On 4 March 2014 18:43, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not reading Max's book, so I don't know exactly what he said, >
It's quoted in the first post on this thread. > but using FPI as in Everett QM and writing down which of two equally > likely events you actually experience is an example of bernoulli trials. > The proportion of 1s and 0s both converge to 1/2 in probability. This is > exactly the way prediction of probabilities are evaluated experimentally. > It is irrelevant that the proportion of subsequences that have exactly > equally 1s and 0s goes down. > > It depends what Max meant. I think he meant that there are likely to be *roughly* equal numbers of 0s and 1s in a long string, which depends on how you interpret "roughly". Say with chris' programme that counts the 0s in all the 16 bit numbers, we should take "roughly half" to be between, say, 7 and 9 inclusive, while with 4 bits it's more reasonable to make it exactly 2. With a 64 bit string it might be reasonable to make it between 30 and 34 (if I got that right). This is a bit nitpicky since we know (or can calculate) the actual proportions anyway, so we can see for ourselves how the number of 0s is distributed. I suspect a bell shaped curve with the maximum at 50% :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
