The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism • Hacker News Board

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#11

Post by kgwgk » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:01 PM UTC

moomin wrote: post #2

The thing about superdeterminism is that it's only interesting if you want to argue philosophy. If you're dealing with hidden variables (or even measurement errors) the only practical tool in your box for handling them is probability distributions. So either way, you've got a probability distribution. And at this point people just apply Occam's Razor and get on with their lives. You can theorize an infinite number of…

> The thing about superdeterminism is that it's only interesting if you want to argue philosophy.

Like the Many Worlds Interpretation!

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#12

Post by kgwgk » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:04 PM UTC

zwkrt wrote: post #7

Can someone explain more clearly how being in a deterministic universe resolves the “problem” of Bell inequalities? It seems like even if the universe were deterministic it would not cause the classic polarizing-filters Bell inequality to seem “reasonable”. In fact it makes it seem less reasonable to me!

The point is not that it's "reasonable", is that it's just what it is. It doesn't resolve the problem, it makes it meaningless.

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#13

Post by zazaraka » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:11 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #5

I don't think the problem with superdeterminism is the lack of free will, but with the way it doesn't really give you anything mentally to work with. It posits some early state from which everything could be deterministically extrapolated... except that state is both very complicated and completely hidden. It takes all of the probabilities and shoves them in a black box and says, "The answers exist, and they're in th…

Whats wrong with a pseudo-random number generator? You start the universe with 1 million random bits and then just iterate your function on them. How would we detect repetition at the 2^1 mil level? Maybe the universe would repeat itself after a while, but how would we know?

Superdeterminism also plays nicely with the simulation hypothesis. You seed the virtual machine with some randomness and the physical laws and then you run the simulation.

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#14

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:16 PM UTC

dharmab wrote: post #6

trevyn wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could an untestable underlying theory inspire new models and implications that are testable?

In a general case, yes. This happened recently with gravitational waves. The construction of multiple gravitational wave detectors across the planet allowed us to test a previously untestable hypothesis about the number of dimensions that gravity can act in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HYw6vPR9qU

> allowed us to test a previously untestable hypothesis

So it is testable now? Is everyone here using the word "untestable" in the same way, i.e. "untestable today with the current state of the art, but it might be tomorrow" vs. "untestable ever, as a principle, even with perfect tech"

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#15

Post by jfengel » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:23 PM UTC

zazaraka wrote: post #13

jfengel wrote: post #5

I don't think the problem with superdeterminism is the lack of free will, but with the way it doesn't really give you anything mentally to work with. It posits some early state from which everything could be deterministically extrapolated... except that state is both very complicated and completely hidden. It takes all of the probabilities and shoves them in a black box and says, "The answers exist, and they're in th…

Whats wrong with a pseudo-random number generator? You start the universe with 1 million random bits and then just iterate your function on them. How would we detect repetition at the 2^1 mil level? Maybe the universe would repeat itself after a while, but how would we know? Superdeterminism also plays nicely with the simulation hypothesis. You seed the virtual machine with some randomness and the physical laws and t…

I don't believe you'd need even a million random bits. It's conceivable that only a few random bits are actually required, and then let iteration take care of the rest.

There's nothing wrong with that. I just don't think people find it very useful as an organizing principle, so it doesn't attract a lot of attention.

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#16

Post by namanyayg » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #14

dharmab wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a general case, yes. This happened recently with gravitational waves. The construction of multiple gravitational wave detectors across the planet allowed us to test a previously untestable hypothesis about the number of dimensions that gravity can act in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HYw6vPR9qU

> allowed us to test a previously untestable hypothesis So it is testable now? Is everyone here using the word "untestable" in the same way, i.e. "untestable today with the current state of the art, but it might be tomorrow" vs. "untestable ever, as a principle, even with perfect tech"

Untestable is a layman's word, everyone here should be saying "falsifiable".

Many Worlds isn't falsifiable and hence untestable; but untestable can also mean not possible to test with current tech. Falsifiable is more accurate here.

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#17

Post by klodolph » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

samirillian wrote: post #10

whatshisface wrote: post #4

"The Facts" basically say that among the statements, "Your experiment design isn't predestined by the universe to make it accidentally seem like quantum mechanics is true," "the state of the universe today is all you need to know to predict the state of the universe tomorrow," and "an experiment only has one outcome," there is at least one lie. If the first one is a lie that's superdeterminism, the second one the Cop…

Where does Pilot Wave theory fall?

My understanding is that it is possible to conduct an experiment which would invalidate pilot wave theory or confirm it, to the extent that theories are invalidated or confirmed--we just haven't figured out how to conduct the experiment.

The article mentions that Bell's inequality was in a similar position in the past.

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#18

Post by klodolph » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:44 PM UTC

namanyayg wrote: post #16

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> allowed us to test a previously untestable hypothesis So it is testable now? Is everyone here using the word "untestable" in the same way, i.e. "untestable today with the current state of the art, but it might be tomorrow" vs. "untestable ever, as a principle, even with perfect tech"

Untestable is a layman's word, everyone here should be saying "falsifiable". Many Worlds isn't falsifiable and hence untestable; but untestable can also mean not possible to test with current tech. Falsifiable is more accurate here.

"Falsifiable" is a fantastic term but the philosophy of science did not stop with Popper, and it's not the only term we have available to discuss competing theories.

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#19

Post by namanyayg » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:48 PM UTC

klodolph wrote: post #18

namanyayg wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Untestable is a layman's word, everyone here should be saying "falsifiable". Many Worlds isn't falsifiable and hence untestable; but untestable can also mean not possible to test with current tech. Falsifiable is more accurate here.

"Falsifiable" is a fantastic term but the philosophy of science did not stop with Popper, and it's not the only term we have available to discuss competing theories.

What other terms would you use? "Falsifiable" is more accurate that "untestable"?

Re: The Forgotten Solution: Superdeterminism

#20

Post by scythe » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 5:54 PM UTC

The problem is that superdeterminism contains a principle of explosion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion

If superdeterminism explains quantum mechanics, why not cosmic inflation? Why not matter asymmetry? Why not abiogenesis? Why not Brexit? Superdeterminism, by construction, can explain everything — and all there’s left to do is pray to God.