RichardKennaway comments on Is the potential astronomical waste in our universe too small to care about? - Less Wrong

21 Post author: Wei_Dai 21 October 2014 08:44AM

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

Comments (14)

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

Comment author: RichardKennaway 21 October 2014 03:50:10PM 2 points [-]

the non-zero probability that the universe can support an infinite number of computations means that the expected number of computations we expect to be performed in our universe is infinite.

Where do you get the non-zero probability from? If it's from the general idea that nothing has zero probability, this proves too much. On the same principle, every action has non-zero probability of infinite positive utility and of infinite negative utility. This makes expected utility calculations impossible, because Inf - Inf = NaN.

I consider this a strong argument against the principle, often cited on LW, that "0 and 1 are not probabilities". It makes sense as a slogan for a certain idea, but not as mathematics.

Comment author: James_Miller 21 October 2014 04:00:17PM 6 points [-]

I'm not certain of this, but my guess is that most physicists would assign much great than, say, .0001 probability to the universe being infinite.