Before we try to answer the question
outcome of a collision
can be absolutely predetermined,
we should consider whether the state
of each of the
colliding particles before
the impact can be exactly defined.
At first we found that light can be
simultaneously wave and particle.
Then came the relativity theory
and in the 20s we
began to notice
that there is an inherent inaccuracy
regarding the location in space and
the momentum of an electron.
which states that both the position and
of an electron are somewhat uncertain.
We had to develop new Mechanics,
the Quantum Mechanics.
It was a real shock to
our way of thinking.
A shock that we may not have
completely surpassed yet.
What was happening here?
In reality nothing special.
It was what we mentioned about
the blur in a photograph.
As long as we viewed the world
from afar we
picture was quite clear.
As we increased the magnification and came
close at the atomic level, it turned out
that the image by its nature was somewhat "cloudy",
somewhat blurred, somewhat uncertain.
For the difficulty we might still have
the physical truth which this
principle describes, three facts are to blame:
way in which it was initially
formulated using the term "random",
fact that the calculations of Quantum
Mechanics were based on probability and finally
thoughts used to make
the principle easier to understand.
One of these said:
We will never be able to know exactly
what are the momentum and the position
of the electron because, while trying to
find it, we will interfere with the electron
and therefore change its state.
it is useless to ask
about the state of the electron.
We must accept it as random.
But is this really the problem?
Whether we know it or not?
Does not this consideration re-introduced
mistake of putting ourselves
in the centre of the universe?
Shouldn’t the electron be in a certain state
no matter whether we are concerned about it or not?
Is this not required by the principle of objectivity?