Quote:
Quote by: Merge  I think his point is that there are possibly causes that we cannot observe. Basically, unless you can prove that blergs (particles currently unobservable by humans that interfere with light) don't exist, you can't say that you have disproved determinism. Just because we can't observe something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. |
Your attempt to save your hypothesis by claiming that there are "things" that are really the cause but we just can't see them yet is not original.
Einstein tried to pull the same s***:
Hidden variable theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You can always try to say that your hypothesis might still be true by claiming that we can't yet obtain the information that would make it true.
It's a cop out.