gwern comments on The Dilemma: Science or Bayes? - Less Wrong

19 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 13 May 2008 08:16AM

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

Comments (185)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: quen_tin 22 September 2010 09:00:55AM 0 points [-]

Actually the many-world interpretation misses something very important, which is a kind of theory of mind.

Why does my consciousness follow only one world and at what point do different worlds separate ? Why am I not conscious of the many-worlds but only of one world ?

The one-world interpretation does not fail at this point. It seems to me that many-worlds adepts are so hypnotised by the beauty of mathematics that they forget what reality we have to account for...

Comment author: gwern 22 September 2010 03:34:47PM 0 points [-]

Copenhagen doesn't fail? Wigner's friend might disagree.

Comment author: Manfred 09 November 2010 12:01:07PM 1 point [-]

Goodness. Neither interpretation fails. Entangled states look like ordinary probabilities from inside, so you can never be both at once. Correlation with the past preserves memories in both interpretations, so you'll never remember being in a different "branch" (MWI) or a different column of the matrix (The Matrix! I mean typical linear algebra interpretation).

In fact, now that I think about it, the measurement collapse is probably equivalent to starting with the continuous, deterministic big ol' wavefunction of the universe, and then asking "what does it look like to an observer from inside?"

Comment author: p4wnc6 20 June 2011 05:08:37AM *  0 points [-]

Copenhagen fails. W.r.t. Wigner's friend, isn't that entire thought experiment highly flawed when one considers timeless physics?