Brought over from email

I've actually been focused on the inventions and stuff along with working a turnaround in Wyoming. We should be leaving today or tomorrow and making the twenty-one hour ride back to the good country. Lol.

You don't bother me at all with the determinism debates as I actually see enough variables and judgments based off judgments that it is nothing more than a logical debate of closest to facts opinions that we can make on both sides. All that we can do is to try to narrow the discussion to the most logical debate. I actually had a response and got side tracked. I think we need to further clarify a few points before we proceed though because much of the confusion with the determinism debate is definition based along with the distinction of the ability to know vs the ability to merely function (bio vs geo) just as QM tries to place the wavefunction collapse at the mercy of the observer when you and I know that things are as they are despite us deciding to open the box and see the health of the cat. Free will or not, our thoughts only change the world by way of our further actions due to such, whereby the world isn't dictated to alter itself due to our thoughts or decisions to see what's inside without the proper physical channels of classical mechanics whereby the path to such changes are governed by the common four forces. To me, there is only one universe in one specific state and not a multitude of infinite possibilities. From there, there is a distinction of observation vs mere operation whereby I see operation as objective and observation as a sub-subjective aspect. However, the randomness and uncertainty that I find threatening determinism is the reverberation of cause and effect penetrating inward and outward communicating between the macro and micro whereby establishing the world which merely is as accuracy only gains meaning at the more macro scales.