# Re: Why you should do the unexpected bet in front of a QS experiment ?

```2013/1/9 meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>

> On 1/9/2013 3:10 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> let us start with the proposed QS experiment by Tegmark, a QS machine
>> with a 99/100 chance of a *perfect* kill (so let's put aside HP failure or
>> whatever so to have either the experimenter is killed with the given
>> probabilities or it is not, no in between, so in 1/100 he is not killed and
>> perfectly well, 99/100 he is killed).
>>
>> You are a witness of such experiment, and you're asked to make a bet on
>> the experimenter surviving (or not).
>>
>> So you bet 100\$, if you bet on the experimenter surviving, if he survive,
>> you'll get 200\$, if he does not you'll lose your bet, likewise if you bet
>> on him die.
>>
>> What you should do contrary to what seems reasonable, is to bet on the
>> experimenter will survive for the following reason:
>>
>> If MWI is true:
>>
>> 1st Test: in 99/100 worlds you lose 100\$ (and the bet ends here, there is
>> no experimenter left for a second round), in 1/100 worlds you win 200\$
>> 2nd Test: well... you cannot play again in the 99/100 worlds where you
>> did lose 100\$, so you start already with 200\$ in your pocket for this 2nd
>> test, so you should do the same, no here in 99/100 worlds, you did make a
>> draw (you put 100\$ in 1st test + 100\$ win on the 1st test - 100\$ you did
>> lose now because the experimenter is dead), in 1/100 you win again 200\$,
>> that make 300\$ in your pocket.
>>
>> From the 3rd test on, you can only get richer, weither the experimenter
>> lives from your POV or not.
>>
>> In QM+collapse, if the guy luckily survive two tests, you win money...
>> you'll only lose money if he is killed at the first test.
>>
>>
>> So contrary to what you may think, you should bet the experimenter should
>> live, because in MWI, it is garanteed that you'll win money in a lot
>> branches after only two succeeded test, and as in QM+collapse, only the
>> 99/100 of the first test lose money, all the others either make no loss or
>> win money.
>>
>
> Did you bother to calculate the expected value of playing this game?  It's
> \$98/0.99 whether you bet on survival or death.  And since \$98/0.99<\$100 you
>```
```
??

you only lose on first bet if the experimenter die, which in MWI happens in
99% of the worlds... so discounting that *first* and only bet where you
lose, you win 100\$ every time till the experimenter die.

On 2nd bet, you win nothing if the experimenter die (100\$ (from first bet)
+100\$ (from winning first bet)-100\$(from losing second bet).

At the third bet, you win 100\$ if the experimenter die... and 100\$ more
every time you see the experimenter survive. Only on the first bet when the
experimenter die you lose 100\$ (and in that case, there is no more bet
possible as there is no more experimenter).

But after the second bet, all worlds following that 2nd bet if MWI is true,
contains *only* winner witness.

Quentin

>
> Brent
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscribe@
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
> .
>
>

--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to