Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Caledonian2 comments on GAZP vs. GLUT - Less Wrong

33 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 07 April 2008 01:51AM

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

Comments (166)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Caledonian2 09 April 2008 10:10:41PM 0 points [-]

Would you argue that odd numbers are as probable as even numbers in the set of natural numbers, because the order of the category of infinities that they belong to is the same?

How about squares (1, 2, 4, 9, 16, ...) versus non-square numbers? Prime numbers versus composite numbers?

As far as I understand, the sets of odd numbers, squares, and primes are all countable.

As such, a one-to-one correspondence can be established between them and the counting numbers. Therefore, considered across infinity, there are just as many primes as there are odd numbers.

There are as many examples of ABABABAB as there are examples of AB[random sequence of English letters six symbols long] in the full Library. There are as many examples of ABABABAB as there are examples of AB[random sequence of English letters ten-thousand symbols long] in the full Library.

I acknowledge that this is very counterintuitive. But isn't the point of this blog to move beyond mere intuition and look at what rationality has to say?