Random Musings on Uncertainty

Public Domain

In science, uncertainty must be quantified. For every measurement or calculation, the precision of that value must also be specified for the sake of completeness and integrity. In essence, us scientists have to have a level of certainty with respect to uncertainty. Life, however, can be somewhat different, in that the experiential uncertainties we face on a day to day basis may leave us with questions that are completely unanswerable.

Where will I be in five years? Ten years? Or (((gasp))) fifteen years?

I hope I made the right decision. What will happen now?

What if [insert catastrophic scenario here] were to happen?

While it may seem to be theoretically possible to narrow down the possibilities with enough data and analytical thinking, this very process would inherently disrupt the course of events it seeks to predict in the first place. Say a particularly nervous graduate student (totally not me...) were to put all of their time, energy, and resources into predicting their postdoctoral job prospects and planning future decisions accordingly. If this were the case, they wouldn't get anywhere because they would never be able to do anything else! Even if this information were attainable via clairvoyant means, the student's knowledge of the results could alter the outcome. This scenario is an example of the observer effect*, in which the very act of observation fundamentally disrupts the observed processes.  In non-technical terms, this means that obsessing over life's mysteries may distract us from living and experiencing what is beyond our control in the first place. As with the paradoxical case of Schrödinger's cat**, some future outcomes may have to remain unknowable until the metaphorical box is opened.

*While it may share some qualitative similarities with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the two are not quite the same.

**Meow. What's this link lead to? You won't know until you click!