The Hard Fact of Life in Big Physics City

Update: 2018-04-24

Description

How similar is the fine-tuning of our universe to probabilistic reasoning we use and understand? Simon Friederich and Erik Curiel go through a series of examples. In the third part of their discussion, Simon Friederich and Erik Curiel go over the connection between a widely recognized fallacy--the Gambler’s Fallacy--and the fine-tuning argument. How similar is the fine-tuning argument for the multiverse to common ways of reasoning from observations to likelihoods? This discussion was conducted at the University of Oxford on October 6, 2017.

Comments

In Channel

Fine-Tuning Discussion

2018-04-2430:05

Erik Curiel: Measure, Topology, and Probability in Cosmology.

2018-04-2441:33

Natalja Deng: What Kind of Fine-Tuner?

2018-04-2433:59

Simon Friederich: Fine-Tuning for Life in the Universe, A Panoramic View

2018-04-2440:15

Evidence in the Multiverse

2018-04-2425:24

The Hard Fact of Life in Big Physics City

2018-04-2414:56

Stability and Probability

2018-04-2415:31

Problems with Probability

2018-04-2419:53

The New Era in Observational Cosmology

2017-04-0407:17

When is a theory good enough?

2017-04-0414:10

Can we measure naturalness?

2017-04-0407:46

An Encyclopedia of Inflation

2017-04-0424:12

Inflation in the Future

2017-04-0407:03

Strings, Inflation, and Alternatives

2017-04-0424:07

Inflation Predicts

2017-04-0415:53

Evidence For Inflation

2017-04-0421:33

Panel on Inflation

2017-04-0422:47

Does Inflationary Cosmology Solve Fine-Tuning Problems?

2017-04-0447:28

Inflationary Attractors

2017-04-0440:43

Inflation After Planck

2017-04-0448:58

00:00

The Hard Fact of Life in Big Physics City

Erik Curiel, Simon Friederich

#box-pro-ellipsis-17572849101606{-webkit-line-clamp:2;}The Hard Fact of Life in Big Physics City

The Hard Fact of Life in Big Physics City

Erik Curiel, Simon Friederich

The Hard Fact of Life in Big Physics City