If a supercomputing could predict exactly what we would do for the rest of our lives, would it refute the concept of free will?

The problem with this question lies in the beginning.It is impossible to predict the future. How big that computer is too. Though it is tie of the size of the Earth, eventually the reality runs out of the pass with the prediction. Compare it with the weather, though you planted around the meter a weather station that transmits measurements in the ground and bobbing in boats at sea, the biggest supercomputers coupled, then you could not predict the weather of 2 weeks ahead with high certainty. Reality and prediction always run apart.

Here we come in the field of non-linear mathematics.

In the middle of last century, the computer began to take its place, Edward Lorenz discovered that non-linear systems are de facto unpredictable.

The story behind it is nice enough.Lorentz had programmed a (very simple) weather system, consisting of three differential equations. And that simple system behaved pretty the same as the real weather. 鈧?虄Morning, his Collega s were looking at the prediction for that day. Bets were closed and lost.

So far nothing going on, a simple non-linear system and those do this kind of weird stuff.But on an evil (actually a very good) day, the HP computer was stuck. Luckily, Lorentz had the printout of his system at hand. He performed the last values in his system and luckily he was a meticulous man. He performed the last 4 weeks of data (or thereon), 4 decimal places, and his computer did not go in and started the calculation.

He expected the system to print the same data as before, a good check if everything worked well.4 decimals, das not nothing. But no, to his astonishment, the new calculations were increasingly divergent. Until there was no more agreement.

This led to a deeper understanding of the unpredictability of non-linear dynamic systems.

This incident led to the winged ruling: the wing blow of a butterfly in Brazil could cause a hurricane in Texas months later.Very small effects can have enormous consequences. However, this applies to special circumstances, denoted by the term 鈧?虄far out of Equilibrium . All this led to what we now know under the name Chaos theory.

The Butterfly Effect: How one action can change the world-Bedrock

For now, it is still a mustache with free will.Saved by not Lineairiteit, you will only happen…

Carel

No.

Free will and determinism are not mutually exclusive.
Incidentally, it would mean that that supercomputing built a kind of fac-simile from you.

Free Will has previously to do with the degree of influence you exert on your environment (degrees of freedom).This is based on the information and influences that you experience as a person. The decisions you take yourself, regardless of how that information has ended up with you.

Instead of approaching this question very scientifically, I think you can do enough with a practical answer.I’ve outlined here two Scenario s.

1. The supercomputing is able to predict what we do > the word predict assumes a certain chance that the computer is not at the right end.

It therefore only imposes restrictions on free will, since we can tend to follow a path predicted by the computer. Here will be a psychological term for it, but I do not know.

• The supercomputing is capable of dictating what we do > it speaks for itself.
• We have no more free will. What is predicted is happening.