Boltzmann Brain Paradox

Comments center on the Boltzmann brain paradox, anthropic principle, fine-tuned universe, and probabilistic arguments questioning whether observers are likely evolved beings or random fluctuations in a multiverse.

📉 Falling 0.3x Science
2,902
Comments
20
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#3434
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2007
4
2008
33
2009
40
2010
49
2011
44
2012
37
2013
76
2014
122
2015
117
2016
167
2017
137
2018
232
2019
202
2020
268
2021
228
2022
298
2023
267
2024
387
2025
187
2026
7

Keywords

en.m YES TIL wikipedia.org medium.com universe brain probability anthropic infinite finite principle chose tuned infinitely

Sample Comments

kiicia Sep 19, 2023 View on HN

we don't, check Boltzmann brain https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain

Isinlor Aug 22, 2018 View on HN

Similar arguments are made in scientific discourse.If you assume that the universe happened by chance, and the observable universe is just a part of a bigger multiverse, then you can ask yourself what is more likely:1. The whole, enormous universe happening out of nothing, including you2. Your small brain (no offense, we compare with the universe :P) happening out of nothing in a mental state that contains all memories of a world existing as you experience it nowOption 2. seems to be

mgh2 Jun 24, 2022 View on HN

Yes, people's imagination can run wild and hypothetical scenarios are limitlessIt is the same argument used to justify any opinion without proof[1] "Multiverse" vs. fine tuned universe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_universe[2] "Choice" vs. responsibility: <a href="https://trendguardian.medium.com/free-will-a-rich-fairy

Ygg2 Jul 14, 2023 View on HN

There is an Anthropic Principle solution. If the events occured differently, we wouldn't be here to observe them.

arunix Apr 7, 2017 View on HN

Can a Boltzmann brain exist in the absence of a universe?

soulofmischief Nov 18, 2024 View on HN

You're referring to the Anthropic principle, which is a hypothesis, not a law of nature.It also says nothing on inevitability. These things could easily have just not occurred (knowing what we know) and then we wouldn't be here to observe them.The causal arrow is important.

amelius Oct 6, 2021 View on HN

Perhaps a Boltzmann-brain every now and then.

transposed Aug 6, 2017 View on HN

Well that rules out Boltmann brains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain

d4rkph1b3r Jan 9, 2016 View on HN

His argument is sound. If there is infinite #s of universes, or the universe keeps reforming infinitely (implication being it will have varying degrees of uniformity), then it's mathematically probable that we would be boltzman brain's in a less coherent universe. We don't observe that.

amelius Jan 24, 2022 View on HN

Anthropic principle makes sense only for the past, not the future. We live in a universe with certain rules that make life possible, but there is no guarantee for the future. So why do the rules stay the same? The Bolzmann brain argument seems more probable.