One of the problems I have with Quantum Superposition is the incongruence with fate. Fate is a philosophical construct and Quantum Superposition is a scientific theory which can be held up to experimentation. I can imagine some saying “that’s like comparing apples to chairs, they have nothing to do with each other”, I however would argue you can eat an apple while sitting in a chair, much to the same similarity that Quantum Superposition has with fate; the observer knows what happened in the past so it seems like fate but is uncertain what will happen in the future which is also similar to fate.
The first step in trying to control your future is to set up a situation in which “C” is the only outcome of “A” plus “B”. In most cases one can set this situation up. In the case where something is left to chance one can predict the probability that something will turn out one way or the other. But one is still unsure because it is just a prediction.
Take Schrödinger’s Cat for example, because the state of the cat is unknown, the information about the cat is a superposition of both being alive and dead at the same time. Then once observed, the uncertainty drops out and there is only one solution to the question. The mere fact of observation gives us information that did not exist previously, this allows us to turn observation into recorded history and when individual histories are strung together a history of causality can be determined by a person’s understanding. This might seem like the most logical conclusion that A affected B, which in turn affected C; but only taken as a system do these events happen together. When examined individually each event can stand as independent, and the probability of the next step is unchanged by the probability of all of the previous steps (if all of the probabilities started out as equal).
One problem with this model is co-dependence, whereas one variable or a group of variables affects the outcome of the next and so on until all of the remaining outcomes are known given the many iterations of this process. One would think that this process would allow everything to be known about a situation. Including the speed and location of particles themselves, but this is where the Uncertainty Principal comes into affect.
If one could add up all of the uncertainty that the Uncertainty Principal states should be there about every particle affecting a future situation, then we would still be stuck with a system in which we can predict what might happen, but we will not know what will happen. As in Schrödinger’s Cat, quantum fluctuations can affect real world macroscopic events and objects. This leads to the view that anything that we can directly control we know exactly how it will turn out but there are also some things that are left up to chance which we have no control over. The combination of these two things can define fate. Our history seems to be fated because a string of events can be traced back but it is a construct that only exists in our knowledge of the situation. In essence fate is the history of the situation, which leads me to this paradoxical statement.
History is fated and the future is not.
