[ExI] End of time?

[Adrian Tymes]

The author seems to be confusing probability theory.  This may be simple
dismissal without addressing the substance of it, but if these flaws are
found
in the intro section, well...

> This undermines the
> basis for probabilistic predictions of local experiments. If in
nitely
many observers
> throughout the universe win the lottery, on what grounds can one still
claim that
> winning the lottery is unlikely? To be sure, there are also in
nitely many
observers
> who do not win, but in what sense are there more of them?

The author is confusing senses of "infinity".  There are (infinitely) many
grades of
"infinity" for precisely this reason.  Take a, the number of people who play
the
lottery and win, and b, the number of people who play the lottery and lose.
Let's
say this lottery only happens every time there is an exact multiple of 100
players,
and that the odds of winning are 1%.  Thus, a = 99 * b.  Therefore, a > b.
This
relationship holds true even if b becomes infinite.

> The
> sun will shine with probability x, and it will snow with probability 1 -
x. But
> this does not mean that it cannot rain.

Actually, yes, if the probabilities are that way, it does mean that.  (The
author
does not seem to be allowing for multiple states of weather within a day.)
x + (1 - x) = 1, leaving no room for any other probability.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:52 AM, scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:

> see also:
>
> http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/09/bousso-et-al-catastrophe-imminent-time.html
>
> 'time' is 'abundant' here http://www.fqxi.org/community
> http://www.fqxi.org/community/essay/winners/2008.1
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100929/8d25590a/attachment.html>