Le 05-oct.-07, à 09:14, Wei Dai a écrit :
> Followed by Bruno Marchal's reply defining RSSA/ASSA: > >>> Perhaps we need to distinguish a "Strong Self-Sampling Assumption", >>> which is like the SSA but instead of discussing "observers", it >>> refers to >>> "observer-instants". >> >> Useful distinction, indeed. >> >> Nevertheless I do think we should also distinguish between >> a relative strong SSA and a absolute strong SSA. >> The idea is that we can only quantify the first-person >> indeterminism on the set of consistent observer-instants >> extensions. I mean : consistent with the observers memory of its own >> (first person) past. > > Actually now I'm not sure what Bruno really meant. I had assumed that > ASSA > was the same thing as SSSA, only with the clarification that it's not > relative. But if Bruno had really meant to define ASSA as "SSSA > applied to > the next observer moment" then I have been using the term "ASSA" > incorrectly. It is really a difficult matter. That is partially why I try to find a more direct (arithmetical) interpretation of the OMs, in term of the sigma1 sentences (those having the shape "it exist a number having such verifiable property"). Those sentences are coding the universal deployement in the arithmetical language, and I intend to try to explain more. I think we have to distinuish already 1-OM, 3-OM, 1-plural-OM, etc. About: > 1. You should reason as if your current observer-moment was randomly > selected from a distribution that is shared by everyone and > independent of > your current observations (hence "absolute"). > 2. You should expect your next observer-moment to be randomly selected > from > a distribution that is shared by everyone and independent of your > current > observations. I would say before further clarifications: you should expect your next observer-moment to belong to the "closer" computational history among those which would have reach your current OMs (platonically: no machine can define with certainty which one that current state is). And "closer computational history" is what I ask the lobian machine to define for me. Hmm... sorry. Again, I repeat it could be that ASSA and RSSA and other views will fit better when we progress catching misunderstandings. Bon Week-end, Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
