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.

Jan_Rzymkowski comments on Fragile Universe Hypothesis and the Continual Anthropic Principle - How crazy am I? - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: PeterCoin 18 August 2015 12:53AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (32)
Tags: principle anthropic

Comments (32)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Jan_Rzymkowski 18 August 2015 08:11:02PM 1 point [-]
  1. It must kill you (at least make you unconscious) on a timescale shorter than that on which you can become aware of the outcome of the quantum coin-toss
  2. It must be virtually certain to really kill you, not just injure you.

Both seem to be at odds with Many World Interpretation. In infinite number of those it will just injure you and/or you will become aware before, due to same malfuntion.

Comment author: PeterCoin 19 August 2015 02:14:42PM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure what you're trying to draw from here, but I don't think MWI requires an infinite number of possibilities.

What matters is in my interpretation of Tegmark's view is that there are many many more cases (by infinite or finite measure) where it works properly than cases where it doesn't.

Example: 499,999,999,999,000 cases cause death without observer experience 500,000,000,000,000 cases do nothing 1000 cases represent equipment failures

We should expect that the subject can predict for himself the do nothing case will occur with extremely high probability.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit