blaze spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > To give another dramatic example, suppose at 1:00 pm on the afternoon of > > December 17, 1903, you were take a poll about whether man can fly. > > What does that have to do with the value of prediction markets? > I mean only that prediction markets cannot be used to confirm or deny assertions about scientific or engineering, such as whether airplanes can exist or not. Prediction markets are the wrong tool for that. They cannot affect physical reality as measured by instruments and photographs. Prediction markets might be a useful way to predict whether the public will believe that a breakthrough exists, or whether it will continue denying the facts. I do not know if these markets are good for that purpose. I do not know enough about them. > I thought you believed that Rossi had figured this out years ago. > > (Which is what I'm trying to predict. . . . You cannot predict that. You can only judge it by a careful evaluation of the Levi report and by looking at others who have produced Ni-H cold fusion. "Predicting" is the wrong word in any case. A prediction applies to the future. Rossi's experiments have already happened. You are trying to determine whether they proved what he claims. To do that, you must use the tools of science and engineering, not the tools of a prediction market. Or, you might be trying to determine whether other people will believe him at a given date in the future. That is an entirely different matter. People did not believe the Wrights until 1908, but obviously they did actually fly on many occasions between 1903 and 1908. People's beliefs have absolutely no bearing what is true. Beliefs cannot affect reality. It works both ways. If you were betting on the outcome of an election, you would not try to use the laws of thermodynamics, or a manual on calorimetry. You might use a prediction market though. - Jed
