I subscribe to the Jaynes/Laplace view of probabilities, namely that they exist in the mind and result from changes in information rather than changes in the world, let alone multi-worlds.
Imagine I tell you about an urn with black and red balls, without an additional detail. You can provide a probability of getting a black or red ball (50/50). As I provide more information (“there’s 5 red balls but 50 black balls”, “the red balls are sitting on top of the pile”, …) your probability assignment will change without the physical urn having changed at all. As your knowledge of the urn and the selection mechanism becomes more complete, your uncertainty decreases and your confidence/probability levels grow.
I subscribe to the Jaynes/Laplace view of probabilities, namely that they exist in the mind and result from changes in information rather than changes in the world, let alone multi-worlds.
Imagine I tell you about an urn with black and red balls, without an additional detail. You can provide a probability of getting a black or red ball (50/50).
As I provide more information (“there’s 5 red balls but 50 black balls”, “the red balls are sitting on top of the pile”, …) your probability assignment will change without the physical urn having changed at all.
As your knowledge of the urn and the selection mechanism becomes more complete, your uncertainty decreases and your confidence/probability levels grow.
Again, the existence of in-the-mind probability doesn’t imply the non existence of objective probability.