On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 7:36 AM Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
> Brent, > > I went through the document you sent, and it outlines the different > interpretations of probability: mathematical, physical symmetry, degree of > belief, and empirical frequency. But none of these resolve the core issue > in a single-history universe—where probability is supposed to describe > "possibilities" that, in the end, never had any reality. > > Your frequentist approach assumes that, given enough trials, outcomes will > appear in proportions that match their theoretical probabilities. But in a > finite, single-history universe, there is no guarantee that will ever > happen. Some events with nonzero probability simply won’t occur—not because > of statistical fluctuations, but because history only plays out one way. In > that case, were those possibilities ever really possible? If something > assigned a probability of 10% never happens in the actual course of the > universe, then in what meaningful way was it ever a possibility? > > You argue that if all possibilities are realized, probability loses its > meaning. But in a single-history world, probability is just as meaningless > because it describes outcomes that never had a chance of being real. If > probability is supposed to quantify potential realities, then in a > framework where only one reality exists, probability is nothing more than a > retrospective justification—it has no actual explanatory power. > It is a shame that you think that quantum mechanics, with its reliance on probability calculations, has no actual explanatory power. That is contrary to the experience of quantum physicists for over close to 100 years. Good to see that being out on an impossible limb is still attractive to some people..... Bruce The math remains internally consistent, but it becomes an empty formalism, > detached from anything real. The whole structure relies on pretending that > unrealized events still "exist" in some abstract sense, even though they > never affect reality. That’s the contradiction at the heart of the > single-history view. It uses probability to describe possibilities while > simultaneously denying that those possibilities ever had a chance to be > real. > -- 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/CAFxXSLRkqQMJMhHdKuSPdCngh6n%2B73by9XF4qT2FYw-R_vu41g%40mail.gmail.com.
