Fate

>>18434818
There's literally no way to know, but I'll say probably not because quantum mechanics are supposedly based only on probability and nothing else.

>>18434818

I guess it's like this, otherwise time travel wouldn't be possible. But that also would mean that we are condemned to eventually do something bad since our birth.

Now, that is a real good question, because if not, that means thatif you could take a time travel machine and go to the future, it wouldn't be necessarily your future, but just an hypothesis, a combination of probability.

I'll let answer the most intellegents here.

Given infinite time then whatever is possible will happen at some point. In one universe you WILL marry Beyonce and have a baby called Tayqwan. In another universe I'll murder and rape you (in that order).

If time is infinite the universe will endlessly cycle through different configurations, every configuration forever.

In one universe you'll be a black dude called Charles but people will call you Chizzle.

Maybe this is relevant?

The forefront of quantum experimentation suggests that the universe could be constructed of probability folded into matter. Not only that, further experiments have shown that the act of observation can affect matter on the quantum scale.

>>18435221
wat

>>18435221
>>18435225
Not that anon, but basically what he's saying is: if a tree falls in the middle of the forest and no one is around to see it, does it still make a sound?
He worded it strangely, but it's a good point and a real question in actual quantum mechanics.

Karma, Cause and Effect, An object in motion stays in motion.

You can control your reactions to things that is it...or can you

I think human will is free. So not.

>>18435055
This is gooood

>>18434818
>big bang
gffo out of here with your science shit

What if time is recorded like a spherical record where the end is also the start?
For all we know our universe could be a rerun on loop.

>>18435935
I'm actually pretty sure this is what's happening, and a bunch of travelers looping in from the opposite direction have just punched through.

>>18434818
Fate isn't real. The human brain seeks patterns where none exist, so it can find meaning and purpose in ultimately random events. The closest thing you can get to destiny is cause and effect. What looks like meaning is actually chaos, and not that edgy shit, I mean it's all a random occurance of possible outcomes.

>>18434818
You may think of your question as this:
1. Everything that is going to happen lies ahead as a thread woven by your thoughts and actions. While it has not happened yet (undetermined), its concept (the thread) is, (because you and your actions are real) and that's called fate. For example think of a person falling into lava. The person is not yet dead but soon he will be. His fate is to die shortly afterwards. Now you may apply this principle to much more subtle examples. You will realize that there are literally endless factors to consider, thus making "calculating" one's fate impossible. God however, who already knows all, he already knows your fate, knows all possible outcomes. What he doesn't know is what outcome YOU will choose as you have the ultimate gift: free will, to determine your own fate. This doesn't make God not omniscient, as he already knows the end of all. Imagine it like having a child. You can see them become everything, but you dont know what they will choose, but ultimately youll be there for them whatever they choose.
2. As for the universe, probably it's not deterministic because it follows strict rules. These rules however may produce truly endless outcomes so no, two twin big bangs would probably not give rise to identical universes. The processes they would follow however would probably obey the same set of rules.