• FundMECFSOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 天前

    The thing is I agree with nearly every premise of superdeterminism. But the conclusions seem stretched.

    I love the idea of not abiding to the strict assumptions set forth by Bell’s theorem. The idea that determinism doesn’t have to hide within the simple hidden variable model bell’s theorem disproves to be true. The idea that we are essentially always part of the experimental system. The questioning of the objective rational experimenter with free will ideal.

    Yet I haven’t seen any serious mechanism explaining how the required correlations between experimenter choices and particle states could have been embedded in the universe’s initial conditions in such a finely tuned manner, given that experimentally, the outcomes are indistinguishable from standard quantum mechanics… I just can’t imagine how this could likely be the case without adding quasi-conspiratorial assumption.

    • kata1yst@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 天前

      I mean, effectively superdeterminism’s natural conclusion is that time is an illusion. Everything that will be was already fixed at the start of the universe.

      But turning this back on itself, what’s the proposed mechanism for quantum wave collapse at superluminal speeds?

      Our understanding is fundamentally flawed, but thankfully the math works!