Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by carstimon 4329 days ago
Isn't the conclusion, "all particles have free will"? So, the arguments conclusion is pretty far from its premise. "All numbers are larger than 5" is very far from "some number is larger than 5".

And, whether or not you call this property "free will" is irrelevant to the proof itself; see the final paragraph.
1 comments
danielrm26 4329 days ago
The knight's move seems to be the following:

1. Experimenters have free will 2. They're made up of particles 3. Those particles therefore have free will 4. Therefore we have free will (that's why it's called a proof of free will)

Item #1 above assumes the conclusion.

link
roywiggins 4328 days ago
Read it again. That's not the argument. The argument is roughly:

Either the observer's choice of measurements of the particle is completely determined by prior events, and the observer has no free will, or the observer can at his or her whim pick a way to measure the particle. If the latter, then the particle must be able to, also at whim, pick which spin to be measured at.

He never assumes that the observer is made of particles.

link
sjy 4329 days ago
> This theorem states "If there exist experimenters with (some) free will, then elementary particles also have (some) free will."

How did you pull (4) out of that?

link