We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter turns to the prospects for empirically testing specific cosmological multiverse theories such as the landscape multiverse scenario or cyclic multiverse models. The most commonly pursued strategy to extract concrete empirical consequences from specific multiverse theories is to regard them as predicting what typical multiverse inhabitants observe if the theories are correct, where "“typical” is spelled out as “randomly selected from some suitably chosen reference class.” I scrutinize a proposal by Srednicki and Hartle to treat the self-sampling assumption and the reference class to which it is applied as matters of empirical fact that are themselves amenable to empirical tests. Unfortunately, this proposal turns out to be incoherent. A much better idea, which coheres well with the intuitive motivation for the self-sampling assumption, is that we should make this assumption with respect to some reference class of observers precisely if our background information is consistent with us being any of those observers and neutral between them. I call this principle the “background information constraint” (BIC) and point out that it at least formally solves the problem of selecting the appropriate observer reference class.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.