Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Quackenbush's' started by THEU, Sep 11, 2008.
In reply to:
My decision on what to eat for dinner is only happening in one place. I am also only eating dinner in one place. The relativity of simultaneity has nothing to do with one person making a decision and whether free will is possible.
There is no frame of reference in which I eat dinner before I decide what to eat for dinner.
It only calls into question the order of events that take place in two discrete locations and, realistically, via two different actors.
I am the only actor in the deciding then doing sequence. Once again, there is no frame of reference possible where I do before I decide. Relativity of simultaneity does not apply to this situation. The order of these events is not in question according to any theory I've ever heard of.
If I drop a rock from a rooftop, there is no frame of reference in which the rock hits the ground before I release it. The order of independent events is questioned by relativity of simultaneity. These events are not independent.
Bah. My post two posts ago was poorly written. It all boils down to the fact that the order of dependent events is not in question.
It's somewhat analogous to the example showing that a perfectly rigid rod can't exist. There's no observational frame where the other end of the rod moves before the end that I push because the other end's movement is clearly dependend on the pushed end's movement.
No, I got you, and you were right. I didn't mean it so much as an attack on "free will" just an attack on the concept of a fundamental state of "right now" that God would have to know completely to meet the standard of omniscience. As it relates to the choice itself, the order is not variable even if the interval is. Relativity does not deny free will.