Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on The Correct Contrarian Cluster - Less Wrong

38 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 December 2009 10:01PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (228)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: orthonormal 23 December 2009 08:49:53AM 6 points [-]

I think that the sailing-faster-than-the-wind or the directly-downwind-faster-than-the-wind (DDFTTW) problems would make for a very interesting contrarian-cluster question, as it has a few features that don't often coincide in one controversy:

  • Many ordinary people claim that sailing downwind faster than the wind actually works in practice, not merely in theory.
  • This claim appears to have the form of "I don't need to check the details of your perpetual motion machine, I know right off the bat that it can't work!" It seems blindingly obvious that some principle of physics ought to prevent DDFTTW from working.
  • The amateur Youtube video for the DDFTTW machine is a very low-status means of demonstration (i.e. it's just what a crank or faker would do).
  • However, several of the smartest and most skeptical minds who did the actual computations have averred that the folk wisdom is right, and the "obvious" physics principle is mistaken in its application here!

Just having considered these data points (I haven't worked through Tao's or MarkCC's analyses), I assign very high probability (>99%) to sailing-faster-than-the-wind and DDFTTW working as described.

I expect Robin and Eliezer to agree with this assessment (and, though I expect them both to have updated in the same fashion, I suspect that Robin would have updated faster and with less effort than Eliezer in this instance— though on other types of problems I'd expect the opposite.)

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 December 2009 09:27:44AM 9 points [-]

Robin would've had to update pretty fast to update faster than I updated. I'm like, "Tao says it works? OK."

I don't really find it very counterintuitive. The different velocities of wind and ground are supplying free energy. Turns out you can grab a bunch of it and move faster than the wind? I don't see how that would violate thermodynamics or conservation of momentum. I haven't even checked the math; it just doesn't seem all that unlikely in the first place.

Comment author: orthonormal 23 December 2009 07:32:33PM *  6 points [-]

Ah: a focus on negentropy makes the idea more plausible for you at first glance. I was expecting you'd each find it counterintuitive, that Robin would be first to favor the expert consensus, and that you would wait until you'd worked through the full analysis. So I take a hit on my Bayes-score with regard to "things Eliezer finds counterintuitive".

Comment author: PhilGoetz 23 December 2009 02:57:34PM *  0 points [-]

I find it counterintuitive, but not impossible. it's this specific implementation that I have trouble with. But the "string" example does appear to work.

Moving faster than the wind is not even counterintuitive; sailboats can, because the mass of the wind is greater than the mass of the boat. Moving downwind faster than the wind is counterintuitive.

Comment author: orthonormal 23 December 2009 07:46:34PM 0 points [-]

Right; I was talking about two linked problems (mentioned together by you), and linked to a discussion of each: sailboats keeling faster than the wind by Tao, and DDFTTW by Chu-Carroll. The characteristics I listed applied to each problem in much the same way, so I discussed them together.