Eh, I don’t buy it, or like, I think it’s just restating the underlying question. My best guess is wind direction is pretty strongly overdetermined (like, even on just the extremely dumb first order approximation you can often get to 95%+ confidence about wind direction, because places tend to have pretty consistent wind patterns).
But even granting that, it’s still not settled because there might be other reasons that would have overdetermined the outcome of the election. For example, it might be overdetermined that Trump dies before the election due to old age. We don’t know that, but an omniscient observer probably would. To settle this, it’s not enough to find one event that seemingly affects the result from the perspective of our present uncertainty, you need to confirm that the effects of that event were not screened off on the variable that you are measuring via any other pathway.
And granting even that, while the question here was ambiguously phrased, the relevant variable measurement here was “which party will win the election” not “which president will win the election”, so it’s not particularly relevant.
That said, it’s still an interesting case of small variations having large effects.
If everything about the two elections were deterministic except for where that shot landed, and Trump otherwise wouldn’t have died, due to his large influence over the Republican party & constituents, when alive, he would very likely influence who the Republicans run for 2028 (as he does who they run in many congressional elections), and this would be predictable by Laplace’s demon.
Eh, I don’t buy it, or like, I think it’s just restating the underlying question. My best guess is wind direction is pretty strongly overdetermined (like, even on just the extremely dumb first order approximation you can often get to 95%+ confidence about wind direction, because places tend to have pretty consistent wind patterns).
But even granting that, it’s still not settled because there might be other reasons that would have overdetermined the outcome of the election. For example, it might be overdetermined that Trump dies before the election due to old age. We don’t know that, but an omniscient observer probably would. To settle this, it’s not enough to find one event that seemingly affects the result from the perspective of our present uncertainty, you need to confirm that the effects of that event were not screened off on the variable that you are measuring via any other pathway.
And granting even that, while the question here was ambiguously phrased, the relevant variable measurement here was “which party will win the election” not “which president will win the election”, so it’s not particularly relevant.
That said, it’s still an interesting case of small variations having large effects.
(Also, this question is about 2028, it’s not particularly clear to me what effect even a successful assasination would have had on the 2028 election)
If everything about the two elections were deterministic except for where that shot landed, and Trump otherwise wouldn’t have died, due to his large influence over the Republican party & constituents, when alive, he would very likely influence who the Republicans run for 2028 (as he does who they run in many congressional elections), and this would be predictable by Laplace’s demon.