Examining Probability and Isolated Systems in Physical Configurations

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Isolated system System
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of probability in physical configurations, particularly focusing on the assumptions made when assigning probabilities to systems. It touches on concepts from quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and general relativity, exploring how these theories influence experimental definitions and interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that assigning probability to a physical configuration involves assumptions about the exclusion of the observer from the system.
  • Others raise questions about the isolation of the system and how comprehensive it is when defining probabilities.
  • There is a mention of the reproducibility of measurements as a critical factor in the context of probability assignments.
  • One participant proposes that interpretations from quantum mechanics may influence these assumptions, indicating a potential conflict with classical views.
  • Another participant emphasizes that violations of assumptions can arise from various combinations of the stated points, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics.
  • A philosophical question is posed regarding the role of chance in physical processes, exemplified by the phrase "Does dice play God?"

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of quantum mechanics for the discussion, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations related to assumptions about observer effects, system isolation, and the definitions of reproducibility, which are not fully resolved within the conversation.

Loren Booda
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
4
When we ascribe a probability to a physical configuration, are we not arbitrarily assuming

1. That the system excludes the observer,

2. How isolated the system is,

3. How comprehensive the system actually is,

4. The reproducibility of measurement?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you talking about quantum mechanics?

Pete
 
E. g., quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and general relativity - however you would apply physics ultimately to define an experiment.
 
1. Or, that we exclude QM's interpretation...:wink:

2. Yes.

3. Always.

4. A violation here can exist either due to point
num. 3 or 3 and 2 combined or - if you do not exclude
QM's interpretation, then - due to 1 too.

"Does dice play God ?"

Live long and prosper.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
915
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K