foliation

The technical term for this is that you have to choose a "preferred foliation of space-time".

He sewed up the entire field of foliation theory, and showed that most knots are hyperbolic.

There are explorations of natural foliations of space-time which provides the kind of nonlocality needed.

For instance, a preferred foliation of spacetime can be derived from the wave function itself [1], which means a preferred reference frame is actually a part of every interpretation of QM.

A foliation is somewhat unpleasant, but there are ways to tease them out of the existing structures of relativity + wave function [0].As for determinism, that is not the main point for many proponents of BM.

While there are solutions, mainly centering on finding a natural foliation, the tension with relativity has not really been resolved, a tension which exists regardless of interpretation.

I have yet to see a convincing argument for why we, as observers, couldn't perceive any of these other foliations of Schwarzschild spacetime and for why we definitely wouldn't live to see someone else cross the event horizon.

What EPR and Bell's arguments showed is that if you have definite results of experiments at the space-time locations where/when we think the results happened, then there has to be something non-local going on and a foliation is the simplest way to orchestrate that.

Formalisms that do a 3+1 foliation to look more like pre-Einsteinean physics can produce surprisingly bogus results, even though the "block world" suggests that if we know the entire configuration of the universe at any "slice", we know the configuration of the whole "block" history of the universe.

From the Wikipedia page:'In fact, Thurston resolved so many outstanding problems in foliation theory in such a short period of time that it led to a kind of exodus from the field, where advisors counselled students against going into foliation theory[1] because Thurston was "cleaning out the subject"'