Can Bayesian inference be applied to quantum immortality?
I'm writing an odd science fiction story, in which I'd like to express an idea; but I'd like to get the details correct. Another redditor suggested that I might find someone here with enough of an understanding of Bayesian theory, the Multiple Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, quantum suicide, that I might be able to get some feedback in time:
Assuming the Multiple Worlds Interpretation of quantum theory is true, then buying lottery tickets can be looked at in an interesting way: it can be viewed as an individual funneling money from the timelines where the buyer loses to the timelines where the buyer wins. While there is a great degree of 'friction' in this funneling (if a lottery has an average 45% payout, then 55% of the money is lost to the "friction"), it is the method that has, perhaps, the lowest barrier to entry: it only costs as much as a lottery ticket, and doesn't require significant education into abstruse financial instruments.
While, on the whole, buying a lottery ticket may have a negative expected utility (due to that "friction"), there is at least one set of circumstances where making the purchase is warranted: if a disaster is forthcoming, which requires a certain minimal amount of wealth to survive. As a simplification, if the only future timelines in which you continue to live are ones in which you've won the lottery, then buying tickets increases the portion of timelines in which you live. (Another redditor phrased it thusly: Hypothetically, let's say you have special knowledge that at 5pm next Wednesday the evil future government is going to deactivate the cortical implants of the poorest 80% of the population, killing them all swiftly and painlessly. In that circumstance, there would be positive expected utility, because you wouldn't be alive if you lost.)
Which brings us to the final bit: If you buy a lottery ticket, and /win/, then via Bayesian inference from the previous paragraphs, you have just collected evidence which suggests an increased likelihood that you are about to face a disaster which requires a great deal of resources to survive. That is, according to the idea of quantum immortality, if you never experience a timeline in which you've permanently died, then the only timelines you experience are the ones in which you have sufficient resources to survive; thus implying that whatever resources you have are going to be sufficient to survive.
However, I'm not /quite/ sure that I've got all my inferential ducks lined up in a row there. So if anyone reading this could point out whether anything like the idea I'm trying to describe could be considered reasonably accurate, then I'd appreciate the heads-up. (I'm reasonably confident that it would be trivial to point out some error in the above paragraphs; you could say that I'm trying to figure out the details of the steelmanned version.)
(My original formulation of the question was posted to https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/2g09xh/bstqrsthsf_factchecking_some_quantum_math/ .)
Just out of curiosity: How (if at all) is this related to your LW post about a year ago?
I think surely the following has to be wrong:
if you never experience a timeline in which you've permanently died, then the only timelines you experience are the ones in which you have sufficient resources to survive; thus implying that whatever resources you have are going to be sufficient to survive.
because you can't get that kind of information about the future ("are going to be sufficient") just from the fact that you haven't died in the past.
As for the...
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one.
3. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.
4. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.