On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 3:13 PM Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's true provided you assume the universe is realistic, that is to >> say even if it has not been measured, an electron has one and only one axis >> of spin and one and only one direction the spin axis points to. And you >> *also* assume Superdeterminism is incorrect because it would be *literally >> impossible* to imagine a theory that was a greater violation of Occam's >> Razor than Superdeterminism. But some people like Superdeterminism anyway, >> which goes to show you that even with scientists emotion can sometimes get >> the better of logic and they will go to any lengths, no matter how absurd, >> to avoid all those many worlds which they despise so much. >> > > * >Yet here on the "everythinglist" superdetermism is (or was) the default > assumption, except it was mitigated by every possible/computable thing is > determined to happen...sort of MWI on the grand scale.* > The difference is Many Worlds goes from simple assumptions to an astronomically complex outcome, but Superdeterminism goes from astronomically complex assumptions to a simple outcome. And if you can't get more out of a theory then you put into it then the theory is just silly. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> csd -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2k%2BbckkhpF%3DFzv5TW8uOwENdDADdBRDOSE1hpcWUvQTw%40mail.gmail.com.
