In this paper, we study the principle of equal probability (i.e., unless we have sufficient reason to regard one possible case as more probable than another, we treat them as equally probable) in measurement theory (i.e., the theory of quantum mechanical world view), which is characterized as the linguistic turn of quantum mechanics with the Copenhagen interpretation. This turn from physics to language does not only realize theremarkable extensionof quantum mechanicsbut alsoestablish the method of science. Our study will be executed in the easy example of the Monty Hall problem. Although our argument is simple, we believe that it is worth pointing out the fact that the principle of equal probability can be, for the first time, clarified in measurement theory (based on the dualism) and not the conventional statistics (based on Kolmogorov’s probability theory).
In this paper, we study the principle of equal probability (i.e., unless we have sufficient reason to regard one possible case as more probable than another, we treat them as equally probable) in measurement theory (i.e., the theory of quantum mechanical world view), which is characterized as the linguistic turn of quantum mechanics with the Copenhagen interpretation. This turn from physics to language does not only realize theremarkable extensionof quantum mechanicsbut alsoestablish the method of science. Our study will be executed in the easy example of the Monty Hall problem. Although our argument is simple, we believe that it is worth pointing out the fact that the principle of equal probability can be, for the first time, clarified in measurement theory (based on the dualism) and not the conventional statistics (based on Kolmogorov’s probability theory).
Recently we proposed measurement theory, which is a kind of quantitative language for the descriptions of ordinary science, and is based on the quantum mechanical world view. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the Monty Hall problem in measurement theory. For this, we first introduce partial statistical measurements and unintentional random measurements. And further, we clarify the principle of equal probability (i.e., the probabilistic interpretation of no information). Under these preparations, we completely understand the Monty Hall problem.
Recently we proposed the linguistic interpretation of quantum mechanics (called quantum and classical measurement theory, or quantum language), which was characterized as a kind of metaphysical and linguistic turn of the Copenhagen interpretation. This turn from physics to language does not only extend quantum theory to classical systems but also yield the quantum mechanical world view (i.e., the philosophy of quantum mechanics, in other words, quantum philosophy).And we believe that this quantum language is the most powerful language to describe science. The purpose of this paper is to describe the Monty-Hall problem and the three prisoners problem in quantum language. We of course believe that our proposal is the final solutions of the two problems. Thus in this paper, we can answer the question: "Why have philosophers continued to stick to these problems?" And the readers will find that these problems are never elementary, and they can not be solved without the deep understanding of "probability" and "dualism". KEY WORDS: Philosophy of probability, Fisher Maximum Likelihood Method, Bayes' Method,The Principle of Equal (a priori) Probabilities
It is a matter of course that Kolmogorov’s probability theory is a very useful mathematical tool for the analysis of statistics. However, this fact never means that statistics is based on Kolmogorov’s probability theory, since it is not guaranteed that mathematics and our world are connected. In order that mathematics asserts some statements concerning our world, a certain theory (so called “world view”) mediates between mathematics and our world. Recently we propose measurement theory (i.e., the theory of the quantum mechanical world view), which is characterized as the linguistic turn of quantum mechanics. In this paper, we assert that statistics is based on measurement theory. And, for example, we show, from the pure theoretical point of view (i.e., from the measurement theoretical point of view), that regression analysis can not be justified without Bayes’ theorem. This may imply that even the conventional classification of (Fisher’s) statistics and Bayesian statistics should be reconsidered.
Since the problem: "What is statistics?" is most fundamental in sceince, in order to solve this problem, there is every reason to believe that we have to start from the proposal of a worldview. Recently we proposed measurement theory (i.e., quantum language, or the linguistic interpretation of quantum mechanics), which is characterized as the linguistic turn of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. This turn from physics to language does not only extend quantum theory to classical theory but also yield the quantum mechanical world view (i.e., the (quantum) linguistic world view, and thus, a form of quantum thinking, in other words, quantum philosophy). Thus, we believe that the quantum lingistic formulation of statistics gives an answer to the question: "What is statistics?". In this paper, this will be done through the studies of inference interval, statistical hypothesis testing, Fisher maximum likelihood method, Bayes method and regression analysis in meaurement theory.
Recently we proposed "quantum language" (or, "the linguistic Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics", "measurement theory") as the language of science.This theory asserts the probabilistic interpretation of science (=the linguistic quantum mechanical worldview), which is a kind of mathematical generalization of Born's probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics.In this paper, we consider the most fundamental problems in philosophy of science such as Hempel's raven paradox, Hume's problem of induction, Goodman's grue paradox, Peirce's abduction, flagpole problem, which are closely related to measurement.We believe that these problems can never be solved without the basic theory of science with axioms.Since our worldview (=quantum language) has the axiom concerning measurement, these problems can be solved easily.Thus we believe that quantum language is the central theory in philosophy of science.Hence there is a reason to assert that quantum language gives the mathematical foundations to science.
The article discusses approaches to understanding the nature of probability in mathematics and physics with the consequences of these approaches, as well as the difficulties that arise. The ontological status of probability is discussed. It is shown that probability theory, contrary to R. Mises, should be classified as a mathematical science, using the definition formulated by A.N. Kolmogorov. The application of this definition in practice is provided within the framework of the classical approach, provided that the connection with physical reality is defined through the concept of equal opportunity. To do this, the concepts of simple and complex events are introduced, and the method of decomposing complex events into simple ones is explained. The point of view is substantiated, according to which a mathematical probability determined and related to physical reality in this way can be considered an objective probability, that is, existing independently of any tests. Various interpretations of quantum mechanics and approaches to understanding probability are also revealed. It is shown that in physics today the existing approaches to understanding the nature of probability contradict each other. In the Bohm interpretation, probability is an analogue of the classical approach – statistical objective probability, which has a mathematical formalization, and in quantum Bayesianism, probability quantifies the degree of reliability and depends on the subject conducting the experiment. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics tries to eliminate the difficulties associated with combining the wave and corpuscular properties of light and electron beams into a single picture by giving the ontological status of probability, which leads to the problem of understanding physical reality. The article argues for the need for a new connection between the mathematical description of probability and physical reality. The empirical (frequency) approach of R. Mises is analyzed, which causes a lot of criticism, as it does not have a clear consistent formalization. The article argues that this approach is inconsistent with quantum mechanics. The probability given by M. Born in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is also considered, which formulates a new definition of probability, which does not exclude the difficulties associated with the physical interpretation of probability. Born’s approach is based on the classical approach and is reduced to a formal axiomatic definition, which assumes the interpretation of probability as a mathematical construct. The connection of probability with physical reality and the consistency of the statistical method of finding probability values remain unresolved problems, which creates a dualism of understanding probability: in mathematics – one thing, in physics – another. If in the mathematical approach, the solution of these problems is carried out through the connection of probability with physical properties, then in quantum mechanics, in the Copenhagen interpretation, problems persist, which is caused by giving the wave function an ontological status.