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

TL;DR

This paper refutes recent criticisms of Invariant-set theory's hidden-variable formulation, clarifying misunderstandings about the model and Bell's local causality to defend its validity.

Contribution

It provides a detailed rebuttal to superdeterminist critiques, clarifying the correct interpretation of Invariant-set theory and Bell's causality principles.

Findings

The criticisms are based on misunderstandings of the hidden-variable model.

Invariant-set theory remains consistent with Bell's notion of local causality.

The paper clarifies conceptual issues in the debate on hidden-variable theories.

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.