<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Apple Color Emoji";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">An invocation of superdeterminism would be in a double slit experiment that the particles are imagined to be synchronized in a deterministic fashion with the measurements (whether human or machine) who had to measure exactly when they did.
An inevitable consequence 13 billion years later. The randomness of a radioactive decay or a pseudo-number random number generator is all the same sort of thing. Want a different universe? Change your random seed and replay..<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Friam <friam-bounces@redfish.com> on behalf of Frank Wimberly <wimberly3@gmail.com><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b>The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, April 30, 2019 at 6:40 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Tell me if I am wrong. When we read Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity by John Baez I had the impression that wormholes were mathematical fictions. Is hyperdeterminism some form of the idea that if you knew the position and momentum of every
particle in the universe you could calculate the trajectory thereof for all time.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Frank <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-----------------------------------<br>
Frank Wimberly<br>
<br>
My memoir:<br>
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly">https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly</a><br>
<br>
My scientific publications:<br>
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2">https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2</a><br>
<br>
Phone (505) 670-9918<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 6:33 PM Marcus Daniels <<a href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<p class="MsoNormal">I was just throwing out two, the wormhole idea of Maldacena & Susskind and super-determinism described by Hooft. They seem very different to me, and could imply two very different universes. That QM works for either doesn't help explain
how one or the other or neither is the true explanation.<br>
<br>
On 4/30/19, 6:02 PM, "Friam on behalf of uǝlƃ <span style="font-family:"Apple Color Emoji"">
☣</span>" <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a> on behalf of
<a href="mailto:gepropella@gmail.com" target="_blank">gepropella@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Yes, I understand your skepticism. I even share it. But nothing you've said validates the dichotomy you laid out before. The wizard's spell sense you get from entanglement across 3 meters of space is a reflection of how you (yes, and most of us) model the
world. Even if it's only like 5/7e9 people that have any intuition of how the other model(s) work(s), it's still not zero. And I suspect it's more than 5.<br>
<br>
A pedestrian example is in how/why/what the kids love about Instagram and hate about Facebook ... or can listen to that gawdawful music they listen to. They're developing intuitions us old farts will never have. What's to say it won't also happen with QM
effects? E.g. we're already (fairly) comfortable with the way transistors work, even if most of the modeling language in which they're used is classical. The distinction between the circuits-level language of use versus the underlying quantum properties of
materials level language of transistor construction (again riffing off Eric's point) isn't near as crisp as it once was.<br>
<br>
That optimism does rely on a progressive society, though ... which looks unlikely at this point.<br>
<br>
On 4/30/19 4:34 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:<br>
> There are more people that catch fly balls than develop theories of physical information. I don't believe a well-funded liberal culture will change that. Maybe in a hundred or a thousand years if we are a reconfigurable species, a large part of the
population will spend their days experiencing and manipulating physical phenomenon as first class thing using an extended nervous system. But as it is, the inputs are from a narrow range of temperatures & pressures and a tiny window of electromagnetic radiation.
And cognitively, the short term workspace of a human is small and slow compared to even a simple computer. <br>
<br>
-- <br>
<span style="font-family:"Apple Color Emoji"">☣</span> uǝlƃ<br>
<br>
============================================================<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br>
to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">
http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<br>
<br>
<br>
============================================================<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br>
to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC" target="_blank">
http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br>
FRIAM-COMIC</a> <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>