Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Why Non-Scientists Are Needed to Advance Science

Manuel S. Morales

Published Jan 6, 2025• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

A new empirical method has been developed to test superdeterminism, i.e., predetermined events. [1] The successful results reveal that current scientific methods fail to account for the predetermined condition of two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive nonlocal variables that can only come-to-exist yet are necessary to conduct all local experiments. The discovery of nonlocal missing variables in scientific investigations explains why local methods yield false-positive and false-negative results. The unambiguous empirical evidence obtained has undergone peer review, has been published, and can be tested by the entire human race via the Final Selection Experiment. [2] The evidence is universal and absolute, which sets the stage for researchers worldwide to embrace this new method for the advancement of science. However, scientists still require funding and peer acceptance. Thus, nonscientists who are free from peer pressure and have the authority to grant such funding will inadvertently be needed to advance science beyond its current limitations.

DOI
10.31219/osf.io/uxzwv_v1

Related papers

Why Non-Scientists Are Needed to Advance Science

Manuel S. Morales

A new empirical method has been developed to test superdeterminism, i.e., predetermined events. The successful results reveal that current scientific methods fail to account for the predetermined condition of two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive nonlocal variables that can only come-to-exist yet are necessary to conduct all local experiments. The discovery of nonlocal missing variables in scientific investigations explains why local methods yield false-positive and false-negative results. The unambiguous empirical evidence obtained has undergone peer review, has been published, and can be tested by the entire human race via the Final Selection Experiment. Because the evidence is universal and absolute, it paves the way for scientific research around the globe to adopt this new method for the advancement of science. However, scientists still require funding and peer acceptance. Thus, nonscientists who are free from peer pressure and scientific accolades and who have the authority to grant such funding will inadvertently be needed to advance science beyond peer bias.

•Feb 14, 2025•0 citations

Why Non-Scientists Are Needed to Advance Science

Manuel S. Morales

A new empirical method has been developed to test superdeterminism, i.e., predetermined events. The successful results reveal that current scientific methods fail to account for the predetermined condition of two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive nonlocal variables that can only come-to-exist yet are necessary to conduct all local experiments. The discovery of nonlocal missing variables in scientific investigations explains why local methods yield false-positive and false-negative results. The unambiguous empirical evidence obtained has undergone peer review, has been published, and can be tested by the entire human race via the Final Selection Experiment. Because the evidence is universal and absolute, it paves the way for scientific research around the globe to adopt this new method for the advancement of science. However, scientists still require funding and peer acceptance. Thus, nonscientists who are free from peer pressure and scientific accolades and who have the authority to grant such funding will inadvertently be needed to advance science beyond peer bias.

•Feb 10, 2025•0 citations

How Artwork Was Used to Obtain Unambiguous Empirical Evidence of Superdeterminism

Manuel S. Morales

The United Nations has designated 2025 as the ‘International Year of Quantum Science and Technology’ in recognition of the 100-year anniversary of the theory of quantum mechanics. As with all fields of science, unbiased empirical evidence can establish if a scientific theory is valid or not. By repeating what had been done twice before, I developed a nonlocal no-go method, i.e., the Method of Everything, that tested without ambiguity physicist John S Bell’s superdeterminism loophole, thereby establishing that nonlocal cause predetermines local effects. This means that quantum mechanics is not a fundamental theory as currently recognized. It also means that Albert Einstein was correct about quantum mechanics being an incomplete theory. In the peer-reviewed Method of Everything manuscript, I presented unambiguous empirical evidence that confirmed local events are predetermined nonlocally. Therefore, the goal of this article is not to rehash what has already been published. Rather, I will review the manuscript by addressing how I used artwork as a mechanism to empirically confirm superdeterminism by leading the reader through the lessons I learned and the steps taken while also addressing why scientists, in general, could not make the same discovery. Moreover, I have provided an experiment for the entire human race to confirm and thus peer-review my findings for themselves by testing if the functions of motion are predetermined laws of nature. Accordingly, I discuss the ramifications of this discovery as well as how the findings can help to advance science.

•Nov 15, 2024•0 citations

Waves versus particles

Tony Hey, Patrick Walters

… I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman Science and experiment Science is a special kind of explanation of the things we see around us. It starts with a problem and curiosity. Something strikes the scientist as odd. It doesn't fit in with the usual explanation. Maybe harder thinking or more careful observation will resolve the problem. If it remains a puzzle, it stimulates the scientist's imagination. Perhaps a completely new way of looking at things is needed? Scientists are perpetually trying to find better explanations – better in the sense that any new explanation must not only explain the new puzzle, but also be consistent with all of the previous explanations that still work well. The hallmark of any scientific explanation or ‘theory’ is that it must be able to make successful predictions. In other words, any decent theory must be able to say what will happen in any given set of circumstances. Thus, any new theory will only become generally accepted by the scientific community if it is able not only to explain the observations that scientists have already made, but also to foretell the results of new, as yet unperformed, experiments. This rigorous testing of new scientific ideas is the key feature that distinguishes science from other fields of intellectual endeavour -such as history or even economics – or from a pseudoscience such as astrology.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Oct 23, 2003•0 citations

A Unified Framework for Superdeterminism, Neurobiology, and the Mechanics of Human Meaning

Rowan Brad Quni-Gudzinas

Superdeterminism is the concept of a perfectly rigid clockwork universe where every single event, including human thought, was mathematically fixed at the beginning of time. In theoretical physics, this framework posits that the initial boundary conditions of the cosmos dictate the exact evolution of all quantum fields and macroscopic structures without exception. The entire physical system operates as a singular, unfolding equation where particles interact and transfer energy along strictly predefined geometric trajectories. This absolute rigidity is mathematically necessary to preserve the fundamental conservation of information and energy across the spacetime manifold. Just as the precise orbit of a planet can be calculated centuries in advance using gravitational mechanics, the exact firing of a human neuron is equally bound by these inescapable physical laws. By eliminating any possibility of uncaused events, this framework proves that the subjective feeling of making a free choice is merely a biological illusion masking a predetermined mechanical output. Understanding this foundational rigidity requires us to first dismantle the pervasive human belief that randomness exists anywhere in the natural world.

•Mar 5, 2026•0 citations

What Does the World Look Like according to Superdeterminism?

A. Baas, Baptiste Le Bihan

The violation of Bell inequalities seems to establish an important fact about the world: that it is non-local. However, this result relies on the assumption of the statistical independence of the measurement settings with respect to potential past events that might have determined them. Superdeterminism refers to the view that a local, and determinist, account of Bell inequalities violations is possible, by rejecting this assumption of statistical independence. We examine and clarify various problems with superdeterminism, looking in particular at its consequences on the nature of scientific laws and scientific reasoning. We argue that the view requires a neo-Humean account of at least some laws, and creates a significant problem for the use of statistical independence in other parts of physics and science more generally.

arXiv:2009.13908•The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science•Apr 15, 2021•2 citations
A new empirical method has been developed to test superdeterminism, i.e., predetermined events. [1] The successful results reveal that current scientific methods fail to account for the predetermined condition of two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive nonlocal variables that can only come-to-exist yet are necessary to conduct all local experiments. The discovery of nonlocal missing variables in scientific investigations explains why local methods yield false-positive and false-negative results. The unambiguous empirical evidence obtained has undergone peer review, has been published, and can be tested by the entire human race via the Final Selection Experiment. [2] The evidence is universal and absolute, which sets the stage for researchers worldwide to embrace this new method for the advancement of science. However, scientists still require funding and peer acceptance. Thus, nonscientists who are free from peer pressure and have the authority to grant such funding will inadvertently be needed to advance science beyond its current limitations.
A new empirical method has been developed to test superdeterminism, i.e., predetermined events. The successful results reveal that current scientific methods fail to account for the predetermined condition of two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive nonlocal variables that can only come-to-exist yet are necessary to conduct all local experiments. The discovery of nonlocal missing variables in scientific investigations explains why local methods yield false-positive and false-negative results. The unambiguous empirical evidence obtained has undergone peer review, has been published, and can be tested by the entire human race via the Final Selection Experiment. Because the evidence is universal and absolute, it paves the way for scientific research around the globe to adopt this new method for the advancement of science. However, scientists still require funding and peer acceptance. Thus, nonscientists who are free from peer pressure and scientific accolades and who have the authority to grant such funding will inadvertently be needed to advance science beyond peer bias.
A new empirical method has been developed to test superdeterminism, i.e., predetermined events. The successful results reveal that current scientific methods fail to account for the predetermined condition of two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive nonlocal variables that can only come-to-exist yet are necessary to conduct all local experiments. The discovery of nonlocal missing variables in scientific investigations explains why local methods yield false-positive and false-negative results. The unambiguous empirical evidence obtained has undergone peer review, has been published, and can be tested by the entire human race via the Final Selection Experiment. Because the evidence is universal and absolute, it paves the way for scientific research around the globe to adopt this new method for the advancement of science. However, scientists still require funding and peer acceptance. Thus, nonscientists who are free from peer pressure and scientific accolades and who have the authority to grant such funding will inadvertently be needed to advance science beyond peer bias.
The United Nations has designated 2025 as the ‘International Year of Quantum Science and Technology’ in recognition of the 100-year anniversary of the theory of quantum mechanics. As with all fields of science, unbiased empirical evidence can establish if a scientific theory is valid or not. By repeating what had been done twice before, I developed a nonlocal no-go method, i.e., the Method of Everything, that tested without ambiguity physicist John S Bell’s superdeterminism loophole, thereby establishing that nonlocal cause predetermines local effects. This means that quantum mechanics is not a fundamental theory as currently recognized. It also means that Albert Einstein was correct about quantum mechanics being an incomplete theory. In the peer-reviewed Method of Everything manuscript, I presented unambiguous empirical evidence that confirmed local events are predetermined nonlocally. Therefore, the goal of this article is not to rehash what has already been published. Rather, I will review the manuscript by addressing how I used artwork as a mechanism to empirically confirm superdeterminism by leading the reader through the lessons I learned and the steps taken while also addressing why scientists, in general, could not make the same discovery. Moreover, I have provided an experiment for the entire human race to confirm and thus peer-review my findings for themselves by testing if the functions of motion are predetermined laws of nature. Accordingly, I discuss the ramifications of this discovery as well as how the findings can help to advance science.
… I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. Richard Feynman Science and experiment Science is a special kind of explanation of the things we see around us. It starts with a problem and curiosity. Something strikes the scientist as odd. It doesn't fit in with the usual explanation. Maybe harder thinking or more careful observation will resolve the problem. If it remains a puzzle, it stimulates the scientist's imagination. Perhaps a completely new way of looking at things is needed? Scientists are perpetually trying to find better explanations – better in the sense that any new explanation must not only explain the new puzzle, but also be consistent with all of the previous explanations that still work well. The hallmark of any scientific explanation or ‘theory’ is that it must be able to make successful predictions. In other words, any decent theory must be able to say what will happen in any given set of circumstances. Thus, any new theory will only become generally accepted by the scientific community if it is able not only to explain the observations that scientists have already made, but also to foretell the results of new, as yet unperformed, experiments. This rigorous testing of new scientific ideas is the key feature that distinguishes science from other fields of intellectual endeavour -such as history or even economics – or from a pseudoscience such as astrology.
Superdeterminism is the concept of a perfectly rigid clockwork universe where every single event, including human thought, was mathematically fixed at the beginning of time. In theoretical physics, this framework posits that the initial boundary conditions of the cosmos dictate the exact evolution of all quantum fields and macroscopic structures without exception. The entire physical system operates as a singular, unfolding equation where particles interact and transfer energy along strictly predefined geometric trajectories. This absolute rigidity is mathematically necessary to preserve the fundamental conservation of information and energy across the spacetime manifold. Just as the precise orbit of a planet can be calculated centuries in advance using gravitational mechanics, the exact firing of a human neuron is equally bound by these inescapable physical laws. By eliminating any possibility of uncaused events, this framework proves that the subjective feeling of making a free choice is merely a biological illusion masking a predetermined mechanical output. Understanding this foundational rigidity requires us to first dismantle the pervasive human belief that randomness exists anywhere in the natural world.
The violation of Bell inequalities seems to establish an important fact about the world: that it is non-local. However, this result relies on the assumption of the statistical independence of the measurement settings with respect to potential past events that might have determined them. Superdeterminism refers to the view that a local, and determinist, account of Bell inequalities violations is possible, by rejecting this assumption of statistical independence. We examine and clarify various problems with superdeterminism, looking in particular at its consequences on the nature of scientific laws and scientific reasoning. We argue that the view requires a neo-Humean account of at least some laws, and creates a significant problem for the use of statistical independence in other parts of physics and science more generally.