I think 't Hooft has argued in some other paper that one should consider the set of possible initial states that the early universe could have been in, which then restricts the freedom of observers today. So, he actually uses this issue to argue why superdeterminsim isn't all that strange, but I would have to re-read his arguments.

Saibal

Citeren meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>:

On 9/2/2013 1:15 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote:
It is difficult to falsify, e.g. it is not strictly correct to say that local determinism has been falsified, as 't Hooft explains here:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1007

Ah, yes I should have mentioned the superdeterminism option. I'm not sure though that it's compatible with with the big bang origin of the universe. Wouldn't there have to have been as much information in the initial state as there is now in the Hubble sphere?

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to