On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 08:42:15AM +1100, Russell Standish wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 09:50:47PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > > > My point about S-G magnets to measure spin values was that they can easily > > be > > rotated away from the 50/50 position. The exact values do not matter in this > > context. You still get either an UP or a DOWN result along the axis of the > > magnet in its final position. The only thing that changes are the > > probabilities > > for each outcome. > > > > Yes - and my point is that branch counting will probably explain the > variation in probability in this experiment too. But my main point is > that your argument fails, and that is most clearly seen when creating > outcomes that are simple logical functions of the 50/50 case. >
For example: Sebens & Carroll (2014) arXiv:1405.7577v1 has quite a good discussion of this. Bruce's argument could be classified as an inappropriate application of the "indifference principle" (the assignment of uniform probability when no further information is available). This is not to say that branch counting and frequentism don't have problems - just that they're more nuanced than Bruce would have you believe. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders [email protected] http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/Z3xVFqvbhAfa3px7%40zen.
