Schrödinger's Cat & Running Bad (a BBV Dissertation w/ Cliffnotes...)

[imabigdeal]

i wonder how many people just opened this and immediately hit back after seeing how long it was. i thought it was pretty interesting, i've actually read quite a bit about the Schrodinger's Cat experiment. never thought about applying it like this, though. makes sense

[kyleb]

Schrödinger's flips. I like it.

[threesrwild]

The snozberries taste like snozberries.

[goofyballer]

Wait, so does this picture refer to Schrodinger's Cat?



The first time I saw this I didn't get it, but now I'm lolling. Awesome.

[losingdonkey]

So would a good strat would be to attempt to spew bad karma everywhere I go?

[UptownExpress]

i liked the part about killing FGators. Quality post.

[JammyDodga]

I had a theory about this once.

OK, now imagine that instead of you being outside the box with the cat, you are the cat. Or rather you are inside a box, with a random particle determining whether you live or die.

Now there's still going to be two universes, one where you live, and one where you don't, but of course, you won't know about the one where you die, so you'll only know about the one where you live.

Therefore, you could carry out this experiment 100 times, and each time, you would survive, or one of you would survive, and that the only one who would know about it.

So to everyone else, you wind up dead, in your own universe, you are alive and have just survived 100 random 50 50 events...


Now if we extend this to live, and assume that the majority of things which could kill us are in some way determined by a random event. So life is like one big shrodingers experiment, and your own self will always survive the random events, because you wont know about the ones that don't... so everyone, in their own universe will survive until there is no possible universe in which they don't die... so everyone really has like 120 years ahead of them...

[mdm13]

The coinflipping example is used by Warren Buffett in the Preface to the Intelligent Investor to show how that if everyone in America flipped coins everyday after a few years there would be people who won all the time and would be sharing their superior coin flipping strategies, etc. But then he explains how that by analyzing the thought process that goes into doing whatever that leads to results is the more telltale sign of reliability of the results. So I guess that would mean looking at how someone who runs bad plays, as opposed to merely looking at all in EV graphs or sample sizes.

[jtr]

Nit objection, but wasn't it originally supposed to be a jar of prussic acid in the box rather than a gun?

Nice post though.

[Pugwash]

Here's the concluding chapter from my recently finished poker strategy book:

'...if you still aren't winning then you haven't killed enough people yet.'