Determinism [Spirituality & Religion]

Determinism only needs one example to be torn down. Answer this.

You have 1 trillion atoms of a radioactive substance of a single isotope. The half-life of said substance is 10 years. So, after 10 years, only 500 billion atoms remain. After 20 years, only 250 billion. 30 years, 125 billion. This keeps going until there is only a single atom left. After 10 years, there is a 50/50 shot of that atom disappearing. After 20 years, there is a 75/25 shot of that atom disappearing. Now for two questions:
How can the beginning of time and space determine which atoms within the original 1 trillion will disappear, and which ones will stay?
and
How can anything know for certain whether the final atom will stay or disappear?

If there are laws of physics which are constant, then two systems with the exact same starting parameters will progress the same way.

You ask how we can know about the final atom? We can't because (a) we will never have a complete understanding of the laws of the universe (b) you can't build a model of the universe that doesn't contain the universe.

The question then is whether we believe there are a set of immutable physical laws or not. If there are, determinism is inevitable. We have constructed our entire world around that notion. It's why planes don't fall out of the sky without a physical reason, how we were able to land on the moon.

@GlassDog: So in other words, you partially agree with my statement, because humans haven't discovered a way to disprove my statement. How about this? Humans are developing computers at such a fast rate, and at one point, computers will upgrade themselves to a point where they can model and predict universal outcomes. Would these computers be able to answer my question? Would there even be a need to?

@michaelpokemon8: Yes, determinism is impossible to prove. A computer cannot model everything because it would have to include itself in the model too. Any change to the model would mean another change to the model because the computer changed, and so on, and so on.

All we can go on is whether it feels like the universe observes a set of laws (known and unknown). My gut instinct is that there are a set of physical laws (some of which we already know), so then I have to say my gut also believes in determinism.

@GlassDog: I believe @IvanKaramazov explained it well. Determinism cannot account for quantum theory, thus is not omni-applicable. Not many observable events are truly random, so keep in mind, limited determinism can be applied, but absolute determinism cannot be proven, therefore, cannot be used as evidence for no god/God.

@michaelpokemon8: Isn't it the other way round? That the laws of physics account for determinism? And what may appear random might simply yet to have a pattern discovered.

@GlassDog: Determinism only needs one counterexample to disprove. Since it relies on no true randomness, and no one can accurately answer the question I posed, no one can logically believe in absolute determinism. Quantum mechanics is very popular, with famous names like Einstein and Hawking being thrown about as simple "physicists." However, quantum mechanics is unlike normal physics, as it deals with subjects general physics does not account for. For example, the position of an electron at any given time interval, radiation, or almost anything subatomic. Schrodinger made a huge breakthrough with his PhD thesis, and won a Nobel Prize due to his single formula on finding the amount of energy in a quantum mechanical system. Normal physics as normal people see is mainly electricity, fluid dynamics, and macroscopic motion. These can all theoretically be predicted. But, just as no one can predict where two atoms will go once they collide, one cannot prove absolute determinism.

@MaybeTooNarcissistic: I'm afraid I just have to say the same thing again. It doesn't matter than we can't predict it. What matters is that it is predictable (whether we've discovered how to yet or not).

Before we learned to predict solar eclipses, where they unpredictable? No. Our ignorance had no effect on their predictability.

@GlassDog: Unless they can be proven to be predictable, one cannot assume that something is predictable. Therein lies the fallacy. If we assume a being smart enough to devise a way to predict such things exists, then the discussion is meaningless. Determinism may be true, may be untrue, but cannot be assumed true unless proven. Similarly, no undeniable proof for Darwinian Evolution has come to light, so it cannot be taken as undeniable truth. To be clear, I am not a Christian, and I believe that the Bible cannot also be taken as undeniable truth.

@MaybeTooNarcissistic: Pretty much exactly what I said earlier. It can never be proved nor disproved because the only way to do so is to know everything.