Joy Christian wrote:Heinera wrote:Joy Christian wrote:What could be deeper than the depth itself? The physical space, S^3, is what it is. By mathematical necessity, its orientation can only be either λ = +1 or λ = -1, with 50/50 chance.
You are grasping at straws.
Ok, so the 50/50 is the depth itself.
Irreducible. Why this is less irreducible then QM probabilities is only for Humpty Dumpty to decide.
Actually, John Bell explains it very well why any randomness in terms of a hidden variable like my λ is reducible while quantum mechanical randomness is not. Just read the first chapter of his book, or read the less technical chapter about Bertlmann's socks. The fundamental difference between a reducible explanation and irreducible explanation is not difficult to understand.
Trouble is, as you go down, randomness *has* to become more fine-grained. More precisely, it can’t ever be *less* fine-grained. In the lab, when we measure spins of two particles, there are four *joint* outcomes, not two. And they typically have probabilities different from zero, one half, or one. The deeper level has to have at least as many “atoms” of probability, and their sizes have to add up in groups to the sizes of atoms at the top level.
Now I’m happy to believe that at some deep level the handed-ness of space is responsible for the randomness of spin measurements. But I cannot believe it works through a single binary fair coin toss λ.
A real fair coin toss provides an excellent example. An idealised coin is launched vertically into the air with a rotation speed around a horizontal axis X > 0 and a vertical velocity Y > 0. It rises and then falls and hits a flat surface which instantly absorbs all energy and leaves the coin lying flat. In suitable units this could result in the binary outcome Parity(IntegerPart(XY)). If X and Y have a joint smooth probability distribution which extends in both directions far enough, the outcome is almost a fair coin toss. This has been studied long ago by Persi Diaconis. Who is both a great mathematician and a great conjuror. He can toss a coin and have it land heads 95% of the time.
I’ll add some references and pictures later.
Added later:
Preprint:
https://statweb.stanford.edu/~susan/papers/headswithJ.pdfPicture (Figure 6)
https://www.instagram.com/p/BzPX7h1HuqKPersi Diaconis, Susan Holmes, and Richard Montgomery
SIAM Review, 2007
https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036144504446436We analyze the natural process of flipping a coin which is caught in the hand. We show that vigorously flipped coins tend to come up the same way they started. The limiting chance of coming up this way depends on a single parameter, the angle between the normal to the coin and the angular momentum vector. Measurements of this parameter based on high‐speed photography are reported. For natural flips, the chance of coming up as started is about 0.51