- #36
RonLevy
- 16
- 0
Dear selfAdjoint and Spin Network,
The probabilities of Quantum Physics seem different than the probabilities of the macroscopic world: the probabilities of the Quantum World do not seem to reflect the same thing as "classical ignorance" about a throw of dice, but rather seem to be a kind of "speed limit" on what can ever be known in some cases,
so if we were to construct a wagering on the outcome of a quantum measurement (Las Vegas-style), like say a wager based on a Bell-type inequality where one of the outcomes was expected to be 5/9, how would the wager be decided?
If you bet $10 on whether the Moon was someplace and a $10 bet on whether the orbit was there, when nobody looked, who wins and how much do they win?
Actually, it is amazing that someone has not yet set up a profitable Quantum Theory Casino, based on the outcomes of quantum measurements, except for the problem of how tough it seems to be to understand what's going on, including the problem for The Casino operators to understand it. Maybe the physicists could do this to raise money to help out the grad students and pay for the next Super Super Collider.
Or is this line of thinking pathological, and a sign that I'm all mixed up?
I'm wondering if any of you could find a way to re-phrase the issue about the Moon in terms of a bet on the outcome.
(Maybe there is actually a way to write a whole Physics Book using this approach, where you pass the course only if you have any money left at the end of the exam.)
Ron
The probabilities of Quantum Physics seem different than the probabilities of the macroscopic world: the probabilities of the Quantum World do not seem to reflect the same thing as "classical ignorance" about a throw of dice, but rather seem to be a kind of "speed limit" on what can ever be known in some cases,
so if we were to construct a wagering on the outcome of a quantum measurement (Las Vegas-style), like say a wager based on a Bell-type inequality where one of the outcomes was expected to be 5/9, how would the wager be decided?
If you bet $10 on whether the Moon was someplace and a $10 bet on whether the orbit was there, when nobody looked, who wins and how much do they win?
Actually, it is amazing that someone has not yet set up a profitable Quantum Theory Casino, based on the outcomes of quantum measurements, except for the problem of how tough it seems to be to understand what's going on, including the problem for The Casino operators to understand it. Maybe the physicists could do this to raise money to help out the grad students and pay for the next Super Super Collider.
Or is this line of thinking pathological, and a sign that I'm all mixed up?
I'm wondering if any of you could find a way to re-phrase the issue about the Moon in terms of a bet on the outcome.
(Maybe there is actually a way to write a whole Physics Book using this approach, where you pass the course only if you have any money left at the end of the exam.)
Ron
Last edited: