According to Norbert Wiener, the concept of system, modelling and control, should be regarded in the frames of cybernetics. However, until now there does not exist any concept of cybernetics as a formal science, enabling us to attack the problem of control and communication in general. The authors of this paper consider two dichotomies holding between particular manifestations of control and communication under certain concepts. The first one holds between deterministic and indeterministic control and communication processes considered separately in the frames of commutative and non‐commutative theories. The latter theories are connected with cases when the measurement changes states of the observed system. Such a situation takes place in two domains: quantum measurement and psychological measurement. The authors propose a new look at cybernetics as a Birkhoff logic or an orthomodular lattice as well as the generalized probability theory constructed on it, which could yield a unified description of classical—quantum—and psycho‐sociological control and communication processes. Such an attempt, as a practical result, lays the foundations for noncommutative psychological measurement theory which should be constructed in the future.
According to Norbert Wiener, the concept of system, modelling and control, should be regarded in the frames of cybernetics. However, until now there does not exist any concept of cybernetics as a formal science, enabling us to attack the problem of control and communication in general. The authors of this paper consider two dichotomies holding between particular manifestations of control and communication under certain concepts. The first one holds between deterministic and indeterministic control and communication processes considered separately in the frames of commutative and non‐commutative theories. The latter theories are connected with cases when the measurement changes states of the observed system. Such a situation takes place in two domains: quantum measurement and psychological measurement. The authors propose a new look at cybernetics as a Birkhoff logic or an orthomodular lattice as well as the generalized probability theory constructed on it, which could yield a unified description of classical—quantum—and psycho‐sociological control and communication processes. Such an attempt, as a practical result, lays the foundations for noncommutative psychological measurement theory which should be constructed in the future.
Instances of non-commutativity are pervasive in human behavior. In this paper, we suggest that psychological properties such as attitudes, values, preferences and beliefs may be suitably described in terms of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics i.e., non-classical or quantum logic. We expose the foundations of non-classical measurement theory building on a simple notion of orthospace and ortholattice (logic). Two axioms are formulated and the characteristic state-property duality is derived. A last axiom concerned with the impact of measurement on the state takes us with a leap toward the Hilbert space model of Quantum Mechanics. An application to social sciences is then proposed. First we suggest an interpretation of the basic axioms and properties for human behavior. We next develop a decision theoretical example and indicate how non-classical measurement theory could be used to formulate a theory of actualized preferences.
Instances of non-commutativity are pervasive in human behavior. In this paper, we suggest that psychological properties such as attitudes, values, preferences and beliefs may be suitably described in terms of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics. We expose the foundations of non-classical measurement theory building on a simple notion of orthospace and ortholattice (logic). Two axioms are formulated and the characteristic state-property duality is derived. A last axiom concerned with the impact of measurements on the state takes us with a leap toward the Hilbert space model of Quantum Mechanics. An application to behavioral sciences is proposed. First, we suggest an interpretation of the axioms and basic properties for human behavior. Then we explore an application to decision theory in an example of preference reversal. We conclude by formulating basic ingredients of a theory of actualized preferences based in non-classical measurement theory.
Quantum mechanics emerged as the result of a successful resolution of stringent empirical and profound conceptual conflicts within the development of atomic physics at the beginning of the last century. At first glance, it seems to be bizarre and even ridiculous to apply ideas of quantum physics in order to improve current psychological and linguistic or semantic ideas. However, a closer look shows that there are some parallels in the development of quantum physics and advanced theories of cognitive science. In psychology, geometric models of meaning have a long tradition. However, they suffer from many shortcomings which are illustrated by discussing several puzzles of bounded rationality. In the first part of this article, we argue that the present account of quantum cognition - taking quantum probabilities rather than classical probabilities - can give a more systematic description of these puzzles than the alternate and rather eclectic treatments in the traditional framework of bounded rationality. Unfortunately, the quantum probabilistic treatment does not always and does not automatically provide a deeper understanding and a true explanation of these puzzles. In the second part of this article, we explain the foundational issue from the perspective of Piron, Foulis, Randall, and others, and we apply it to the foundation of quantum cognition. In this connection, we show that quantum probabilities are of (virtual) conceptual necessity if grounded in an abstract algebraic framework of orthomodular lattices. This framework is motivated by assuming partial Boolean algebras (describing particular perspectives) that are combined into a uniform system while considering certain capacity restrictions. It is at this point that one important aspect of the whole idea of bounded rationality directly enters the theoretical scenery of quantum cognition: resource limitation.
In 1933, Kolmogorov synthesized the basic concepts of probability that were in general use at the time into concepts and deductions from a simple set of axioms that said probability was a σ-additive function from a boolean algebra of events into [0, 1]. In 1932, von Neumann realized that the use of probability in quantum mechanics required a different concept that he formulated as a σ-additive function from the closed subspaces of a Hilbert space onto [0,1]. In 1935, Birkhoff & von Neumann replaced Hilbert space with an algebraic generalization. Today, a slight modification of the Birkhoff-von Neumann generalization is called “quantum logic”. A central problem in the philosophy of probability is the justification of the definition of probability used in a given application. This is usually done by arguing for the rationality of that approach to the situation under consideration. A version of the Dutch book argument given by de Finetti in 1972 is often used to justify the Kolmogorov theory, especially in scientific applications. As von Neumann in 1955 noted, and his criticisms still hold, there is no acceptable foundation for quantum logic. While it is not argued here that a rational approach has been carried out for quantum physics, it is argued that (1) for many important situations found in behavioral science that quantum probability theory is a reasonable choice, and (2) that it has an arguably rational foundation to certain areas of behavioral science, for example, the behavioral paradigm of Between Subjects experiments.
Norbert Wiener’s idea of “cybernetics” is linked to temporality as in a physical as in a philosophical sense. “Time orders” can be the slogan of that natural cybernetics of time: time orders by itself in its “screen” in virtue of being a well-ordering valid until the present moment and dividing any totality into two parts: the well-ordered of the past and the yet unordered of the future therefore sharing the common boundary of the present between them when the ordering is taking place by choices. Thus, the quantity of information defined by units of choices, whether bits or qubits, describes that process of ordering happening in the present moment. The totality (which can be considered also as a particular or “regional” totality) turns out to be divided into two parts: the internality of the past and the externality of the future by the course of time, but identifiable to each other in virtue of scientific transcendentalism (e.g. mathematical, physical, and historical transcendentalism). A properly mathematical approach to the “totality and time” is introduced by the abstract concept of “evolutionary tree” (i.e. regardless of the specific nature of that to which refers: such as biological evolution, Feynman trajectories, social and historical development, etc.), Then, the other half of the future can be represented as a deformed mirror image of the evolutionary tree taken place already in the past: therefore the past and future part are seen to be unifiable as a mirrorly doubled evolutionary tree and thus representable as generalized Feynman trajectories. The formalism of the separable complex Hilbert space (respectively, the qubit Hilbert space) applied and further elaborated in quantum mechanics in order to uniform temporal and reversible, discrete and continuous processes is relevant. Then, the past and future parts of evolutionary tree would constitute a wave function (or even only a single qubit once the concept of actual infinity be involved to real processes). Each of both parts of it, i.e. either the future evolutionary tree or its deformed mirror image, would represented a “half of the whole”. The two halves can be considered as the two disjunctive states of any bit as two fundamentally inseparable (in virtue of quantum correlation) “halves” of any qubit. A few important corollaries exemplify that natural cybernetics of time.
In this paper we propose a unified conceptual framework in which quantum probability, quantum logic, and classical probability theory are understood as different structural levels of a single theoretical hierarchy. Starting from a statistical interpretation of quantum interference, previously developed by the authors, we argue that quantum probability is not an alternative to classical Kolmogorov probability, but a more general structure. Classical probability theory emerges as a limiting case corresponding to the disappearance of interference and the effective decomposition of the whole into independent elements. Within this framework, the Birkhoff–von Neumann quantum logic appears as a natural logical expression of quantum probability rather than as an abstract algebraic construction detached from physical meaning. The priority of the whole over its parts plays a central role in both quantum probability and quantum logic, while classical logic and probability arise when this priority becomes trivial. We emphasize that the proposed interpretation does not reject existing quantum formalism, but reinterprets its logical and probabilistic foundations. This approach may have implications for the conceptual understanding of quantum algorithms and quantum information processing.