Tarot: Consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics

[Willie Lumplump]

Correct predictions of the future, whether by tarot or other means, would have the profoundest consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics. For the future to be predicted correctly, it would have either to already exist in some sense or to exist as a potential implicit in the positions and momenta of every particle in the universe. In that second case, the universe would be a kind of machine that grinds out the inevitable future according to the immutable, deterministic laws of Isaac Newton. Regarding the first alternative, it's hard to say exactly what an "already existing future" would mean. If it means anything, it certainly would be incompatible with free will since all that will ever exist already exists. The second alternative is equally incompatible with free will since a deterministic universe, by definition, does not allow for alternative possibilities that free will assumes. This picture is complicated by quantum theory (the most precise theory ever developed) which tells us that the universe is not deterministic because particles are continuously popping in and out of existence according to laws of statistical probability, and no particle even has an exact momentum and an exact position until it is measured. Therefore, tarot and other occult arts that claim to predict the future are actually refutations of quantum theory. This is hard to accept since much of the modern world is based on quantum theory--computers, lasers, particle physics, astronomy, etc.

[mykil]

I think, we may need an anti-gratitude button here folks!

[Willie Lumplump]

I think, we may need an anti-gratitude button here folks!

Or you could just offer an opinion on the ideas that I presented--your own opinion or somebody else's (you could quote). Or you could ask a question. Or you could ask somebody else to respond. Or you could just ignore the whole thing. Isn't it nice to have so many options?

[Zeno Swijtink]

Correct predictions of the future, whether by tarot or other means, would have the profoundest consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics. For the future to be predicted correctly, it would have either to already exist in some sense or to exist as a potential implicit in the positions and momenta of every particle in the universe. In that second case, the universe would be a kind of machine that grinds out the inevitable future according to the immutable, deterministic laws of Isaac Newton. Regarding the first alternative, it's hard to say exactly what an "already existing future" would mean. If it means anything, it certainly would be incompatible with free will since all that will ever exist already exists. The second alternative is equally incompatible with free will since a deterministic universe, by definition, does not allow for alternative possibilities that free will assumes. This picture is complicated by quantum theory (the most precise theory ever developed) which tells us that the universe is not deterministic because particles are continuously popping in and out of existence according to laws of statistical probability, and no particle even has an exact momentum and an exact position until it is measured. Therefore, tarot and other occult arts that claim to predict the future are actually refutations of quantum theory. This is hard to accept since much of the modern world is based on quantum theory--computers, lasers, particle physics, astronomy, etc.

I find this an altogether too broad attack on Tarot.

Certainly not all forms of prediction of the future are incompatible with free will or quantum mechanics: phases of the moon of the moon could be one simple example. Any phenomenon that does not involve the will.

It all depends on what kind of events Tarot is claiming to be able to predict.

In itself freedom of will is a hard one. Any universal physical theory that states general laws, be in Newtonian physics or Quantum Mechanics, seems incompatible with free will.

You cannot sneak in free will in the probabilistic laws in QM thus defying them.

[Willie Lumplump]

I find this an altogether too broad attack on Tarot.

Well, I just mentioned tarot because we've discussed it recently. As I said in my original post, any art or discipline that claims to be able to predict the future would serve equally well as an example.

Certainly not all forms of prediction of the future are incompatible with free will or quantum mechanics: phases of the moon of the moon could be one simple example. Any phenomenon that does not involve the will.

Obviously you're first sentence is right, but I'd call phases of the moon a trivial example because it's basically a two-body system that allows easy calculation. Add just one more body and the system becomes so complex that nobody can calculate positions after a short time (of course, I'm talking about a three-body system in which one body doesn't dominate the movements of the others, as the sun does in the solar system). And it's possible to predict the weather a few days in advance. And, in principle, it's possible to predict the outcome of the next presidental election through proper statistical sampling. But these are all trivial examples that don't bear on the problem at hand, which is predicting events that are dependent on free will or chaotic systems.

Free will aside, most systems are chaotic and therefore unpredictable. Drop two bottles into the ocean side-by-side, and a couple of months later they may well be in different oceans. And you can predict the weather a few days in advance, but if you try to predict the weather a month or two in advance, all of the chaotic influences come into play making the task impossible. It's the "butterfly effect." A butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil causing a rainstorm in Africa a month later.

It all depends on what kind of events Tarot is claiming to be able to predict.

I'd refer back to Christine's claims for examples.

In itself freedom of will is a hard one.

Well, there's no doubt about that, and I'd have to say that my single paragraph on the subject is misleading to some extent.

Any universal physical theory that states general laws, be in Newtonian physics or Quantum Mechanics, seems incompatible with free will. You cannot sneak in free will in the probabilistic laws in QM thus defying them.

Well, actually I agree with those statements, but not everybody does. Roger Penrose, for example, has made much of quantum uncertainty as a basis for free will. But my main point still stands. Accurate, nontrivial predictions of the future would be fatal to the notion of free will and have profound consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics.

[Braggi]

Well, I just mentioned tarot because we've discussed it recently. As I said in my original post, any art or discipline that claims to be able to predict the future would serve equally well as an example.

Willie, you're trolling again. And this time, I have to say, you're really full of it. You're not even very good at this. Look over ThePhiant's posts and try to learn something about trolling.

My wife predicts the future all the time. The future of her patients. It's not done by tarot, it's done by examining the past of the person in question, the attitude of that person, and the general trajectory of their life. She can usually predict quite accurately whether they'll wind up in prison, on the street, or happily married with a good job. She's amazing in these ways. Of course, she's a trained professional and has decades of experience at it. Don't think she's ever studied quantum mechanics or the "science" of "free will."

... And you can predict the weather a few days in advance, but if you try to predict the weather a month or two in advance, all of the chaotic influences come into play making the task impossible. It's the "butterfly effect." A butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil causing a rainstorm in Africa a month later.

Well, the "butterfly effect" is bull and you know it so we can dispense with that one. And you are ignorant about long range weather prediction. Check these guys out: https://www.weatheraction.com/index....d=13&Itemid=38
And look here: https://www.worldweather.com.au/HomeFrame.htm

I've actually not been able to locate the service I used to use which predicted weather 18 months in advance and had a several years long record of 85% accuracy. They did not update their predictions based on current weather but kept their 18 month old prediction right up to the present. They weren't perfect, but they were pretty damn good--for a year and a half out they were amazing. I'll see if I can find them again.

Your comments on quantum mechanics seem out of context to this discussion. Computer science isn't based on the notion that particles pop into and out of existence. Quite the opposite. It's based on the predictable behavior of particles. In fact, I know of no applied science based on quantum mechanics. Perhaps you could educate us on that.

Or perhaps this is another thread you should just drop, Willie.

-Jeff

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie, you're trolling again. And this time, I have to say, you're really full of it.

I think we have to be cautious when attempting to read other people's motives. I can see in retrospect that I was incautious during my discussions with Christine. I've publicly apologized for that, and Christine has been gracious enough to publicly accept my apology. In the present discussion I'd have to say that your reading of my motives is mistaken. Of course I may have unconscious motives that, by definition, I'm not aware of, but to the extent that I am aware of my motives now I can assure you that I am being completely honest. When Christine challenged me, it rang a bell and called my unconscious motives into the light. Your challenge here rings no bells with me. Of course, you're welcome to try again.

[Willie Lumplump]

My wife predicts the future all the time. The future of her patients. It's not done by tarot, it's done by examining the past of the person in question, the attitude of that person, and the general trajectory of their life. She can usually predict quite accurately whether they'll wind up in prison, on the street, or happily married with a good job. She's amazing in these ways. Of course, she's a trained professional and has decades of experience at it.

I can see that this is a very difficult subject to approach in a community bulletin board. In the relatively limited space of a single post, it's impossible to cover a complex topic from enough angles to avoid all possible misunderstandings.

We all are able to predict the future. Our mammalian ancestors going all the way back to the beginning of the Triassic Period survived because they could, to one extent or another, predict the future. "If I go out into the forest in daytime, I probably will encounter a hungry dinosaur." "If I stay in my nest tonight, my supply of stored food will not supply me with the calories I need to get through another night of hunting." (Of course, I'm anthropomorphizing here.) Or, in a modern context, "Based on observed negative interactions between this married couple, I can predict with 95% accuracy that they will be divorced within five years." Or, "Based on my statistical records, I can predict with 95% confidence that between 90 and 110 people will die in California auto accidents within the next week. All of those kinds of predictions are quite reasonable, and no one would argue otherwise. The predictions of concern, the ones I was talking about, are hard to categorize except that they are very specific outcomes of chaotic systems. If you predict that two bottles dropped in the ocean together will end up in two different oceans, it's not news if that comes to pass. However, suppose that you predict that one bottle will end up on a beach near Colombo, Sri Lanka while the other will end up in a water intake vent in Ontario, Canada. If those predictions come to pass, that is news because the chaos inherent in ocean currents simply doesn't allow us to make those kinds of predictions accurately.

It's getting kind of late, so I really can't continue with this now. I'll get back to it soon as I can (if I can).

[Braggi]

I can see that this is a very difficult subject to approach in a community bulletin board. In the relatively limited space of a single post, it's impossible to cover a complex topic from enough angles to avoid all possible misunderstandings.

Oh, I think I understood you. I'm messing with you a little because I think you're messing with us.


I agree with you that crystal ball gazing isn't likely to help me predict what's coming in your future. But doing it for myself (skrying) can indeed help me find some valuable insights about myself I might otherwise miss.

Again, I think you're attacking the wrong thing here, especially in this community. I think you're fighting something you don't understand, partly because there are so many ways to understand it. Most of those ways I have to agree with you, are so much poppycock. Even that doesn't mean they are a total waste of time. Even watching FOX news isn't a complete waste of time (although it mostly is).

Just think of it as entertainment and maybe it will bother you less. I always smile when I go by a neon hand sign declaring "Past, Present and Future." I wouldn't spend my money there, but a lot of people get something of value out of it. Let's leave it up to them to decide. Oh, that's the "free will" part.

Cheers,

-Jeff

[Willie Lumplump]

Well, the "butterfly effect" is bull -Jeff

Before I turn in for the night, I have to give one cogent example of the "butterfly effect." (For the uninitiated, the butterfly effect refers to the extreme sensitivity of chaotic systems to initial conditions, as in my previous example of two bottles dropped next to each other in the ocean.)

It's been calculated that if a single electron were instantaneously transported from the farthest point in the universe to, say, downtown Santa Rosa, the electron would undergo only about 60 interactions with neighboring particles before the effects of the electron would be visible macroscopically. That's because one thing affects two other things which affect two other things and so on until you soon end up with something that looks nothing at all like what you started with. Think about it. You go out the door to work in the morning, and for no particular reason, this time you decide to check the wall clock before you go. Checking the wall clock takes three seconds. Those three seconds may be all that separate you from a car collision that would end your life. Your life hangs on whether you check the wall clock or not. Every second of every day is like that for all of us. Each minute we make small decisions that alter the course of our lives. That's the "butterfly effect."

[ChristineL]

As I've stated before, I don't have the science background or the understanding of scientific methods that you have Willie. However, I will try to explain what readings are supposed to do and you can talk about how it does, or doesn't, fit your into your "implications".

If I did not believe people could use their free will to change the course of their lives, I would not be doing readings. To tell people a series of upcoming events that they cannot change serves no purpose whatsoever. Sometimes, such as when I have seen people were going to get laid off from their jobs, they could not change the occurrence, but being prepared for it allowed them to mitigate its effect on them. In the case of the woman who called me to ask if she was pregnant, I saw she was not but had something very wrong with her that would result in death if she did not see a doctor within twenty four hours. I told her she needed to see her doctor ASAP and be prepared for a three day hospital stay. She did the next morning, and her doctor told her on the second day she would be fine. He also told her had she waited another twenty four hours to see him, he could not have saved her. It was still her decision to trust my insight and go. The woman I told she could not save her marriage and needed to leave it immediately because he would end up killing or permanently disabling her did admit he had already put her in the hospital several times, but he was her "soul mate" and she could not leave him. Again...she was using her free will. There was also the woman I told to have a glucose tolerance test as I felt her depressions and general moodiness was a result of hypoglycemia. A month or so later, she told me her doctor had confirmed my feeling, but she was doing nothing about it as it would require cutting out alcohol...again...free will at work.

Basically, readings are a guidance system...I explain to people it's about "If you continue to do things the way you're doing them, this is where you end up." If you don't like the destination, let's see how to change the road. I can also tell someone when they're going to meet Ms. or Mr. Right, but if they then decide to stay home and do nothing...chances are it's not the postal carrier, UPS person or meter reader.

The beliefs of myself, my teachers, and many genuine psychics is that there is little that is engraved in stone. Even an Astrolgy chart or numerology chart gives your strong points, weak points, and how to use the first to mitigate the second. They also indicate the best times to pursue various things such as career growth or finding a permanent partner. I think sometimes the way psychics, Astrologers, Numerologists, etc. word things is wrong. Just because I may get a marriage proposal doesn't mean I'll accept and get married. I remember years ago a card reader, who I trusted, told me I was going to get pregnant. A trip to Planned Parenthood to update my birth control method and judiciously using it ever after took care of avoiding that outcome.

I also have a tendency to feel when I should avoid certain roads, take a detour, postpone my departure, etc. The next day's news has often told me why. Again...I could choose to test it.

Again, maybe everything is pre-destined and a reading with me is part of what was pre-written. I'll leave you and like-minded people to ponder these issues. I myself enjoy my free will and if it's a delusion...I'd rather enjoy the dilusion.

[ChristineL]

... I always smile when I go by a neon hand sign declaring "Past, Present and Future." I wouldn't spend my money there, but a lot of people get something of value out of it. Let's leave it up to them to decide. Oh, that's the "free will" part.

I always smile when I go by one of those neon signs. The more sincere you are, and the better you are at Tarot, Palmistry, etc., the less "frou-frou", signage, and special effects you need.

Christine

[Willie Lumplump]

I've actually not been able to locate the service I used to use which predicted weather 18 months in advance and had a several years long record of 85% accuracy. They did not update their predictions based on current weather but kept their 18 month old prediction right up to the present. They weren't perfect, but they were pretty damn good--for a year and a half out they were amazing. I'll see if I can find them again.

Your comments on quantum mechanics seem out of context to this discussion. Computer science isn't based on the notion that particles pop into and out of existence. Quite the opposite. It's based on the predictable behavior of particles. In fact, I know of no applied science based on quantum mechanics. Perhaps you could educate us on that.

Well, I think you're pulling my leg a little here about quantum mechanics and computers, aren't you? You're obviously an educated person, so you must be aware, in at least a general way, of the central role that quantum theory played in the development of semiconducting materials on which computers are based.

I can't tell if you're pulling my leg about weather forecasting or not. In case not, I assure you that I've heard of improving weather forecasts. Important meteorological and oceanographic discoveries such as the discovery of the Southern Oscillation (responsible for el Nino) have helped. More powerful supercomputers have made possible the development of more powerful mathematical models which depend largely on computing the behavior of millions of individual atmospheric cells. And, of course, short-range forecasting has also been extended by several days. But, paradoxically, the butterfly effect continues to make mid-range weather forecasting extremely problematic.

[Willie Lumplump]

As I've stated before, I don't have the science background or the understanding of scientific methods that you have Willie. However, I will try to explain what readings are supposed to do and you can talk about how it does, or doesn't, fit your into your "implications".

...

Yes, I understand that you want to help people and to do that you have to believe in the existence of free will. You've educated me to the point where I can completely accept your sincerity. But your sincerity isn't at issue here. As I've already explained (a little), the ability to predict the future accurately would have tremendous consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics. For you to predict the future, the future must already exist in some sense, at least in the latent form that was familiar to physicists after Newton. And that is the core of the problem. If the future already exists in some form, it is predetermined, and that is the end, not of your sincerity, but of free will.

[Willie Lumplump]

you should just drop, Willie.-Jeff

Did you mean "You should just drop, Willie," or did you mean, "You should just drop Willie." The second possibility makes me nervous.

[alanora]

We are always at choice, hence "free will". All possibilities exist simultaneously. We are quite conditioned re our choices, hence no "free will". A limitless number of possible outcomes all existing simultaneously, some more probable due to previous conditioning, history, and an incalculable number other factors, including, just possibly the magnetics of planetary positions, and our soul choices prior to incarnation. If thoughts are things and are creative, this makes anything ever thought of a possibility. Seems like there is an inextricable, ever changing multiply faceted relationship between the universe and everything in it, which when we attempt to apply scientific methods classifies things out of existence rather than clearing things up for me. I hope I was clear. mindy

Yes, I understand that you want to help people and to do that you have to believe in the existence of free will. You've educated me to the point where I can completely accept your sincerity. But your sincerity isn't at issue here. As I've already explained (a little), the ability to predict the future accurately would have tremendous consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics. For you to predict the future, the future must already exist in some sense, at least in the latent form that was familiar to physicists after Newton. And that is the core of the problem. If the future already exists in some form, it is predetermined, and that is the end, not of your sincerity, but of free will.

[Willie Lumplump]

We are always at choice, hence "free will". All possibilities exist simultaneously. We are quite conditioned re our choices, hence no "free will". A limitless number of possible outcomes all existing simultaneously, some more probable due to previous conditioning, history, and an incalculable number other factors, including, just possibly the magnetics of planetary positions, and our soul choices prior to incarnation. If thoughts are things and are creative, this makes anything ever thought of a possibility. Seems like there is an inextricable, ever changing multiply faceted relationship between the universe and everything in it, which when we attempt to apply scientific methods classifies things out of existence rather than clearing things up for me. I hope I was clear. mindy

"Magnetics of planetary positions?" This is just an arbitrary combination of words. How about the positions of magnetic planets? Or the planets of magnetic positions? Or the magnetics of positional planets? But anyway, if there are, as you say, a "limitless number of possible outcomes," free will remains untoppled. It's prediction that implies determinism that topples free will.

[alanora]

What if prediction is not future telling but an ability to read all these factors and piece them coherently together, perhaps with a portion of our previously unused grey matter that makes paranormal merely normal. I am referring to the planets as magnetic forces however scientifically weak or distant that may alter human embryos growth and tendencies and hence futures, which we remember are concurrent with here and now, and thus possible cause I have thought of them?!!!!!Therefore your future evolves with you. Do I make any sense at all to the educated ones? mindy

"Magnetics of planetary positions?" This is just an arbitrary combination of words. How about the positions of magnetic planets? Or the planets of magnetic positions? Or the magnetics of positional planets? But anyway, if there are, as you say, a "limitless number of possible outcomes," free will remains untoppled. It's prediction that implies determinism that topples free will.

[Braggi]

Let's imagine there is a spice you can eat (as in Frank Herbert's Dune), or a drug you can take that allows you to see visions from the future. Or visions of a possible future, or visions of possible futures. Let's imagine that under the influence of this drug, your mind, or your being becomes sensitive to very strong feelings that may happen to you, given certain sets of circumstances.

Now, imagine the feeling that comes to you in this altered state of consciousness is one of dread and grief. Perhaps this feeling involves the loss of a loved one. Imagine the feeling involves the death of a certain person.

When you return to ordinary consciousness you realize that you must warn that person to be extra careful because the feelings are still so strong and the "target" has been made clear to you so you make a phone call and give that person the warning.

You'll never know if your intervention just saved that person's life. It could never be proven.

Would you make that call?

-Jeff

[ChristineL]

Yes, I understand that you want to help people and to do that you have to believe in the existence of free will. You've educated me to the point where I can completely accept your sincerity. But your sincerity isn't at issue here. As I've already explained (a little), the ability to predict the future accurately would have tremendous consequences for philosophy, ethics, and physics. For you to predict the future, the future must already exist in some sense, at least in the latent form that was familiar to physicists after Newton. And that is the core of the problem. If the future already exists in some form, it is predetermined, and that is the end, not of your sincerity, but of free will.

Willie, I'm taking this thread seriously. I really wasn't talking about my sincerity. Take off from the premise that there are people like me and that we can really do what we say we do. As I've also often dreamed things before they happened, I have wondered if time is perhaps not linear and the information I get already exists. I still tend to think that there are multiple outcomes existing at the same time. Sorry, not scientific...I'm leaving that to you. I also apologize if, from your point of view, I'm not clear.

[Willie Lumplump]

What if prediction is not future telling but an ability to read all these factors and piece them coherently together, perhaps with a portion of our previously unused grey matter that makes paranormal merely normal. I am referring to the planets as magnetic forces however scientifically weak or distant that may alter human embryos growth and tendencies and hence futures, which we remember are concurrent with here and now, and thus possible cause I have thought of them?!!!!!Therefore your future evolves with you. Do I make any sense at all to the educated ones? mindy

Everytime a cell phone goes off, or a regular phone, or everytime the doorbell rings, or everytime lightning strikes, or everytime a car drives by, you are subjected to magnetic fields that are billions . . . make that trillions . . . of times stronger than the fields from other planets are on earth. Also, unused gray matter would be an evolutionary burden that humans could not afford. It is extremely expensive energetically to build and maintain gray matter. If it isn't used, it's selected against and soon disappears.

[Willie Lumplump]

Willie, I'm taking this thread seriously. I really wasn't talking about my sincerity. Take off from the premise that there are people like me and that we can really do what we say we do.

That's like asking me to take off from the premise that pigs wear suspenders or that hedgehogs wear flowered shirts. But my point was that if we do accept your premise, what are the consequences? One consequence is that free will is precluded. The future must have causes which must have earlier causes which must have still earlier causes all the way back to the present. The present therefore, in a sense, contains the future. If you're able to predict the future, it means that the chain of cause-and-effect extends from the present to the future. That's determinism. If the future is determined, you have something to read, but free will is dead.

I could make this discussion a whole lot more complicated by explaining my own opinion, but it exhausts me just thinking about doing that.

[Willie Lumplump]

Let's imagine there is a spice you can eat (as in Frank Herbert's Dune), or a drug you can take that allows you to see visions from the future. Or visions of a possible future, or visions of possible futures. Let's imagine that under the influence of this drug, your mind, or your being becomes sensitive to very strong feelings that may happen to you, given certain sets of circumstances.

Now, imagine the feeling that comes to you in this altered state of consciousness is one of dread and grief. Perhaps this feeling involves the loss of a loved one. Imagine the feeling involves the death of a certain person.

When you return to ordinary consciousness you realize that you must warn that person to be extra careful because the feelings are still so strong and the "target" has been made clear to you so you make a phone call and give that person the warning.

You'll never know if your intervention just saved that person's life. It could never be proven.

Would you make that call?

-Jeff

Actually, I have seen visions, I have experienced an altered state of consciousness (without chemical aids, yet), and I know when I'm high. I can imagine that visions might enhance a person's powers of introspection. I don't imagine that they give clues about other people's future.

[scorpiomoon]

Actually, I have seen visions, I have experienced an altered state of consciousness (without chemical aids, yet), and I know when I'm high. I can imagine that visions might enhance a person's powers of introspection. I don't imagine that they give clues about other people's future.

Is this thread for real or is it something that already existed somewhere else and is the loop endlessly returning us to the same questions and are you observing this from a moving position or are you standing perfectly still

[ChristineL]

That's like asking me to take off from the premise that pigs wear suspenders or that hedgehogs wear flowered shirts. But my point was that if we do accept your premise, what are the consequences? One consequence is that free will is precluded. The future must have causes which must have earlier causes which must have still earlier causes all the way back to the present. The present therefore, in a sense, contains the future. If you're able to predict the future, it means that the chain of cause-and-effect extends from the present to the future. That's determinism. If the future is determined, you have something to read, but free will is dead.

I could make this discussion a whole lot more complicated by explaining my own opinion, but it exhausts me just thinking about doing that.

You started this thread...why not explain your opinion? I promise just to read...

The repercussions and consequences are what interested. I'll leave this thread to you scientists. I'll just read. It might be more fun if you took off from the premise that pigs wear suspenders. (yes, I'm kidding).

[Zeno Swijtink]

Is this thread for real or is it something that already existed somewhere else and is the loop endlessly returning us to the same questions and are you observing this from a moving position or are you standing perfectly still

I wonder whether people here use Tarot or other forms of clairvoyance in making up their mind about important questions they face.

For instance relationship questions ("I've been with this great guy for 10 months now an we really love each other. Should I marry him?") or whether to move to another part of the country to take on a new job.

[Willie Lumplump]

Is this thread for real or is it something that already existed somewhere else and is the loop endlessly returning us to the same questions and are you observing this from a moving position or are you standing perfectly still

What a great question! This idea isn't as looney as it sounds. John Archibald Wheeler, who died not long ago and who was, I believe, the last living student of Niels Bohr, once proposed that there is only one electron in the universe, and . . . well, my memory fails me here . . . but a part of the idea was that somehow we are sweeping over a stationary picture that represents all there is, all there ever was, and all there will ever be. Wheeler's idea didn't catch on, but I wish more physicists would at least discuss it. And then Brian Greene in his most recent book explained something that sounded to me like it was a similar idea, but Greene often isn't very good about explaining in enough detail so you can know what he's talking about.

[Willie Lumplump]

You started this thread...why not explain your opinion?

I've never tried to explain it to anyone before, so I don't know how I'll do, but here goes: We know that the quantum world is ruled by laws of probability, and most physicists who think about the more philosophical side of physics (there aren't many) probably agree with the standard Copenhagen interpretation that there is no more fundamental level of reality hiding under the probabilistic laws. In the language of physics, there are no "hidden variables." That means that at the quantum level, that is, at the level of very small things, the universe is nondeterministic. Many quantum events don't happen for a reason. They just happen. Particles just suddenly pop out of the vacuum and then disappear back into the vacuum without reason (unless you consider statistical probabilities a reason). Furthermore, these popping, virtual particles can become real particles in some circumstances. Events happening without a reason closes the door on a deterministic universe, and so it seems to open a door on free will and close the door to tarot-like predictions of the future. However, if free will is subject to laws of probability, how is that free will? To exist at all, free will would have to be independent of both determinism and the random fluctuations of quantum mechanics. But if it were independent, it wouldn't be able to affect us, and that makes nonsense of the whole idea of free will. Therefore, my conclusion is that free will doesn't exist. It seems real only because . . . oh good grief . . . I'm already many words into this paragraph and I see that I've only just begun. Anyway, the rest of my ideas I take from E. O. Wilson who addressed the problem of consciousness in his book "Consilience." Maybe I can finish this later, if anybody is interested (which I doubt).

[Braggi]

... That means that at the quantum level, that is, at the level of very small things, the universe is nondeterministic. Many quantum events don't happen for a reason. They just happen. ...

Oh, I get it. What we don't understand we label "magic."
That seems to be the lesson of human history.

... Furthermore, these popping, virtual particles can become real particles in some circumstances. ...

Real, unreal. Real, unreal. Sure. More magic. I'm following along.

... Events happening without a reason closes the door on a deterministic universe, and so it seems to open a door on free will and close the door to tarot-like predictions of the future. ...

So, tarot and other divination methods are "magical thinking" and therefore untrue. Hmmmmm.

... To exist at all, free will would have to be independent of both determinism and the random fluctuations of quantum mechanics. But if it were independent, it wouldn't be able to affect us, and that makes nonsense of the whole idea of free will. ...

Gee teacher. I'm confused. (As usual.)

I have to make some lunch. Hopefully comprised of particles that are real and will stay that way for at least a few hours.

This is fun.

-Jeff

PS. Quantum mechanics is important to tarot readings like calculus is important to making change at a cash register. One couldn't exist without the other, but it's not something that is necessary to think about or understand in the moment.

[Willie Lumplump]

Oh, I get it. What we don't understand we label "magic."

I'm afraid that you've missed the point, which is much more troubling than you suppose. The point is that at the quantum level, there is nothing more to understand. There is no deeper layer of reality underlying the random appearance and disappearance of quantum particles. Understanding stops at probabilities. To even pose the question of what is behind the probabilities (like magic) is meaningless.

PS. Quantum mechanics is important to tarot readings like calculus is important to making change at a cash register. One couldn't exist without the other, but it's not something that is necessary to think about or understand in the moment.

Again, I think you've missed the point. Tarot implies certain consequences. If any of those consequences can be shown to be inconsistent with empirical reality or with basic logical assumptions, such as the universality of cause and effect, tarot is invalid.