OK,

I once believed that it would one day be possible to predict the future
with extreme accuracy. I have never believed in "magic" or the word
"random". However, then I thought about this proof by contradiction:

We want to prove the future is unpredictable.

Assume: The future is predictable.

Then: I can obtain a printout of the future.

Then: I can choose to betray the future.

Thus: The future printout was wrong.

Contradiction.
Thus: The future is unpredictable.

Let me know your thoughts!
julia

From:	stlbl
Subject:	Re: proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	5 Jan 2005 04:53:12 -0800

By saying you can predict the future, and, assuming you believe in
causality(cause produces effects in a time frame mving forward)---you
have assumed that in the "printout" of the future, all the events that
would have led up to this "true" future would have come to pass, to
enable it. By "betraying the future", you invalidate the future
printout through causality, NOT make it unpredictable.
Its sort of like the way to get around probability of flipping a
coin---50 % are heads and tails if you do enough trials---but if you
knew ALL the parameters, the force with which you flips it, its
trajectory weight, how long it remains in the air, etc---you could
predict EACH trial. I think Einstein or some other physicist put forth
this argument.Knowing all the starting conditions of every event
connected with each next event, using a Kalman like predictor-model,
maybe one could predict the future. Still because you cant know
everything, it woould be difficult and even impossible to be correct
100% of the time. Some future events are easily predictable however.

From:	Soteira
Subject:	re:proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	Wed, 05 Jan 2005 15:04:19 GMT

I also used to believe that in a fully causal universe everything
could be, in principle, predicted perfectly. The possibility of
"betrayal" was an annoying but also amusing play, and endless loop
with no sensible solution...

I believe the idea of causal universe has nowadays been shattered from
many different angles (actually, quantum physics probably had
shattered it before i was born, the fact just wasn't generally
noticed or accepted into western consensus reality). Uncertainty
principle alone says that accurate observations can't be made
(requirement for predictions), existence of singularities (black
holes etc.) in the universe necessarily "breaks" causality etc. etc.
Finally, in order to predict how universe behaves, you'd need an
exact copy of our universe and "spoil" it by retrieving one
prediction from it (retrieval of data would necessarily change its
state and thus direction). And then the knowledge of the prediction,
registered in your brains (as change in matter/energy), would change
this universe also, remember that "everything is effected by
everything". At which point things would really start fizzling.

Predicting "human destiny" is actually a whole lot more sensible
playground, at least in the context of (Jungian) subconscious mind.
The whole of the psyche seen as a process where our conscious mind -
not being aware of the whole of the psyche with its data structures
(archetypes etc.) and alterations of energy - is only a manifestation
of the whole. Then there could be predictions meaningful to this "seen
level" of everyday consciousness, based on somehow retrieving
subconscious material, knowing something about the process itself,
and, finally, mapping the data somehow to represent predictions
MEANINGFUL to our everyday life. But this is not an option for the
western consensus reality, which denies the possibility of our
everyday rational mind not being the ultimate authority, and would
rather cling to causal model of the universe.

A question: can consciousness exist in a fully deterministic, causal
universe?

--------------------------------------------
Posted at the Plebius Press
Psychology News - http://www.plebius.org/

From:	julia
Subject:	Re: proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	5 Jan 2005 05:54:47 -0800

Right... well that is what I just proved... the future cannot be
predicted with 100% certainty. In fact, by my first axiom: "The future
is predictable" the "printout" must take into consideration EVERYTHING
in the world, including future printouts since they clearly have an
effect on the future.

julia

From:	Vince
Subject:	Re: proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:21:40 GMT

"julia" wrote in message
news:1104933287.047619.280640@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Right... well that is what I just proved... the future cannot be
> predicted with 100% certainty. In fact, by my first axiom: "The future
> is predictable" the "printout" must take into consideration EVERYTHING
> in the world, including future printouts since they clearly have an
> effect on the future.
>
> julia

Not so. Some predictions have an effect on the future, but it is still
possible to make a prediction that will not be published and so will not be
contradicted.

From:	stlbl
Subject:	Re: proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	5 Jan 2005 07:50:13 -0800

Can consciousness exist in a fully deterministic, causal universe?
Good question. I don't believe that the universe is completely causal
or deterministic, but do believe that consciousness exists.
Consciousness, to use the Jungian model, is probably just the tip of
the iceberg, as the UNconscious includes the preconscious, i.e.
elements of the psyche that have not aquired enough energy, numinosity,
meaning or form to erupt into the conscious, the personal unconscious,
the collective unconscious, etc..
Therefore consciousness does not and cannot exist by itself (an island
unto itself)---if the questioner had this in mind!? Its almost as if
you are asking whether or not determinism or causality precludes
consciousness, or if complete determinism and its use to make the
ENTIRE FUTURE always predictable (boring) make consciousness
UNNECESSARYand since I am in no position to say what CAUSES
consciousness (I am assuming here that I am conscious) I certainly
whould make not attempt to guess what may preclude or prevent
consciousness, or render it useless. Jung seemed to be fascinated by
people or myths concerning beings going about their business in a
seemingly unconscious state. The unexamined life may not be worth
living, but it sure is fun to analyze! Without it there may be no call
for psychologists or counselors....

From:	JAKJRF
Subject:	re:proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	Fri, 07 Jan 2005 14:04:23 GMT

It is "...possible to predict the future
with extreme accuracy". Prediction with accuracy involves modeling
the system for which we will make prediction. That model can be
improved by observation [several methods have been suggested
already]. Systems are constrained quite nicely; even those with
seemingly infinite number of actors , each
actor relates in limited ways [large number theory bears this out].
Since the leading question posed "prediction with accuracy" rather
than foreknowledge [e.g. returning to past or future] there is no
contradiction. For us to say we will do a thing then purposefully not
do that thing may creates a moral dilemma but more importantly
suggests the model of ourselves needs improvement.

--------------------------------------------
Posted at the Plebius Press
Psychology News - http://www.plebius.org/

From:	Vince
Subject:	Re: re:proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	Sun, 09 Jan 2005 06:47:16 GMT

"JAKJRF" wrote in message
news:1105106663.5f7b76bbae61d3ef9fb5a5fd7fa83724@teranews...
> It is "...possible to predict the future
> with extreme accuracy". Prediction with accuracy involves modeling
> the system for which we will make prediction. That model can be
> improved by observation [several methods have been suggested
> already]. Systems are constrained quite nicely; even those with
> seemingly infinite number of actors , each
> actor relates in limited ways [large number theory bears this out].
> Since the leading question posed "prediction with accuracy" rather
> than foreknowledge [e.g. returning to past or future] there is no
> contradiction. For us to say we will do a thing then purposefully not
> do that thing may creates a moral dilemma but more importantly
> suggests the model of ourselves needs improvement.

But I do think that it is possible to set up a situation in which someone
will see a published prediction and deliberately confound it by doing
something differently. All this means is that any such prediction is open to
confounding - not that all predictions will be. We can predict that a
particular prediction will never come into the hands of anyone who is both
empowered and intent on confounding it. Then it can be a true prediction.

From:	stlbl
Subject:	Re: proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	5 Jan 2005 04:54:40 -0800

Sorry Plebius, I did nt read your post before I sent my previous one.

From:	julia
Subject:	Re: re:proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	5 Jan 2005 05:52:08 -0800

Ok, sorry I guess I just worded it wrong. I know it is possible to
somewhat predict the future. We do it all the time. For example:

d = v * t

Distance is velocity by time. In fact any function in time attempts to
predict the future.

However, I feel that my proof gives a topological proof that the entire
state of the future cannot be known. I suppose this is similar to the
"Heisenberg principal"? That is let us say we have the state of the
world today: S and we want the the state for tomorrow: S' then we
simply apply all the rules of nature, F (granted we certainly do not
know all of F today, but we do know parts of it):

F(S, t) = S'

This is what I previously believed. Now I believe this based on my
proof:

F(S, S', t) = S'

So again, you bring up a good point, but I'm trying to prove whether or
not the future is 100% predictable. I suppose this may be an obvious
point to some people? I guess, I just wanted to prove it.

julia

Plebius wrote:
> You've set up a false dichotomy between predictability and
randomness.
> When, in fact, we can predict certain things about the future with
> varying degrees of accuracy.
>
> Prediction of the future is not an all-or-nothing proposition.
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Posted at the Plebius Press
> Psychology News - http://www.plebius.org/

From:	Plebius
Subject:	re:proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:04:14 GMT

You've set up a false dichotomy between predictability and randomness.
When, in fact, we can predict certain things about the future with
varying degrees of accuracy.

Prediction of the future is not an all-or-nothing proposition.

--------------------------------------------
Posted at the Plebius Press
Psychology News - http://www.plebius.org/

From:	Vince
Subject:	Re: proof that it is impossible to predict the future
Date:	Thu, 06 Jan 2005 16:07:44 GMT

"julia" wrote in message
news:1104898905.738377.267880@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> OK,
>
> I once believed that it would one day be possible to predict the future
> with extreme accuracy. I have never believed in "magic" or the word
> "random". However, then I thought about this proof by contradiction:
>
> We want to prove the future is unpredictable.
>
> Assume: The future is predictable.
>
> Then: I can obtain a printout of the future.
>
> Then: I can choose to betray the future.
>
> Thus: The future printout was wrong.
>
> Contradiction.
> Thus: The future is unpredictable.
>
> Let me know your thoughts!
> julia

The crucial distinction, for me, is between published predictions and actual
events. I agree with you that if you are going to confound all published
predictions as a matter of demonstration, you can do that, at least
regarding your own actions. So it follows logically that no prediction to
which you have access and which is about your future actions can be
guaranteed correct. You can always (in principle) confound it.

But suppose that I am another scientist who works secretly and has the sole
task of discovering what events are already predetermined for the world;
what is really going to happen. I don't publish anything. Now whatever
happens, whatever predictions are published, and whatever attitude you
assume to them, and however you respond by trying to demonstrate that they
are false, which they might well be, the determinist will still say that it
was bound to happen that way, including all of your responses to the
published predictions. Determinism per se is not about publishing
predictions and then holding its breath to see whether someone contradicts
them. It is just about there being only one possible future. And if there is
only one possible future it might logically be possible to predict it,
provided that the prediction is not published and read by someone with your
agenda.

Vince

>