On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 10:00:41 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:01 AM Philip Thrift <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > >> Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a very good reason. >>> Occam's razor says the best physics theory that explains the facts is the >>> one that's simplest, but that doesn't just mean the one that has the >>> simplest laws but also has the simplest initial conditions. The initial >>> conditions needed for Superdeterminism to work are as far from being simple >>> as it is possible to get; out of the infinite number of ways the universe >>> could have started out in only one of them is set up in exactly the right >>> way such that things are really deterministic but fool us into thinking >>> they are not even after 13.8 billion years of cosmic evolution. Theosts >>> answer the question "why does the universe exist?" by saying "because God >>> created it", and I have a problem with that because it immediately suggests >>> another obvious question that they have no answer for, "why does God >>> exist?". I have pretty much the same problem with Superdeterminism; why did >>> the universe start out in the only initial condition in which even after >>> churning for 13.8 billion years it is still able to make fools of us? >>> Superdeterministic theory is about as useful for increasing our >>> understanding as saying things are the way they are now because things are >>> the way they are now. >>> John K Clark >>> >> >> > >> *Statistical non-independence is less restrictive than statistical >> independence * >> > > What are you talking about? If at the Big Bang the position or momentum of > just one Quark or Gluon or Electron or Photon was out of place by even a > infinitesimally small amount then today after 13.8 billion years of cosmic > evolution the universe would be unable to fool us over and over and over > again into thinking things were non-deterministic or non-local or > non-realistic when in actuality that was not the case. That is as > restrictive as a universe can be! Why is the universe putting such an > immense effort into fooling us, what's the point of this *HUGE* cosmic > conspiracy? > > John K Clark >
As Hossenfelder commented on her paper Rethinking Superdeterminism S. Hossenfelder, T.N. Palmer arXiv:1912.06462 [quant-ph] http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/12/the-path-we-didnt-take.html : "Ken Wharton and Nathan Argaman (see reference [ https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.04313 ] in our paper) don't assume that a superdeterministic theory is deterministic." @philipthrift -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/93dd1687-7215-4436-bbe2-d8ed5c954e15o%40googlegroups.com.
