5 ms·

Why would a physicist embrace superdeterminism? Present science holds the falsifiability of a theory as a necessity for its utility. Under the light of SD ever

Why would a physicist embrace superdeterminism? Present science holds the falsifiability of a theory as a necessity for its utility. Under the light of SD every experimental result may be impossible to interpret as supportive of a theory. Free will seems to be the most difficult philosophical question. Accepting SD invalidates the scientific method's approach to learning about the world. You may be interested in other non-local hidden variable theories as a way to sidestep Bell's Theorem & the Copenhagen interpretation.

rytill 7y ago
> Free will seems to be the most difficult philosophical question Please elaborate. It seems like it’s not even possible to phrase a question about free will that makes sense. What would it mean for an entity to have free will, such that you could ask a question about whether or not we had it? If you could ask a meaningful question, it doesn’t seem as difficult as explaining why anything does or does not exist, or qualia.
- chr1 7y ago
  There is an analog of free will that works even in a cellular automaton. For that you need two things: 1. the part of cellular automata describing a thinking entity can be separated from the rest of the world: that is changing states of cells anywhere outside of it doesn't change the state of the entity itself. 2. it is not possible to replace the computation describing this entity with anything simpler. 2 means that any method of predicting what this thinking entity choses is completely equivalent to that entity living and making the choice it wants by itself. And 1 means that the part of network is indeed a separate entity. With superdeterminism 1 can not be true, and a spin change of a single particle far away triggers very complex change in behavior of all thinking entities that were close to that particle in the past.
steve76 7y ago
Knowledge ends with the experimenter's life. The end of all particles are those that arc off the wire and cut your heart out based on your genome alone. All atoms are only different versions of graphene. Without humanity, there is only death. Whimper, and cower at your pettiness. You've lived in paradise all this time. Your self-righteousness lobotomizes you to an effective evil wicked being. All cosmic censors drops. State secrets, a police sting operation, to fool idle children from poisoning us. You have no choice to face your terrifying immortality, as all your faults and misdeeds lay open to the world. It's either that, or I UWB you all into Micro Plumb Island, a living breathing walking medicinal coma to contain your stupidity from murdering us all. We are at the mercy of wicked and evil men and women. They make sure the insiders stay in and the outsiders stay out. Our only option is to scare them, and scare them good. They do indeed have the keys to the kingdom. They won't open the doors just because they are nice. It's not like anyone hasn't died speaking Christ's name before. We need to let them know death is no escape. We keep you alive, no matter if we have to rip your genome out of the noise of the Cosmos itself, poisoning everything out there that is non-human. And all just to prove a point. Such is the stubbornness of such fraudulent and violent treacherous fools!

rytill 7y ago

> Free will seems to be the most difficult philosophical question Please elaborate. It seems like it’s not even possible to phrase a question about free will that makes sense. What would it mean for an entity to have free will, such that you could ask a question about whether or not we had it? If you could ask a meaningful question, it doesn’t seem as difficult as explaining why anything does or does not exist, or qualia.

chr1 7y ago
There is an analog of free will that works even in a cellular automaton. For that you need two things: 1. the part of cellular automata describing a thinking entity can be separated from the rest of the world: that is changing states of cells anywhere outside of it doesn't change the state of the entity itself. 2. it is not possible to replace the computation describing this entity with anything simpler. 2 means that any method of predicting what this thinking entity choses is completely equivalent to that entity living and making the choice it wants by itself. And 1 means that the part of network is indeed a separate entity. With superdeterminism 1 can not be true, and a spin change of a single particle far away triggers very complex change in behavior of all thinking entities that were close to that particle in the past.

steve76 7y ago

Knowledge ends with the experimenter's life. The end of all particles are those that arc off the wire and cut your heart out based on your genome alone. All atoms are only different versions of graphene. Without humanity, there is only death. Whimper, and cower at your pettiness. You've lived in paradise all this time. Your self-righteousness lobotomizes you to an effective evil wicked being. All cosmic censors drops. State secrets, a police sting operation, to fool idle children from poisoning us. You have no choice to face your terrifying immortality, as all your faults and misdeeds lay open to the world. It's either that, or I UWB you all into Micro Plumb Island, a living breathing walking medicinal coma to contain your stupidity from murdering us all. We are at the mercy of wicked and evil men and women. They make sure the insiders stay in and the outsiders stay out. Our only option is to scare them, and scare them good. They do indeed have the keys to the kingdom. They won't open the doors just because they are nice. It's not like anyone hasn't died speaking Christ's name before. We need to let them know death is no escape. We keep you alive, no matter if we have to rip your genome out of the noise of the Cosmos itself, poisoning everything out there that is non-human. And all just to prove a point. Such is the stubbornness of such fraudulent and violent treacherous fools!