Essentially no. And there are no proofs, because we don't know exactly what the uhiverse is doing now based on approximations of what is obsevd from long ago.

Agreed sir. But at broader scale, it seems like universe is somewhat predictable for example eclipses, orbital motion of planets etc.

Obviously, at quantum level the uncertainty of events is realized.

What is your opinion sir?

Regardless of what theory you talk about, there always is emirical components that escape theory. Theory alone is not enough.

Theory is just an aide to understanding.

You cannot prove quantum mechanics.

Respected Weisz,

Thanks for your response Sir. I could not get your answer. Whether you are in favor of deterministic universe or non-deterministic universe?

Quantum theory says only probabilities of outcomes can be predicted. The alternative is that particles prior to interactions have some pre-determined information which will be the cause of the outcome, but which we cannot observe in advance. That idea is generally known as "hidden variables". The experiments first performed by Alain Aspect, and subsequently by others who improved the techniques to remove "loop holes" have pretty much ruled out hidden variable theories. That implies the universe is not deterministic other than over statistically significant averages which give us classical mechanics.

@Dishman

Respected Sir,

Thanks for your response :-)

The existence of the concept of probability density provides a clear and complete answer to the question "is it possible to predict everything". The probability density expresses our scope of determination.

Chaos theory definitively says that "growth conditions" lead to non predictable macroscopic situations and microscopic situations are not within our scope of determination.

Therefore the answer is "we cannot determine or predict everything".

The concept of "Hidden Variables" tries to keep a backdoor open.

"If it would be possible to determine all hidden variables it may be deterministic.."

But according to chaos theory this backdoor cannot exist because the "tininess" is not limited. To any scope of determination an undeterminated subspace exists.

Radioactive decay is the classical example of unresolvable unpredictability.

No, not any possibility to predict.

However, the laws of physics are deterministic.

What is baffling is that we will never know all the boundary conditions.

No means to scrutinize nor shield the ground noise of all the de-Broglie-Dirac waves.

We live in deterministic universe as we can precisely predict with 200% surety that human would give birth to human only not monkey or donkey . It is called Law of determinism or Lapalase deterministic universe . Quantum mechanics and uncertainty principle of Heisenberg are now obsolete . in that place divine mechanics and mind incorporation in physics have come . Pl read attachment . For further details write Atomicgenetics or Atomicgenetics and origin of universe on google search , you will get new physics . Einstein's dice has won but Schrodinger's cat has lost the battle as it predicts both possibilities of dead and alive at the same time without opening the box ( superposition is fake concept of Quantum mechanics ) . By new theory of origin of universe where Creator B.B.B ( basic building block ) could predict all quantum experiments precisely even It could tell without opening the box whether cat is alive or dead . Every event of the universe is fedback to Almighty B.B.B via quantum entanglement . Pl learn New Physics or Physics of Mind .

Thanks

Dr Das

[email protected]

941146418

Dear George,

You wrote: "The experiments first performed by Alain Aspect, and subsequently by others who improved the techniques to remove "loop holes" have pretty much ruled out hidden variable theories."

That is a biased and wrong statement. These experiments (based on Bell's theorem) are related with the entanglement of particles, in which the straightforward understanding of science obliges us to conclude that in that case, the information between the particles is going much faster than light.

In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_experiments it is well explained that local reality cannot be excluded.

The fact that it is difficult to observe the possible validity of Bell's theorem, by testing, doesn't guarantee that on a finer level of particles, there would be no determinism.

To some degree we always have to respect the status quo

before moving on. So the usual answer is non deterministic.

Have nerver been able though to simply disregard those who say

that there is a noisy background involving short spatial and time

fluctuations as the hiddent variables and underlying cause.

@Wolfgang Konle

Respected sir,

Thanks for your response and reference to Chaos theory.

@Jacques Lavau

Dear sir, thanks for your answer..

@Vijay Mohan Das

Respected sir,

You have come with entity different idea. It would take time for me to read and understand your ideas. Did you try to publish your ideas with reputed research journals?

@Thierry De Mees,

Dear sir,

Your answer leaves me to continue reading more on this topic.

Thanks for you response sir.

We can divide known theories in two classes. Classical theories, which govern the universe at large scales are indeed deterministic. But quantum theories, which govern the world at the scale of atoms or smaller that are probabilistic in nature. You can however take classical limits of quantum laws, which are stated in terms of eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of quantum mechanical operators. To do this we have to compute `expectation values' of operators. Such expectation values enter into classical laws.

There are however a class of effects which are purely quantum mechanical in nature, which have no classical analog. One example of this is tunneling. Consider two Hydrogen nuclei fusing together to form a Helium nucleus. There is a coulomb barrier between two positive charges, which is penetrated by the effect of quantum tunneling. Since almost all the energy that we receive from the sun is produced via tunneling, we can say that purely quantum effects are also vital to our very existence.

@Biswajoy Brahmachari

Dear sir,

Simply, classical theories are deterministic and quantum theories are probabilistic.

But may we expect that in future we have some theory which is deterministic at atomic and sub-atomic level too?

Is there any theoretical barrier that prevents the possibility to have such a theory?

@Biswajoy Brahmachari : "probabilistic in nature".

No, only the Göttingen-København semantics is probabilistic in nature, though the formalism is 100 % undulatory and deterministic.

It remains that you will never "isolate" any quantic system in the real world. You will never know "all" the boundary conditions. You will never shield your ideal experiment from the de-Broglie-Dirac ground noise. Your only hope is that on big numbers, the de-Broglie-Dirac ground noise will average.

No more, no less.

Translation at

Transactional Quantic Microphysics, Principles and Applications, chapters 1 and 2.

Determinism in the sense of exact predicability is very rare to find.

Even the clasical three body problem cannot be worked out analytically, not

to mention the behaviour of a gas in terms of individual atoms and subjects like chaos theory. Probabilistic methods are indispensable even without

quantum theory. Without this science would indeed be rather impovrished.

Even in math, to talk about the distribution of the prime numbers, this is important.

It is becoming old fashioned to talk about determinism.

I think that those in qm talking about determinism, simply refer to the free evolution of the schrodinger eq. between measurements...the behaviour of a partial differential equation.(without mention of the meaning of psi)

@Juan Weiz : " the meaning of psi " is in your mind what the ennemies of Erwin Schrödinger said it "is". Precisely the contrary of what Schrödinger wrote himself.

Maybe you are right, the Born interpretation came later.

@Danewalia: Theory and experiment should go hand in hand. The barrier for constructing a deterministic quantum theory is not purely theoretical, it is also experimental. Let me quote from a paper of Heisenberg in which he proposed a high resolution gamma ray microscope. "If one wants to be clear about what is meant by `position of an object,` for example of an electron..., then one has to specify definite experiments by which the "position of an electron" can be measured; otherwise this term has no meaning at all."

Very high energy and very modern experiments of today can probe nuclei and it's substructures at the quark level. But Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is not violated yet.

Of course ! " Heisenberg's uncertainty principle" is just a relabelling of the properties of the Fourier transform, already known for a century when Heisenberg relabelled them for his territorial purpose!

We are that far from small scale determinism that this should not be a question at all.

Think about "Brownian Motion" or the undeterminable istant and the radiation direction when an excited atom or molecule will emit a photon. And without small scale determinism, large scale determinism is also limited. The limitations are described by the chaos theory.