Reply to superdeterminists on the hidden-variable formulation of Invariant-set theory

Abstract

In a recent article (arXiv:2108.08144), Hance, Hossenfelder and Palmer have advanced arguments claiming to show that the analysis of Invariant-set theory in a hidden-variable setting (arXiv:2107.04761) is wrong. We explain here why these arguments are incorrect, and involve misunderstandings of the hidden-variable model in question and Bell's notion of local causality.

References in corpus (5)

• Is the quantum state real? An extended review of $\psi$-ontology theorems
• Local deterministic model of singlet state correlations based on relaxing measurement independence
• How much measurement independence is needed in order to demonstrate nonlocality?
• Analysis of the superdeterministic Invariant-set theory in a hidden-variable setting
• Experimental Tests of Invariant Set Theory