I don't know why Nick hasn't told us about his new book. I just found out
about it on his web site:
Anthropic Bias: Observation Selection Effects in Science and Philosophy
Nick Bostrom, Routledge, New York, July 2002
There are some free sample chapters at
- Forwarded message from Wei Dai [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:28:43 -0700
From: Wei Dai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Nature Article
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 12:45:17AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dyson, L., Kleban, M. Susskind, L. Disturbing
I think that the difference is that invoking the SIA does not affect the
conclusion of the paper.
Saibal
Wei Dai wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 12:45:17AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dyson, L., Kleban, M. Susskind, L. Disturbing implications of a
cosmological constant. Preprint
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:28:28PM +0200, Saibal Mitra wrote:
I think that the difference is that invoking the SIA does not affect the
conclusion of the paper.
Why do you say that? I think SIA affects the conclusion of the paper the
same way it affects the Doomsday argument.
It's kind of
I haven't read the paper in detail, so I could be wrong. Consider the two
alternatives:
1) true cosmological constant
2) no true cosmological constant
We also assume SIA. Is it the case that there are much fewer observers in
case of 2) than in case of 1) ? I haven't seen such a statement in
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 12:26:10AM +0200, Saibal Mitra wrote:
I haven't read the paper in detail, so I could be wrong. Consider the two
alternatives:
1) true cosmological constant
2) no true cosmological constant
We also assume SIA. Is it the case that there are much fewer observers in
6 matches
Mail list logo
