|
You are here |
www.lesswrong.com | ||
| | | | |
scottaaronson.blog
|
|
| | | | | Dan Faggella recorded an unusual podcast with me that's now online. He introduces me as a "quantum physicist," which is something that I never call myself (I'm a theoretical computer scientist) but have sort of given up on not being called by others. But the ensuing 85-minute conversation has virtually nothing to do with physics,... | |
| | | | |
qualiacomputing.com
|
|
| | | | | "It seems plain and self-evident, yet it needs to be said: the isolated knowledge obtained by a group of specialists in a narrow field has in itself no value whatsoever, but only in its synthesis with all the rest of knowledge and only inasmuch as it really contributes in this synthesis toward answering the demand,... | |
| | | | |
www.greaterwrong.com
|
|
| | | | | Eliezer's Anthropic Trilemma: So here's a simple algorithm for winning the lottery: Buy a ticket. Suspend your computer program just before the lottery drawing - which should of course be a quantum lottery, so that every ticket wins somewhere. Program your computational environment to, if you win, make a trillion copies of yourself, and wake them up for ten seconds, long enough to experience winning the lottery. Then suspend the programs, merge them again, and start the result. If you don't win the lottery, then just wake up automatically. The odds of winning the lottery are ordinarily a billion to one. But now the branch in which youwin has your "measure", your "amount of experience",temporarily multiplied by a trillion. So with the brief expenditure of a l... | |
| | | | |
diffxweyl.wordpress.com
|
|
| | | This post explains quantum mechanics (QM) without any advanced math. Unlike most introductions, I will focus on the interpretation of QM: what the objects in the theory mean and how they fit into a broader philosophy of doing physics. Specifically, I explain why the Von Neumann-Wigner interpretation, a variant of the standard Copenhagen interpretation, is... | ||