= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RolfAndreassen comments on Lotteries & MWI - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (65)
Point of order: The probability that appears in lottery odds is not the same as the probability that appears in quantum mechanics. One is an expression of our ignorance about the detailed kinematics of tumbling balls in a sphere; the other arises from the evolution of the wave function. It is not obvious that one-in-a-million lottery odds translates directly to an amplitude with magnitude 0.001 for winning the lottery. (And then there's the issue of complex interference.) It may be the case, but you cannot just point at the MWI and notice that both kinds of probability are referred to by the same word.
Entirely true. This is why I asked, elsewhere in this thread, about possible ways of introducing the 'correct' form of randomness, which was answered with several quantum-based random number generators to use as coin-flip decision-makers.
Fair enough, I missed that.