Unknown: Hrm, hadn’t thought of using the SSSI. Thanks. Ran through it myself by hand now, and it does seem to result in the experimenter and test subject agreeing.
However, it produces an… oddity. Specifically, if using the SSSI, then by my calculations, when one takes into account that the external observer and the test subject are not the only people in existance, the actual strength of evidence extractable from a single quantum suicide experiment would seem to be relatively weak. If the ratio of non test subjects to test subjects is N, and the probability of the subject surviving simply by the nature of the quantum experiment is R, the likelihood ratio is (1+N)/(R+N), (which both the test subject and the external observer would agree on).
Seeing a nonsurvival gives a MWI to ~ MWI likelihood ratio of N/(R+N).
At least, assuming I did the math right. :)
Anyways, so it looks like if SSSI is valid, quantum suicide doesn’t actually give very strong evidence one way or the other at all, does it?
Hrm… I wonder if in principle it could be used to make estimates about the total population of the universe by doing it a bunch of times and then analyzing the ratios of observed results… chuckles May have just discovered the maddest way to do a census, well, ever.
Clearly it can’t actually matter what the population of the universe is. (There’s nothing about the experiment that is based on that! It would be this bizarre nonlocal phenomenon that pops out of the theory without being put into it!) That’s the kind of weirdness you come up with if you do anthropic calculations WRONG.
Unknown: Hrm, hadn’t thought of using the SSSI. Thanks. Ran through it myself by hand now, and it does seem to result in the experimenter and test subject agreeing.
However, it produces an… oddity. Specifically, if using the SSSI, then by my calculations, when one takes into account that the external observer and the test subject are not the only people in existance, the actual strength of evidence extractable from a single quantum suicide experiment would seem to be relatively weak. If the ratio of non test subjects to test subjects is N, and the probability of the subject surviving simply by the nature of the quantum experiment is R, the likelihood ratio is (1+N)/(R+N), (which both the test subject and the external observer would agree on). Seeing a nonsurvival gives a MWI to ~ MWI likelihood ratio of N/(R+N). At least, assuming I did the math right. :)
Anyways, so it looks like if SSSI is valid, quantum suicide doesn’t actually give very strong evidence one way or the other at all, does it?
Hrm… I wonder if in principle it could be used to make estimates about the total population of the universe by doing it a bunch of times and then analyzing the ratios of observed results… chuckles May have just discovered the maddest way to do a census, well, ever.
Clearly it can’t actually matter what the population of the universe is. (There’s nothing about the experiment that is based on that! It would be this bizarre nonlocal phenomenon that pops out of the theory without being put into it!) That’s the kind of weirdness you come up with if you do anthropic calculations WRONG.