Tag Archives: physics

The case for limited free will (Part 1)

Part 1

When I retire, and have more free time, I’m going to expand on this topic considerably. But for now I’m just sharing a 3-part premise.

There is a convincing argument against the idea of free will, and some very bright people argue that there is no such thing. I, on the other hand, believe we do have free will… but it is limited.

Go to the ‘free-will’ tag on my blog and you’ll see that I’ve shared this and other related idea before.

Right now I just want to put down a list of premises which, one day, I’ll defend, but for now, here they are:

  1. Consciousness is emergent. It is the product of excess processing time beyond what’s needed for survival.
  2. Free will is not fully free. Both the environment and more importantly our hardware affect our ability to think freely. Don’t believe me? Try to make a challenging decision when you have an agonizing tooth ache.
  3. Limited free will is also emergent and comes with consciousness. Despite the fact that there are constraints and limits to how free free will is, it’s still more free than no free will.

Consciousness is at the crux of the argument. Consciousness does not have a physical position in our physical world. You can’t point to a part of the brain and say, ‘there it is’. So arguing against free will based on physics falls apart.

Looking at an MRI or other brain scan after asking someone a question and being able to predict their answer before they say it is another argument against free will. However, that doesn’t tell us how our brain came to that decision, it only shows that our conscious mind doesn’t react or even necessarily fully understand our unconscious mind… but there is still an unconscious mind that made that decision. Deciding to discuss the conscious and unconscious mind as two separate things is a false division that is useful to talk about, but the reality is, we are of one mind… Even if we ourselves can’t fully grasp how our own consciousness works. 

Two things are happening in the MRI argument that are faulty when used in an argument against free will: First, there is a free will decision that happens, even if it’s before our conscious mind knows. Second, the fact that our hardware limits the decisions themselves and then also how we rationalize those decisions based on our (limited) decision-making, does not negate the fact that we still made the decision.

Well, there you have it, I said I wasn’t going to expand on these premises and I already started to. The thing to realize is that just because our free will has considerable limits, and constraints, doesn’t negate the fact that we are still making choices that are truly ours.

We have limited free will but still freer than not having free will at all.

A Tetraverse Response Video

This video probably has an ideal audience of less than a couple dozen people in the entire world. If you are reading this as a regular Daily-Ink reader, you might not spend much time thinking about 4D space and the structure of the universe… and you can just bypass this, or at least watch the second video I share as an introduction to what Joe Truss and I are talking about.

Here is:
A Dimensional Twist of the Tetraverse (A response video to Klee Irwin’s 20 Group Twist)

And hopefully more digestible, and more introductory in nature, here is:
We live in a Tetraverse

And if you want something a little more esoteric, try:
Secret Origins of the Enneagram

And finally, here is the first response video we made, to Neil deGrasse Tyson & Chuck Nice’s Startalk interview with Sarah Imari Walker:
A Short Take on Assembly Theory in the Tetraverse Model: A Geometric Representation

More videos to come in our Book of Codes series.

A Short Take on Assembly Theory in the Tetraverse Model

The full title of this video is a mouthful:

A Short Take on Assembly Theory in the Tetraverse Model: A Geometric Representation

Here is the description and related videos:

Joseph Truss and David Truss discuss the geometric model of a tetrahedral universe as it relates to Assembly Theory.
With video clips from Neil deGrasse Tyson & Chuck Nice’s Startalk interview with Sarah Imari Walker.

And clips also from our first Book of Codes video,  ‘We Live in a Tetraverse’.

I recognize this video is for a small audience, and I’m hoping to get some help. Joe and I are viewing the world as geometers, not physicists or mathematicians. If you know of someone smarter than us in these fields, we encourage dialogue and perspectives that challenge our thinking, please share.
Thank you!

We will never have time travel

I’m not a physicist and I don’t play one on the internet, but I believe that we will never have time travel. My premise is simple: if it was invented 50, 250, 500, or even 5,000 years from now, there is no way that the first time we’d ever discover someone from the future was 2022. Surely if it will ever be invented a time traveller would travel to somewhere in the past before us, and we don’t have evidence of that… so at no time in the future will a time machine be invented.

The only possibility that I see for a time machine to work is that we live in a multiverse and if a person did go back in time then they wouldn’t change our history, they would create another new history splitting the history we know and creating a new one that they know… and so in this case while I’d be wrong, you and I will never know.

In the future, if we don’t blow ourselves up and send the world back into the Stone Age, we’ll get closer and closer to traveling the speed of light. A very long time from now humans will visit other planets beyond our solar system. Those travellers will experience time differently than anyone who stays on earth. But while they will age less, they won’t be going back in time.

Time travel like H. G. Wells wrote about will never exist. It’s a fun thing to think about, but the reality is that if it ever was to be invented, we’d already know about it… we wouldn’t have to wait for some time in the future to learn about it.