I Does Memorizing 70,000 Digits Increase the Chance of Being a Bolzmann Brain?

[Bolzmann_brain]

TL;DR Summary

In his article https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.00850 Sean Carroll says that we should abandon any theory that leads us to the BB problem. Why can't I, by generating quantum random numbers and memorizing them (the record for memorizing pi is 70,000 characters), make my experience as a normal observer so rare that one can say almost without a doubt that I am a Boltzmann brain and reject indeterministic quantum mechanics?

Assuming that all of my brain states are equally likely to be BBs, and that BBs may exist somewhere outside the event horizon and I won't know about this аnd also the fact that I am either BB or OO, by memorizing 70,000 digits in this way, it is expected that I have increased my chance that I am а BB іn 10^70000 times. Where is the error?

 

[riballoon]

If I am understanding you correctly, you assume that all brain states are equally likely to be a BB.

Therefore, after having memorized the digits, your brain state would have to be equally likely to be a BB as before you did or while you did, no?

-Riley

 

[Bolzmann_brain]

OK. As it stands, I didn't realize how small the chance of creating a Bolzmann brain was. Apparently, this small change to the experience can greatly increase its spawn time. The problem is writing a number with powers in the book. The numbers are all written in one row. I thought it must be even smaller than 10^70000 without even paying attention. If you think that is silly... Yes, it is. I thought... Okay, if the whole brain comes up so often, one little memory won't change much. Meybe the need for quantum experience was also quite unreasonable. But the question was more about BBs, not about QM. And what about quantum number generators, well, I found them less speculative and that's all.

 

[Dale]

by memorizing 70,000 digits in this way, it is expected that I have increased my chance that I am а BB іn 10^70000 times.

This seems like a strange claim. Do you have a professional scientific reference that supports this specific claim? Please PM me with the reference and I will reopen the thread