You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

shminux comments on Open Thread, June 2-15, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: TimS 02 June 2013 02:22AM

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

Comments (433)

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

Comment author: shminux 06 June 2013 05:33:13PM *  6 points [-]

Why, then, don't more people realize that many worlds is correct?

Note that you are using Eliezer!correct, not Physics!correct. The former is based on Bayesian reasoning among models with equivalent predictive power, the latter requires different predictive power to discriminate between theories. The problem with the former reasoning is that without experimental validation it is hard to agree on the priors and other assumptions going into the Bayesian calculation for MWI correctness. Additionally, proclaiming MWI "correct" is not instrumentally useful unless one can use it to advance physical knowledge.

'hey, maybe at that point half of the superposition just vanishes, at random, faster than light'

It's worse than that, actually. In some frames it means not just FTL but also back in time. But given that this is unmeasurable, it matters not in the slightest if you adopt the Physics!correct definition.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 06 June 2013 06:52:05PM 0 points [-]

Note that the OP wasn't asking about physicists, but people... explicitly "bright middle school children" for example.
It's certainly possible that the lack of differential predictive power or experimental validation for MWI explains that, but I'm inclined to doubt it.

Comment author: shminux 06 June 2013 07:08:34PM 3 points [-]

Good point, I missed it in my original reading. Certainly "bright middle school children" are unlikely to spontaneously discover the definition of correctness which matches either Eliezer!correct or Physics!correct. Certainly it's still an open issue for adult professionals.