> On 2 Dec 2018, at 15:00, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Sunday, December 2, 2018 at 12:11:50 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 30 Nov 2018, at 12:13, agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, November 30, 2018 at 12:34:13 AM UTC, Brent wrote: >> What can be inferred always depends on what you take as premises. If you >> start from the Hilbert space formulation of QM or an equivalent formulation >> and you premise that there is a probability interpretation of a state, then >> Gleason's theorem tells you that the Born rule provides the unique >> probability values. >> >> Brent >> >> So to get Born's Rule, Bruno would have to assume a huge amount IN ADDITION >> TO ARITHMETIC. I don't buy it. AG > > On the contrary, mechanism assumes less than any other theory. And Mechanism > is roughly the idea that the brain does not invoke magical things. > > The theory of everything, with mechanism assumed at the metalevel, assume > only S K, S≠K, and the axioms > > 1) If x = y and x = z, then y = z > 2) If x = y then xz = yz > 3) If x = y then zx = zy > 4) Kxy = x > 5) Sxyz = xz(yz) > > I doubt that you will find an easier theory. > (Exercice: prove that x = x) > > Bruno > > But you haven't replied to my objection. In addition to logic and the axioms > of arithmetic, you must ALSO assume such a thing as probability exists to > even approach QM. What you have above won't cut it, IMO. AG
I do not assume any probabilities in the ontology. I justify them through the phenomenology. Here I was just making clear that I assume only the 5 rules and axioms above. There is three inference rules: 1) If x = y and x = z, then y = z 2) If x = y then xz = yz 3) If x = y then zx = zy And two axioms: 4) Kxy = x 5) Sxyz = xz(yz) Nothing else is assumed, except mechanism and as much as needed mathematics at the meta level, like in all theories. I don’t expect you to believe this immediately. I just present the result, hoping you will study the proof. Bruno > > > > > >> >> On 11/29/2018 10:23 AM, agrays...@gmail.com <> wrote: >>> Regardless of rules of arithmetic and mathematical logic, I simply don't >>> believe that something like Born's Rule can be inferred without actually >>> observing a quantum interference pattern. AG >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list >> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com > <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
