[ExI] teachers

[efc at swisscows.email]

Thank you Adrian.

Which interpretation do you subscribe to, or find most likely?

Best regards,
Daniel


On Mon, 28 Aug 2023, Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 6:22 PM Stuart LaForge via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>       On 2023-08-27 09:33, efc--- via extropy-chat wrote:
>       > But what about superdeterminism?
>       >
>       > Wouldn't that also be one of the better "candidates" even though it
>       > goes
>       > against our intuition?
>
>       Not at all. It would mean that quantum mechanics (the most accurate
>       scientific theory to date) is completely wrong. Superdeterminism would
>       mean that all agency, choice, chance, luck, and randomness is an
>       illusion.
> 
> 
> Not so much.  Only such things when considered purely within the universe.
> 
> But...what, or who, set up the initial conditions?  And if they set us up, are they not "us" - the ones who are making decisions - in
> a sense?  Particularly if this was multiple agents, each one far from omniscient.
> 
> Also, while superdeterminism informs the states of individual particles that are separate from others, are there truly random (or, at
> least, unpredictable) things within superdeterminism, such as the exact timing of atomic decay?
> 
> Granted, this is sheer speculation.  But there do exist models of superdeterminism wherein choices and free will continue to exist.
>  
>       It would literally mean that time is entirely scripted from
>       beginning to end with the bizarre property that the characters in the
>       script are forced to both run experiments to test if the world is
>       scripted and every experiment forces them to reach the conclusion that
>       the world is random and there is no script.
> 
> 
> Just like a well-designed simulation, where there is no "hack" or "glitch" letting the simulated folks break out or even know  they
> are in a simulation.
> 
>