Free will is built into the cosmos by virtue of quantum uncertainty. Although you reference determinism on the level of atoms, on the quantum level there cannot be any such determinism because quantum effects are probabilistic.
In the universe there are really only two properties: energy and charge. Matter does not really exist. It only appears to exist from our perspective. But at the quantum level, matter and mass are artifacts created by energy that has acquired charge, and from this the illusion of matter is created.
But matter is all based on statistics -- when you look at an electron, for example, you find that there is no "there" to the electron -- rather, there is only a probability of where you will find the greatest effect of the idea of an electron.
That statistical uncertainty about where exactly the electron is, and therefore what its interactions will be with other particles, which we call probability, introduces unpredictability into the universe, and the outcome for us at this level of existence is free will.
Can we prove though that quantum indeterminacy has any significant effect for linear, macro-scale events?
Can't predict radioactive decay, which is a feature of quantum indeterminacy ;-)
And, if you talk to computer chip manufacturers, they will tell you that quantum tunneling, where indeterminacy will occasionally cause electrons to pop into existence outside of a wire, limits how small we can make computer chips.
Sorry for the late reply. This is indeed interesting, but not enough to defy the linearity of time (past-present-future) which is precisely what limits our free will. Although quantum effects are probabilistic, on the macroscale we always end up with a definite result.
For example, although it's impossible to predict the decay of individual atoms, an element will decay at some point and you can make predictions for larger numbers of atoms together. Combine this fact with the countless interactions that happen every day on all levels, that lead to a certain result at a specific point in time, which in turn is combined with countless other results and lead to yet another one. That result couldn't have happened any other way because everything which lead up to that point has already happened. The world seems so chaotic, but it only seems so because the interactions are just to many for us to predict any result. So it's seemingly random. But if, say, we had a supercomputer that could somehow note all the chains of variants... we could predict the outcome.
All I'm trying to say is that the randomness that exists on the quantum level cannot significantly affect linear interactions. An electron might not be here and be there instead, a particle might end up doing something unexpected; but a glass, which is a whole bunch of particles, will still break when falling from a table. This is also about statistics. The possibilities of all particles "agreeing" to be modified in such a state each that the glass un-breaks are so low they are practically zero.
Additionally, even if there was some level of randomness, that still does not mean it's free will. Our decisions would still be based on outside factors beyond our control. The definition of "free" requires something that exists on a separate space-time frame, not bound to anything, which is not possible. Such belief does not differ from a religious one.
A fellow steemian wrote another
article on the subject. He agrees that free will is an illusion, let me know what you think.
I agree with all of what you say about macro versus micro. It's the whole "river" analogy -- you can splash about all you want and create some local ripples, but the steady flow of the river very quickly erases any record of your presence.
Sort of.
The reality is that the ripples we create are part of a dynamic system, but that dynamic system follows strict rules. In theory, if you had a powerful enough computer and the ability to track precisely each and every molecule, including precise information on speed and location of each and every molecule, you could reverse engineer every single ripple that ever happened in that river in the past as well as the future, because the system is roughly the equivalent of a hologram in its ability to store a record of every interaction that ever happened with it.
Sort of.
Because, you notice, I said "precise information on speed and location", and that's where the whole quantum indeterminate issue starts to affect the whole system. Imagine one molecule being in a slightly different place -- won't have macro effects today, but that will start a ripple, a chain of events that will get steadily larger, and if you looked at the outcome 5 years from now, the river might actually be running differently than it would have had that molecule not been in a slightly different place. It's the whole butterfly effect thing. You can't actually predict its exact state 5 years from now because those small indeterminacies start to have larger and larger effects the longer the system runs. It's like a rifle whose position you change by a fraction of a millimeter -- the location of the bullet 1 inch from the gun will not be detectably different, but you go out 2 miles and suddenly that bullet is 2 feet off from where it otherwise would have been.
I sense that you and the other article you reference are equating free will with the ability to do whatever we want without those choices being affected in any way by the system, but that is only one definition of free will. Another definition would be that there is nothing outside of the system that forces the system to stay in any particular configuration -- and that, I believe, we do have.
Have you ever read anything about the effect of intention on random number generators, or the effect of "healers" of many different belief systems on medical outcomes?
He can't predict shit. Many say we are living in a quantum timeline with all possibilities playing out simultaneously.
Very interesting point of view, I haven't heard that before. I will definitely have a look into what you are saying!