Sean Carroll

And now this is past my pay grade because I haven't thought about this very deeply.

But I guess what I'm imagining is scientists are kind of fallibilists at heart.

They think that the theories we have right now are not the final ones.

We'll do better.

Some of our experiments aren't perfect.

They'll change or whatever.

So if we fit data perfectly, but only by having so many parameters, we're like the humble people we started talking about, humble rational agents who say, like, it's too good to be true.

Like, you know, either some of these measurements are going to change or we'll invent a better theory.

And so let's not get too excited about our perfect agreement between crazy jury-rigged theory and the experiments we happen to have today.

I like it.

But again, that's just off the cuff and it's certainly not a very systematic theory of it.

I would like to have that.

But OK, good.

Back to crazy thought experiments.

Sure.

We are going to get to Boltzmann brains and many worlds and things like that very quickly.

But I got to give you, of all people, a chance to explain the Sleeping Beauty problem to us.

I don't think it was your idea, but you certainly have been a pioneer in pushing a particular theory.

theory of it.

So let's not assume the audience knows what the thought experiment is.