On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 6:25 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> wrote:
> *Superdeterminism is typically discarded swiftly in any discussion of > quantum foundations.* 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 -- 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/CAJPayv2Ny6085u9_NS0b%3DNNAZvdJEBwC1D8ET2cYTewCi2ErSw%40mail.gmail.com.
