h a l f b a k e r y
Not the Happy Cuddle Club.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Set up a machine that will kill you unless you get what
want. Set it up so that the probability of the machine
malfunctioning is massively less than the
of you actually getting what you want by chance. Then,
activate the machine. In the universe you subsequently
you have what you want!
The many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics
suggests that in the Shrödinger's Cat experiment, there
are some future universes in which the cat lives and
in which the cat dies. If you (an observer, I presume) sat
in the box instead of / with the cat, you could only
outcomes in which you survive. With some minor
this suggests a way to get any outcome you want
There are many variations on this: the randomizer could
be the stock market, the lottery, etc. The lethal
mechanism could be many disturbing things, such as a
computer program to recommend you eat either some
toxic sushi or some non-poisonous sushi, which you have
placed in a revolving randomizing mechanism after
the computer which is which (multiple levels of error-
checking and backup systems would help ensure
reliability, otherwise the least-unlikely survival scenario
is that you screw up the lethal contraption and end up
losing all your money and also eating the non-lethal
sushi). You must remain the observer for this to work.
you see someone else try this, or hire someone else to
do this for you, they will have a much
lower success rate, since you can observe outcomes in
which they die.)
Once could argue that life is an example of this: each
of us will die unless we get rich enough to buy
immortality. I find this thought reassuring, given my
desire for both wealth and immortality.
Obligatory Wikipedia Link
If you haven't heard of Shrödinger's Cat and this sounds interesting, then you should read this. [sninctown, Jan 16 2013]
Use of cat to pick random shares for investment purposes
[pocmloc, Jan 16 2013]
||It's been a while since I've performed my 'Copenhagen
Rant'; would anyone like to hear it again?
||All rants must use the word "shit" once and "musket"
twice... at least
||Musket? Shit. Musket? Why does it always end this way?
||I agree, the original point of the Shrödinger's Cat
example was to show that the situation was
absured and therefore incomplete and/or wrong.
||[Alterother], I agree that from a God perspective
(outside of time), the Multiverse just exists, with
no change. I also agree that from that God
perspective, the Shrödinger's Day-Trader is
connected to lots of different past states as well
as lots of different future states. In some of these
future states (and in a few weird past states),
Shrödinger's Day-Trader is dead.
||If we take the perspective of the consciousness of
Shrödinger's Day-Trader, it seems clear that this
consciousness can only take one of the available
paths that go forward in time, in other words that
Shrödinger's Day-Trader will experience unusually
good luck and continue to live.
||I would love to hear the rant. I hope it uses the
words "musket" and "remotely-steered comet" or
better yet "God's Holy Fire", but not the words
"assault weapon" or the names of any political
||[Brian], what I have found is that if something
doesn't make sense, it's probably not being
||As a bonus, if you actually do this experiment
you'll have a pretty good idea whether the
Copenhagen or Many-Worlds Interpretation is
correct. Unfortunately, the realization that the
Copenhagen Interpretation is correct would be
||I'm smarter now. Shitty thing is that my wife
corrected me on the pronunciation of Schrodinger.
||We like this idea, but we are not going to bun it until we see the
Umlauts in their correct locations..
||//Set up a machine that will kill you unless you get what you want.//
I laughed at this for about three minutes! Excellent.
||Cometh the Umlaut, cometh the Bun.
||I think there should be an umlaut in umlaut.
||Currently, it is unlauted.
||Everyone's a diacritic these days.