On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 9:03 AM Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le ven. 14 févr. 2020 à 22:57, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> a > écrit : > >> On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 8:50 AM Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Le ven. 14 févr. 2020 à 22:48, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> a >>> écrit : >>> >>>> On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 1:35 AM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Just to be clear, are you OK with P(W) = 1/2 in the WM-duplicatipon, >>>>> when “W” refers to the first person experience? >>>>> >>>> >>>> No. As I have said before, the H-man has no basis on which to assign >>>> any probability at all to the possibility that he will see W (or M) >>>> tomorrow, The trouble is that probabilities tend to be defined by the limit >>>> of relative frequencies over a large number of trials. If you perform the >>>> WM-duplication N times, there will be 2^N "first person experiences" and >>>> many of them will assign probabilities greatly different from 0.5. >>>> >>> >>> That's false, most of them will infer the correct probability... >>> >> >> Wrong again. Respond to Kent's argument if you disagree. (arxiv:0905.0624) >> > > I disagree, that's called statistics. > I attach an extract from Kent's paper. Take up your argument with him if you think he has got the statistics wrong. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLQvMZS4Jg2vs8hVTsDEHcUPcp5kp4SEW9t646m3vsTuwQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Born.rule.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
