I rechecked Hutter on induction https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.5721.pdf and the convergence stuff seems to be already known. Going to recheck logical induction. I think maybe Occam’s razor is actually hard to justify. What is easier justify is using a prior that will actually converge, if there is any explanation at all (your observations aren’t random noise)
All of this is just getting annoyed at the NFL theorem trying to be objective, but one thing that I’d find interesting is what happens if you start out with very different priors.
I rechecked Hutter on induction https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.5721.pdf and the convergence stuff seems to be already known. Going to recheck logical induction. I think maybe Occam’s razor is actually hard to justify. What is easier justify is using a prior that will actually converge, if there is any explanation at all (your observations aren’t random noise)
Ok yeah. Logical induction just works then because you don’t expect any adversaries in math truths.
All of this is just getting annoyed at the NFL theorem trying to be objective, but one thing that I’d find interesting is what happens if you start out with very different priors.