Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by adrianN 2752 days ago
I think it's a boring theory that doesn't pass Ockham's razor. For the universe to be superdeterministic you'd have to encode its whole evolution somewhere. That is more complicated that the normal interpretation of QM but doesn't explain more.
2 comments
naasking 2752 days ago
> I think it's a boring theory that doesn't pass Ockham's razor. For the universe to be superdeterministic you'd have to encode its whole evolution somewhere

The Cellular Automaton Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, by 't Hooft https://arxiv.org/abs/1405.1548

link
adrianN 2752 days ago
That's really interesting, I like CAs a lot. However the author himself states in the introduction that Bell's inequality and related theorems very strongly suggest that his theory is not correct.
link
naasking 2752 days ago
> However the author himself states in the introduction that Bell's inequality and related theorems very strongly suggest that his theory is not correct.

It's widely believed that Bell's theorem and other no-go theorems preclude a local, hidden variable interpretation of QM. The author merely mentions that he can reconcile existing results with this local, hidden variable interpretation via "superdeterminism".

link
joycian 2752 days ago
Isn't it simpler? There are just a few rules and everything works? For the normal QM you have to get some randomness from somewhere else.

edit: I mean I agree it's problematic for experimental science, but I think Occam's razor cuts the other way in this instance.

edit2: Isn't the entire history encoded anyway in the current state of the universe in the deterministic case. I don't understand what the problem is there.

link
adrianN 2752 days ago
To get rid of the randomness you have to have prepared the result of every decision that is currently attributed to randomness in a big lookup table.
link
joycian 2752 days ago
Why would that be necessary if there are local deterministic propagation rules, that have been there since the beginning?
link
adrianN 2751 days ago
Because local, deterministic rules don't agree with experimental observations as far as I understand quantum physics. You can have either local, or deterministic, but not both without superdeterminism, i.e. the giant lookup table, or instant communication.
link