[ExI] Summary - Many Worlds versus Super-determinism

[Adrian Tymes]

Checking the link, you start the QM-relevant part of the discussion
(after a question on financial debt) with, "can you explain
superdeterminism and explain why most physicists reject it".  As you
know, if you include a conclusion in the question like that, the AI
will tend to reach that conclusion.

On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 5:17 PM BillK via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
> Adrian, Jason and John have had a long discussion on this subject.
> I asked Kimi K2 Thinking AI to summarise the differences between these theories.
> (Hoping to add some clarification).
> BillK
> -------------
>
> Kimi K2 Thinking AI -
> Here’s a detailed breakdown of why most physicists prefer the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) over superdeterminism, despite both being deterministic theories:
>
> Click the link to view the complete summary <https://www.kimi.com/share/19a6fcce-a8a2-8623-8000-0000e0a140f6>
>
> ## Bottom Line: The Consensus Preference
>
> MWI is preferred because:
> 1. **Preserves statistical independence** (the bedrock of experimental science)
> 2. **Avoids cosmic conspiracy** (no need for fine-tuned initial conditions)
> 3. **Accepts only "tame" non-locality** (no faster-than-light causation)
> 4. **Maintains scientific method** (experiments test real hypotheses)
> 5. **More parsimonious** (uses existing mathematical structure)
>
> Superdeterminism, by contrast, is seen as a **desperate loophole** that "undercuts the whole scientific method"  to avoid admitting quantum non-locality. While not definitively disproven, its cost to scientific epistemology is considered too high
> --------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat