On acausal trade, an important point is that a lot of evidence is emerging that the universe is in fact infinitely large, which validates your thesis even more (and by extension, make’s MacAskill’s arguments nonsense.)
Why does accepting acausal trade (or EDT) provide evidence about an infinite universe? Could you elaborate on that?
And of course, not all kinds of infinite universes imply there’s the same amount of Good Twins and Evil Twins.
I’m talking about the evidence from the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, as well as a little bit of dark energy, which is converging on a picture of a universe that is flat, infinite and homogeneous, that is at the large scale there are no imbalances in the distribution of mass.
There’s already a lot of evidence from physics to bear on this question, which is what I’m talking about.
On acausal trade, an important point is that a lot of evidence is emerging that the universe is in fact infinitely large, which validates your thesis even more (and by extension, make’s MacAskill’s arguments nonsense.)
The authors consider the infinite case in section 5 of the paper. They conclude:
Why does accepting acausal trade (or EDT) provide evidence about an infinite universe? Could you elaborate on that? And of course, not all kinds of infinite universes imply there’s the same amount of Good Twins and Evil Twins.
I’m talking about the evidence from the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation, as well as a little bit of dark energy, which is converging on a picture of a universe that is flat, infinite and homogeneous, that is at the large scale there are no imbalances in the distribution of mass.
There’s already a lot of evidence from physics to bear on this question, which is what I’m talking about.
Oh, of course, I see! I had understood you meant acausal trade was the source of this evidence. Thanks for your clarification!