Algorithmic idealism: what should you believe to experience next?
Markus P. Mueller

TL;DR
This paper introduces algorithmic idealism, a framework in physics that focuses on what an agent should expect to observe next, offering solutions to longstanding enigmas like the Boltzmann brain problem and the simulation hypothesis.
Contribution
It proposes a novel, mathematically rigorous approach based on algorithmic information theory to interpret quantum theory and resolve foundational paradoxes in physics and cosmology.
Findings
Dissolves the Boltzmann brain paradox by advising against betting on being one.
Shows that shutting down simulations does not necessarily end their inhabitants.
Predicts an approximate embedding of subjective experience into an external world.
Abstract
I argue for an approach to the Foundations of Physics that puts the question in the title center stage, rather than asking "what is the case in the world?". This approach, algorithmic idealism, attempts to give a mathematically rigorous in-principle-answer to this question both in the usual empirical regime of physics and in some more exotic regimes within cosmology, philosophy, and science fiction (but soon perhaps real) technology. I begin by arguing that quantum theory, in its actual practice and in some interpretations, should be understood as telling an agent what they should expect to observe next (rather than what is the case), and that the difficulty of answering this former question from the usual "external" perspective is at the heart of persistent enigmas such as the Boltzmann brain problem, extended Wigner's friend scenarios, Parfit's teletransportation paradox, or our…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
