On 11/21/2022 6:15 PM, smitra wrote:
On 22-11-2022 02:47, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 11/21/2022 5:12 PM, smitra wrote:
The problem lies with the notion of probability, he explains here
that it cannot refer to anything in the physics world as an exact
statement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfzSE4Hoxbc&t=1036s
That's then a problem for a fundamental theory of physics as such a
theory must refer to statements about nature that are exactly true.
Who says so? Physics never makes exact measurements. Why should the
theory do something that the physics can't? Deutsch is like the
scholastics, he thinks physics is just a branch of mathematical logic.
Brent
But physics cannot implement a rigorous notion of probability. So,
that then makes QM in the traditional formulation problematic.
Physics "implements" things operationally. Probability's operational
meaning in physics is frequentist. That this differs from the axiomatic
foundation of measure theory is no more surprising than physics
measurements are always rational values while the theories are written
in real numbers. Does that make Newtonian mechanics "problematic"? Is
this a new revelation that physics is not mathematics?
Brent
Saibal
--
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/eab5e915-459f-322e-1bad-3bd6bba6bc04%40gmail.com.
