My feeling is that it’s the other way around: the reason the past predicts the future is because Occam’s Razor says it should. The simplest worlds are the ones in which the laws that govern the past also govern the future, and simpler worlds are more probable.
The simplest worlds indeed have the past predicting the future, but very simple worlds can break that (“after time t, nothing happens” or the grue/bleen example in the post).
So I think it’s an issue of simplifiability, not simplicity. Which I think is more robust to language changes.
My feeling is that it’s the other way around: the reason the past predicts the future is because Occam’s Razor says it should. The simplest worlds are the ones in which the laws that govern the past also govern the future, and simpler worlds are more probable.
The simplest worlds indeed have the past predicting the future, but very simple worlds can break that (“after time t, nothing happens” or the grue/bleen example in the post).
So I think it’s an issue of simplifiability, not simplicity. Which I think is more robust to language changes.