[moedersmooiste]

I'm no expert but I also lean toward superdeterminism. It's either that or the universe is not deterministic at all. Believing that the universe is only partly deterministic is the same as believing someone can be partly pregnant.

[GoblinSlayer]

As I understand, superdeterminism isn't the same as determinism. Normally Bell's theorem would tell you that it's determinism, but a deterministic system still can arbitrarily end up with skewed statistics and thus look like anything and you can't expose it because it's skewed in a specific way. That's superdeterminism, it looks like not what it is by pure chance.

[samecouldbesaid]

Superdeterminism is still determinism but an idea added to it for all particles sharing all future states. Superdeterminism is against the idea of real-time processing while Quantum Mechanics is typically imagined as real-time processing. Sure, determinism can illustrate a deterministic system producing infinite universes that are deterministically operating every possibility imaginable, where a local subject could get the impression things aren’t deterministic while they indeed are if viewing the whole system non-locally and that with what you’re describing doesn’t really fit the expression of chance.

[GoblinSlayer]

In any determinism all particles share all future states simply because future states are predictable and there's only one future, which is total statistical correlation. In superdetermininsm these future states aren't any states, but particularly selected states that show skewed picture. And they ended up this way arbitrarily, which is a chance (maybe bayesian).