= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
ABranco comments on Torture vs. Dust Specks - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (596)
Mathematically, I have to agree with your reply: you either have no molecules or at least one. And then, your calculations hold true. And I'm wrong.
Physiologically, though, my argument is that the "nanoutility" that this molecule would add would have such a negligible effect that nothing would change in the person's life measured by any practical purposes. It will pass completely unnoticed (zero!) — for each person in the 3^^^3 generations.
I assume a fuzzy scale of flu, so that no single molecule would turn sure-flu to sure-non-flu. As I assumed with the specks.
Even if you perform the more sophisticated analysis, the probability of the flu should shift slightly -- and that slightly will be on the order of 10^-23, as before. And that times 3^^^3...