Energy galore with IEC ...

[eclectron]

an opinion does not form reality.

Absolutely agree. but yet we do that all our life, we build mental models of reality, which ultimately remain more or less valid opinions. The whole being to collate the most valid models.

Up to now all the experiences on the subject (and mainly that on the experiences of non locality) demonstrate that one can no longer affirm that reality would be strictly deterministic.
Maybe someday we will discover "hidden variables" to explain the results, but so far they have all been beaten up.

Just for your information, do you speak as a professional or an enlightened amateur?
I am a perfect lover

Going back to the origin of this digression, namely can humanity choose other paths in the future? There is no need to resort to quantum physics.
...
In conclusion, determinism (science) and predestination (superstition) should not be confused.

Indeed to continue in the current way would be resigned to a collapse. All the indicators blink ... still it is not necessary to be in denial to meet the current challenges.

For example, no less than 200 proposals have been identified to break with fatalism and change the world, in the book: "We must kill TINA" -
Unfortunately, I have not yet been able to read it.

To refocus on the initial subject, energy galore, sweet dreams for some, nightmare for others (of which I am not), yet the need will quickly be felt, another indicator blinking:

[Exnihiloest]

Science is deterministic. Even in quantum mechanics, the wave function is deterministic.

Hence the Heisenberg uncertainty principle ...

...

Ask before you say anything, because here I am in my element.
"Since the evolution of the wave function is causal and deterministic, and represents all knowable information about a system, why is the result of a quantum measurement fundamentally indeterministic?"
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problème_ ... _quantique

It is the result of the measurement, the question of "wave packet collapse" (whether there is really collapse), which answers a probability not the wave function which simply depends on t.

As for the principle of uncertainty, it has nothing to do with non-causality but with the limits of our simultaneous knowledge of two properties of a particle.

[sen-no-sen]

Ask before you say anything, because here I am in my element.
"Since the evolution of the wave function is causal and deterministic, and represents all knowable information about a system, why is the result of a quantum measurement fundamentally indeterministic?"

The wave function is above all a concept, a mathematical abstraction, which allows scientists to (partially) reduce quantum uncertainty, there is still some way to definitively affirm that this would be very real, but work is progressing. .
But you say that science is deterministic, which by extension means that your object of study (nature) would be too.
Off the facts are far from being as conclusive, find out about this on the work of Nicolas gisin and on the principle of non-locality and of what he calls "pure chance" (a contrario of deterministic chaos), see above.
The fact is that our lack of knowledge about a fortiori quantum systems leads us to be more restrained about this kind of assertion.
There are also several schools of thought on the interpretation of quantum phenomena and it has still not been possible to decide definitively on the question.

As for the principle of uncertainty, it has nothing to do with non-causality but with the limits of our simultaneous knowledge of two properties of a particle.

It is an old debate, many still hope to find hidden variables to remove the probabilistic character of QM, but it is clear that the still such variables have not been found.

In addition there are physicists, and not least as Holger Bech Nielsen who considers it very likely (30000 to 1 according to his statements) that retro-causal phenomena are at work in the Universe.
We can also quote the works of Archibald Wheeler with delayed choice experiments or Richard Gott's work on time loops ... the question is far from being resolved!

[Exnihiloest]

Ask before you say anything, because here I am in my element.
"Since the evolution of the wave function is causal and deterministic, and represents all knowable information about a system, why is the result of a quantum measurement fundamentally indeterministic?"

The wave function is above all a concept, a mathematical abstraction, which allows scientists to (partially) reduce quantum uncertainty ...

The wave function is an equation like all equations in physics, it is part of its formalism.
It only describes the evolution of the quantum state of a particle, and its squared module gives the probability density of finding the particle at position (x, t), i.e. by integrating this value on a volume, you have the probability of detecting the particle there. This function can therefore be seen as an amplitude of probability. It is deterministic, that is to say that if it tells you that you have a 5% chance of finding the particle in a certain place following a certain experience, then all experiments reproducing the same conditions will also give you a 5% chance of finding the particle in the same place. As it is a probability, not all experiments will detect the particle there, but if you do a lot, you will observe that 5% of them will detect it.
There is no evidence that detection of the particle or not is non-deterministic. It could be due to finer stochastic phenomena. For example we know that the vacuum is not empty, that there are quantum fluctuations, and as in the models we ignore the wave functions of the virtual particles and their interactions with the tested particle, we can very well imagine that it's this sort of Brownian noise that makes this quantum happenstance. This chance would then only be a classic chance linked to our ignorance, therefore deterministic, like knowing the future position of a particular grain of sand of a collapsing sand castle, which is out of our reach but which we can predict that its probability of presence will be 100% in a volume of height less than the initial height of the castle.
It is only one hypothesis among others, but no more non-determinism than the determinism of the universe is scientifically proven, and then what determinism? The neophite imagines effects which follow from causes which are posterior to it. But in quantum mechanics a cause can be, at least apparently, posterior to the effect. Thus the change of conditions on the path of a photon, after the passage of the photon, will modify the measurement results made later and later (see the experiments of Wheeler with delayed choice as you pointed out). Determinism is a philosophical concept, not a scientific one. In any case science is based on causality in principle, we would not see indeed what it could seek if it could not draw general rules from its observations, because what would happen would be without cause. It is in this sense that I say that science is deterministic.

[sen-no-sen]

Determinism is a philosophical concept, not a scientific one. In any case science is based on causality in principle, we would not see indeed what it could seek if it could not draw general rules from its observations, because what would happen would be without cause. It is in this sense that I say that science is deterministic.

Determinism is indeed a philosophical concept*, and it is for this reason that it is difficult to assert that science, and therefore nature would be deterministic. A certain number of philosophical concepts begin to date and no longer to account for the world when one pushes research in its entrenchments, as in MQ for example.
Therefore some speak of a quantum determinism, history of saving furniture and semantics, but perhaps it would be more just to invent a more adequate term.
Besides ... by the way a Universe with cause it is no longer too compatible with a universe appeared out of thin air!


* It's the same thing about the weather, we are happy to talk about presentism(only the present exists), which is apparently the case, but contradicts the relativity which is depicted philosophically by the notion of eternalism or latest by branch futurism for the quantum version.
idem of realism which is hardly tenable in MQ, or one will speak rather about model dependent realism.