In religion
en.wikipedia.org
Predestination is a doctrine in Calvinism dealing with the question of the control that God exercises over the world. In the words of the Westminster Confession of Faith, God "freely and unchangeably ordained whatsoever comes to pass."[2][3] The second use of the word "predestination" applies this to salvation, and refers to the belief that God appointed the eternal destiny of some to salvation by grace, while leaving the remainder to receive eternal damnation for all their sins, even their original sin. The former is called "unconditional election", and the latter "reprobation". In Calvinism, some people are predestined and effectually called in due time (regenerated/born again) to faith by God while all others are reprobated.[4]
You're talking about a religion that involves Omniscience, though, and as we're hopefully all already aware at this point, Omniscience is
contradictory. Anything you get from that vine after the original sin of invoking unbounded comprehension just as tainted.
As those events are themselves deterministic, we can imagine a "God's eye view" of a static block universe, in which every event is predetermined
This is where you fell off.
Even in a static block, it's not pre-determined, at least not using the general idea of time: the determination is physically offset from its "priors", still, by exactly the separation you previously saw in time.
It's still determined by course, all that you changed is that you can see the whole course at roughly the same time.
Our decisions are part of what determines our "future" even if someone perceives our "future" as "to the left of" rather than "to the 'future' of" some present.
Well, yes, my point is that no such God exists, so the "predetermined" claim fails. We can imagine it; But to do so is erroneous.
I'll also note that "at roughly the same time" has a big caveat in that it's not the same time dimension of the simulation, and I would argue that the act of actually rendering the block will cost you whatever time you experience to calculate, render, and arrange the frames... In which case it's literally determined by course not at the "block viewing" but at that earlier time before you were standing in front of the block, assembling the frames, and putting it in front of you to view.
I could do literally all those actions with an execution of, say, Dwarf Fortress. The frame state log buffer would need to be built into DFHack or some similar memory hack, and it would slow down execution to like, one "frame" per "realtime minute", but you could be recording in maybe a week? It might take you a year or more to get any "interesting" events.
One interesting fact about DF is that it is absolutely deterministic, AND uses a pRNG. I suppose this is a concrete example of macrophysical
indeterminism, insofar as there are decisions dwarves
have made by actions "completely" uncorrelated to anything else in the system.
You could replace the pRNG with a much more interesting RNG using CMWBR, or sound, and just record it on a cassette and distribute numbers as cassette positions/addresses and make a finite tape that gives you the same result, and then the game is both "indeterministic" and "finitely deterministic", in that you can replay it the same any time.
But as you can imagine, this creates a problem in that we can fairly readily observe the ability to declare a change, an alternative, at any point based on the dance the "RNG" performs.
The problem here is that this pRNG is not employed so as to make the dwarves make sense. The purpose is to simulate something that the programmer doesn't know how to code, and even if he did it would eat too much processor time: the actual cogitation of the dwarf.
One could concievably remove any reliance on the RNG at all, in the system, except the role in whatever process generates the initial state.
It can be pRNG based or "aperiodic" or "some human somewhere tossed a whole gobshite of dice willy nilly, or any such thing.
The RNG access, however, is only really useful to allow something to be decided
by something external to it. This is why I mock indeterministic nonsense with "Jesus take the wheel".
It is an act of giving the controls of "you" over to "noise". This can be useful when trying to create a problem that is difficult or impossible to really solve, and it can be used to settle decisions, but we call that "gambling", and doing it might mean you are rather "responsible for making a really bad gamble" rather than making a "directly flawed decision".
But as the player and observer and as a human being, generally you can observe that specific fact of "noise" having sway over decisions makes those decisions LESS useful for the dwarves (for all there is still priority sorting).
In fact, any system could be employed to do so, really; it doesn't even need to be chaotic or unpredictable, although the predictability and knowledge of what someone would say would give some power to manipulate such a "simpleton".
In most games, in fact, prediction is specifically the act used to change how outcomes go based on prior outcomes.
As such, having a perfect prediction would give you perfect power over the future rather than no power.
