Good question to ask, since specifics of selection process may affect the decision outcome! Other variants include growing humans in a vat from scratch on demand, using Star Trek transporter clones, or abducting the necessary number of people from a pre-selected list where your name happens to be the first one. For now, imagine the potential population as the 5 billion living cognizant adults.
as X approaches infinity, the difference becomes negligible
It may be negligible to the 4.999… billion adults sleeping comfortably and securely in their beds tonight, but the problem presupposed that you have already been abducted. It remains underdefined whether you refers to you the specific person reading this meme, or a more general you-the-unfortunate who has been chosen and is now listening to this on the headphones.
It’s a standard runaway trolley problem. The trolley is traveling down the main track unless the switch is flipped to send it down the side track. The lever is labeled such that there is no ambiguity which way it is set, the blindfolds notwithstanding. The villain is pernicious and will be equally (though not exceedingly so) delighted to see you die by your own action where inaction would have had saved you. You can somehow trust that the announcement in the headphones is true and not a lie. Such as, for example, you have seen this exact situation happen many times before on TV and survivors/witnesses have described the villain to be truthful every time.
You are on the side track in scenario A. You die if you pull. Ironically, you’d be killing yourself. The dice are to make the two scenarios not equally likely.
My guess is that no to the first, since I have a 1/3 chance of being in the forked path, vs 1/15 of being in the straight path and my lever being connected.
Suppose you live in a kingdom where everyone is as selfish as you, and you’ve seen on TV many situations exactly like this one where people were tied to the tracks - usually one at a time and occasionally 10 at a time. (The villain has been prolific.) You’ve seen them all follow this logic and choose not to flip their switch, yet out of ~1500 people you have seen in peril this way, ~1000 of them have died. If only their logic had convinced them (and you) otherwise, 1000 of them could have selfishly survived! Doesn’t seem very logical to follow a course of action that kills you more often than its opposite.
(If you don’t want to imagine a kingdom where everyone is selfish, you can imagine one where x% are selfish and (100-x)% are altruistic, or some other mixture maybe with y% of people who flip the lever randomly back and forth and z% who cannot even understand the question. The point is that the paradox still exists.)
Edit: I can see now how in a 100% altruistic kingdom, where you are the only selfish one and you know for sure that everyone else will logically altruistically pull the lever, it makes sense for you to not pull the lever. Presumably there is some population x% split (44% selfish/56% altruistic?) where your selfish decision will have to reverse. Weird to think that your estimate of the selfishness of the rest of the population has a relevance on your decision!
there’s no way to know which track the trolley is on
It’s a standard trolley meme problem, the trolley will keep going on the main track unless the lever is switched 😁. I thought !science_memes would be familiar with trolley problems, but I guess I get to introduce some of you! You might want to start off on some easier trolley memes first, this is advanced level stuff.
where the real lever sends it
There is not usually ambiguity with the lever. If you wish, you can have an announcement in the headphones “main track… side track…” every time you flip the lever. Your only uncertainty is which track you yourself are bound to, given how you’re blindfolded.
The recent post made me fear that a lot of you are taking this “monkey looks at double-slits” meme, which was only ever supposed to be a funny monkey meme, actually seriously. Honorable mention goes to @kromem, whose 12 posts on the topic, insisting that the quantum eraser experiment (but not the delayed-choice quantum...
I want to clarify that the “cannot” here refers not to the inadequacy of our tools (which hypothetically could have been fixed in the future by building better tools), but by a fundamental prohibition of the quantum mechanics theory. Practically, the single-photon lasers and detectors used here are like 90%+ efficient - plenty good enough to distinguish between the two monkey scenarios. But some observables in quantum mechanics are “orthogonal” - you can measure one or the other, but not both at the same time - the math will not allow it. The typical example of that is “position” and “momentum” of a particle.
The math is quite beautiful actually, the analogy I’d use is something like asking “Which way is east at the North Pole?” In your head you can either know “This direction is east.” or “I am standing at the North Pole.” but you cannot hold both pieces of knowledge in your head at the same time.
The orthogonal observables in this experiment are the “which-way top/bottom slit” information and the “which-interference-category Pattern 4/Pattern 5” information. It’s even more beautiful in the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment that I was ranting about here. There, both pieces of information are stored orthogonally in a single photon. You can choose at a later time to either measure it one way, which will tell you the which-way info, or in a different way, which will tell you the interference category info, but there is no hypothetical way to measure it in both. The only way you can get the category info out to allow your computer to draw the interference pattern is if you guarantee that the which-way information has been irrecoverably erased. It is as if the whole universe conspires to censor this information from you! But it’s just the consequence of the math rules in use.
Sleeping Beauty Trolley Problem (mander.xyz)
OC just for you! ♥️
The real double-slit quantum eraser they don't want you to know about! (mander.xyz)
The recent post made me fear that a lot of you are taking this “monkey looks at double-slits” meme, which was only ever supposed to be a funny monkey meme, actually seriously. Honorable mention goes to @kromem, whose 12 posts on the topic, insisting that the quantum eraser experiment (but not the delayed-choice quantum...