Is there such thing as destiny?

[Ian]

If the definition of the Universe is "everything in it" then the set with {"everything in it", the Universe} perforce is {"everything in it", "everything in it"} and that is double counting. It has nothing to do with whether matter and energy is the total of "everything".

If we want the multiverse, then by definition of "in" other universes were not in it, but other universes deny the definition of the universe as "everything". I hope we are not arguing that causality can be affected by "other universes" because such other universes have no force transmission into ours.

Similarly with multiple dimensions. Force is a vector, and for a force to cause an effect, the effect follows from that vector. If there are dimensions we cannot see, then either motion in them does not cause effects in our three spatial dimensions or Newtonian mechanics are wrong. We could have additional "rolled up dimensions" and an argument could be made that the quantization of action (leading to the existence of Planck's constant, and hence quantum mechanics) is evidence of such an additional dimension, but it does not affect determinism.

The argument that that which is affected by deterministic effects is predetermined arises because the cause of this effect was the effect of a previous cause, and we are forced to go back to the big bang. Since mechanics are deterministic, we have to go back and ask is there anything in addition to mechanics, and as I pointed out above, thermodynamics can introduce new causes. Thus if I operate a hose, the mechanics of the hose and water are fulfilled irrespective of where I point it, but what happens where the water strikes was caused by my decision and that was not predetermined, or at least you cannot prove it was.

[Jim]

Having monitored this discussion since it began in May, 2018, many of the messages, both pro and con, brought to mind a quote attributed to Confederate General Lou Armistead when asked to describe fellow General, George Pickett, during the American Civil War. He said: "George has a knack for trivializing the momentous and complicating the obvious."

[J.]

Jim wrote: "Having monitored this discussion since it began in May, 2018, many of the messages, both pro and con, brought to mind a quote attributed to Confederate General Lou Armistead when asked to describe ..."

A quote which is sadly applicable to Pickett's most famous moment in history.

[Papaphilly]

Ian wrote: "If the definition of the Universe is "everything in it" then the set with {"everything in it", the Universe} perforce is {"everything in it", "everything in it"} and that is double counting. It has nothing to do with whether matter and energy is the total of "everything"...."

As you note, we can define the Universe as everything in it. By your own definition, Everything not in the Universe is not part of the universe. Yet, that does not preclude there are things not in the Universe or that it is impossible that there are things not in the Universe. The definition is that to be part of the Universe, you have to be in it. It also does not preclude something not in the universe to affect the Universe.

Ian,

I think I gave you the next book to write.

[Ian]

Papaphilly, I think you tried to push me into the next rabbit hole :-)

[Papaphilly]

Ian wrote: "Papaphilly, I think you tried to push me into the next rabbit hole :-)"

I'm late, I'm late for a very important date..