Not deterministic, exactly. It sounds like you're pushing a sort of "hidden variable" theory, and those have been ruled out experimentally for quantum physics. We can make very accurate probabilistic predictions, but at the bottom level it is impossible (as far as we can tell) to predict the outcome of a measurement on a quantum system that is in a superposition of states. You might know that a neutron will decay some time in the next two minutes with 90% probability, for instance, but there's no way to predict that it will decay exactly 27 seconds from now. You're on one of your favorite hobby horses again. You shouldn't go around making proclamations about what "reality is" unless you can actually back them up - something you've never managed to do in your time here, in regards to your pet theories about "implicate orders" and so on. At some point you have to realise that stringing scientific-sounding terms together like this, without backing them up, is a waste of yours and everybody else's time. What you just posted there is completely unsupported by any argument or evidence. Are you aware of that? Do you just make this stuff up as you type?