Hidden variables

## hidden variables is junk/in not in itself a theory [but untheoretical part of others]

hidden variables is junk/in not in itself a theory [but it is the nontheoretical/unprocedural part of others (no rigorous hidden variables generator is produced; it CAN but the results look exactly like Everettism... but particle decay becomes a monstrosity when described by a hidden variables generator which gives rise to the same Everettian results AND predicts also the many-worlds; otherwise you don't have the hidden variables generator)] (by Ken Astute) It is doable to create a TOTALLY EQUIVALENT hidden variables retrocausality generator (totally equivalent means I repeat that the generator produces also alternative universe-strains; the analytical retrocausal hidden variables generator theory has the exact results as Everettism and the real world; thus its untestable as differentiated from Everettism. Only erroneous hidden variables generator theories make the wrong predictions, but that's merely a human mistakes. It's painful to mathematical describe that, because it requires beforehand known paths of particles and many cancellations of paths and particles... and you have to mention everything from the Big Bang. The hidden variables generator (a Deutschian constructor) might be even wrong if physics is axiomatically open... [David Hilbert tried to axiomatize physics but he was wrong on many things; David Tong is closer to truth because the deeper we zoom in in matter in particle accelerators the more complexity we see. Quantum field theory is the best physical theory we have which matches the data, and still the more we zoom in [higher energies] the more complexity we see. The axiomatics of physics = physics as an axiomatic system should have a list of axioms. Mathematics fails to be axiomatic system based on a single axiom generator. Why physics isn't mathematics (and why Max Tegmark doesn't explain rigorously enough the difference between mathematics and physics). Physics (and in particular the ontologically true physics and not the physics of nowadays science) results from and is an axiomatic algorithm = an axiomatic generator which doesn't act as a simple list but has proceduralities like the uncertainty principle and the expansion of the universe which is a form of ontological entropy, and that axiomatic algorithms performs these tricks because it has to workaround without to cancel the problems of axiomaticity (incompleteness, inconsistency and uncalculability; at least two of them necessarily per axiomatic system). The axiomatic algorithm of the universe has to be an ontological Turing machine (a subcategory of the Turing machine) which is its own hardware, software and axiomatics because the universe isn't a laptop in which we can separate software from hardware and the circuit designer doesn't have to know the axiomatics of the circuit elements which is physics. An ontological Turing machine has to express its hardware, software and axiomatics in the same nature. David Deutsch claims that different constructors are possible in the universe, but we know that causopermeability (causal permeability) exists between orders of magnitude and nonclosed nonidealized systems.

Can a hidden variables generator mimic an Everettian universe? Yes it can. The result is tautological; identical; the alternative worlds are unavoidable; but it creates way more complicated spacetime diagrams with extra retrocausal paths of which the biggest part is cancelled out.

Occam's razor isn't fundamental.

Any correct theory is equivalent.

(We have to describe the "Hubble volume field" because Hubble volumes are infinite and overlapping. That also produces alternative universes.)

Sabine Hossenfelder with superdeterminism can push the hidden variables before the Big Bang, or at the physical foundations. Still Everettian-like superdeterministic alternative initial hidden variables are possible solutions and hidden variables aren't defined with a specific analytical theory and formulas particular on the hidden part. Hidden variables are nonmathematical. Hidden variables don't refute alternative hidden variables and alternative worlds.