4 ms·
For you it isn't 1/6 but for him it is. From your perspective can you derive from the knowledge you have why that for him the probability is 1/6? And I mean de
by deltasevennine 4y ago
For you it isn't 1/6 but for him it is. From your perspective can you derive from the knowledge you have why that for him the probability is 1/6?
And I mean derive as in derive the mathematical probability from all your knowledge about physics and the dice to explain why the lack of knowledge appears to him as a probability.
This is the essence of my question. We assume it. Probability is taken to be true for no reason, similar to how we just assume logic to be true.
- quickthrower2 4y agoProbability is an abstract concept so if he has a really good model of the universe there is no reason he couldn’t have better information. We don’t really know if “god plays dice” so to speak. We probably will never fully understand the underlying fabric of the universe even with lots of theories and experiments. It is like we get to run valgrind on the program but never see the source code.
- deltasevennine 4y ago> Probability is an abstract concept so if he has a really good model of the universe there is no reason he couldn’t have better information. It's not about reasoning. Sure he could have better information but this isn't the point. It's all about WHY probability works. Why are these laws suddenly obeyed when there's a lack of information? Do we assume it's fundamental? Or can the laws of probability be derived from deeper axioms, like logic.