Seeing as we’re now closer to the singularity than we are to my birth, it’s with reluctance that I concede the probability that I ever actually had a childhood in this universe is looking rather slim.
Fraser
Karma: 143
If the observer is distinct from Alice, absolutely. If the observer is Alice, nothing needs explaining in either case.
To put a bit of a crude metaphor on it, if you were to pick a random number uniformly between 0 and 1,000,000, and pre-commit to having a child on iff it’s equal to some value X—from the point of view of the child, the probability that the number was equal to X is 100%.
Apologies if there’s something more subtle with your answer that I’ve missed.
If the only observable outcome is the one in which we got that extremely lucky, then it doesn’t need explaining. You only can observe outcomes compatible with the fact of you making an observation.
There are exactly two lower bounds on the fidelity of reality. The first, is my moment-to-moment experience of being. The second, that ideas as complex as “simulation” and “Kolmogorov induction” and “a-causal trade” haven’t been discretely patched out.
I would so very-much like to know if there are any other similar thoughts, one rotation away-, that that no human’s mind has ever happened to remember making.