On 11 Jun 2014, at 02:22, Russell Standish wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 09:00:35PM +0200, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:25 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 10 Jun 2014, at 06:51, 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.
But then your first person experience will depart from the
gaussian one,
that we can observe, in the 3p view of the many 1-views which are
defined
by the testimony of the experiences in the observable many
diaries. In the
iterated WM duplication, you will get a majority of doppelgangers
criticizing your "selection" as arbitrary.
Of course this is assuming we already inherit the normality which
must
exist with comp, and seems to exist technically, and also
empirically, of
course, ... well I hope.
I think I see what is meant, but can you elaborate on why
"normality must
exist with comp/technically"? PGC
I think Bruno is referring to the central limit theorem. The WM
duplication gives a kind of binomial distribution of outcomes, and in
the limit of many trials, this approaches a normal (aka Gaussian)
distribution.
In answer to Bruno's question, indeed the ability to influence one's
subjective probability in this was will lead to a departure from
normality, one that is not visible objectively to any third party.
OK.
In
short, the reality you inhabit will increasingly become "magical",
like a white rabbit or Harry Potter universe.
As for mechanism? There won't be one, certainly not sharable
scientifically, anyway. Any number of arcane rituals or spells might
work, or might not. For me, I don't think this stuff gets much beyond
bar talk - but maybe Liz can weave this into one of her novels :).
Hmm... you have still to convince her that it makes sense :)
(I think I can make sense of it ... for a fraction of the resulting
people, but that is a priori self-selection, or wishful thinking).
Philip Dick wrote a novel where people use the Yi-King. It can help to
take a difficult decision.
Bruno
Cheers
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected]
University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au
Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret
(http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
