A kind of funny way in which something like this might (just about) happen in reality occurs to me: Possible time delay in human awareness of decision making. Suppose when you make a conscious decision, your brain starts to become committed to that decision before you become aware of it, so if you suddenly decide to press a button then your brain was going through the process of committing you to pressing it before you actually knew you were going to press it. That would mean that every time you took a conscious decision to act, based on some rational grounds, you should really have been wanting to be the person who had been predisposed to act in that way a short time ago, when the neural machinery was pushing you towards that decision. I’m not saying this resolves any big issues, but maybe it can be amusingly uncomfortable for a few people—especially given some (admittedly controversial) experiments. In fact, with some brainwave monitoring equipment, a clever experiment design, and a very short experiment duration, you might even be able to set up something slightly resembling Newcomb’s paradox!
I have a description here of a practical demonstration of Newcomb’s paradox that might just be possible, with current or near-future technology. It would rely, simply, on the brain being more predictable over a short span of time. I would be interested to see what people think about the feasibility.
A test subject sits at a desk. On the desk are two buttons. On button “O” corresponds to opening one box. The other button “B” corresponds to opening both boxes. There is a computer, with a display screen. The boxes are going to be computer simulated: A program in the computer has a variable for the amount of money in the each box.
This is how an experimental run proceeds.
The subject sits at the desk for some random amount of time, during which nothing happens.
A “Decision Imminent” message appears on the computer screen. This is to warn the subject that his/her decision is about to be demanded imminently.
A short time after (maybe a second or two, or a few seconds), the computer program decides how much money will go in each box, and it sets the variables accordingly, without showing the user. As soon as that is done, a “Select a box NOW” message appears on the computer screen. The subject now has a (very) limited amount of time to press either button “O” or “B” to select one or both boxes. The subject will have to press one of the buttons almost immediately before the offer is withdrawn.
The subject is then shown the amount of money that was in each box.
Now, here is the catch (and everyone here will have guessed it).
The subject is also wired up to brain monitoring equipment, which is connected to the computer. When the “Decision imminent” message appeared, the computer started to examine the subject’s brainwaves, to try to see the decision to press being formed. Just before the “Select a box NOW” message appeared, it used this information to load the simulated boxes according to the rules of the Newcomb’s paradox game being discussed here.
I have no idea what level of accuracy could be achieved now, but it may be that some people could be made to have a worrying experience.
A kind of funny way in which something like this might (just about) happen in reality occurs to me: Possible time delay in human awareness of decision making. Suppose when you make a conscious decision, your brain starts to become committed to that decision before you become aware of it, so if you suddenly decide to press a button then your brain was going through the process of committing you to pressing it before you actually knew you were going to press it. That would mean that every time you took a conscious decision to act, based on some rational grounds, you should really have been wanting to be the person who had been predisposed to act in that way a short time ago, when the neural machinery was pushing you towards that decision. I’m not saying this resolves any big issues, but maybe it can be amusingly uncomfortable for a few people—especially given some (admittedly controversial) experiments. In fact, with some brainwave monitoring equipment, a clever experiment design, and a very short experiment duration, you might even be able to set up something slightly resembling Newcomb’s paradox!
I have a description here of a practical demonstration of Newcomb’s paradox that might just be possible, with current or near-future technology. It would rely, simply, on the brain being more predictable over a short span of time. I would be interested to see what people think about the feasibility.
A test subject sits at a desk. On the desk are two buttons. On button “O” corresponds to opening one box. The other button “B” corresponds to opening both boxes. There is a computer, with a display screen. The boxes are going to be computer simulated: A program in the computer has a variable for the amount of money in the each box.
This is how an experimental run proceeds.
The subject sits at the desk for some random amount of time, during which nothing happens.
A “Decision Imminent” message appears on the computer screen. This is to warn the subject that his/her decision is about to be demanded imminently.
A short time after (maybe a second or two, or a few seconds), the computer program decides how much money will go in each box, and it sets the variables accordingly, without showing the user. As soon as that is done, a “Select a box NOW” message appears on the computer screen. The subject now has a (very) limited amount of time to press either button “O” or “B” to select one or both boxes. The subject will have to press one of the buttons almost immediately before the offer is withdrawn.
The subject is then shown the amount of money that was in each box.
Now, here is the catch (and everyone here will have guessed it).
The subject is also wired up to brain monitoring equipment, which is connected to the computer. When the “Decision imminent” message appeared, the computer started to examine the subject’s brainwaves, to try to see the decision to press being formed. Just before the “Select a box NOW” message appeared, it used this information to load the simulated boxes according to the rules of the Newcomb’s paradox game being discussed here.
I have no idea what level of accuracy could be achieved now, but it may be that some people could be made to have a worrying experience.