On 6/9/2014 9:51 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 04:39:14PM +1200, LizR wrote:
On 10 June 2014 14:52, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6/9/2014 6:48 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
OK - there are 2 future branches, A and B, each of which have equal
objective probability of occurring. Ie the Born rule says each has a
probability of 0.5.
However, perhaps _subjectively_, Alice sees branch A with probability
0.9 and branch B with probability 0.1, and Bob sees branch A with
probability 0.1 and branch B with probability 0.9.
If there are only two branches then Alice see each with probability 1.0.
From a bird's eye view you can renormalize this and call it 0.5. But I
don't see any way to even assign meaning to 0.1 or 0.9 when the branch
probabilities are 0.5.
Me neither. Glad we agree on something :-)
Over to you, Russell. What are we missing?
The probabilities are those of entering branch A or B from the
unbranched state the precedes them.
You're making an assumption that this measure is proportional to the
cardinality of those branches. I'm making no such assumption. That's all.
I'm not assuming branch counting. I'm assuming the branches can have real valued
probabilities per the Born rule. What seems incoherent is to say that branch A occurs
with probability p but Alice experiences it with probability q. If Alice is in branch A
then she experiences it /period/. And the meaning of the Born probabilities for Alice are
the relative frequencies with which she sees A-events as compared to B-events in
repetitions of the branching.
Brent
--
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/d/optout.
