[ExI] Bell's Inequality

Adrian Tymes atymes at gmail.com
Mon Jan 2 18:47:57 UTC 2017

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:19 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> Superdeterminism would mean giving up, there would be no point i
> n
> doing science because the universe is determined
> (or superdetermined)
> to make us ask the wrong questions

Unless we had free will, so that we could choose what questions we ask
without being predestined since the beginning of time to ask those
specific questions.  Like it or not, your objection boils down to "but
free will".

This is why I have that caveat.

>> (There are arguments such as, "if we assume all parts of the wave
>> function are real", but that makes an assumption.
> If some parts are real and some parts are not then an explanation is needed
> to explain the differentiation

The explanation is that the wave function represents our knowledge of
the thing - of the probabilities for what state it could have given
what has been observed - rather than the actual thing.  Those parts
that correspond to what it actually is can be said to be real, though
that may be slightly inaccurate depending on what version of "real" is
being used.

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list