https://www.umsu.de/blog/ Musings in Analytic Philosophy https://www.umsu.de/blog/2021/740#c2467 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2021/740#c2467 Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:26:53 +0000 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/828#c2464 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/828#c2464 Mon, 23 Feb 2026 02:35:59 +0000 that of estimation of the binomial parameter n from a single observation (eg Jeffrey's tramcar). If p is known, then the generalized Bayes estimator of n with improper prior pi(n) ~ 1/n is 1/p. The likelihood ratio comparing two hypothetical n's should be (1-p)^(n1-n2) * n1/n2, so if p is small and n1=1, then it increases by 1 for each increment of n2.]]> https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/828#c2463 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/828#c2463 Sat, 21 Feb 2026 06:31:41 +0000 different from "I inhabit a universe"

I'm feeling a bit dull, but doesn't the former imply non-independence of p's ie existence of life in U1 extinguishes probability of occurrence in the other universes? ]]> https://www.umsu.de/blog/2025/822#c2462 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2025/822#c2462 Mon, 16 Feb 2026 21:01:22 +0000
As an aside, using complete expansions of models that is, structures containing a constant for every member of the expanded model, is a usual device in elementary model theory (Robinson diagrams etc.). So in this respect the expansion based semantics for the quantifiers matches model theoretic perspectives rather well.]]> https://www.umsu.de/blog/2025/822#c2461 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2025/822#c2461 Mon, 16 Feb 2026 16:12:31 +0000
On the flip side, in proof theory/tableau texts, one sometimes finds "eigenvariables" or "parameters" that are used specifically to instantiate universal quantifiers. But these usually don't figure in the semantics, as far as I can tell.]]> https://www.umsu.de/blog/2025/822#c2460 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2025/822#c2460 Sat, 14 Feb 2026 22:47:34 +0000
]]> https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/827#c2458 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/827#c2458 Wed, 11 Feb 2026 06:20:59 +0000
1) In the current cosmology "observed" within our simulation, a high computing future is quite possible.
2) There will be an interest by such future entities in running simulations of universes
3) The physics within simulations performed will be based the actual physics underlying those computers - Anthropic arguments might mean that these are the only ones that run nicely.

3 is where the infinite skeptical possibilities are constrained.

As to Boltzmann brains, you only need 1 good one.
Iammarino, Darren. "God is a Boltzmann Brane: Arriving at God via Physicalism." Theology and Science 23.1 (2025): 167-182
]]> https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/826#c2457 https://www.umsu.de/blog/2026/826#c2457 Fri, 23 Jan 2026 12:20:49 +0000
With respect to my beliefs, I don't think I genuinely locate myself inside my head. I self-attribute properties like being 180 cm tall, and I don't think anything inside my head is 180 cm tall. So the "I am here" arrow in my belief worlds doesn't seem to be pointing at something inside my head. So I don't "take myself to be located" at the focal point of my visual field, as I&P claim, although I admit that there is some temptation to do so, in certain contexts, because my visual input is centred on this location.

You might respond that I don't self-attribute properties like being 180 cm tall; rather, I self-attribute being part of a human body that is 180 cm tall. More precisely: we could explain my thoughts and assertions about my height (etc) even if we assumed that the "I am here" arrow in my belief space points at my brain, or at my pineal gland. That seems right, and it's interesting how little hangs on the choice. I still prefer the view that the arrow points at my entire body, because it's more straightforward. But this might ultimately just be a modelling choice. Not sure!

(I also don't fully agree that it even "appears to me visually" that I'm located inside my brain. I don't think my visual input represents me at all.)

The practical reasoning connection seems right, but I'm not sure how much it helps to determine what the "I am here" arrow singles out. Somehow, I must realize that my choices affect the movement of this mouth and these arms etc., but this doesn't settle whether the arrow's destination is a body that includes the mouth and arms, or just the brain, or the pineal gland, or a point in space 1m to the left of the pineal gland.
]]>