Interesting question here is what happens with the total measure across multiverse in time:
(1) If it remains =1 then each branch has smaller and smaller measure and it compensates the increase in the number of observers. In that case, the argument for MWI is not working, but as we assume here MWI=true for branch splitting it, doesn’t affect the proof. I am also should be very early (but I am not very early – there were anthropically-aware people before me).
(2) If total measure increases, the total number of observers is growing many orders of magnitude each second, and thus—based on SIA—I am now in the last moment of the existence of the universe before Big Rip (which is compensated by quantum immortality, so not a real problem).
The idea (2) is more probable than (1) as I know that I am not early, but can’t know that I am in the last moment of the universe existence. (Ups, seems to be infohazardous idea)
But physics is roughly time-symmetric so branches merge all the time as well. (I believe they merge at a rate slightly less than splitting, so the configuration space expands a bit over time.)
I see why branch splitting would lead to being towards end of universe, but the hypothesis keeps getting strong evidence against it as life goes on. There might be something more like the same number of “branches” running at all times (not sharing computation), plus Bostrom’s idea of duplication increasing anthropic measure.
I don’t see why (1) says you should be very early. Isn’t the decrease in measure for each individual observer precisely outweighed by their increasing multitudes?
Content warning: info-hazard
Interesting question here is what happens with the total measure across multiverse in time:
(1) If it remains =1 then each branch has smaller and smaller measure and it compensates the increase in the number of observers. In that case, the argument for MWI is not working, but as we assume here MWI=true for branch splitting it, doesn’t affect the proof. I am also should be very early (but I am not very early – there were anthropically-aware people before me).
(2) If total measure increases, the total number of observers is growing many orders of magnitude each second, and thus—based on SIA—I am now in the last moment of the existence of the universe before Big Rip (which is compensated by quantum immortality, so not a real problem).
The idea (2) is more probable than (1) as I know that I am not early, but can’t know that I am in the last moment of the universe existence. (Ups, seems to be infohazardous idea)
But physics is roughly time-symmetric so branches merge all the time as well. (I believe they merge at a rate slightly less than splitting, so the configuration space expands a bit over time.)
I see why branch splitting would lead to being towards end of universe, but the hypothesis keeps getting strong evidence against it as life goes on. There might be something more like the same number of “branches” running at all times (not sharing computation), plus Bostrom’s idea of duplication increasing anthropic measure.
I don’t see why (1) says you should be very early. Isn’t the decrease in measure for each individual observer precisely outweighed by their increasing multitudes?