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 <[email protected]>:
On 9/2/2013 1:15 PM, [email protected] 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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
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 [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
