[extropy-chat] Just curious, cryonicist living life in reverse

[Mike Dougherty]

On 3/2/07, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
> One very thorough way of doing the shuffling is to have a computer generate
> all programs via a Universal Dovetailer. If the computer runs long enough,
> it will generate OM1, OM2 and OM3 and even though this is completely useless
> for an external observer - they are hidden in the background randomness -
> the internal observer will still experience OM1, OM2, OM3 occurring as if
> arising in what we consider the usual manner.
>
> One complication is that the UD will generate not only OM1, OM2, OM3 but
> every possible variation. Thus OM1 could experience as next moment OM2.1,
> OM2.2, OM2.3... each of which will have a distinct measure, or subjective
> probability. The effect of this is that although the UD is perfectly
> deterministic from the point of view of an external observer, from the point
> of view of the internal observer his future is indeterminate. In form, this
> matches the branchings in the many worlds interpretation of quantum
> mechanics.

every possible > every probability : especially within the limits of
some optimization to reduce complexity in order to fit the capability
of the UD.

Sure, a purist might want to encode every possible state, but for the
sake of project deadlines, it's usually more common to 80/20 and see
if you can get away with it.  (or if you 80/(80/20) - it's usually
acceptable to discount the 4%)