“So does it boil down to, “I believe the photon goes on existing as it wings off to nowhere, because my priors say it’s simpler for it to go on existing than to disappear”? This is what I thought at first, but on reflection, it’s not quite right. (And not just because it opens the door to obvious abuses.) I would boil it down to a distinction between belief in the implied invisible, and belief in the additional invisible.”
“So does it boil down to, “I believe the photon goes on existing as it wings
off to nowhere, because my priors say it’s simpler for it to go on existing than
to disappear”?
This is what I thought at first, but on reflection, it’s not quite right. (And
not just because it opens the door to obvious abuses.)
I would boil it down to a distinction between belief in the implied invisible,
and belief in the additional invisible.”
Eliezer, what are these obvious abuses?