SCIENCE IS BASED ON THE IDEA THAT EFFECTS HAVE causes, and scientists use the mathematics of continuous change, called calculus, to formulate laws in disciplines ranging from fundamental physics to economics. With the absolute continuity and precision of calculus, we form causal links between the past and the future, an attribution that makes the laws of physics deterministic and predictable. In this article I argue that these abstract models are different from real processes, which consist of events that are not only discrete but also exhibit a degree of unpredictable randomness. People who are unaware of this difference trust the calculus-based laws and adopt overgeneralized interpretations of real-life observations and data. I show why calculus-based equations should be seen as idealized models of real processes, invented by humans, rather than autonomous laws of nature that humans merely discovered. Free from the shackles of these equations, we can see that a random event can happen without an imminent cause.
What Came First?
What causes the first cancer cell? What initiates an unexpected car breakdown? Where do new ideas originate? All cause-and-effect chains in our lives originate from either an initial event or from fundamental processes that unfold according to the laws of physics.