What's expected of us

3 min read Original article ↗
  • Futures
  • Published:

Nature volume 436, page 150 (2005)Cite this article

It's a tough choice...

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

$199.00 per year

only $3.90 per issue

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ted Chiang is an occasional writer of science fiction. His work can be found in his collection Stories of Your Life and Others, published by Pan Macmillan.

    • Ted Chiang

About this article

Cite this article

Chiang, T. What's expected of us. Nature 436, 150 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/436150a

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/436150a

Comments

Commenting on this article is now closed.

  1. Alhun Aydin

    Well, this actually shows the existence of free will, rather than refuting it. Because the device acts solely according to your decisions/actions. If you decide and take the action of pushing, it flashes (it does not matter it acts retro-causally, since it acts only if you act), otherwise it does nothing. This is perfectly a causal relationship.

    Yet on the other hand, there is no such thing as free will of course, as it is easily proved by ordinary logic.

  2. amorpheous

    Since this device is not real and does not actually exist, the reasoning in the story is not valid. This made up fiction based on logic is not valid because there is no factual basis for the initial premise; that the device can send information backwards in time.

  3. Godless Replied to amorpheous

    You are an idiot. Do you think you can't follow a chain of reasoning through a thought experiment?

  4. Mahmoud Yahya Replied to amorpheous

    it appears that the famous nature magazine has fallen into the trap of science fiction.

    i spent half an hour searching for the "predictor" device online like an idiot but it appears that it only exists in fiction.

    the weird thing is that this article is here on a science magazine instead of the science fiction category on netflix.

    and random people appears to believe that the "perfect predictor" device that predicts one second ahead really exists and is scientific because its on nature magazine ! :)

    Victory goes to pseudo-science today

    i do build complex electronic circuits and i tell you that there is no electronic circuit nor component of any sort that can receive signals of any sort or shape from its own future ! unless its a simulation of some sort or playing a prince of persia , chrono trigger or Quantum Break games

  5. Godless

    https://discord.gg/WxXqvhz