Is Free Will an Illusion? Quantum Experiments Aim to Find Out

New Quantum physics experiments can soon test the question old as humanity: Do we really have free will?

Researchers say they are closing in such a way as to determine whether our elections are truly ours or dictated by the hidden laws of physics, according to a report published in A new scientist Tuesday.

Quantum experiments are designed to test the so -called “assumptions about the independence of measurement”, which suggests that the hidden variables do not affect the settings chosen by the experiments proof or denial of free will existence.

“Many religions resolve the conflict between the concept of the omniscient God and the commandment of God not to commit sin, assuming that human beings have a partial free will,” a professor at the University of Seville wrote in the report by Adan Cabello. “But if partial free will is not possible, nor is that resolution.”

In the report, researchers developed new tests based on Bell’s inequality, also known as Bell’s theoremThe principle that physicist John Bell introduced in 1964 to show whether entangled particles show correlations that cannot be explained to classical physics.

This assumption tests Quant tangledwhere particles seem to currently coordinate their behavior at long distances.

Defining free will

IN quantum computersThe tangling of the quabits connects so that the condition of one currently affects the state of the other, regardless of their physical separation, allowing the system to simultaneously execute complex calculations in multiple directions.

Loosing this assumption and considering the possibility that the elections were not completely free of charge, the team hoped to determine if the connections between the entangled particles-they were known as non-loose correlations, which are currently at huge distances-themework of quantum mechanics or the result of some hidden force in the game.

Concept free will It has deep roots in western thought, appearing in ancient Greece with philosophers like Aristotle, and shaped by the emphasis of Christian theology on moral responsibility. He later developed through the Enlightenment Ideals of Individual Autonomy.

According to the California University of San Diego, professor of philosophy Eddy Chen, every attempt to connect quantum mechanics with free will depends largely on how the free will is defined – something even philosophers and physicists often disagree.

“Even those who have been studying it for years to define it, and seemingly clear definitions remain controversial,” Chen said Decipheses. “If you accept it, others may not. Therefore, whether quantum mechanics can prove or deny free will depends on how a free will is defined.”

Chen, associate of the John Bell Institute for the foundations of physics, said that, although science, he can inform philosophical issues, often remains neutral in questions that include values, the ultimate causes or nature of the reality itself.

He explained that questions such as free will or coincidence can have scientific implications if certain assumptions are made, but these assumptions are open to challenge and supervision.

“Some discussions, especially philosophical concepts such as free will, rely on the resonate, not the empirical testing,” he said. “Science can solve questions with clear definitions, but Murkier concepts are harder to experimentally solve.”

Hidden relationships

The new approach to the researcher is spreading to Bell’s theorem exploring scenarios where experimenters could only have partial free will, which means that their choices are not completely independent, but they still contain a certain degree of autonomy. According to Chen, it does not weaken the argument, but expands its implications.

“They do not say that we lack free will. Even if one has only partial free will, the theorem is still applied,” Chen said. “As long as there is some freedom, only local interactions can not produce quantum predictions. Therefore, Bell theorem is applied not only to full freedom, but also in space with partial freedom.”

When asked what could control the “second half of” human choice if the free will is only partial, Chen said that finding this answer would require a radical new theory – one that not only explains daily physics, but also for hidden relationships between distant decisions.

“The skeptic could claim for a new physical theory that explains not only what we see, but also the hidden connections between your choice and mine, even though we are far away,” he said.

“While such a theory does not exist, we take it seriously. This theorem can be applied in cases where such local theory cannot act. It is not only difficult to construct – it is mathematically impossible.”

Quantum experiments may not resolve the discussion of free will, but they begin to change our understanding.

Even a little choice, researchers say, is enough to exclude simple explanations, suggesting that the real mystery is not free will, but how much we actually have.

Edited Sebastian Sinclair and Josh Quttner