Superdeterminism

[local]

Who's to say "we need to fix it somewhere far in the past e.g. in Big Bang, and somewhere in the future e.g. Big Crunch, infinity etc."? Your argument is circular.

[Jarek]

What is crucial here is time/CPT symmetry of physics e.g. in Lagrangian formalism (from QFT to GR), unitary evolution.
In contrast we try to enforce our time asymmetric intuition like in Euler-Lagrange evolution, but maybe we should be more careful.

Here are some symmetric ways to choose a solution:
1) The least action principle: solution is chosen as action optimizing one based on state in past and future ... but state when exactly? Can be minus plus infinity.
2) Path ensemble e.g. Feynman's of paths from minus to plus infinity. Boltzmann path ensemble ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximal_E ... andom_Walk ) already has e.g. Anderson localization e.g. rho~sin^2 in [0,1], Born rules, which can lead to Bell violation constructions.
3) Path ensemble is naturally transformed into propagator, allowing to imagine the current moment as effect of meeting of two propagator: from minus and plus infinity as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state ... _formalism

Accepting time/CPT of physics - that physics has chosen solution we live in in symmetric way like in the 3 ways above, the current state was already chosen to be compatible with all future measurements - as in superdeterminism.

Having solution chosen in symmetric way, we can switch to compatible asymmetric perspective, e.g. least action principle -> Euler-Lagrange evolution.
More arguments: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0910.2724