I'm not a physicist, I have read a lot about Bell's theorem and the Einstein/Bohr debates and I have the following question:
Judging by only classical physics, it seems we live in a 100% deterministic universe. If I got that wrong, then my whole question won't make sense. But I think you would agree that we can calculate a bullet's path with 100% accuracy and we don't observe true randomness anywhere in the universe based on classical physics. When I shoot a billiard ball and all forces are known, I'm sure you will all agree that there's no uncertainty about where the ball will land. In other words, if we forget about Quantum Physics for a moment, couldn't we all agree that the universe is deterministic ?.
But Bell's theorem came along and ruled out superdeterminism , which completely contradicted all that. But when I'm looking at Bell's theorem:
- Bell admitted there might be loopholes
- everything that isn't on a quantum scale in the univers acts as perfectly deterministic
We assume that tiny building blocks act in non-classical physics while seeing that larger building blocks act perfectly according to classical physics and in turn determinism. So shouldn't the fact that classical physics is so well observed and tested force us to assume that there is a high probability that Bell's theorem has some sort of loophole?
At the risk of going more off topic I would like to add:
- I don't get why Bell's Theorem is often discussed in the context of Free Will. What does the one have to do with the other? Because even if there is quantum uncertainty, how does that proof that our brains make use of this uncertainty to make decisions?