[Merged] Immortality & Bayesian Statistics

[Toontown]

Your analogy is flawed.

There is only one brain that brings me. A slightly different brain would be someone else. To make an analogy to lottery tickets, we would have to have a lottery where every ticket wins.

Analogy to what? I was talking about selection, or why one apparently random event can carry information, while another does not. Or why one apparently random event can impart different information to different observers.

 

[godless dave]

Analogy to what?

Of the topic of this thread - what you call the "unique brain hypothesis".

 

[Toontown]

Of the topic of this thread - what you call the "unique brain hypothesis".

I fail to see how a lottery everyone wins is in any sense analogous to the "unique brain hypothesis".

Every possible unique brain has one shot to see the money. One dauntingly complex unique organization occurring at one unique set of spacetime coordinates. That's not exactly a guaranteed winner, is it? Wasn't that Jabba's claim, that the the odds against a specific unique brain may be infinite?

 

[godless dave]

I fail to see how a lottery everyone wins is in any sense analogous to the "unique brain hypothesis".

Because different combinations results in a different unique brains. Each one is unique, but each one is a conscious brain.

A unique brain has one shot to see the money. One dauntingly complex unique organization occurring at one unique set of spacetime coordinates. That's not exactly a guaranteed winner, is it? Wasn't that Jabba's claim, that the the odds against a specific unique brain may be infinite?

Yes, that's Jabba's claim and it is itself wrong (the odds against are large, not infinite) but also fails to support his thesis because the odds against a brain existing are not large at all; quite the contrary.

The odds against a specific brain are large, just like the odds against drawing a lottery ticket with specific numbers are large. The odds against a brain are not large at all, just like the odds against drawing a lottery ticket with unspecified numbers are not large.

Think of each lottery ticket as a unique brain.

 

[jt512]

I don't know where Jabba got that equation, and I'm not going to express any opinion on its correctness, but it's easy to derive some consequences of that equation.

If I'm parsing that equation aright, the first term on its right hand side consists of a product divided by itself. If that product is nonzero, as it presumably is, then that first term simplifies to 1 and the entire equation simplifies to

P(SM|me) = 1+P(me|NSM)*P(NSM|k)​

Probabilities can't be less than zero or greater than one, so the second term on the right hand size must be zero. Hence

P(me|NSM)*P(NSM|k) = 0​

and

P(SM|me) = 1​

In summary: Jabba's equation basically implies the current consensus "Scientific Model", and basically rules out any alternative explanation.

Jabba mistyped his equation. Everything to the right of the slash ('/') should be contained in a pair of parentheses.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Jabba mistyped his equation. Everything to the right of the slash ('/') should be contained in a pair of parentheses.

Thank you.

 

[Toontown]

Because different combinations results in a different unique brains. Each one is unique, but each one is a conscious brain.

Most combinations result in everything except brains. If you're going to fail to differientiate between the sum of all random sequences of events and one very specific random sequence, at least have the common decency to include all random sequences. Why discriminate against asteroids?

Yes, that's Jabba's claim and it is itself wrong (the odds against are large, not infinite)...

I'm not so sure about that, but I am sure the difference, if there is a difference, makes no practical difference in terms of buying or not buying the unique brain explanation of my current ride on the sentience train.

Giganogargantuan or infinite - either way, if there is only one unique brain that would give you a ride on the sentience train, then you beat some odds that are tall enough that they should give you pause, when considering the unique brain hypothesis.

How many ways could the quantum chaos shortly after t=0+10^-43 have turned out?

...but also fails to support his thesis because the odds against a brain existing are not large at all; quite the contrary.

And those are the odds Jabba is specifically not referring to. Because the odds for or against some random brain are completely uninformative for Jabba's purposes. There is nothing there. You might as well be talking about grains of sand on Mars. Or snowflakes, as you were in fact talking about a few days ago.

The odds against a specific brain are large, just like the odds against drawing a lottery ticket with specific numbers are large.

And those are the odds Jabba is specifically referring to. Referring to a brain would make about as much sense as referring to a random chunk of debris in some random gas giant's rings. Has nothing to do with what Jabba has been trying to talk about.

And even less to do with anything I would talk about, if I was going to talk about my alternative to the unique brain hypothesis, which I'm not.

The odds against a brain are not large at all, just like the odds against drawing a lottery ticket with unspecified numbers are not large.

Right. So you are the one who is post-picking winners. All of them. And studiously ignoring all the unconscious space debris. I suppose the concept of a losing ticket doesn't exist for you, because they never show up at The Unsurprised Lottery Winners Club.

Think of each lottery ticket as a unique brain.

I have a better idea. You think of each lottery ticket as a unique configuration of elementary particles at t=0+10^-40. Lots of ways that could have turned out that wouldn't have included your unique brain. Maybe an infinity of ways. So maybe that one brain is not the explanation for that ride on the sentience train.

 

[dafydd]

Why discriminate against asteroids?

Asteroids are alive and immortal?

 

[Toontown]

Asteroids are alive and immortal?

No, and that's the point. Different combinations of the quantum dice result in lots of things besides brains. Mostly things besides brains.

 

[godless dave]

Most combinations result in everything except brains. If you're going to fail to differientiate between the sum of all random sequences of events and one very specific random sequence, at least have the common decency to include all random sequences. Why discriminate against asteroids?

But it's not one specific random sequence. A brain doesn't appear out of the cosmos in isolation. It's the result of billions of years of evolution of life on earth.

When two post-pubescent have sex, there's a pretty good chance - about even, I believe - that the result will be a new human who has a brain, which is conscious.

There are over 7 billion functioning human brains on the earth right now.

Giganogargantuan or infinite - either way, if there is only one unique brain that would give you a ride on the sentience train, then you beat some odds that are tall enough that they should give you pause, when considering the unique brain hypothesis.

Why? If I draw five cards and I get A 5 6 9 K, should I be astounded that I drew that and not 2 3 6 J Q?

How many ways could the quantum chaos shortly after t=0+10^-43 have turned out?

I don't think that's possible to calculate.

And those are the odds Jabba is specifically not referring to.

And that's Jabba's mistake.

And those are the odds Jabba is specifically referring to. Referring to a brain would make about as much sense as referring to a random chunk of debris in some random gas giant's rings. Has nothing to do with what Jabba has been trying to talk about.

It has everything to do with it. Brains come into existence all the time. Each one is unique, but not unexpected.

Right. So you are the one who is post-picking winners. All of them. And studiously ignoring all the unconscious space debris. I suppose the concept of a losing ticket doesn't exist for you, because they never show up at The Unsurprised Lottery Winners Club.

I have a better idea. You think of each lottery ticket as a unique configuration of elementary particles at t=0+10^-40. Lots of ways that could have turned out that wouldn't have included your unique brain. Maybe an infinity of ways. So maybe that one brain is not the explanation for that ride on the sentience train.

What does one have to do with the other?

Reality could have ended up many different ways, and because it ended up as one of those ways, something funny must be going on?

 

[godless dave]

No, and that's the point. Different combinations of the quantum dice result in lots of things besides brains. Mostly things besides brains.

So? We should be surprised that those combinations that have the capability of thinking about their existence are doing so?

 

[dafydd]

No, and that's the point. Different combinations of the quantum dice result in lots of things besides brains. Mostly things besides brains.

Therefore immortality? No.

 

[Toontown]

So? We should be surprised that those combinations that have the capability of thinking about their existence are doing so?

No, but you should be very surprised to be among them if you believe a specific brain is the only way to be involved in any of that thinking.

 

[dafydd]

A most amusing thread.

 

[godless dave]

No, but you should be very surprised to be among them if you believe a specific brain is the only way to be involved in any of that thinking.

Why?

 

[Toontown]

But it's not one specific random sequence. A brain doesn't appear out of the cosmos in isolation. It's the result of billions of years of evolution of life on earth.

There wouldn't be an earth if a few of those quantum dice had turned up differently.

When two post-pubescent have sex, there's a pretty good chance - about even, I believe - that the result will be a new human who has a brain, which is conscious.

Not your brain. A few minor differences in the Planck era, and your brain doesn't exist.

There are over 7 billion functioning human brains on the earth right now..

Your mastery of irrelevance is now complete. You have masterfully segued from talking about snowflakes to every human brain on earth except the only one that tells you anything (given the unique brain hypo).

Why? If I draw five cards and I get A 5 6 9 K, should I be astounded that I drew that and not 2 3 6 J Q?

Not in the least. But if you are playing holdem, you've shoved your last chips into the pot, you're down to the river, the 3s is the only card that can keep you in the game, and that's exactly what comes - then you should be a little surprised. You should be more surprised if you need two specific runners and get them.

It has everything to do with it. Brains come into existence all the time. Each one is unique, but not unexpected.

Unless it's the one and only runner runner runner runner.......runner that absolutely has to be there for you, specifically, to see the light of day. That's the one that should be unexpected (given the unique brain hypo). But only to you. To everyone else you're just another face in the crowd. Nobody else thinks that 3s on the river means anything. But it means something to you. Think of it as a private message.

Reality could have ended up many different ways, and because it ended up as one of those ways, something funny must be going on?

In case you haven't noticed - something funny is going on. We've been knowing something funny was happening for a long time. We just don't know what it is, do we, Mr. Jones.

 

[dafydd]

In case you haven't noticed - something funny is going on. We've been knowing something funny was happening for a long time. We just don't know what it is, do we, Mr. Jones.

Now you're confusing Dylan songs with reality. What does any of this have to do with immortality? Who's we? I don't think that there is something funny going on, apart from this thread.

 

[Toontown]

Now you're confusing Dylan songs with reality. What does any of this have to do with immortality? Who's we? I don't think that there is something funny going on, apart from this thread.

"Immortality" is Jabba's word. I haven't offered any specific alternatives to the unique brain hypo, and don't intend to.

So. You don't think anything funny is going on. Except this thread, which is, so you say, the oddest thing in your version of the universe.

How very interesting. Well, I'd like to hang around and exchange pointless unpleasantries with you, but as oddities go, this thread is pretty mundane, and I have this limited remaining sliver of sentience oddly sandwiched between endless stretches of eternal nothingness, so...

 

[godless dave]

There wouldn't be an earth if a few of those quantum dice had turned up differently.

So what?

Not your brain. A few minor differences in the Planck era, and your brain doesn't exist.

Again, so what?

Your mastery of irrelevance is now complete. You have masterfully segued from talking about snowflakes to every human brain on earth except the only one that tells you anything (given the unique brain hypo).

What's special about mine?

Not in the least. But if you are playing holdem, you've shoved your last chips into the pot, you're down to the river, the 3s is the only card that can keep you in the game, and that's exactly what comes - then you should be a little surprised. You should be more surprised if you need two specific runners and get them.



Unless it's the one and only runner runner runner runner.......runner that absolutely has to be there for you, specifically, to see the light of day. That's the one that should be unexpected (given the unique brain hypo). But only to you. To everyone else you're just another face in the crowd. Nobody else thinks that 3s on the river means anything. But it means something to you.

And that's what tells me there's nothing special about my brain. Unless I'm a solipsist by philosophy or a narcissist by personality, I understand that every brain sees things from its own perspective, and objective thought requires not privileging any one perspective.

In case you haven't noticed - something funny is going on. We've been knowing something funny was happening for a long time.

No, I hadn't noticed. Everything in the world seems to act as if naturalism were true. I'm not aware of any exceptions.

 

[Akhenaten]

Dumb All Over,
- I hoped I was doing it by starting that thread under Million Dollar Challenge...
- HighRiser suggested that I read the instructions...
- I guess he has a point...
- Thanks.

You guess?

- I seem to be striking out. So far, I can't find
1) the instructions, or
2) the thread I started...

And people doubt that you've 'essentially' discovered immortality.

How could they possibly fail to be impressed by such mad research skillz?