A remark on the role of indeterminism and non-locality in the violation of Bell's inequality

Some years ago Aerts et al. presented a macroscopic model in which the amount of non-locality and indeterminism could be continuously varied, and used it to show that by increasing non-locality one increases, as expected, the degree of violation of Bell's inequality (BI), whereas, more surprisingly, by increasing indeterminism one decreases the degree of the violation of BI. In this note we propose a different macroscopic model in which the amount of non-locality and indeterminism can also be parameterized, and therefore varied, and we find that, in accordance with the model of Aerts et al., an increase of non-locality produces a stronger violation of BI. However, differently from their model, we also find that, depending on the initial state in which the system is prepared, an increase of indeterminism can either strengthen or weaken the degree of violation of BI.Comment: 7 pages, 4 figure

Is Time Travel Too Strange to Be Possible? Determinism and Indeterminism on Closed Timelike Curves

Notoriously, the Einstein equations of general relativity have solutions in which closed timelike curves (CTCs) occur. On these curves time loops back onto itself, which has exotic consequences. However, in order to make time travel stories consistent constraints have to be satisfied, which prevents seemingly ordinary and plausible processes from occurring. This, and several other "unphysical" features, have motivated many authors to exclude solutions with CTCs from consideration, e.g. by conjecturing a chronology protection law. In this contribution we shall investigate the nature of one particular class of exotic consequences of CTCs, namely those involving unexpected cases of indeterminism or determinism. Indeterminism arises even against the backdrop of the usual deterministic physical theories when CTCs do not cross spacelike hypersurfaces outside of a limited CTC-region (such hypersurfaces fail to be Cauchy surfaces). By contrast, a certain kind of determinism appears to arise when an indeterministic theory is applied on a CTC: things cannot be different from what they already were. We shall argue that on further consideration both this indeterminism and determinism on CTCs turn out to possess analogues in other, familiar areas of physics. CTC-indeterminism is close to the epistemological indeterminism we know from statistical physics, while the "fixedness" typical of CTC-determinism is pervasive in physics. CTC-determinism and CTC-indeterminism therefore do not provide incontrovertible grounds for rejecting CTCs as conceptually inadmissible

Session 4: Evolutionary Indeterminism

Proceedings of the Pittsburgh Workshop in History and Philosophy of Biology, Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, March 23-24 2001 Session 4: Evolutionary Indeterminis

The dome: An unexpectedly simple failure of determinism

Newton's equations of motion tell us that a mass at rest at the apex of a dome with the shape specified here can spontaneously move. It has been suggested that this indeterminism should be discounted since it draws on an incomplete rendering of Newtonian physics, or it is "unphysical," or it employs illicit idealizations. I analyze and reject each of these reasons. Copyright 2008 by the Philosophy of Science Association. All rights reserved

Free Will: Real or Illusion - A Debate

Debate on free will with Christian List, Gregg Caruso, and Cory Clark. The exchange is focused on Christian List's book Why Free Will Is Real