Superdeterminism Definition and 16 Threads

Recently stumbled across [Unacceptable reference deleted by the Mentors] and the abstract says that an experiment that spanned 2000-2012 has proven that physics is superdeterministic. I have absolutely no background in quantum physics whatsoever which is why I can't verify or reject the claim...

As I understand it the principle states that the more accurately you measure one factor of an object, for example speed, the less you can tell of any other factors, for example position. To me this seems we will every only be able to measure an approximation of reality and thus determinism...

Continue reading...

This paper claims that the major superdeterminism loophole in Bell's theroem is closed, because "a local hidden variable theory consistent with relativity requires that relativistically non-invariant relations such as the time order of spacelike separated events have no physical significance...

Anton Zeilinger, wrote, " "We always implicitly assume the freedom of the experimentalist... This fundamental assumption is essential to doing science. If this were not true, then, I suggest, it would make no sense at all to ask nature questions in an experiment, since then nature could...

I keep thinking that the universe "knows" when, how, where these know-it-all (no pun intended) physicists did their experiment so all the results are not only consistent, but perfectly normal, nothing freaky about it. I'm no longer capable of thinking like a normal human being and subsequently...

Bell's superdetermimism seems to imply that there is a hidden variable. Please correct me if I am wrong but that seems like classical physics.

It's being discussed in another thread but I really think clarification is in place. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism I've known about Bells quote for years but I never got what his point was. Why the need for a "super" inclusion to postulate that human beings are subject to...

Hi. I'm not a physicist, but I’m intrigued by Bell's theorem and I've been stumbling with "superdeterminism." My understanding of the concept is that everything is not just predetermined, but the initial conditions of the universe are fine-tuned and "conspire" so choices of which versions of...

[Mentor's note: This thread has was forked off from another thread because it was a digression there. This is false. Bell's theorem is based on a certain assumption (the statistical independence or free-will assumption). Some local and realistic theories that contradict this assumption exist...

Hi. As far as I understand, superdeterminism (i.e. the experimentators are not free to choose the measurement parameters) allows the formulation of a local realistic quantum theory. But apparently physicists don't like the thought of not being in charge. Anton Zeilinger: "[W]e always implicitly...

Forgive me if this question has been asked previously on this board, but I cannot seem to find anything similar having searched around earlier. I suppose this blog entry written by the Physicist Robert Oerter linked below has accurately reflected how I feel about Many Worlds: "But now you see...

So my question is, do we believe that he's correct? Do we really believe that a mechanisitic view makes experimentation pointless or is he being over dramatic?

from my thinking nonlocality and entanglement are never a problem because in a totally determinstic universe, the information about what is going to be instantaneously tranferred from a to b is already known to the universe. we may not be in block time but the universe acts as if it were. this...

In the context of Bell's Theorem, a superdeterministic theory would negate the statistical independence between the source generating the entangled particles and the detectors. IMHO there is nothing absurd about this. There are plenty of examples in physics where the motion of two distant...

why is there such little talk regarding superdeterminism? So, it's not testable or falsifiable, but it seems with the erosion of free will in neuroscience - there would be more talk about the possibility or impossibility of free choice experiments.