I’m okay with reposting this from my Facebook wall largely because no one will understand it. This is probably just insane (it has more conjunctions):
But some of my more insane ideas have to do with how the Born rule as betting odds is just an approximation of the rule implicit in the entire quantum superposition which results from agents coordinating decision policies across quantum branches in order to make the multiverse recohere faster, which lets them reverse the computation already done by the universe as information gets returned back from the heat bath to the superintelligences. IMHO this idea is awesome. It requires a certain amount of computational efficiency times raw resources relative to the quantum information density of the universe (which I’ve heard is really, really high, like black hole high, which maybe implies there’s a weird conservation thingy going on… and I think maybe cosmological natural selection (fecund universes) might be involved, where universal laws are in local optima for black hole production… this stuff is crazy).
(This probably isn’t insane so much as something probably cancels something out in a way that makes it moot. Or it’s just insane. Needs more math at any rate.)
Whatever else it may be, by the rules of this discussion, a decision is a type of physical process. So if it is possible for the decisions of a superintelligence in one branch of a superposition to affect the recoherence time of the whole superposition, then logically it must be possible for physical events in one branch of a superposition to have this effect, because these “decisions” are just a type of physical event.
So the key idea that needs investigating is the whole idea of events, occurring “in one branch”, which affect the recoherence time of the whole. This might allow us to temporarily sidestep the, uh, issues surrounding Wallace’s “derivation” of the Born rule from quantum decision theory (which is the reverse of how everyone outside the Deutsch-Wallace school of thought sees it). If reducing the time to recoherence is the objective, one should first try to understand what “recoherence acceleration” looks like. You could look at some of the models of recoherence that you just posted, find out the parametric dependency of the time to recoherence (that is, find out which parameters or physical quantities it depends upon), and then think about what sort of processes, inside or outside the system, could control those parameters.
I also think the derivation from decision theory is really circular (which I think is the same as “reverse”), which is unacceptable. I say “circular” because we don’t know very much about either the Born rule or decision theory. ;)
I’ll look closer at your comment later. I’d like to send you a much longer essay. (I received your email and want to respond to it but have lacked the necessary psychological motivation. I really, really appreciated how you kept your eye on the “save the world” ball unlike everyone else.)
I’m okay with reposting this from my Facebook wall largely because no one will understand it. This is probably just insane (it has more conjunctions):
(This probably isn’t insane so much as something probably cancels something out in a way that makes it moot. Or it’s just insane. Needs more math at any rate.)
Whatever else it may be, by the rules of this discussion, a decision is a type of physical process. So if it is possible for the decisions of a superintelligence in one branch of a superposition to affect the recoherence time of the whole superposition, then logically it must be possible for physical events in one branch of a superposition to have this effect, because these “decisions” are just a type of physical event.
So the key idea that needs investigating is the whole idea of events, occurring “in one branch”, which affect the recoherence time of the whole. This might allow us to temporarily sidestep the, uh, issues surrounding Wallace’s “derivation” of the Born rule from quantum decision theory (which is the reverse of how everyone outside the Deutsch-Wallace school of thought sees it). If reducing the time to recoherence is the objective, one should first try to understand what “recoherence acceleration” looks like. You could look at some of the models of recoherence that you just posted, find out the parametric dependency of the time to recoherence (that is, find out which parameters or physical quantities it depends upon), and then think about what sort of processes, inside or outside the system, could control those parameters.
I also think the derivation from decision theory is really circular (which I think is the same as “reverse”), which is unacceptable. I say “circular” because we don’t know very much about either the Born rule or decision theory. ;)
I’ll look closer at your comment later. I’d like to send you a much longer essay. (I received your email and want to respond to it but have lacked the necessary psychological motivation. I really, really appreciated how you kept your eye on the “save the world” ball unlike everyone else.)
Thanks for restating the key question in a very clear way.