![]() ![]() The aim of this paper is to argue that the (alleged) indeterminism of quantum mechanics, claimed by adherents of the Copenhagen interpretation since Born (1926), can be proved from Chaitin's follow-up to Goedel's (first) incompleteness theorem. Which is correct? Does everything depend on our current psychological dispositon as to what is right and wrong? Correctness has no meaning in these cases, all this can lead to agnostic and atheistic stances." If we rely on logic and reason alone we can end up in utter confusion, with many contradictory but logically-consistent systems of reasoning/logic. This is the basis of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. But now we have two sets of sel-consistent rules and again there will always be something called B that we cannot agree upon. You can take A to be true and I can take A to be false, but in either case we are both logically consistent with our new set of logical rules respectively. Strange but true! For example let's say: you and I have agreed upon a set of logical rules, then there will always be some thing, lets call it A, that we cannot determine as true or false, using our logical rules. And whether you select the answer to these "some things" as true or false doesn't affect the validity of your logical rules. ![]() ![]() It is pointed out that, no matter how you describe the world (with logical rules) there will always be "some things" that you cannot determine as true or false. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |