Are there unverifiable assertions about probabilities

In summary, the theory cannot be verified because it depends on an experiment that can never be repeated.
  • #1
jk22
731
24
Suppose we obtain a probability of ##1/\sqrt{2}## from QM for example.
This will be never verifiable since experiments can only give rational numbers even more : finite digits.

Does this mean that such a theory cannot be real in some sense since it would need an everlasting expetiment ?

Are there any attempts or approaches to get only rational numbers from the theory ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
jk22 said:
Suppose we obtain a probability of ##1/\sqrt{2}## from QM for example.
This will be never verifiable since experiments can only give rational numbers even more : finite digits.

Does this mean that such a theory cannot be real in some sense since it would need an everlasting expetiment ?

Are there any attempts or approaches to get only rational numbers from the theory ?
Consider ##\pi ## instead:


Now we have eliminated any "reality" of the "theory", because all we have used is a circle. From this point on you can eternally talk about realism, Plato and other philosophies. The mathematical resp. physical essence is, that we cannot actually create a circle, we can only come as close as we want to, depending on the effort we put in. Under the electron microscope, however, ...

Our models are all idealizations. The real world is discrete!
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
  • #3
fresh_42 said:
The real world is discrete!
No. It is fuzzy!
jk22 said:
Suppose we obtain a probability of ##1/\sqrt{2}## from QM for example.
This will be never verifiable since experiments can only give rational numbers even more : finite digits.

Does this mean that such a theory cannot be real in some sense since it would need an everlasting experiment ?
No. One never expects predictions to be accurate to infinite precision - except in pure mathematics!
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Klystron
  • #4
jk22 said:
Does this mean that such a theory cannot be real in some sense since it would need an everlasting expetiment ?

What theory doesn't?

I have a theory that reindeer can't fly. I gather a hundred reindeer, and push them off my roof to their deaths. All I have shown is that these hundred reindeer can't (or at least didn't) fly. What about #101? Or #1001? Or #100000000000001?
 
  • #5
Vanadium 50 said:
What theory doesn't?

I have a theory that reindeer can't fly. I gather a hundred reindeer, and push them off my roof to their deaths. All I have shown is that these hundred reindeer can't (or at least didn't) fly. What about #101? Or #1001? Or #100000000000001?
Was this conditioned on the presence of a red nose?
 

FAQ: Are there unverifiable assertions about probabilities

What is an unverifiable assertion about probabilities?

An unverifiable assertion about probabilities is a statement or claim made about the likelihood of an event occurring that cannot be proven or verified through evidence or data.

Why are unverifiable assertions about probabilities problematic in science?

Unverifiable assertions about probabilities can be problematic in science because they are not based on empirical evidence or scientific methods, making them unreliable and potentially misleading. This can lead to incorrect conclusions and hinder the progress of scientific research.

How can scientists determine if an assertion about probabilities is verifiable?

Scientists can determine if an assertion about probabilities is verifiable by examining the evidence and data used to support the claim. If the evidence is based on reliable and replicable experiments or observations, then the assertion is more likely to be verifiable.

What are some common examples of unverifiable assertions about probabilities?

Common examples of unverifiable assertions about probabilities include superstitions, conspiracy theories, and pseudoscience. These claims often lack scientific evidence and rely on personal beliefs or anecdotes.

How can scientists address and combat unverifiable assertions about probabilities?

Scientists can address and combat unverifiable assertions about probabilities by promoting critical thinking and scientific literacy, conducting rigorous research, and communicating their findings to the public. It is also important for scientists to remain open-minded and willing to revise their beliefs based on new evidence.

Similar threads

Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
859
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
232
Views
18K
Replies
43
Views
4K
Back
Top