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.
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 measurement theory ( or. quantum language) as a linguistic turn of quantum mechanics (with the Copenhagen interpretation). This theory has a great power of scientific descriptions. In fact, we have continued asserting that even statistics can be described in terms of measurement theory. Thus, we believe that quantum language is future statistics (i.e., statistics will develop into quantum language). However, now we think that our arguments were too abstract and philosophical, that is, we should have presented concrete examples much more. Thus, in this paper, we show that the calculation of Kalman filter is more understandable in terms of quantum language than in terms of usual statistics. For this, we devote ourselves to statistical measurement theory, in which the Bertrand paradox is discussed.
Recently, we proposed quantum language (or, measurement theory), which is characterized as the linguistic turn of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. We believe that this language has a great powet of description, and therefore, even statistics can be described by quantum language. In this paper, we show that ANOVA (analysis of variance (one-way and two-way)) can be formulated in quantum language. Since quantum language is suited for theoretical arguments, we believe that our results are visible and understandable. For example, we can answer the question "What kind of role does Kolmogorov's probability theory play in ANOVA?" That is, the readers find that Kolmogorov's probability theory is merely used in order to calculate multi-dimenstional Gauss integrals, and thus, they can avoid to confuse the relation between Kolmogorov's probability theory and statistics.
In this paper, we do not try to solve the measurement problem, but rather to properly formulate it. One of the reasons why it still lacks a precise, agreed definition is that the problem may take very different aspects depending on the interpretation of quantum mechanics embraced. Inspired by the methodology of theory-independent results like Bell's theorem, we propose to identify the common root of the puzzle in an interpretation-independent way i.e. as a property of the empirical statistics only, before deriving its philosophical consequences. The key observation is that quantum matter can not be described by a Kolmogorovian probabilistic theory. Arguing that the Kolmogorov axioms of probability theory are the postulates of epistemic uncertainty leads us to reformulate the measurement problem as the impossibility to build an ontology independent of epistemology for quantum matter. Said differently, there exists no God's-eye view on quantum systems. Although it is meaningless to solve the measurement problem as defined in this way, insofar as it is a feature of the universe's statistics, such a formulation may on the other hand bring side benefits. In particular, we argue that it allows to: (i) shed a new light on the variety of interpretations; (ii) propose a fundamental reason why quantum mechanics and general relativity are so incompatible, not relying on purely mathematical or technical arguments; (iii) guide the quest for quantum gravity.
In this paper, we study and answer the following fundamental problems concerning classical equilibrium statistical mechanics: 1): Is the principle of equal a priori probabilities indispensable for equilibrium statistical mechanics? 2): Is the ergodic hypothesis related to equilibrium statistical mechanics? Note that these problems are not yet answered, since there are several opinions for the formulation of equilibrium statistical mechanics. In order to answer the above questions, we first introduce measurement theory (i.e., the theory of quantum mechanical world view), which is characterized as the linguistic turn of quantum mechanics. And we propose the measurement theoretical foundation of equili-brium statistical mechanics, and further, answer the above 1) and 2), that is, 1) is “No”, but, 2) is “Yes”.
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.