free will theorem

Compiled with AI assistance and selectively reviewed. Please consult the cited passages; the books remain the authoritative source. About this companion

Editorial synthesis · provisional

Definition

The Free Will Theorem is Conway and Kochen’s conditional no-go result: under their explicit quantum and independence assumptions, measurement settings not fixed by accessible past information cannot be paired with particle responses fixed by that past alone. RB1 emphasizes FIN/MIN qualifications and published criticisms. The theorem is not a proof that people possess morally responsible freedom or that particles make deliberative, self-originated choices.

Explanation

The direct exposition treats the result as an incompatibility among stated assumptions, not an unconditional elimination of every deterministic interpretation. FIN in the earlier version and MIN in the strengthened version carry locality-related and freedom-of-settings independence conditions. RB1 explicitly warns that a no-faster-than-light-signaling gloss alone misses the stronger premise at issue.

The provocative particle-freedom wording remains a Conway–Kochen quotation. The native Goldstein and Menon discussion limits its implication to independence and indeterminacy rather than self-origination. Alternatives can reject or reinterpret premises, with conceptual costs; the entry does not turn those costs into a claim that no such alternative exists.

The author explicitly says the positive account of agency does not rest on this theorem. AB’s native note preserves the difference between Kastner’s compatibility claim and the work’s inherited-openness account, while PB calls its own freedom formalization unverified. The proposal therefore records the conditional result without upgrading it to a scientific proof of human responsibility.

Scope and attribution

Preserve assumptions, idealizations, critique and the author’s explicit separation of the theorem from the positive freedom argument.

AB — The Actual Book

The native freedom note distinguishes physical interpretation and further agency accounts.

Occurrence locators: Notes: 240.

RB1 — The Real Book, Volume I: The Possible Is Real

The conditional no-go result retains MIN/FIN independence, quoted rhetoric and published critiques.

Occurrence locators: 297, 298, 299, 301.

Background used in the editorial explanation

Named theories and mechanisms are distinguished from neighboring background, homonyms and the author’s own synthesis. Reproduced AI passages retain their separate voice.