this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
147 points (95.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

29675 readers
1398 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics (NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out)
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct-----

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jesterraiin@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yes, but you're not applying the hypothesis to the fullest.

If it's correct, and the number of worlds is infinite, then some of you buy tickets even when you don't. And they win. So, you don't actually need to make the move at all. 😎

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it's truly an infinite number of worlds, in some of them you win the lottery without even buying a ticket.

[–] jesterraiin@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. In some, you're given enough wealth that it renders lotteries obsolete.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And then there's the other infinite number of worlds where you're eating out of dumpsters and living under a bridge.

[–] burntbutterbiscuits@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No. I'm mocking the you in another universe, you're fine.

[–] burntbutterbiscuits@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This really makes one of me angry somewhere

[–] BitterSweet@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Don’t worry I think I just slapped them in world 445B-Omega

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jesterraiin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Of course. And some that put the reality of Dead Man's Letters into shame.

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

In a literal sense, assuming the theory that consciousness in some way depends on quantum processes is correct, this is the proper interpretation.

Lottery balls being picked seems very unlikely to be dependent on a superposition.

But (a) choosing to buy a ticket, and (b) what numbers you choose both plausibly could if the above assumption is correct.

So not only would other yous be buying tickets in other worlds, they'd be buying many different numbers in many different worlds, even if the you in this world wasn't buying any tickets at all.

And even if the you in this world was now so strongly against the lottery that no future 'branch' of you would ever buy a ticket regardless of the degree to which a superposition might influence your decisions, the many yous from childhood would be so variably influenced in different ways from others around you from birth to now that there might be other parallel yous who superstitiously buy every ticket.

Even in terms of number selection - if the you here might choose the birthdate of a spouse or children as the numbers, yous in other worlds might have different spouses or children to choose numbers based on.

Many worlds is a rather boring theory unless also entertaining it with the notion that - like how birds navigate - our decision making somehow depends on quantum effects.

[–] Gregorech@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I just need to invent a device to merge with them.

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's possible to have an infinite number of universes where you win the lottery in none of them. It's a common misconception that infinity=every combination when that's not necessarily the case (there are infinite values between 1 and 2 for example, but none of those are 3)

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

It's also a common misconception that Everett's many worlds involves an infinite number of universes.

And that it involves multiple outcomes for macro objects like lottery balls.

It only means multiple 'worlds' specifically for quantum outcomes, so in OP's case their winning or not winning the lottery would need to be dependent on a superposition of quanta (i.e. Schrodinger's lottery ticket).

And given the prevailing thinking is that there's a finite number of quanta in the universe, there cannot be an infinite number of parallel worlds. (There could only be an infinite number of aggregate worlds if time is infinite and there's perpetual quantum 'foam' in its final state perpetuating multiple possibilities).

The theory is much less interesting than is often depicted in mass media (though as of recently is a fair bit more interesting given the way many worlds as a theory would mirror what backpropagation of the physical universe might look like).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

That's only if you assume that you winning the lottery falls within the infinite, but bounded, realm of random fluctuations between when you bought the ticket and the winning numbers are drawn. There's still physical constraints that the random quantum fluctuations fall within.

An example is, there are infinite numbers between 1 and 2, there's 1.1, 1.11, 1.111, etc. Because of the constraints however, we can still know that none of those infinite numbers between 1 and 2 are equal to 3. Infinite doesn't mean anything is possible.

[–] sudoreboot@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While the basic idea is interesting, the statement is misconceived. It confuses what you believe to be possible with what is possible according to quantum physics.

For your statement to be true, the lottery would have to be set up in such a way that the choice of winning lottery number is decided by the outcome of a quantum measurement which includes the possibility of your number being chosen. The outcome would then exist in superposition, and as soon as you learn the result, you are entangled with it and enter into superposition as well.

But like I said, the core idea is still fun to think about, because this type of branching happens constantly and it becomes an interesting philosophical dilemma of how to think about what could possibly happen, not merely what does (as far as any 'you' can tell). Imagine if you could experience all outcomes of some particular chain of events and how that would affect the way you make decisions.

[–] Gregorech@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Like the idea of winning is more fun than actually winning. Until you check you have both won and not won.

[–] Koma52@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Even if you don't buy a lottery ticket an infinite of you wins

[–] rockstarpirate@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Serious question: Can somebody explain to me, if an infinite number of universes exist, why do we assume that every possibility must exist within the set? Like, why can’t it be an infinite number of universes in which OP does not win the lottery?

[–] admiralpone@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your intuition is correct here. OP is wrong. An infinite set of branches of the wavefunction does not necessarily imply that everything you can imagine must happen somewhere in that wavefunction.

[–] thenofootcanman@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

But surely the chance of "me" winning the lottery at least once is 1 if I play an infinite number of times

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] There1snospoon7491@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Fun fact: you can have multiple sets of infinities and even though all are infinite, that does not mean they are all equal. See Georg Cantor.

My infinity is bigger than yours

[–] rockstarpirate@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] There1snospoon7491@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, Cantor said so, not I. But an easy example

Imagine a list of all whole numbers. 1, 2, 3 on up and up. Obviously this list is infinite - numbers do not end.

Now imagine a list of all real numbers - that is, all numbers plus their decimal amounts between each while number. 1, 1.1, 1.11, 1.12, 2, 2.1, and so on. This list is also infinite - but it is also inherently larger than the infinite list of only whole numbers. It has more numbers.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's like saying am infinite number of feathers is lighter than an infinite number of bricks. Neither is heavier than the other - they're both infinitely heavy.

[–] There1snospoon7491@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’re measuring a quality of the two objects, not the quantity, which might make a difference. I’m just sharing something I learned that I think is cool:)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] fubo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

However, every time you buy a lottery ticket, almost all of you lose a little bit of money.

[–] kometes@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An infinite number of you wins.

[–] Gregorech@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Someday that me might be me.

[–] Dr_Chocolate@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

In at least one world, the ticket machine short circuits and electrocutes you. In one of those, you become a superhero named Lottery Lightning.

[–] Ucinorn@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Correction: at least one of you wins.

It's possible to buy a lottery ticket where ALL of the alternative universes wins the lottery EXEPT you

[–] s_s@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

In many of those worlds the lottery doesn't exist.

In many of those worlds you don't exist.

[–] Gregorech@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The possibilities are endless.

[–] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But also, every time you buy a lottery ticket, one of you gets a paper cut from it and dies from an infection from antibiotic resistant bacteria.

[–] Hedup@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You'd have to pick numbers purely randomly. Maybe construct a machine that randomly decays cesium. If it does, it triggers some sort of mechanism to register a 1 or 0. Maybe put it in a box with a toxic fial and a cat. When it triggers, the toxic substance is released and cat dies. So depending on if cat is dead or alive you get 1 or 0. Generate enough bits this way and you'll get numbers to put in the lottery.

[–] burntbutterbiscuits@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How many dead cats would that take?

[–] Hedup@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's impossible to tell - it's random. But on average it would take a number of cats equal to half the bitsize of the numbers you generate.

[–] PotjiePig@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

And every time you don't win, you can slowly confirm your darkest fears that you are indeed in your shittiest timeline.

[–] nymwit@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Yet you'll go bankrupt 10 years after in every one you win. This universal constant defies the multiverse.

[–] pozbo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also, everytime you buy a lottery ticket you also don't.

Likely one of the "other" yous won when you decided not to buy a ticket.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

So a version of me must win every single lottery, but I will never win any of them if I don't buy a ticket.

Gotcha.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί