If there is no such thing as free will, then there can be only one possible outcome.
(Free will implies choice. And choice implies variable outcomes.)
If no outcomes can be varied, the start of an action and its invariable end are inextricably connected such that they are one and the same. One cannot be separated from the other. They are the same "thing."
How is it, then, that light can be either wave or particle depending on the "viewer" or instrument doing the observation and not independent of it? (Keeping in mind that each -- wave vs. particle -- yield different results.) [See: Double Slit Experiment
, noting to watch till the end.]
Let me repeat that. The OUTCOME is wholly dependent on the viewer (or precisely, the instrument doing the viewing) and NOT independent of it. Point being... It SHOULD be independent of it since the light pattern (see experiment) has no foreknowledge or decision-making capabilities to change its pattern according to the viewer!
But that is precisely what appears to happen!
Now I know that this does not in any way prove or suggest a "free will." But it does suggest the possibility of variability in outcomes, OR that outcomes are not time dependent (meaning every "potential event" already exists).
But if every potential event already exists, i.e., outcome A and outcome B already exist, then there can in fact be more than one possible outcome. Yet, if there is no free will, there cannot exist more than one possible outcome, nor would there be a need for one.