3 ms·

To be clear, I could be convinced that humans are partial halting oracles but it would take extraordinary evidence as it is an extraordinary claim and so many p

To be clear, I could be convinced that humans are partial halting oracles but it would take extraordinary evidence as it is an extraordinary claim and so many people react so strongly to these claims because they dont feel it comes with the appropriate extraordinary evidence. If you're interested in Bayesian approximations of mutual information check out the references listed at [1] and tell me what you think, as this is far from my speciality. [1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_information#Bayesian_estimation_of_mutual_information https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_information#Bayesian_...

yters 8y ago
Thanks for the link, I will be checking it out. I evaluate this issue with a Bayesian + max entropy approach. We have two hypotheses: 1. humans are TMs 2. humans are PHOs Max entropy weights these hypotheses equally. What humans do is given the highest expectation with #2. Thus, Bayesian hypothesis selection says #2 is the most likely explanation of the evidence. Inference to the best explanation says humans are PHOs.
- eigenspace 8y ago
  > I evaluate this issue with a Bayesian + max entropy approach. I have a similar approach to gravity. There are two hypotheses 1. The gravitational field comes about from the curvature of spacetime 2. The ghost of Einstein flies around through all of space at an impossibly high speed nudging all objects such that their trajectories align with what he would find elegant. Max entropy weights these hypotheses equally. What h̶u̶m̶a̶n̶s̶ planets do is given the highest expectation with #2. Thus, Bayesian hypothesis selection says #2 is the most likely explanation of the evidence. Inference to the best explanation says h̶u̶m̶a̶n̶s̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶P̶H̶O̶s̶ gravity is Einstein's ghost.
  - yters 8y ago
    The Einstein ghost approach isn't very well defined, so it is just a placeholder. It is equivalent to saying "god did it" or "FSM did it". PHO is well defined.

yters 8y ago

Thanks for the link, I will be checking it out. I evaluate this issue with a Bayesian + max entropy approach. We have two hypotheses: 1. humans are TMs 2. humans are PHOs Max entropy weights these hypotheses equally. What humans do is given the highest expectation with #2. Thus, Bayesian hypothesis selection says #2 is the most likely explanation of the evidence. Inference to the best explanation says humans are PHOs.

eigenspace 8y ago
> I evaluate this issue with a Bayesian + max entropy approach. I have a similar approach to gravity. There are two hypotheses 1. The gravitational field comes about from the curvature of spacetime 2. The ghost of Einstein flies around through all of space at an impossibly high speed nudging all objects such that their trajectories align with what he would find elegant. Max entropy weights these hypotheses equally. What h̶u̶m̶a̶n̶s̶ planets do is given the highest expectation with #2. Thus, Bayesian hypothesis selection says #2 is the most likely explanation of the evidence. Inference to the best explanation says h̶u̶m̶a̶n̶s̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶P̶H̶O̶s̶ gravity is Einstein's ghost.
- yters 8y ago
  The Einstein ghost approach isn't very well defined, so it is just a placeholder. It is equivalent to saying "god did it" or "FSM did it". PHO is well defined.