On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 11:30:52AM +1000, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On 01/10/2007, Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It isn't, because Mallah's DA + ASSA predicts a negligible probability
> > of finding oneself in an OM of (say) greater than 120 years old,
> > whereas with the RSSA one has the QTI predictions, and experiencing
> > being 200 years old is not that unusual. Explaining how two
> > intelligent people can come to such dramatically different conclusions
> > from a given argument lead to formalising this distinction between the
> > ASSA and the RSSA.
> There is a small probability that you will find yourself greater than
> 120 years old, but you might still be guaranteed of living to 120. For
> example, if the lifespan of every human were exactly 120 years and one
> minute, then you are very unlikely to find yourself over 120 years
> old, yet you will certainly find yourself over that age eventually.
> Similarly with the QTI your measure is not uniform over your entire
> very long lifespan, so that a randomly sampled OM is very unlikely to
> be over 1000 years old, but you are still guaranteed of exceeding that
> age eventually. Is there an inconsistency here?

The ASSA is the assumption that what you will experience must be
randomly sampled from the distribution of OMs. So with the ASSA you
are not guaranteed of experiencing being over 1000 years old at all.

> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou

A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
UNSW SYDNEY 2052                         [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia                                http://www.hpcoders.com.au

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to