First of all, sorry for my knowledge of physics. Maybe my question is too obvious but I want to ask it.

I am thinking about fate and if it exist or no.

According to my assumption if I take any system, for example cube, throw into it some atoms and I will know all the laws which exist at this cube, I can predict position of this atoms at any moment of time.

On the other hand I know about such experiment called "Schrödinger's cat" and quantum superposition. So, it brings uncertainty to my system.

If this uncertainty will exist at cube than I can't predict anything.

Taking into account this assumptions I can say that at our universe fate doesn't exist. But I know that during this choices parallel universe can be created. It's horrible for me to imagine numerous number of parallel universes.

What you can say about it? It's naive or it makes sense?

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The concept of parallel universes is just philosophical right now, so you should just ignore it... given the physics that we actually know, this quantum superposition stuff, then yes there is no "fate" because random fluctuations will perturb your atoms' paths from their originally-determined motions. $\endgroup$ – Chris Gerig Jan 6 '13 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ Like a Schroedinger's cat FATE exists and does not exist at the same time.Chose each day whatever option suits you best and see if something changes. Our FATE is not imposed initial condition but our essence. $\endgroup$ – Asphir Dom Mar 8 '13 at 10:17

If this uncertainty will exist at cube than I can't predict anything.

You can predict something: if you know the wavefunctions of the atoms in the box, you know the probability of finding them in (x,y,z,t) if you perturb them very slightly, with a soft photon, for example. In general quantum mechanical solutions do give predictions, their predictions have been checked against data of elementary particles many many times by now, and they are correct.

I always found the cat in the box an unfortunate analogue. That is because we also have innumerable measurements of macroscopic classical physics, with known equations and laws that are very predictive and work very well. A cat is a macroscopic object and there exists a transition region between microscopic and macroscopic physics which is bridged, among other methods by the density matrix view of the state. It is called Quantum Decoherence.

In quantum mechanics, quantum decoherence is the loss of coherence or ordering of the phase angles between the components of a system in a quantum superposition. One consequence of this dephasing is classical or probabilistically additive behavior. Quantum decoherence gives the appearance of wave function collapse (the reduction of the physical possibilities into a single possibility as seen by an observer) and justifies the framework and intuition of classical physics as an acceptable approximation: decoherence is the mechanism by which the classical limit emerges out of a quantum starting point and it determines the location of the quantum-classical boundary. Decoherence occurs when a system interacts with its environment in a thermodynamically irreversible way. This prevents different elements in the quantum superposition of the system+environment's wavefunction from interfering with each other. Decoherence has been a subject of active research since the 1980s.

In simpler words, when an enormous number of quantum mechanical entities (atoms,molecules, photons) are involved the problem becomes statistical and falls back in the realm of classical physics, which is strictly predictive.

If by "fate" you mean destiny, then the quantum mechanical level is irrelevant, because people move and live in a classical meta level and quantum mechanics rarely interferes with their life.

As @ChrisGerig says in the comment there is no experimental evidence that parallel worlds exist, so you can relax. It is just an extrapolation from the mathematical methods used to describe quantum phenomena. Would you worry if sine and cosine functions exist somewhere immaterial?

  • $\begingroup$ But if single radioactive atom can influence on some toxin, which can poison a person. In this case I can say that the quantum mechanical level is relevant? $\endgroup$ – Viacheslav Kondratiuk Jan 9 '13 at 10:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A single atom is insignificant to the biology of a person. we have multiples of 10^23 atoms in our our body, a single atom is not even noise. If you mean to construct an elaborate experiment where the radioctivity is used as a random number generator, decisive on the life or death of a person, the quantum level is as relevant as a computer generated random number. $\endgroup$ – anna v Jan 9 '13 at 11:46

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.