emotions, what better emotion than the most exalted and mysterious of these, 'love'. What the hell is it, by the way ? Hmm, its like being punched by the invisible man, you can feel it, but you cannot explain or predict it.      The 'punch in the face by invisible man' hypothesis of love is very apt for a discussion of the neurochemistry of love. Because every emotion has to have a sensory input, and no emotion can exist in vacuum. So, the real question we must ask ourselves is this : "What is the mechanism of formation of 'love'-like emotions in the brain ?". Is it different for 'love' of a laddoo for e...