[gus_massa]

> there exists local and deterministic evaluation rule that will compute consecutive states of the universe

If this is the correct meaning of superdeterminism, then it doesn't make sense. Saying that there are some unknown rules that explain something is not a scientific theory.

You can solve the quantum gravity problem saying that there are some unknown rules that explain that. You can solve the renormalization problem saying that there are some unknown rules that explain that. You can solve everything saying that there are some unknown rules that explain that.

[chr1]

It is not that simple. Bell inequalities show that there cannot exist a local evaluation rule that could explain experiments with entangled particles where two people pick filters independently.

Superdeterminism is saying that strictly speaking we do not have a proof that two people (whose past light cones intersect) can pick the filters independently, so Bell inequalities still would allow local rules, that in addition to describing particles, somehow also restrict the choices that experimentators can make.

So superdeterminism is not a scientific theory, but a hypothesis that there exists a scientific theory that would fit in the small crack left open by Bell inequalities.

No one knows how to construct such a theory, and most people think it cannot be constructed.