6 ms·
The theory that we are living in a simulation is primarily based on Bayesian statistics, so I find the article's claim that those who disagree most strongly are
by clove 5y ago
The theory that we are living in a simulation is primarily based on Bayesian statistics, so I find the article's claim that those who disagree most strongly are scientists - the very people most likely to understand and apply Bayesian statistics - incredible. The subheading seems like an attempt to dupe the audience into thinking science opposes the theory, but I don't understand the author's intention. I've read through this article twice but still do not understand the point.
- eimrine 5y ago> The theory that we are living in a simulation is primarily based on Bayesian statistics May I see those equations or formulas or whatever? > I find the article's claim that those who disagree most strongly are scientists - the very people most likely to understand and apply Bayesian statistics - incredible. Scientists have another great instrument called Occam's razor. You know, if the claim about "we are living in simulation" or maybe "there is a small kettle on Earth's orbit" has no outcomes then why to believe it?