Obviously, Free Will is equivalent to anything more than a simple Ability of making decisions! (i.e. accepting the input, processing it, and feeding the outcome back to the Input -- a recursive process, so to speak. The similarity with the computer is clear. And in that sense, the human mind is not different. But *computer has no choice over the kind of input it gets (and puts)*, whereas the human mind is exercising the free will to select the kind of input that is read into it, and,consequently, the mind's output determines our individuality! Therefore, it would be too simplistic to consider the human mind as anything more than just a chemical binary computer... (because the latter doesn't have a choice, i.e. free will) * * *

The number of the outside stimuli (that serve as Input) actually are infinit, but the Input, usually, falls into a finit number of categories -- human consciousness tends to sort all of that input into departments -- which makes the process of analysing the input managable...
Such abstact thinking -- categirising and departamentalising, in addition to the ability of recreating conditions that are necessary for deriving a certain outcome -- is what distinquishes Human beings from the rest of the living creatures! Therefore, at the present level of our development, all of the lower level species are considered of little/no consequence!

We haven't progressed far enough yet for affecting the outcome of (a) Global nature, not to mention that of the (b) Gallactical and (c) Universal... But that -- b and c -- is the subject of a far distant future that's simply beyond of our comprehension...

I don't believe it would be destroyed but would react with the medium it's exposed to....your thoughts?

3) Such an assetion, (_X_), would sure contradict one of the laws of Thermodynamics!!!

So I recently heard that information can be stored inside a vacum of a compressed gas cloud of atoms, and then extracted again. Now it can be wondered if the vacum was a real vacum, or only an aproximation, but I think that for mental purposes, an ideal can be used. Thermodynamics are more like guidelines, though the no perpetual motion idea is a great tool for thinking about how time can progress, because it go along with the thought that one can't get work out of nothing, and that time must then build up physical law sometime, instead of it just appearing and clockwork ready to run out of the package.

The question of whether a computer can have free will is interesting. If the case, which seems reasonable, is made that the characteristic of free will that will be used is the ability to put oneself in a certain environment, then a computer will not meet this criteria. But what is meant by the staement that humans can attend to their environment in a way that they can choose what is in store for them? If what is in their future is actually just a part of their capabilty, that is what they can do with their body, by the l�aws of physics, then it does follow, in certain sense anyway, that that this behavoir is mirrored also in nature. What happens to them, happens also in the real world. So one can attest that free will is actually already written. There is perhaps a simpler way to put it, that all that happens does, which can be taken to imply that what is the most efficient is what nature partakes in. To put this notion to nature, to say that nature acts as such in scenerios where it is most fit or effective, that it could be taken as a choice to run a certain way, that is, to adjust it's laws in new environments, results as the view that allows novelty, and is not determined in the strict sense of the word. Such behavoir is to be predicted for special cases, however, or small time frames whatever small is taken to be.

A vacum is an increadably misleading idea. It attenuates the absence of matter to a state of absolute nothing, where in gr models the absence of matter is still the presence of spacetime. Outside of this, there is nothing. That is where the finite part of the finite, yet unbound phrase comes into play. There is a difference between empty spacetime and what lies beyound it, but since no clear edge can be found, it can be thought that the whole is not contained by a definite boundary. Going back to the whole trapping a vacum in a gas, and trying out a new context, say that the general principle that changes what laws are (given no eternal truths) is such that certain conditions are presented, namely here the condesation of a gas cloud leading to the presence of vacum inside it of a particular kind. Now once that get up is attired, there is information in the vacum, which can (or not as well)be extracted as such. This is what they did in the experiment. Not matter normally has info tied up with it, and so the information that an object has can be used to figure out some other properties about it, and the laws can be enscribed to the realtions that are found. This can go for little atoms as well, and not just bigger everyday bodies. As such, the vacum would be presented as something like a holder or mover of information just like those other matter were. So the vacum is a participant in the info exchange. Now since the experiment put nature in a certain disposition by setting up controls and the type of matter used, how it groups together or how spacious it is, it may not be a prime example, but what happens next is that the system must behave in a certain matter, and choose what is efficient or reasonable, even if it is offered one at gun point. Perhaps the reason that novelty is not seen so often, or the notion of a certain type of choice briefly touched on here, is that the conditions already set up one thing to happen, and one thing only. There is a little saying in practice that no experiment fails, one just did not provision nature with what she needs to succeed. It could be that when it comes to options, that this is not nearly enough.