On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:35:36AM -0700, meekerdb wrote: > > So are you simply assuming there is a "winner", i.e. that the > relevant statistics exist in the limit? Even if they do, it's not > clear that they exist for our experience which is not "in the > limit". It seems that you are assuming something like "The > probability of a number being even is 1/2." >
This was Jean Delahaye's argument. For physical probabilities (Born rule and all that), it suffices to assume that in a situation where 1 bit of information is generated (eg the WM duplication thought experiment), then whether that bit is 0 or 1 has equal probability (ie relative probability of 1/2). That suffices to build a universal prior distribution on observed worlds, and it is a relative, not absolute measure. This could be considered relative to a universal person, having no memories or other characteristics other than being conscious, if such can exist. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
