**From:** Tomaz Kristan (*tomaz.kristan@gmail.com*)

**Date:** Wed Aug 25 2004 - 01:53:03 MDT

**Next message:**Christian Szegedy: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Previous message:**Eliezer Yudkowsky: "Re: The cult of infinity"**In reply to:**Eliezer Yudkowsky: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Next in thread:**Christian Szegedy: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Reply:**Christian Szegedy: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:25:59 -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky

<sentience@pobox.com> wrote:

*>
*

*> I don't see how you could formulate this paradox in strict math language.
*

*> There is no concept of a "random shake" in set theory that I'm aware of,
*

A shake is a random swap of two integers at the Mth and the Nth place.

The probability distribution for the M place (and for the N place) is

the following:

p(M==1)=1/2, p(M==2)=1/4, p(M==3)=1/8, p(M==4)=1/16 ...

p(N==1)=1/2, p(N==2)=1/4, p(N==3)=1/8, p(N==4)=1/16 ...

It is probability 1/8 that we will swap the 1st and the 2nd number.

It's 2^-X*Y, that we will rotate the Xtx and the Yth number in one

shake.

The problem arises after infinitely many such shakes. What numbers do

we see at the low places? Hadn't those gone away quite early in the

game - no matter which they are?

**Next message:**Christian Szegedy: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Previous message:**Eliezer Yudkowsky: "Re: The cult of infinity"**In reply to:**Eliezer Yudkowsky: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Next in thread:**Christian Szegedy: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Reply:**Christian Szegedy: "Re: The cult of infinity"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5
: Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:48 MDT
*