Re: [Fis] Probability in QI

Re: [Fis] Probability in QI

From: Steven Ericsson Zenith <steven@semeiosis.org>
Date: Wed 14 Jun 2006 - 22:53:16 CEST

Dear Andrei,

I realize that much of my thinking in my previous comments is "thinking
out loud" as I work through the arguments that you have made - I assume
what I have said is essentially in accord with your position.

The randomness question appears, then, to be a red-herring - and
randomness arising from entropy at classical levels lies on a continuum
of randomness by natural constraint. That is, the two forms of
randomness are directly related and classical levels simply exist under
more complex constraints. By such a model the behavior of a ball is in
accord with the behavior of an electron. The entropy of ensembles
simply is then founded on the complex constraint case of many
independent parallel events.

Your observation is that "The irreducible quantum randomness in
experimental framework is always exhibited through the ensemble
randomness." I take this to mean that you acknowledge that the above
continuum exists.

You acknowledge also what I have said below when you said "The problem
with the classical probabilistic description arises when we combine the
statistical data from a few different experimental arrangements." And
you referenced EPR.

So relations between probability measures are indeed the issue. However,
I need to clarify what exactly you mean by "CONTEXTUAL PROBABILITIES"

Your reference (http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0307201) describes
using quantum-like statistical models to describe mental states. The
paper attempts to show that these relations are present in a simple
experimental measure of cognition. But it is not clear to me, at least
not yet, how this is comparable to testing a physical quantum system of
particles.

With respect,
Steven

Steven Ericsson Zenith wrote:
> Der Andrei,
>
> Earlier you pointed out that von Neumann argued that random behavior
> in Quantum Mechanics was irreducibly random, whereas randomness in the
> classical world is the product of entropy. Drawing a distinction
> between the nature of probability in Information theory - where it is
> the measure of classical randomness - and probability in Quantum
> theory - where it is the measure of Quantum "irreducible" randomness.
>
> I do not see how this distinction is meaningful. From the point of
> view of probability functions whether or not the behavior measured is
> the product of one or the product of the other is irrelevant. Hence,
> it seems to me, that probability in one is equivalent to probability
> in the other - and Shannon's information theory applies as is to such
> circumstance.
>
> Now, I would expect a response that runs along the lines that *truly*
> random behavior produces results that differ markedly from randomness
> that is the product of entropy in an information signal - and I wonder
> first how true that can be given that the character of quantum events
> is bounded and the possibilities identified i.e., quantum events have
> a "signal," and second, even if it is so, I wonder if it is detectable
> in any meaningful sense. I don't think it is - and so a probability
> measure of quantum events - even spooky events - is exactly equivalent
> to a probability measure in information theory.
>
> Now if there are relations to consider between measures of
> probability, that seems to me to be a different matter altogether.
>
> Maybe I am not paying sufficient attention to the arguments.
>
> With respect,
> Steven
>
> --
> Dr. Steven Ericsson Zenith
> INSTITUTE for ADVANCED SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
> http://iase.info
> _______________________________________________
> fis mailing list
> fis@listas.unizar.es
> http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Wed Jun 14 22:54:51 2006


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 on Wed 14 Jun 2006 - 22:54:54 CEST