• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Proof of Immortality II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
Dave,
- Do you accept the following?
- In Bayesian statistics, all the necessary preceding events to my current existence are treated as random. Nowhere in the Bayesian formula are they otherwise taken into account.
Click to expand...

godless dave said:
I accept that, but random means they each have a likelihood of occurring.
If they weren't random we wouldn't bother with probability or likelihood.
Click to expand...
- So, the likelihood of you being here right now, given the hypothesis in question, is unimaginably small.
 
Jabba said:
- So, the likelihood of you being here right now, given the hypothesis in question, is unimaginably small.
Click to expand...

It's very small, but I wouldn't say "unimaginably". That's putting an emotional characterization on a mathematical problem.
 
Jabba said:
- So, the likelihood of you being here right now, given the hypothesis in question, is unimaginably small.
Click to expand...


If you insist on putting infinity into your denominator to allow for an infinite number of potential souls, then the likelyhood of you being here right now is the same whether you are mortal or immortal.
 
Mojo said:
Because you are arguing that Jabba's unique perspective makes him special. If everyone has a unique perspective, it doesn't.
Click to expand...

Jabba is very special - to himself.

Not to anyone else. But we aren't talking about anyone else. We are talking about one particular iteration of Jabba. We could be talking about you, had you chosen to apply Jabba's formula to yourself. And if we were talking about you, then we wouldn't be talking about Jabba or anyone else.

Analogy 1: You are sitting at a poker table needing an ace after having foolishly called my raise. Meanwhile, at other tables around the room, aces are being dealt. Strangely, none of those other aces are helping you. That's because the ace you need has a unique conditional probability which is completely independent of the ridiculously combined probabilities of any other aces that might be dealt at other tables around the globe. Any decision you might make based on these ridiculously combined probabilities of aces being dealt elsewhere, such as calling my next bet, will be dead wrong.

Analogy 2: The player in a shell game knows the pea is under 1 of 2 shells. His conditional probability distribution on the pea's location is (0.5,0.5). Meanwhile, the little girl standing beside the dealer has seen the pea when the dealer lifted the shell. Her conditional probability distribution on the pea's location is (1,0).

To wit: both the player's and the little girl's conditional probability distributions are equally valid. Both accurately reflect their relative states of knowledge.

To wit: The little girl's conditional probability distribution has no bearing on any decision the player might make. The player does not have the little girl's perspective. He has no idea what the little girl has seen.

To wit: The player's conditional probability distribution has no bearing on the little girl's state of knowledge. She knows where the pea is, and she has no idea whether the player has been able to keep track of the pea's location.
 
Toontown said:
Analogy 1: You are sitting at a poker table needing an ace after having foolishly called my raise. Meanwhile, at other tables around the room, aces are being dealt. Strangely, none of those other aces are helping you. That's because the ace you need has a unique conditional probability which is completely independent of the ridiculously combined probabilities of any other aces that might be dealt at other tables around the globe. Any decision you might make based on these ridiculously combined probabilities of aces being dealt elsewhere, such as calling my next bet, will be dead wrong.o idea whether the player has been able to keep track of the pea's location.
Click to expand...


The only reason an ace would be special is because once I have called you it is a predetermined desired result. Jabba isn't.
 
godless dave said:
On the order of triillions - just like everything else that exists right now in the universe.
Click to expand...

Or considerably fewer if everything be pre-destined. It is not at all helpful to Jabba's likelihood calculation that the so-called Scientific Model is incomplete in a few areas.

Mojo said:
How would these events differ according to whether he is mortal or immortal?
Click to expand...

There is that, not to mention that the complement of the so-called Scientific Model that Jabba is shooting for doesn't guarantee immortality either.
 
Jabba said:
Dave, how many events had to occur in order for you to be here right now?
Click to expand...


Jabba - Are you saying that your proof of your own immortality is valid and logical only form your perspective about your life?

If so, I'd like to heartily agree with you.

If not, I'd like to know exactly why your subjective feeling of coextensiveness with your universe should mean anything to anyone else.
 
Jabba said:
- Once your parents met, what was the random probability that you would ever exist?
Click to expand...

We could get that by estimating the number of years my mother would remain fertile and the number of sperm my dad would create from that point in his life onward, and figuring out all the different possible combinations.

Billions, I would expect, but that's just a guess. Might be more like hundreds of millions.
 
Last edited:
I have a small bit of granite on my desk, what was the random probability that every single atom in it was arranged exactly as it is?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom