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.

ike comments on Open thread, Sep. 28 - Oct. 4, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: MrMind 28 September 2015 07:13AM

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

Comments (198)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: ike 01 October 2015 08:10:14PM 2 points [-]

Are there any known deaths due to Quantum suicide experiments? Conversely, are there any known survivals in such experiments? (We should presumably not expect the latter for large odds of death, but just want the question to be complete.)

Comment author: Risto_Saarelma 04 October 2015 03:16:06PM 3 points [-]

Not exactly, but related: Hugh Everett's' daughter Elizabeth committed suicide in 1996 and wrote in her suicide note that she's going to a parallel universe to be with her father.

Comment author: gwern 05 October 2015 12:12:50AM *  4 points [-]

The exact wording is a little more tentative. From Many Worlds of Hugh Everett, pg757 in my Calibre:

Funeral requests: I prefer no church stuff. Please burn me and DON’T FILE ME Please sprinkle me in some nice body of water … or the garbage, maybe that way I’ll end up in the correct parallel universe to meet up w/Daddy.^7

(The footnote explains that "don't file me" is a joking reference to how Everett's ashes were apparently kept in a filing cabinet for some time.)

Comment author: philh 02 October 2015 10:00:06AM 1 point [-]

Note that to someone not taking part in the experiment, the odds of the experimenter surviving are the same regardless of quantum immortality.

(At least, as far as I can tell. But this seems to suggest that if someone survives lots of QI experiments, they should update massively in favour of QI, but nobody else should update at all, which seems really weird to me.)

Comment author: ike 02 October 2015 05:15:45PM *  2 points [-]

That's what I was trying to say in my parenthetical above.

And yes, anthropics is weird.

Comment author: g_pepper 02 October 2015 06:49:45PM 1 point [-]

But this seems to suggest that if someone survives lots of QI experiments, they should update massively in favour of QI, but nobody else should update at all

It seems like an observer should likewise update in favor of QI in this case. If I know that you have survived many QI experiments, don't I have just as much justification for updating in favor of QI as you do?

Comment author: philh 03 October 2015 01:52:59PM 3 points [-]

No, because from your perspective, me surviving is just as unlikely under QI as under not-QI. If I die on the result of a quantum coinflip, then the universe diverges into two branches. I can only observe the one where I survive, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You're equally likely to observe either of them.

Comment author: advancedatheist 02 October 2015 04:09:53AM 0 points [-]
Comment author: ike 02 October 2015 04:27:05AM 1 point [-]

"accidentally", and it was before the idea had even been thought of (and, in fact, before MWI had been proposed.